« Thoughts on the Latest Mortgage Bailout Plan | Main | Question of the Day – Online Content »
Amen!
By JLP | February 19, 2009
I like this: “The new administration’s big on computers and technology. How about this president and new administration: Why don’t you put up a website to have people vote on the internet as a referendum to see if we really want to subsidize the losers’ mortgages…”
Topics: Miscellaneous | 19 Comments »
February 19th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Funny, I totally suggested that via the new white house website.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
Rick Santelli is one of the bright spots on CNBC. I’ve always liked him over the years, even if I don’t know what the heck he’s talking about half the time.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
SANTELLI, he should have his own show, like the anti-cramer. Santelli is one of the few voices that should and always be listened to in the financial media. He’s a floor trader guy, not some theorist.
February 19th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
We like it or not, it’s the senate and the house who vote in the end.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
Like aa said, we’re not a democracy. The US is a republic
February 19th, 2009 at 11:29 pm
I like Rick Santelli but I think he is wrong on this one since all his buddies on Wall Street were bailed out too and it cost way more money to do that than to throw money at poor housing choices. I think there are two types of people who are in trouble, there are the dumb dumb people and the smart dumb people. The dumb dumb people deserved to be bailed out to some extent, they wanted the American dream, they finally could afford a home using no down payment, no doc loan, or interest only loan or combination of all three combined into one loan. Huge huge mistake for these people. Lets look at what the professionals, the people hired to get them into a house told these unsophisticated people, they were told you house value would rise and you can refinance to get out from these onerous loans. The buyers made an economic decision and went for it, it was the bankers who really made the poor choice here. So the dumb dumb person got a house from the very beginning that was worth less than they paid for it coupled with a very high interest rate. Who are we going to screw in this situation the banker or the buyer.
Now the smart dumb people who had good mortgages but took out loans or cash out refinances to pay for vacations, jet skis, college, etc. just to keep up with the Jones, they deserve to lose their home. They knew better.
Unfortunately we as a country have to decide who is going to get screwed in the end. From a political standpoint it is easier to sell to the public the irresponsible homeowners should get screwed. From an economic recovery standpoint, if we help people stay in their homes at the expense of the banks who were dumb with their money our nations recovery will be faster.
A subprime borrower walks away from a house loses nothing but destroys their credit. A bank who gave the subprime mortgage loses thousands of dollars–who is the dumb one now! Don’t counter with moral obligatons on the part of the homeowner, what about the banks moral obligatons interest rate, giving the loan knowing they can’t make the payments unless they refinance etc.
February 20th, 2009 at 6:34 am
poor hogan,
history continues to show that those witrh money are the ones that reap the rewards of an economic crisis. these folks can’t afford 31% of their incomee just like they can’t afford 55% of thier income – in the end the rich, cash heavy republicans will own thier souls just as they do now. we will wait in the wings, let tehm try to pay thier mortgage, which they won’t, but their houses for 20 cents on the $, rent it back to them, and go on our merry way – making a butt load of money and again owning their souls
which part of history don’t you get – the rich win part, or the stupid people always lose part? either way, the worse it gets, the richer i get
February 20th, 2009 at 6:34 am
How about a referendum on Balack Obama who lied through his teeth telling everyone how important it is to get this pork spending bill passed TODAY or else we will suffer from terrible plaques
, only to take a vacation before signing it, and then, telling us “Oh, by the way, don’t expect much to happen for quite a while, things will get worse before they get better”. We didn’t need this bill to have him tell us that.
February 20th, 2009 at 7:54 am
While I’m sure most people would vote against subsidizing mortgages, I don’t think we want to decide our national policy on a majority vote.
After all, I’m guessing if people could vote on it, they’d support a $10,000 stimulus check for everyone, but that doesn’t mean it would do us any good.
February 20th, 2009 at 8:13 am
How about this idea. Scrap Obama’s plan and just have the government buy every house that is either in or near forclosure at a fair market price and put the current or former residents (or just about anyone else) in the homes at an affordable rent (31% of income to use the plans amount). Give the lessee the option to buy the home at anytime for the same price the government paid. At the end of five years the remaining government owned properties go for sale to any interested parties, maybe even tax incentives could be given to the buyers of these properties to increase the potential for a quick sale. This way the taxpayers would get some if not all of thier money back. I realize this would still reward the bad decisions but at this point I think that is a foregone conclusion.
The other option would be to sell California to China or the highest bidder and wash our hands of all the problems associated with the Golden State (not the least of which is Nancy Pelosi). The proceeds could be used to help with the rest of the bailout.
February 20th, 2009 at 8:17 am
One thing I forgot to mention about my plan. This would also eliminate a substantial portion of the toxic mortgage backed securities from the banks balance sheets and put a value on them. If the banks can’t survive the now defined real losses then they fail and we take the pain and move on.
February 20th, 2009 at 10:44 am
(internet referendum ???)
… and what makes anyone think your Potomac rulers would respond to such a referendum ?
ALL the recent Federal Bailouts/TARP/Giveaways are completely non-Constitutional (illegal actions) under our fundamental U.S. law of the land.
All Congressmen, President & senior officials, and Supreme Court justices solemnly swear to uphold and defend the specifics of the U.S. Constitution law —
how’s that workin’ in reality for all us average citizens & taxpayers ?
If formal laws don’t restrict our rulers, an internet-referendum is silly fantasy. There are masters and servants in our current form of governance — servants don’t give orders (referendums) to their masters.
February 20th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
@tony
The public soaked the rich in the 30s and it can happen again. You make it sound like people with no money in the first place have lost money in the housing downturn. They have not lost money it is the cash rich guy whatever the political persuasion that has lost the money. The question becomes do we let them all go down the banks and homeowners or do we do something. If we did not do anything last fall there would have been massive failure and if that was the case then the cash rich guys would be getting soaked on a much larger scale. Warren Buffet had it right there is a capitalism tax to be paid by everyone even if it goes to inefficient people.
February 21st, 2009 at 12:08 pm
how about we use the internet to vote on taking the money back from the banks and giving it to the homeowners?
I’d put that against his vote any day. He says in his rant that he has a cross section of America with him on the CBOE–he is insanely out of touch and so is the entire financial sector.
February 22nd, 2009 at 10:29 am
I really can’t comment until 2012, ya know when we can see the wheel start to turn on this policy. Not busting out the calculator, but I’m pretty sure that’s 3x the time a normal recession lasts.
February 23rd, 2009 at 1:12 am
Hi,
The team work is good. I am proud of it.
joe
Home Loans
February 23rd, 2009 at 1:59 am
AMEN!! Loser mortgages is what got us into this economic mess in the first place!!
February 23rd, 2009 at 6:33 am
poor hogan:
please read your history – and i said cash rich, not stock or business rich.
it’s working well for me, don’t know what your problem is about being able to read simple english. i bought both of the houses next door for much less than was owed on the mortgage. they were CASH poor – i am not. the poor are not cash poor, it’s all they have but not much of it. the cash poor are people that have a lot of stuff, steady income, and can’t pay for it
as i said, read a litle history about fortunes made after the bid D. poor little hogan
February 23rd, 2009 at 10:17 pm
@tony
Now all of sudden cash rich does not mean stocks or businesses? It just means cash in the bank. So a speculator who buys houses does not lose money and become cash poor? If you are buying your neighbors’ houses that are underwater then you must be in one of these cash poor neighborhoods and now in a neighborhood full single family homes that are rented to dumb people with no cash. This should add value to the home you are residing in. Congrats on losing all of your inherited money.