It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Tent cities have sprung up outside Los Angeles

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 08:48 PM
reply to post by Myrdyn

I think this issue attracts intelligent responses is that it affects a large number of people. While relatively few people will wind up in tent cities, the problem effects everybody by slowing down the economy, tightening the credit market, and causing property values to drop.

The issue cannot be easily framed in terms of race, politics, or wealth. Many of the people that were hit hardest were people who lived in politically conservative suburban communities. These people are now "thinking like liberals" by asking for more governmental intervention and less free markets. The problem has hit liberal states like California and more conservative middle America states like Georgia and Ohio. Many of those who cannot afford to pay their mortgages are not necessarily poor people. Many have six figure incomes. The problem is also hitting all ethnic groups.

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 08:55 PM
reply to post by kelbtalfenek

It may be that our 'Middle Class' will disappear altogether. Sorry to be a little off topic, but it has been suggested that we will evolve into two distinct subspecies; the tall thin intelligent elite and the short stout drone worker. Kind of 'HG Wells' ain't it?

[edit on 15/3/08 by Myrdyn]

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 08:57 PM
reply to post by Myrdyn

I would never look down on somebody that helped the homeless out in an effective and dignified way. Unfortunately there are some people out there that would find a way to make it difficult to help homeless people out by giving them a hand up rather than a hand out.

For example, OSHA and other government agencies may come in to ensure you were not violating labor laws. They might give you a hard time because the tools the homeless people are using are not ergonomically correct. The place you allow the homeless people to live in will undoubtedly be in violation of one health or safety code, just as my home or your home in violation of some health or safety code.

You might then have problems with the unions. The homeless people might do their job cheaper and better than union employees.

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 10:59 PM
reply to post by sy.gunson

You need to point the finger at the people who signed the contract, not the government or the lender. No one forced any of these people to sign on the line. I would love a 5 bedroom 3 bath house with a pool and big garage. The issue is that I know I can’t afford that so we bought a 2 bedroom 1 ½ bath house, which is fine for my family right now. Just because your bank says you can have X amount of money does not mean you have to get a house that is that expensive.

It is not the federal government’s responsibility to house, feed or support the people in the US. It is the responsibility of each person to take care of yourself and your family. That why we are in the shape we are now—expecting government to provide things to us. Social Security, Medicare, and any other such programs should be stopped right now on the Federal level.

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 11:09 PM
but it is their responsibility to regulate how certain market practices should be conducted, and that risky buyers shouldnt be lended x amount of money just to rape them for cash thru debt,

People want to live the american dream that was crammed down theeir throats since grade school, forgive them if they wanted to see what it felt like to have a dishwasher or washing machine..... people make mistakes its human, but the overall system at large with the manpower an resources should be helping the every day joe since it is them who they are runing this country for or have i stumbled into a twilight zone episode....

cut and dry... they need to be better informing their consumers so we all can avoid this mess and help they find a reasonable loan for their bracket.....

On another note, I cannot go into a big body benz dealership an get a loan for the top of the line model.... why?? becuz they will say I do not make enuff money to afford the payments... Hmmm i wonder why they wont but the lenders for housing will.........

people want 4+ bedrooms mostly becuz they have 4+ people in the family?

[edit on 15-3-2008 by Trance Optic]

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 11:11 PM

Originally posted by Vitchilo
A house is only a terrain, a few bricks and paint. Even with today's prices of materials, a two bedrooms house should cost about 100k MAXIMUM to build.

The whole thing is a scam if it's more than that. And the oil prices.. COME ON. There's an artificial scarcity! And even then, other propulsions exists but it's kept off the shelves because the 1% richs wants to push the other 99% to poverty.

You can build a 2 Bedroom house for $100,000. The issue is that most people want a 4+ bedroom house. I was going to build a 3000SF dome house for $175,000 + land, but ended up buying a “normal” house instead.

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 11:19 PM
reply to post by dismanrc

Wrong. Lending what one does not have is a crime. Except that it is not a crime for banks. Why is that? I cannot sell you a car that I do not have. If I were to do so I would be charged and convicted of fraud. Which constitutes a felony. Why is it possible for a bank to sell a loan that represents payment for something when the money to back it up does not exist? It is blatantly a crime. However, it is true that it is not recognized as such.

