Okay Left, Progressives, Liberals and Democrats - Here is your chance!

a reply to: Sillyolme

Great response! Thank you!

Taking out the garbage, eh?

And you should already know i read all your and everyone else's posts.

a reply to: pexx421

Well, you've kind of got two different concepts intertwined together here. One is home prices, and the other is loan practices.

Incidentally, I completely agree on predatory loan practices, and what you describe is what happened with the sub-prime market which was a big contributor to the financial crisis of 2008. The other two factors related to the same subject were the derivatives market on Wall St. which allowed these toxic loans to be packaged and obscured in other securities, AND the short selling market used by hedge funds to dupe millions of unsuspecting investors by short-selling these investments and betting on everyone (except them) losing.

However, how much (total) a bank will loan on a given property is based on appraisals and comparable prices in the area (comps) (well, and credit rating, but that really goes back to loan practices (covered above) and has nothing to do with value). Although, I will agree that the sub-prime market did encourage people to get way upside down in their mortgages, and this may have contributed to artificially elevated prices, but outside the sub-prime market I'm not so sure this is the case.

So, as a question, would it be fair to say your issue is more loan practices than property values in general? (to which I would agree).

If it's property values in general, then could you explain more about what you mean by this?

a reply to: Serdgiam

Good point.

True.

a reply to: ketsuko

Well, yes and no. Fanny May and Freddie Mac (along with HUD and others) did lobby the federal government for relaxed loan requirements based on urgings from the financial sector on Wall St. This was a very complicated 'scheme', but at the end of the day it was driven by hedge funds and derivative fund managers looking to make a buck.

a reply to: pexx421

Civil litigation is a very complicated subject, and one I wholeheartedly agree needs to be overhauled. In fact, it is even one of the root causes for the high cost of healthcare.

However, some of the solutions to this problem are not what most people think. I totally agree with institutions being accountable, but I completely disagree with some of the wild values sought in punitive damages by a pro-bono predatory civil tort system.

Again, I agree, but as I noted, this is a very complicated discussion, one probably worth of a thread of its own. And, it comes down to a universal agreement on the value of a human life (as I have noted elsewhere).

a reply to: pexx421

True, and there is no doubt in my mind that financial institutions have been given a fee pass in the liability area on numerous occasions. The bailouts of 2008,9 and 10 are prime examples of this.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: conspiracy nut

I think the OP intended the list to be what can be obtained by electing certain people to office.

Well, not exactly. What I hope for is to be able to compile a list (independent of candidates) which we can then analyze how we can distill down by priority and commonality. Perhaps if we can do this, then we can get onward with getting these issues (and not all the other 'noise') out in the public debate. Heck, maybe we, ATS, can even help that movement...a truly "uni-partisan" discussion.

There's a lot that govermnent has no place in in your list.
Lovely as it is and I am sure most of us want the same kind of world but
for now what would you like government to do?

Exactly.

Because they are not going to do anything about keeping families together and as for cleanliness well thats what homeowners associations are for lol.

I've let some of those go because they aren't harming the discussion here, they are something a person feels strongly about, so they're relevant. We can sort through those some of these items later, or zero in on what exactly is the desired 'action' to bring about that particular desire.

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
a reply to: Sillyolme

Tax breaks, incentives for families that stay together. High fines for littering, I remember don't mess with Texas, not sure if they take littering as seriously as they used to. Government can do something about education and health care. Limiting corporations and making an equal playing field will help return of mom and pop shops. The other things can solve themselves if families stick together, got to have a good work ethic to support your family, sticking together breeds family values etc etc

Now HERE is an area where the MSM could actually do something productive and helpful for the people of this country! This is a perfect example!

Two of the most compelling advertisements I can remember in my lifetime were:

1. The littering advertisement with the Native American Indian and the cigarette butts. Where are those ads in the MSM now?

2. Smokey the Bear saying..."Only YOU can stop forest fires!" Where are these now? Instead we have non-stop pharmaceutical advertisements and "let's SUE" advertisements.

Imagine if the MSM actually wanted to be part of the solution, and not 90% of the problem with their non-stop creating of drama and division!

a reply to: ketsuko

Let's not go down the path of pointing fingers. What is done is done. We can only affect the future, not the past.

