WOW.....bailout plan voted down....
- Thread starter Steve Sutton
- Start date
Hitch
Well-known member
Think about how many leaders there are that run this country...not many, and then think of how much money big business has to spread around. Until these people are completely separated from this money, nothing will change. Business can not vote...therefore they should not be allowed to contribute to campaigns. Until that happens, nothing will change.
Hitch
Hitch
Ray
Well-known member
There is a good writeup on snopes about it. But then it is Snopes, which is considered a bunch of liberal distorters of the truth.
http://www.snopes.com/.../obama/fanniemae.asp
Raines and Howard are not associated with Obama, just the Johnson fella who quit a while ago.
Making the connection is much like me reading travis "goose" bruce's puppy post and then telling everyone that he is training my dog. Which is not really working all that well anyway. Maybe I should sue him. The treat over their head thing to get them to sit doesn't work when the dog sits as soon as she sees my hand in the treat box. Then again maybe I shouldn't be using "puppy crack" for treats. That is the eukanuba puppy bits in the pink box. Talk about drive. If ducks smelled like that stuff we wouldn't even have to shoot them.
Last edited:
Jay Anglin
Well-known member
That's interesting Ray because the first thing I checked was Snopes. I did several searches and nothing came up. Maybe I didn't search for the right thing or maybe it wasn't there at all. Steve, did you Snopes it?
Dwight Harley
Well-known member
This thread has been so entertaining I just thought I would bring it back up to the top. Wrote my House representative (Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin) this AM to thank her for her "no" vote. Also wrote my senators urging them to vote no today. I don't have much hope for Tim Johnson (the dem) but I hope John Thune will listen to his constituents. I bet the Senate is getting clobbered with angry e-mails and phone calls.
Scott Gentry
Active member
When i bought my home I bought on a 30 year 80% and 20% mortgages.both arms. both with monster ballon payments due in 3 years both hovering around 9.5 locked for two years on the 80%. and 10.5% on the 20% mortgage. My credit score was 430 ish (school was rough only time my shutr off cell phone rang was when verizon wanted money lol)and dropping my realator said he didnt think it was do-able the finance guy said no problem! coming down too the closing date I deal after deal after finance package after fianance package fell through and i told the mortgage guy LOOK heres the deal im buying a house at the end of this month or im already approved too buy a harley so you make it happen or im done.
when i bought my house the roof leaked foundation was condemed due too no permit and the plumbing was horrible. within 9 months i put a foundation under it, patched the roof (then later reroofed after saving a few more pennies) and re plumbed all the septic lines. I did this with all the money had saved for the harley or house fund . As well within a yearfrom original puchase i knew for certain in my union contract i was gauranteed too get me a $5.50 an hour raise. within a year i was able too refi my house down too 6% and my credit had jumped into the low too mid 600s and house value had climbed about 30%.
was it a bad idea for me too jump into a house?
As far as my idea on bailing out the little guy i still think it is a better idea too give the bail out too private citizens than too big bussiness. couse financially strong citizens will help business out alot more than 1 lump some of cash. as for me lowering my mortgage would simply mean i can offord a harley finnally but that being said the lowered mortgage might better be spent on a garage lol iether way aint gonna make or break me
for the record i am opposed too goverment buying up realestate backed investments at all who wants too give their mortgage payment too uncle sam? who wants too see the government come in and foreclose on properties not me
let the flaming of my simple minded idea begin lol
when i bought my house the roof leaked foundation was condemed due too no permit and the plumbing was horrible. within 9 months i put a foundation under it, patched the roof (then later reroofed after saving a few more pennies) and re plumbed all the septic lines. I did this with all the money had saved for the harley or house fund . As well within a yearfrom original puchase i knew for certain in my union contract i was gauranteed too get me a $5.50 an hour raise. within a year i was able too refi my house down too 6% and my credit had jumped into the low too mid 600s and house value had climbed about 30%.
was it a bad idea for me too jump into a house?
As far as my idea on bailing out the little guy i still think it is a better idea too give the bail out too private citizens than too big bussiness. couse financially strong citizens will help business out alot more than 1 lump some of cash. as for me lowering my mortgage would simply mean i can offord a harley finnally but that being said the lowered mortgage might better be spent on a garage lol iether way aint gonna make or break me
for the record i am opposed too goverment buying up realestate backed investments at all who wants too give their mortgage payment too uncle sam? who wants too see the government come in and foreclose on properties not me
let the flaming of my simple minded idea begin lol
Rick Pierce
Well-known member
Steve,
I don't know that I ever saw someone claim CFO for Obama; I know the major claim was that Raines was acting as an advisor to the Obama campaign on banking/finance. I think I did see somewhere (?) a claim that Raines would be in line to work on O's staff if he was elected. I did a little research, and most of the "advisor" claim stems from a Washington Post interview with Obama, where he said he had called Frank seeking advice in that regard.