You are right that borrowers share in the blame. Still, the complicity of the executive branch and Congress make it possible for banks to legally commit fraud. The lion's share of the blame falls on those three institutions.

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 11:22 PM
reply to post by Areal51

How is that a crime? Theoretically the individuals could pay back the banks...I will agree that the value of these loans was misrepresented, but to say that they should not be able to be sold is silly.

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 11:43 PM

Originally posted by sy.gunson
Really Chromatico ?

America headed to be a Third World country? BS!!!! Homelessness is rampant in ALL countries.

Do you even hold a passport ?
Have you ever traveled outside the States ?

Here in New Zealand we have no homeless. Our government and municipal authorities all run housing programs for the poor, sick and elderly.

Likewise in NZ everyone is entitled to free health care, including expensive operations. Our medications are subsidised from taxes so that nobody in this country goes without medication.

Those with wages her pay no more than about $35 for prescription medicines and the poor get prescription medication for $3.

It's similar in Australia. If our countries can do this then why can't the (formerly) richest country in the world ?

And yes though there is still poverty in China, that country is overtaking USA in the fast lane. I kid you not.

Population of New Zealand: 4.2 Million
Population of Australia: 21 Million
Population of US: 303 Million

The US has 24 STATES that has a larger population then New Zealand. Sure with a small population it is easy to provide service.

And yes I do have a passport and have traveled throughout Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Asia. Homelessness is rampant in many of those areas. The one main difference is that most of these areas have a much closer family base then we do. Which translates to multiple generations living in the same household. In the US this is not case because of separation of family due to distances.

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 11:52 PM
reply to post by anxietydisorder

I think that your line of thinking lacks any compassion for your fellow humans, and no thought to why each individual may have arrived at this point in their lives that they cannot pay for the home they wanted. If a bank or any other institution loans money to someone who cannot pay it back that is a form of entrapment, just as bad as paycheck loans in my opinion. That doesn't make it the person trying to own a home at fault. We all have dreams. Sounds like you are bitter about your job intsead of thinking about the human factor here.

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 12:03 AM
reply to post by space cadet

So people need to be protected from any potential bad decisions they could possibly make?

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 12:04 AM
reply to post by Areal51

But the banks do have the money to lend. They still have the money to lend right now. The issue is that people’s eyes are larger then their stomachs.

If you have a family with 2 kids why would you need a house with more then 3 bedrooms, 4 at most for a spare? But if the salesman shows you a 6 bedroom and you buy it is it his fault? No it is yours, all you had to did is tell the salesmen “No”.
Just like you can tell the bank “No” if you don’t like the terms. If they try to force you, or give you the line about not waiting to think about it, you should walk away.

There is nothing wrong with getting an ARM or a variable rate, but if you do you have to plan for this issue.

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 12:14 AM
reply to post by chromatico

Whatever. That is not what I am saying dear. It is the lending institution's responsibilty to tell a potential homebuyer the risk instead of saying sign on the dotted line even though we know you cannot pay for it. Car lots used to do this. It was a way to sell the same car over and over. How ethical do you consider it to be to loan money to someone knowing they cannot repay?

Also the lending institution is the professional in the situation. As such they should know better. If anyone should be held accountable for their mistake it would be them.

[edit on 16-3-2008 by space cadet]

[edit on 16-3-2008 by space cadet]

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 12:47 AM
reply to post by space cadet

No, the person getting the money has to know whether or not he or she can pay it back. It's the debtor's responsibility, as only he can really know what position he is and will be in. Why should a company know best? All the company knows is how much it can afford to lend and at what risk.

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 02:12 AM
reply to post by chromatico

Those that have been directly affected by this need to both be accountable and take responsibility for their own actions. As far as the buyer beware carp, there is a common assumption of trust in marketing (truth in advertising for those of a particularly retentive disposition). It would also serve well to follow the money on this one, which includes the discount premiums brokers pay on those loans at sub prime rates.

It seems difficult to fathom that the mortgage brokers and bankers acted and conspired to bankrupt themselves and destroy their market all at the same time. But I do blame the greed of corporate life and the psychological effects it has on every aspect of American life, including education.

