It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

CNBC Host calls for revolution (tea party), mocks Obama plan

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   

This commentary is saying that those of us that were wise enough to spend within out means, and wise enough to save diligently, and wise enough to prepare for a rainy day, ARE NOW ASKED TO BAIL OUT THOSE THAT DIDN'T.

I can understand the sentiment here, but at the same time, there are millions of people in this country such as myself who work hard, pay their bills on time etc., but don't really have the opportunity to save up for a rainy day. I just don't make enough money, and I plan on furthering my college education in an effort to make more money, but the timing is just awful here. Alot of us are going to get screwed, never had a freakin' chance.




posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Johnny you know that I don't agree with any of the bailouts, but this is what is been done to put a band aid on a whooshing wound and we the tax payer has not even been asked or even taken into consideration if we want it or not, our complains do not count when it comes to our corporate ridden government, the Obama administration is not different.

He can not get away from the corruption that has take over Washington, he is starting to bend to their manipulation.

Bailing out the homeowners will not help the ones that are already homeless but it will ensure that at least the houses will not lay empty at least for while, as the help that is offered in the bail out for the homeowners will not stop foreclosure just delay it.

A government do not want to have too many unhappy citizens, unemployed, destitute and with too much free time in their hands, that breeds unrest.

Things are going to get a lot worst in this nation and not amount of bail out money is going to help it.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Take this poll


Would You Join Santelli's "Chicago Tea Party?"

So far 87% yes out of * 16262 responses.

www.cnbc.com...


Can you fix the link so we could click on it? Thanks!



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by mpriebe81

This commentary is saying that those of us that were wise enough to spend within out means, and wise enough to save diligently, and wise enough to prepare for a rainy day, ARE NOW ASKED TO BAIL OUT THOSE THAT DIDN'T.

I can understand the sentiment here, but at the same time, there are millions of people in this country such as myself who work hard, pay their bills on time etc., but don't really have the opportunity to save up for a rainy day. I just don't make enough money, and I plan on furthering my college education in an effort to make more money, but the timing is just awful here. Alot of us are going to get screwed, never had a freakin' chance.


Your situation I can understand and sympathize with. But your situation is in the vast vast vast minority. Think about it. The AVERAGE person before this, spent more monthly than they made. In the 1960's it was nearly 25% on average. Even in the 80's it was over 10%.

The outrage is helping these sort of people out. I would argue that most of them WANT help, but would admit they dont deserve it.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Johnny you know that I don't agree with any of the bailouts, but this is what is been done to put a band aid on a whooshing wound and we the tax payer has not even been asked or even taken into consideration if we want it or not, our complains do not count when it comes to our corporate ridden government, the Obama administration is not different.

He can not get away from the corruption that has take over Washington, he is starting to bend to their manipulation.

Bailing out the homeowners will not help the ones that are already homeless but it will ensure that at least the houses will not lay empty at least for while, as the help that is offered in the bail out for the homeowners will not stop foreclosure just delay it.

A government do not want to have too many unhappy citizens, unemployed, destitute and with too much free time in their hands, that breeds unrest.

Things are going to get a lot worst in this nation and not amount of bail out money is going to help it.


You are right on most of your points but I disagree on others.

You first are looking too short term. It may short term keep some people in homes, but long term it will force more people out. Why because its dooming the US balance sheet, ruining the dollar, and causing hyper-inflation in the future. That will force more people out of homes than this helps.

You commented about unhappy citizens, and this won't prevent that. If anything its makes more unhappy.

What I would say to you is, you are obviously smart. Now take your conclusions and go out longer term and think how all this will impact people and the economy.....



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Homes all over the nation are being foreclosed due to the horrific policies from the Bush administration. So what's the Republican solution to the problem? Continue repeating Bush's mistakes, letting homes foreclose and their value plummet, stopping the flow of money. What's Obama's solution to the problem? Help people keep their homes so that they can pay a reasonable mortgage and the money flow continues. Hmm I think I know why Republicans lost the election.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
www.cnbc.com...

Is it working now?



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by johnny2127
 


I know exactly how will impact the economy, if you have read many of my thread you know that I have been dissecting the entire bail out since the beginning.

Also as far as two three years ago in this board me and a few others where warning about the economic collapse, but guess what at that time we were laughed at as many thought that America was still very much rich and that China was still living in medieval times, Until recently many didn't have a clue of how much US were relying on Chinas buying our debt.

But that is the nature of some.

I see the pros and cons and I think that our government is desperate enough at this point to try anything to stop a possible civil unrest for now.

But time will tell.


[edit on 19-2-2009 by marg6043]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Leto
 


wrong,


The following quotes are from the New York Times five years ago. Republicans proposed increased oversight and regulation of Fannie and Freddie, but Democrats fought it.

“The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago. Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry. The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.” Democrats pushed back. “Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing”.

“These two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis”, said Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed. “I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnny2127
Actually, it comes from money that the govt is borrowing or printing, that the tax payer later will have to pay back. For generations.


Only the federal reserve can print money and that is a private corporation, thus all the financial injects to the goverment come with interest paid back by me, you, our sons and daughters and so on.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leto
Homes all over the nation are being foreclosed due to the horrific policies from the Bush administration. So what's the Republican solution to the problem? Continue repeating Bush's mistakes, letting homes foreclose and their value plummet, stopping the flow of money. What's Obama's solution to the problem? Help people keep their homes so that they can pay a reasonable mortgage and the money flow continues. Hmm I think I know why Republicans lost the election.



