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.

 

Someone is getting filthy rich right now. Who is it?

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Americanist
 


There is nothing wrong with a nation implementing a plan for affordable housing, there is something wrong when there is not enough common sense, reason and accountability to make this plan effective and result in increased homelessness. A lot of these plans had reduced payments for the first three years, so of course they looked to be working at the beginning. The silliness started when these initial payments did not even cover the interest as the principle continued to grow. There was also an unrealistic expectation that income would increase to cover the increase in payments that would build up as part of the contract. It has only been the upper class that has received increases in income while the middle and lower class income has fallen compared to inflation over the generations.




posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


Nothing wrong at all, but let's not stick it to them either in a complexity of loans, terms, and paperwork. I believe budget counseling to be the recipe for success.

Let's not forget the investor class running cash-out scams on purchases, gobbling up dozens of properties at a time, and sitting on advanced options arms that allowed negative amortization up to 115%. I've witnessed the game first hand... Once you do most anyone can spot the fault lines.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by SourGrapes
 


S&F. If hardwork = riches then Somali farmers would be driving BMWs by now.




posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by bacci0909
Actually... in a way, it did just disappear. Our monetary system is based on fractional and fiat currency. That means it's backed by either a small portion of it's amount, or it's backed by nothing at all. This recession/depression has been largely based on the housing bubble, banks making risky loans to people who ended up not being able to pay, and then selling those bad assets, or debts, to other financial institutions or what have you. Keep in mind, the money that the banks use to make loans for those houses, and the money the financial institutions use to buy the bad debts from the banks were created out of thin air. Created with the stroke of a pen. They are nothing more than a statement on a balance sheet. For instance, If the Fed sets the reserve ratio for the banks at 9 to 1, that means when you deposit $100 into your bank account, they are able to then loan out $900 based on your $100. The $900 was never really there, it was created out of thin air. It's an invisible credit, assumed that it will be liquidated at some point when the loanee pays it back. So all these transactions and purchases and sell offs are carried out on paper, or electronically, not with actual dollar bills. Again, they are based on the assumption that one day, who ever is at the bottom of them, will use their real paper dollar bills to pay it. The problem is when it turns out they can't pay them. Then everything goes wrong, because the banks had created all this money that they didn't have, and now it's becoming apparent that they will never have it.

If you already knew most of this, I apologize. I'm just trying to illustrate the point that when you have a monetary system such as ours, money can and does "just disappear", because for the most part, it was never really there in the first place.

If you want to know everything there is to know about the practice of modern banking, the history of who and what got banking to this point, as well as the history of how banking has influenced nearly every event since it's inception, definitely read G. Edward Griffin's book, The Creature from Jekyll Island. Only book you'll ever need as far as I'm concerned


This made sense to me, sorry I must have missed it last night... Essentially the banks held the tittles to properties and the payments that were made were 100% profit since the capital that was borrowed never actually existed. Lets say that the buyer put down a cash deposit and the seller deposited the title check without ever actually seeing any cash, and the borrower paid cash installments on the loan, then every actual cash payment was given to the banks never to be seen again...

Thats an extrene scenario but possible if not common. Am I seeing this right?



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


Whats wrong with that whole exchange is that it is spending money with less than zero to our figuritive name, lets get out of debt and then talk about the million ways that our government should spend our money.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Usually when the say "Money on the sidelines" this refers to money in MM accounts / Sp 500 current value. Some sort of ratio like that - can't seem to remember all the specifics.

Most likely this money went into bonds and other asset classes. You could probably imagine a bit went into metals of all kinds.

The best way to put this money to work would probably be the US Bond Market as it is easily the most liquid instrument(s) in the world x1000.



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Dance4Life
 


I've said it many times before, the only way to spend our way out of this is mass qualities of tbonds bought by the american public. Go long on us securities and never have to worry about being purchased by china... that way we can keep our little imaginary money game goin



posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TheThirdAdam
 


It's the only real game in town.

Credit ratings be damned.

But in a world full of ****, the US T-Bond is the real deal. No use going against reality.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by TheThirdAdam
 


Governments should not have our money. Taxes are not necessary and are immoral. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a brainwashed fool.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
wish it was me.


but.. but.. i'd give most of it away!


to anyone who asked me for some!

if i was buffet or gates, i would give everyone on the planet $1.00.

and call it a day.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 01:30 AM
link   
reply to post by eldard
 


what is our money exactly? what does the dollar bill represent? without playing their games, what are the tangible assets that we own? at least when you invest in securities you tie their fate to your success, if they win you will win, if they go down, no matter what you do, you're screwed.

i like the odds better when i know that i hold their lifeline and not china



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by fooks
wish it was me.


but.. but.. i'd give most of it away!


to anyone who asked me for some!

if i was buffet or gates, i would give everyone on the planet $1.00.

and call it a day.


A dollar for everyone wouldn't accomplish much.

But using a big pool of money for a focused, limited purpose could acquire quite a bit.



posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Partygirl
But using a big pool of money for a focused, limited purpose could acquire quite a bit.



Like becoming more self-sufficient and debt free? I vote yes

Lets take care of our own bills before we take care of our neighbors'




top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join