This was one of the original tenets of the OP.

Thanks!

a reply to: ketsuko

Please...remember my original request in the OP. No whataboutisms, no Trump, no (insert other president).

Let's just move forward. What is done is done. What do we want the future to be?

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: pexx421

Well, you've kind of got two different concepts intertwined together here. One is home prices, and the other is loan practices.

Incidentally, I completely agree on predatory loan practices, and what you describe is what happened with the sub-prime market which was a big contributor to the financial crisis of 2008. The other two factors related to the same subject were the derivatives market on Wall St. which allowed these toxic loans to be packaged and obscured in other securities, AND the short selling market used by hedge funds to dupe millions of unsuspecting investors by short-selling these investments and betting on everyone (except them) losing.

However, how much (total) a bank will loan on a given property is based on appraisals and comparable prices in the area (comps) (well, and credit rating, but that really goes back to loan practices (covered above) and has nothing to do with value). Although, I will agree that the sub-prime market did encourage people to get way upside down in their mortgages, and this may have contributed to artificially elevated prices, but outside the sub-prime market I'm not so sure this is the case.

So, as a question, would it be fair to say your issue is more loan practices than property values in general? (to which I would agree).

If it's property values in general, then could you explain more about what you mean by this?

Well the problem is that what pushes property values is the loan practices. The values are based upon what other homes sold for, and that’s often a mortgage price. With easy credit and easy approval people are willing to take more on in debt and this is what is pushing home prices higher. And largely, with the debt leveraging system, our banks are making risk free loans, and people wind up trapped in homes they cannot afford, and when the market busts as it did in 08 and will again soon, they wind up upside down on their loans. Banks are massively overpowered in our society, with the power to exploit the most the weakest among us. They are allowed to loan money they don’t have, and then when all their risky practices collapse, they get bailed out. So, I’m all for public banking as well. The public bank of nd is highly successful, the money earned goes back into their local economy, and they don’t engage in the risky and fraudulent activity their peers do, and the results were clear during the last crisis, which left nd largely alone. AND they give small business loans to create new business, as opposed to our standard private banks which mostly give loans to cannibalize worker profits and pensions in takeovers.

a reply to: pexx421

When you say "nd" are you referring to 'North Dakota'?

I'd like to look into this some more, sounds interesting.

BTW...I do agree with your post.

Thanks!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Yep. Public bank of North Dakota. And now several states are pushing biblical bank initiatives.

a reply to: pexx421

Sorry for all the questions, but this is an interesting concept!

I looked up BND. It looks like a derivative of a credit union. How is it different (from a credit union)? And, are they open to the public, or is it only business and government depositors? Lastly, how do they insulate themselves against an S&L type crisis?

Mine is bi-partisan.


I just want people, politicians included, to take responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming other people when they fail.


Never happen.

originally posted by: RickinVa
Mine is bi-partisan.


I just want people, politicians included, to take responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming other people when they fail.


Never happen.

Anything and everything but their own actions. Are there influences from outside sources? Sometimes, but the ultimate blame still rests with the originator of any action.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: pexx421

Sorry for all the questions, but this is an interesting concept!

I looked up BND. It looks like a derivative of a credit union. How is it different (from a credit union)? And, are they open to the public, or is it only business and government depositors? Lastly, how do they insulate themselves against an S&L type crisis?

there are plenty and articles on YouTube and google. It’s open to the public, and it’s different in that their interest rates and fees are lower, they don’t engage in financial shenanigans, and their profits go back into the community.

I want people to use science and logic to make policy decisions. I don't think we can solve the climate change problem, for example, if we deny it exists. Republicans need to come up with some sort of ideas to solve the crisis, or else Dems will solve it, as they are the only ones offering up solutions.

What about business-oriented active solutions to climate change, like geo-engineering? Surely, a corporation could come into existence that could lay out the long-term costs of not dealing with climate change and then offer a solution at a certain cost, and then profit. It could earn money through crowd-funding or government payments.

The Trump administration is actively sabotaging scientific research and advice in favor of emotional and political advice, which is not going to be effective in running a society. A society ran on lies is like a house built on a foundation of sand.