No offense, but this quote shows your ignorance. This is not the result of Bush policies. This has been building for decades. I know its political science 101 that whether the economy is good or bad the party in office gets credit, but seriously you cannot be this ignorant. Dont get me wrong, Bush made mistakes, but this wasn't his doing.

This has been building for decades and is global. Bush didnt make europe or asia or central america or south america do what they did. This is a global problem building for decades.

Stop listening to politicians telling you who is to blame. Stop acting like one of the sheeple.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by johnny2127
 


I know exactly how will impact the economy, if you have read many of my thread you know that I have been dissecting the entire bail out since the beginning.

Also as far as two three years ago in this board me and a few others where warning about the economic collapse, but guess what at that time we were laughed at as many thought that America was still very much rich and that China was still living in medieval times, Until recently many didn't have a clue of how much US were relying on Chinas buying our debt.

But that is the nature of some.

I see the pros and cons and I think that our government is desperate enough at this point to try anything to stop a possible civil unrest for now.

But time will tell.


[edit on 19-2-2009 by marg6043]


Very true. But what I am saying is look FARTHER. This is causes civil unrest. Not ceasing it. Soon those burden with paying the stimulus will revolt. All the burden, none of the benefit.

Quote: "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw (1944)

This is pleasing many Paul's, but creating a mob of Peter's.



[edit on 19-2-2009 by johnny2127]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by MOFreemason
Let the "Tea Party" begin...


I second that! I've had enough.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leto
Homes all over the nation are being foreclosed due to the horrific policies from the Bush administration. So what's the Republican solution to the problem? Continue repeating Bush's mistakes, letting homes foreclose and their value plummet, stopping the flow of money. What's Obama's solution to the problem? Help people keep their homes so that they can pay a reasonable mortgage and the money flow continues. Hmm I think I know why Republicans lost the election.



Why don't you do some research to backup your claim before making statements that make you look foolish?

Check out this article from 1999 during the Clinton administration a DEMOCRAT!!
query.nytimes.com...

"In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits."

This is how it all started. So who is to blame for this mess?



[edit on 2/19/2009 by Erasurehead]



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erasurehead

Originally posted by Leto
Homes all over the nation are being foreclosed due to the horrific policies from the Bush administration. So what's the Republican solution to the problem? Continue repeating Bush's mistakes, letting homes foreclose and their value plummet, stopping the flow of money. What's Obama's solution to the problem? Help people keep their homes so that they can pay a reasonable mortgage and the money flow continues. Hmm I think I know why Republicans lost the election.



Why don't you do some research to backup you claim before making statements that make you look foolish?

Check out this article from 1999 during the Clinton administration a DEMOCRAT!!
query.nytimes.com...

"In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits."

This is how it all started. So who is to blame for this mess?



Good post. Actually this isn't where the subprime started. If you want to truly get the genesis point, go back to Jimmy Carter's CRA. Community Reinvestment Act. This is where it began. Then it grew dramatically under Clinton, not only through Fannie and Freddie, but the directives of the FHA.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Let me add this. I RENT. I have NEVER OWNED A HOUSE.

Why in the hell should I be paying for people who did something that I wasn't STUPID ENOUGH to do?

I don't even have a damn mortgage.

The AMERICAN DREAM IS NOT OWNING A HOUSE.

THE AMERICAN DREAM IS BEING FREE AND HAVING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

Freakin people...RENT DAMNIT!!!

BE HAPPY YOU ARE ALIVE AND CAN EAT FOR THE LOVE OF DSL:KJF:'___'KJF



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erasurehead
This is how it all started. So who is to blame for this mess?
[edit on 2/19/2009 by Erasurehead]


Who was President for the last 8 years? Bush. When did millions of Americans start losing their homes? During Bush's 8 years. How did Bill Clinton get into this conversation? Beats me, you Republicans are so weird.



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leto

Originally posted by Erasurehead
This is how it all started. So who is to blame for this mess?
[edit on 2/19/2009 by Erasurehead]


Who was President for the last 8 years? Bush. When did millions of Americans start losing their homes? During Bush's 8 years. How did Bill Clinton get into this conversation? Beats me, you Republicans are so weird.


That is the most convoluted way of thinking. Do you really think the economy or the govt is a ship that can be turned that easily? Instead taking unrelated point and putting them together, do some research.

If you want, I can show up exactly where this subprime mess came from. Although it has spread out of there. Want me to detail it for you?



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Leto
 





sh's mistakes, letting homes foreclose and their value plummet, stopping the flow of money. What's Obama's solution to the problem? Help people keep their homes so that they can pay a reasonable mortgage and the money flow continues.


What planet are you living on?

WE DON"T HAVE ANY DAMN MONEY.

Holy cripes I CAN"T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!

We are damn BROKE...when in the hell are you guys going to get it into your heads.

I don't care who is responsible anymore.....JUST STOP THIS MADNESS.

Look at the FREAKING NUMBERS. DO SOME DAMN RESEARCH.

IT'S IN YOUR FACES GEEZUS JUST FREAKING LOOK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Has anyone ever heard of HUD. By making a few modifications to the HUD program the poor and unfortunate(loss jobs) could still remain in their homes.

Limit it to the low working families who has a mortgage, who loss their jobs and have lived in the homes.

If the person is living beyond their means and can't keep up with the mortgage, Let HUD find them a home. take the rent (based on income)and pay off the Principle to the HUD home.

How does this sound.......



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join