I think later the campaign came out and said that never happened, and then came out and said they talked, but Raines was not formally an advisor to the campaign with repsect to fiscal policy.
My view of that is that it's like asking the captains of the Titanic and Exxon Valdez the best way to pilot a ship, or asking a great white if it's okay to paddle around in the water for a little while.
I personally believe you hit the nail on the head. The whole thing is incestuous enough that everyone agreed to just let it drop quietly. Both candidates have ties to Fannie and Freddie, and neither wants to have that albatross hung around their neck - which, if true, demonstrates exactly how screwed up the system is and that this is just a dog and pony show for our benefit.
Sorry for the late response.
And yes, I'm tired of the "he's a MUSLIM", "well, he's got CANCER", "oh yeah...well, he's not really a citizen", "oh, really? well HE is a senile, old man out of touch with reality" crap.
I wish they would both just stand up, and talk about concrete ideas and visions for this country. Don't give me "hope and change"; holy shit, that feel-good, do-nothing doublespeak could mean you're going to change things for the worse and hope nobody notices... Tell me if you think we need to raise taxes, keep them as is, or lower...what changes you see as necessary to our tax code...how we reduce the dropout rate in high schools...how we are going to better prepare those students for college...what changes you are willing to make to the welfare system... give me a plan with concrete goals, dates, and dollar figures.
Leave the schoolyard crap for the newspapers and rags like "The National Enquirer". Prove to me why YOU SHOULD BE THERE, not WHY THE OTHER GUY SHOULDN'T.
I don't know that I ever saw someone claim CFO for Obama; I know the major claim was that Raines was acting as an advisor to the Obama campaign on banking/finance. I think I did see somewhere (?) a claim that Raines would be in line to work on O's staff if he was elected. I did a little research, and most of the "advisor" claim stems from a Washington Post interview with Obama, where he said he had called Frank seeking advice in that regard.
I think later the campaign came out and said that never happened, and then came out and said they talked, but Raines was not formally an advisor to the campaign with repsect to fiscal policy.
My view of that is that it's like asking the captains of the Titanic and Exxon Valdez the best way to pilot a ship, or asking a great white if it's okay to paddle around in the water for a little while.
I personally believe you hit the nail on the head. The whole thing is incestuous enough that everyone agreed to just let it drop quietly. Both candidates have ties to Fannie and Freddie, and neither wants to have that albatross hung around their neck - which, if true, demonstrates exactly how screwed up the system is and that this is just a dog and pony show for our benefit.
Sorry for the late response.
And yes, I'm tired of the "he's a MUSLIM", "well, he's got CANCER", "oh yeah...well, he's not really a citizen", "oh, really? well HE is a senile, old man out of touch with reality" crap.
I wish they would both just stand up, and talk about concrete ideas and visions for this country. Don't give me "hope and change"; holy shit, that feel-good, do-nothing doublespeak could mean you're going to change things for the worse and hope nobody notices... Tell me if you think we need to raise taxes, keep them as is, or lower...what changes you see as necessary to our tax code...how we reduce the dropout rate in high schools...how we are going to better prepare those students for college...what changes you are willing to make to the welfare system... give me a plan with concrete goals, dates, and dollar figures.
Leave the schoolyard crap for the newspapers and rags like "The National Enquirer". Prove to me why YOU SHOULD BE THERE, not WHY THE OTHER GUY SHOULDN'T.
Mark W
Well-known member
Rick -
There are certain rules in politics that Obama is following exactly. When asked initially if Raines had anything to do with his campaign the standard answer is "nope" Then when someone finds out that there really was some kind of relationship, you apologize, make up some excuse for not remembering and then say that the relationship, or whatever, was really only a very minor thing and not worth even mentioning. Then if you get busted, you blame someone else. Obama has done 2 of the 4 above and you watch and see, #3 is right around the corner.
Mark W
There are certain rules in politics that Obama is following exactly. When asked initially if Raines had anything to do with his campaign the standard answer is "nope" Then when someone finds out that there really was some kind of relationship, you apologize, make up some excuse for not remembering and then say that the relationship, or whatever, was really only a very minor thing and not worth even mentioning. Then if you get busted, you blame someone else. Obama has done 2 of the 4 above and you watch and see, #3 is right around the corner.
Mark W
Hitch
Well-known member
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&&scp=1&sq=September%2030,%201999&st=cse
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending By STEVEN A. HOLMES Published: September 30, 1999
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.
In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.
''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''
Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.
In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.
''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''
Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.
Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.
Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.
In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent.
Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.
In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.
The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.
Hitchhttp://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...ec=&spon=&&scp=1&sq=September 30, 1999&st=cse
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending By STEVEN A. HOLMES Published: September 30, 1999
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.
In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.
''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''
Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.
In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.
''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''
Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.
Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.
Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.
In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent.
Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.
In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.
The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.
Hitchhttp://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...ec=&spon=&&scp=1&sq=September 30, 1999&st=cse
Rick Pierce
Well-known member
I don't disagree.