I would like the national discourse to be more oriented on facts and logical arguments than name-calling and shaming people based on things that have nothing to do with their policies. When Republicans attack the four Congresswomen in the House, I would prefer a logical critique of their policies instead of fear-mongering based in lies, emotions, and misinformation.

Maybe we need to add some mandatory classes in debate or logic and reasoning to high school classes.

I believe in freedom - I don't think that freedom includes the freedom to suppress others. I want people to become mature enough to realize that they control their own lives, not others' lives. If someone else wants to be gay and get married, that is their business, not yours.

If a Muslim is in Congress, that is their right as a citizen of the United States who has been voted in by their constituents. I see no evidence of Shariah Law being implemented, and I would not support a government that uses religion to justify its laws - however, note that that is exactly what Christianity tries to do every day. We need laws based on scientific evidence and empirical research, not prophecy and emotion.

I think that something needs to be done in order to secure our elections. The intelligence community sincerely believes that Russia is going to try its hand at interfering in the 2020 elections, and it is a fact that our electronic voting machines are susceptible to hacking. Mitch McConnel is actively blocking election security measures from hitting the Senate floor. I believe we need to have a paper trail for electronic voting.

I noticed that DARPA is working on an open-source voting machine that leaves a paper trail - in addition, the codes printed on the receipts can be used after the election to verify that your vote was counted correctly. This is a step in the right direction.

Our entire Democracy functions because the voters have a voice. If there is election interference in 2020, it could invalidate the election, and then we have a situation where the rulers have lost their mandate to rule. It would be a real crisis - one that Republicans seem to want.

I want a reasonable solution to the border crisis. I want people to have empathy and understand that the act of dehumanizing people at the border, by placing them in inhumane conditions, is unethical. It is also unethical to deny asylum. It is also unethical to lock up American citizens in these facilities without due process (as has factually happened, even after they presented the authorities with their papers). I get frustrated when the conservative media uses lies and deception to cover these kinds of atrocities up.

What would I do about the border? I would want to create a guest-worker program in order to get people here legally. There is obviously a demand for migrant workers. They could register and pay taxes, however, the program would have to be realistic in allowing enough people to register for it to be effective. People could be vetted for things like health and criminal history. Making migrants legal would solve a lot of problems, and the ones that skip the program could be dealt with accordingly. Right now, we have unrealistic border policies. There also need to be constitutional protections in place to keep American citizens for being detained in these centers, and if they are, ICE needs to be held accountable instead of let off the hook.

When it comes to health care, I want reasonable arguments from Republicans against the Medicare for All - not fear-mongering based on lies and misinformation, but I would like someone to sit down and logically discuss the costs and determine, without bias, what the pros and cons would be, and how it would be funded.

I am not sold on the idea of free college education, however, I would like someone to research the reasons behind the increase in tuition costs. Maybe not everyone has to go to a four-year college, maybe more focus should be on trade schools and Community Colleges - however, an educated society is a better society, so I would hope that everyone would have access to higher education if they put in the effort.

Basically, if I were in charge, I would do a lot of information-gathering in order to have access to the facts I would need to make good policies. This involves cooperation from both sides of the political spectrum, although I dislike propaganda and lies and prefer logical arguments based on evidence that can be validated.

I would like people to become more educated and less reliant on religion, emotion, and fear-mongering to communicate - and more reliant on things like respectful dialogue and discussing facts in a reasonable manner.

I would also like to deal with the polarization issue! People are being stranded in their political bubbles, and those bubbles aren't communicating with each other. In my view, every bubble has problems that need to be solved by critiques from another bubble, and every bubble has solutions that could be utilized by other bubbles.

a reply to: darkbake

Okay, for the most part, those are not unreasonable objectives! I agree with most.

Thank you!

Another good post.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Thanks! I actually don't really want that much of a change. There are obviously a few criticisms I have of the government and populace at the moment.

I would love to start a business to combat climate change, but basically, I'm not confident I have the skills for it. I have to caution myself from trying to bite off more than I can chew. I've already tried running a business in the past, and I wasn't focused enough on it.

The main thing I need to focus on is advancing my own life in areas such as getting a stable career and being able to afford a house. After that, hopefully, I can use my free time to do something productive for society.