Rick Santelli Is My Hero
- Thread starter aim
- Start date
- Status
Yes it did.
Yes it did.
It's a handout at the expense of the lenders and tax payer. It's going to people whose only qualification for the program, is that they are in over their head with their mortgages.
Have you even considered what will happen to the so-called toxic mortgage security assets when their values are reset? Oh sure, they will go from being worthless, to maybe worth $0.20 on the dollar. That sure will help all of those pension plans holding them rated at AAA.
You're clueless on this. You just keep parroting that it is ok to steal from some people, to give to others who might need it, or maybe it would just be nice to give people stuff that is stolen...
That article is a douchebag article because
Bernanke is not on the list. He's the one who investigated the mortgage industry a couple years ago, and said they were better regulated than ever.
Obama is not on the list. Obama is a big time Acorn supporter, Acorn is a group that pushes irresponsible mortgages for minorities that can't afford them.
Tim Geithner, Obama's Sec. of the Treas. is not on the list. He was the Head of the NY FED under Bush.
Chris Dodd (Senate) and Barney Frank (House) are the heads of the banking committees and both are abject failures who are tied to bank corruption and mortgage fraud. Dodd last year was exposed as getting preferred mortgages from Citi which was a conflict of interest.
And lastly, Pelosi and Harry Reid are not on that list.
The list, is to keep you from identifying all of the crooks who are still stealing your money. The ones who are in office, and continuing to loot you each day.
You've now made at least 4 posts that have contributed little or nothing.
HarveyJ
He is - THE CACTUS!
Agreed.
But if you read it properly, the gist of what I was saying was more planned community that simply had public housing initiatives and amenities to stop it from just being a white collar slum.
I was saying that the people moving in would own their lot. They get it in exchange for the mortgage they're defaulting on, so they end up with a house they should have been able to afford, and developers end up with fresh land for another project that they can refinance at a much better rate than individuals ever could, and at a much lower price than it initially went for.
I did say that Government could do it too, but in this particular case, I think it could be done with less hassle in the private sector.
Wicked Ice: +rep
You're getting closer Harvey, but you're not quite there yet.
Within you it is capitalism I sense. Growing stronger it is.
The reality is, most of these people should not own homes. They cannot afford them. They should be renters. There is nothing wrong with renting, I rent. I don't worry about property taxes, cutting the lawn, or fixing the roof. When something breaks, someone else fixes it at no cost to me.
Sure, I don't have any equity in what is mostly a flat investment. But I can leave almost any time I want, I didn't have to lay a big capital downstroke, and my landlord is a lot more amenable to late rent than the bank would be to late payments should I ever get in that position.
The problem is, some are still working on the presumption that many of these people are home owners. They are not. You can't make them homeowners, when they have no capacity to own or maintain a home, even if it is more modest. That's just tinkering.
I guess this is where I differ from most people.. I don't care about other families, I like to focus on my own.. I don't want to have to pay extra on top of already high taxes in order to help spoon feed a mess of people who unfortunately fell on the lower end of the gene pool.
Other families who've made bad decisions is their problem, not mine. If you want though, you can call me a heartless asshole.
YOUR family will get hurt (provided you own a house) when the other families lose theirs and the value of your own house plummets.
I understand accountability, but its just flat out naive to ignore how interconnected everything is.
The value of your house only matters if you are going to sell. You still have the same house, with the same number of rooms, in the same condition.
Besides, you're basically proposing this is a zero sum game. That if you don't pay to prop up your neighbors, you will pay in your home value. So it's a wash.
There are no guarantees about property value, like the stock market, it is based on speculation. Most people do not understand the subjective theory of value. You're not entitled to any value, only what people will pay you and that can fall, just as it can rise.
What's naive is to assume that people should be held hostage to the irresponsible behavior of their neighbors. Everyone is talking about bailout, no one is talking about how you reform irresponsible borrowers. If they get a bailout, shouldn't they have to pay back? Is this a free ride?
Why is no one talking about the irresponsible people adopting any responsibility under a bailout?
Simple. Because this is about 2010 and 2012. The next two elections. Politicians have no problem putting debt on people's yet unborn grandchildren because their incentives are entirely based in the short term.
They only do what it takes to be re-elected, none of them are thinking 10, let alone 20 years down the line. And the results are starting to show.
So true, I use to go toe to toe with people why renting was probably a better idea than getting a mortgage. People don't like to listen. Now that house value is declining there defiantly is more a reason to rent vs buy.
HarveyJ
He is - THE CACTUS!
Heheh, the image of Yoda spouting free market ideology is funny on so many levels.
That said, I do believe in a capitalist system. I just happen to believe that some services are so expensive that the only way to provide them efficiently is in aggregate form that only something the size of Government can provide efficiently... Then again, a mentioned before though, this is because my government does manage to provide it efficiently for the most part. But back to the topic at hand.
I agree with you to some extent on renting. I rent too, because as I'm technically not "employed full time", I don't qualify for a loan. Technically, that's some responsible lending there (albeit irritating as hell). More on this in a second.
But there are limited options in renting, as there are in home ownership.
It's harder to find a place to rent that has all you want, where as you can build it onto a home that you own.
It's hard to find a landlord that'll let you have pets, especially large ones or lots of them.
However, you don't have the option to leave at the (almost) drop of a hat if you're an owner.
It's a mixed bag.
I think a lot of these people could have afforded homes if they hadn't been loaned to in such an irresponsible manner. 100% loans, no doc loans, and the like. I've even heard of 120% loans, so people could furnish their house. etc. This is all massively irresponsible on the part of the lender, and even more irresponsible of them to then sell it on with a falsified rating.