However...
Steve did ask for proof of Obama's involvement with Franklin Raines. And, to be fair, the Washington Post article is about the only "proof" that exists, currently.
Now, if Senator Obama should happen to win the Presidency, and he names Raines as a top financial advisor, I may well advocate open rebellion because at that point, the politicians aren't even pretending they aren't screwing us all.
However...
Steve did ask for proof of Obama's involvement with Franklin Raines. And, to be fair, the Washington Post article is about the only "proof" that exists, currently.
Now, if Senator Obama should happen to win the Presidency, and he names Raines as a top financial advisor, I may well advocate open rebellion because at that point, the politicians aren't even pretending they aren't screwing us all.
george wilson
Active member
am i the only one that doesn't have a problem with banks tightening thier lending practices --
i remember my first mortgage required 20% down and the ARM started at 9% and could jump 2%/yr to 16% over the next three years - we thought we were getting a deal.
i had cologe loans in 6 figures -- had to work and pay those down - and save for a down payment - but we did it
paid off home, cabin and buisness mortages -- did without many luxuries but did it --- and it ticks me off we want to bail out deadbeats
i can't believe that people with good established credit will be turned down -- it may take longer to process - but who cares
it was lending to people who had no businesss receiving money that got us where we are today
i remember my first mortgage required 20% down and the ARM started at 9% and could jump 2%/yr to 16% over the next three years - we thought we were getting a deal.
i had cologe loans in 6 figures -- had to work and pay those down - and save for a down payment - but we did it
paid off home, cabin and buisness mortages -- did without many luxuries but did it --- and it ticks me off we want to bail out deadbeats
i can't believe that people with good established credit will be turned down -- it may take longer to process - but who cares
it was lending to people who had no businesss receiving money that got us where we are today
Richard Bell
Member
Mark, in my community people with good credit are not being turned down for loans. I have two neighbors that manage small,local banks and they are making all sorts of loans. The local Bank America says they are doing the same thing. All say the number of customers coming in for a loan is down, but not because there is no money ....... I know this is not a great way to gather knowledge, but it is better none at all. Like you, I am not comfortable with the inability of individuals to handle 6.5% on a 30 year note. Your first home loan sounds like one that Hitch got started on. Mine was a VA loan at 10.5% and we felt very happy to get it.
This whole economic package makes me uncomfortable .... I keep having this vision of a toilet flushing and lots of money going down the drain. A couple "little things," picked up within the "garbage information overload," on TV.
1. Roughly half the banks that will benefit from this bail out are not FDIC covered banks. These are the banks that the sovereign wealth funds have invested it .... you know, the Saudis, a lot of the $700,000,000,000 will not benefit us peons.
2. On CNBC, the talking heads indicated that for the bailout to be effective, the "toxic" assets would have to be bought for more that the banks had valued them at. That whoever does this would have to be "creative," because main street will be mad if they know this is going on.
3. Two items covered by the "sweetener," children's arrows and Rum .... individual said he had read it all and that these caught his eye.
$. Our elected officials over and over saying this package is hard to take and not popular or not the best solution.
The mattress is looking better all the time. R.Bell
This whole economic package makes me uncomfortable .... I keep having this vision of a toilet flushing and lots of money going down the drain. A couple "little things," picked up within the "garbage information overload," on TV.
1. Roughly half the banks that will benefit from this bail out are not FDIC covered banks. These are the banks that the sovereign wealth funds have invested it .... you know, the Saudis, a lot of the $700,000,000,000 will not benefit us peons.
2. On CNBC, the talking heads indicated that for the bailout to be effective, the "toxic" assets would have to be bought for more that the banks had valued them at. That whoever does this would have to be "creative," because main street will be mad if they know this is going on.
3. Two items covered by the "sweetener," children's arrows and Rum .... individual said he had read it all and that these caught his eye.
$. Our elected officials over and over saying this package is hard to take and not popular or not the best solution.
The mattress is looking better all the time. R.Bell
Lee Harker
Well-known member
The Arrow thing has become a big joke. What has actually happened was , they got swept into the "excise" tax with hunting arrows. This created a hardship on the company making the toy arrows and they had to layoff people. This was a stupid F'n thing that happens just like a million other stupid things when the tax man lumps his shit in an all encompassing pile. Why this had to be fixed by putting it into this bill just shows the inflexible stupidity of government.
Richard Bell
Member
Lee, thanks for the information on the arrows ...... again too much "garbage jnformation overload," by the talking heads. And they have difficulty understanding why people are mad. R.Bell
TimJ
Well-known member
When I heard the stupid talking heads read the arrow part and laugh I knew right away what had happened. The really dumb thing is that this has to be 'extended' at all, how come they can't just call them toys permanently and be done with it?
I don't think most people know hunting and fishing equipment is taxed at a higher rate then other items.
Tim