The production of drones that can smile and say, "Would you like fries with that?" And the press the button with picture of the fries to include it in the order. And will the manager be mortgage material in a realistic economy?

There were lots of people that took advantage of the disaster of Katrina, yet there were people that truly were deserving and needing assistance who were left with no support services at all.

Blame will not help anyone, and only anger those to whom blame is assessed regardless of truth. It would seem that finding a positive channel for our energies would serve a far nobler purpose.

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 02:20 AM
this is happened because all these fools went for variable loans. we had this HUGE boom in new homes selling nice & low, lots of them in my area here. two homes right by me are empty cos of their choices. They want ya to feel sorry for them so they put this crap on ..ohh boohooo we have no home cos we picked a bad loan. these loans were going out like candy, to anyone and everyone. They dont read the fine print, they dont educate themselves.
they have nobody to blame but themselves. They buy something they can't afford.

by the in SoCal...a 4 bedroom, 2 bath home at about 3500 square feet is about $500,000.

Around here, $100,000 won't even get you a freaking condo.

[edit on 16-3-2008 by buslady]

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 02:28 AM
I've lived in a tent for awhile when I was in high school, but that was because my dad had to quit his job due to Native American politics when a new family became the leaders and decided they wanted only their family members to work for them. Everyone else was laid off, forced to quit, or fired. We were in the middle of buying a piece of property at the time. Eventually the family just moved to Idaho where the cost of living is way better than it was in Washington (state). I think that living in a tent was one of the best experiences I've ever had. Of course, I wasn't in a tent city though, so I'm sure that makes a huge difference.

Also, what the world is wrong with renting an apartment? I see no comparison between that a living in a tent. Rent a good apartment at a decent price and it's no different from owning a house in my opinion...and you tend to get to know your neighbors a lot better, which I don't really see any downside to - even if they're idiots. But maybe that's just because I'm interested in observing people (but no, not like a peeping tom).

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 02:31 AM
It feels happy being rich, but the tears get very heavy as those around you lose their ownings. I have savings, and that's simply the reason I'm not being effected by this crises. I DON'T buy like crazy. I get stuff only when I need it, fast because it's part of my faith and therefore save money, and therefore am maintaining high earnings monthly. I suggest you do the same, though, I would love a good revolt based on taxes to finally give the one finger solute to the income tax.

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 02:46 AM

Originally posted by wingman77
I went down to that tent city a few months ago. They were mostly average people and several families with children. It's a very sad state if affairs. The lot is right next to a train yard and in front of Ontario International Airport, so it's very loud. Many people are aware of the situation though, so plenty of donations are brought in.

I heard the mayor of the city granted the land for these people, so they're protected for now.

I'm thinking about helping them build a community garden on the lot, and maybe proving instruction on natural building techniques like rammed earth.

oh damn...I think I know where you're talking. OMG I wonder if my son's friend's family ended up there! They left this nice 2 story thing just 2 houses down, about a year ago, it's still empty and up on the auction block.

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 02:47 AM
Quote from Gorman91:"It feels happy being rich, but the tears get very heavy as those around you lose their ownings. I have savings, and that's simply the reason I'm not being effected by this crises. I DON'T buy like crazy. I get stuff only when I need it, fast because it's part of my faith and therefore save money, and therefore am maintaining high earnings monthly. I suggest you do the same, though, I would love a good revolt based on taxes to finally give the one finger solute to the income tax. "

Hey I would feel happy being rich too, but I can't be rich unless I win the lottery or some unknown to me rich uncle dies and leaves me a bundle, I have faced the facts, there are no programs to help the single with no dependents group go to college, help with bills, or anything else. I am on my own, and responsible for the way my life goes from here. I tried to educate myself further so I might earn more money, I paid for it out of my own pocket. It did me no good. My honey did go to college and he is in the same industry I am due to closing businesses in the area, and from what I understand it is pretty much the same everywhere in America now, jobs left and went to some other country. Or closed because we a import the same product elsewhere for less. Nafta. I knew that was gonna suck!

[edit on 16-3-2008 by space cadet]
edit=spelling error

[edit on 16-3-2008 by space cadet]

new topics

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in