Our foreclosure rate hasn't changed that dramatically since October because loans like that are a small fraction of the market.
The root cause in this case really is unbridled greed.
Capitalism's great, so long as someone doesn't massively fuck it up... So someone needs to keep an eye on it.
I always lean toward a lack of personal accountability being the problem. Whether people "qualify" for a massive home loan, buy a car they cannot afford, or buy an HDTV they don't need, the market should be allowed to correct itself.
By "allowed," I mean without government intervention (aside from legal issues, which is a whole 'nuther ballgame).
Economic turmoil isn't necessarily bad in and of itself. Even though people can expect to lose their jobs, homes, families, or lives, the market will always be more efficient in cleaning the mess than government.
Yesterday, I read a sobering news clip. The mayor and city council of Houston, TX proposed a plan for supporting local housing prices. They would use taxpayer money to pay off the credit card debt and car loans amassed by people with poor credit scores. In doing so, those people (Santelli might call them "losers") would enjoy improved credit scores, thereby qualifying for home loans.
Thankfully, the plan was scuttled.
That's an example of government sticking their nose into the market. It may have the intended effect (lifting housing prices) in the short term, but represent a slide down a devastating slope of inefficiency in the long term.
And in the meantime, it would perpetuate the "cradle to grave" nanny state mentality amongst the populace.
On a semi-related side note: Jack Cafferty at CNN reported that a new CNN "poll of polls" suggests 75% of the public has more faith in our government regarding matters of the economy than in business leaders.
And the "cradle to grave" nanny state mentality marches on.
Guys, I'm sorry to inform you: Rick Santelli appears to be a front-man...
Digg - Santelli's rant was coordinated to torpedo Obama's econ plan
Check it this post by a digger:
Of course it was coordinated:
Domain Name: CHICAGOTEAPARTY.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
Name Server: NS47.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Name Server: NS48.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientRenewProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 03-aug-2008
Creation Date: 03-aug-2008
Expiration Date: 03-aug-2009
This is the official site.
Note the creation date of 3 months prior to the election.
This is known as a "contingency plan".
Levying formal charges of sedition against all involved would not be inappropriate in this case.
Digg - Santelli's rant was coordinated to torpedo Obama's econ plan
Check it this post by a digger:
Of course it was coordinated:
Domain Name: CHICAGOTEAPARTY.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
Name Server: NS47.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Name Server: NS48.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientRenewProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 03-aug-2008
Creation Date: 03-aug-2008
Expiration Date: 03-aug-2009
This is the official site.
Note the creation date of 3 months prior to the election.
This is known as a "contingency plan".
Levying formal charges of sedition against all involved would not be inappropriate in this case.
You are a douchebag.
Even if the rant was contrived, what he said was true. You can attack Rick Santelli the man, but you can't attack the truth of his statements.
This is what the Obama admin is going to be about. It's going to be about attacking people personally, such as the way that the Press Secretary attacked Santelli, or just outright accusing critics of criticizing Obama because he is black.
That said, I read the Crooks and Liars article, and as webmasters and IMs, that's not even a serious case.
The official site of WHOM?
Sedition? For criticizing the government in an organized manner?
Obama-Bots are total idiots.
Are there are any intelligent, thinking people left in the world?
I don't agree with Obama's socialist agenda either., especially/Rahm's agenda for REQUIRED civil service ([ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtDSwyCPEsQ]YouTube - Obama's Plan for The Draft- MANDATORY SERVICE everyone 18-25[/ame]).
I just provided information. You made a personal attack. I can understand your frustration and I don't disagree with your frustration towards Obama-zombies.
I don't offer plans. And I am certainly not for revolution. Pay closer attention.
What's interesting about this entire subprime crisis is how involved ACORN was.
First Clinton revised the CRA in 1995 to force the banks to lend to bums, and then ACORN forced Fannie and Freddie to devote a trillion dollars of their portfolio to buying those shitty loans. Then they securitized them, sold them and leveraged them, and well, the rest is history. And now ACORN breaks into foreclosed homes, because the bums who shouldn't have gotten the loans in the first place got evicted, which was completely predictable, and ACORN is crying because the mess that they started had a completely predictable, logical outcome.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4]YouTube - Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis? Bombshell[/ame]
First Clinton revised the CRA in 1995 to force the banks to lend to bums, and then ACORN forced Fannie and Freddie to devote a trillion dollars of their portfolio to buying those shitty loans. Then they securitized them, sold them and leveraged them, and well, the rest is history. And now ACORN breaks into foreclosed homes, because the bums who shouldn't have gotten the loans in the first place got evicted, which was completely predictable, and ACORN is crying because the mess that they started had a completely predictable, logical outcome.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4]YouTube - Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis? Bombshell[/ame]
You provided the information that is not information.
So the domain was registered in August. What does that prove?
Unless someone can prove a conspiracy, that Santelli owns the domain or bought the domain, there is no case except a smear.
And as webmasters, I would have thought someone would look at the domain history. We're supposed to be smart about this stuff, the average DailyKOS fanatic is not.
And the point still stands, Santelli is right, even if he's having anal sex with George Bush. He's right. That's what really matters.
What pissed me off is when you mentioned sedition for arguing against government policy, in an organized manner. Maybe you were kidding, but charges of treason for free speech is an early sign of fascism.
The playboy article is down. Actually, this all looks like bloggers blogging bloggers, with the initial blog post now pulled. But if someone has a link to it archived, I would like to read it.
I actually just quoted the top digged comment; that was not my suggestion. Further, I actually agree with you and retract my previous statement. I think Santelli's comment, as you said, does more good than harm. I think your comment about fascism is true. I'd prefer if more people were like you and rejected fascism (however, easy on the insults). Cheers.
- Status