It's not the people unable to pay their mortgages fault that your corrupt government gives your money away to banks, again, for no valid reason.
That's an issue, perhaps one that wouldn't exist in this way if there hadn't been a housing crisis (which is not solely the fault of the people getting mortgages btw, also the people giving them, i.e. banks, i.e. the ones profiting now from what they co-****ed-up), though it is a sign of the underlying fact that the government doesn't give a **** about it's people and is out to screw them, they may have had an opportunity less, but who the **** gives a shit, what they do is wrong, and should perhaps be discussed in the thread on the fact, rather than shifting the blame on people who are completely guiltless about this particular issue, though they admittedly are guilty about something else, that could perhaps be discussed in an appropriate thread, rather than hijacking this one, which, really, is a more important issue anyways.
Originally posted by jaden101
Cheese with that whine?My point still stands...I'm right...You're wrong.
Nope, cause your point is unrelated to anything anyone has said here or what this thread is about. You bring up a totally off topic argument (which I immediately agreed with) and I just pointed out how it doesn't matter, as the thread is about the governments willingness to bend you over and take you to brown town, rather than the reasons it had the opportunity to do so.
Originally posted by Bardock42
More whining
I'd love to have a discussion about this with you but...Actually no I wouldn't...It's boring.
But here's the other option...The government asks the banks to buy up all the debt from other collapsed banks in the form of defaulted mortgages without offering the banks any sort of security on those debts at all (seeing as any offer to secure the debts would be from tax payers money and be "screwing people" by giving money to the banks)
What would happen to that debt?...Nothing...None of the banks would touch it with a barge pole and we'd still be in the exact same situation we were immediately after the sub prime mortgage market collapsed.
Originally posted by jaden101
I'd love to have a discussion about this with you but...Actually no I wouldn't...It's boring.But here's the other option...The government asks the banks to buy up all the debt from other collapsed banks in the form of defaulted mortgages without offering the banks any sort of security on those debts at all (seeing as any offer to secure the debts would be from tax payers money and be "screwing people" by giving money to the banks)
What would happen to that debt?...Nothing...None of the banks would touch it with a barge pole and we'd still be in the exact same situation we were immediately after the sub prime mortgage market collapsed.
You must have missed where I said that giving them a security is fair enough...honestly, it seems like you haven't watched the video, nor read anything in this thread and rather went off on a pet peeve of yours. That, by chance, the case?
I believe about 25% of the population in the U.S. have lost their jobs, at least in many areas. If there aren't any jobs, then they have to default on their mortgages. Unfortunately a bad move by the government was "School to Work Programs", which was to re-train the unemployed with Federal loans, but once people began to graduate, there still wasn't any jobs out there. Now the Federal government is trying to collect all the loans paid out to reeducate everyone, which was a failed project.
Originally posted by inimalist
so the point of the video is that rich people collude with government to get more rich?/yawn, wake me when its not 1838 anymore
Just because it isn't a new phenomenon (though many are close to oblivious about it), doesn't mean it isn't valid, interesting or necessary to talk about.
Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Problem now is like the video said is banks are manipulating the system to prevent a recovery and bilk the taxpayers out of yet ever more huge sums of money.
If that's truly the case (which is possible), then the only thing 'we' the people can do is revolt and replace our government, because it's either corrupt and in bed with the [evil] banking-empire, or it's so ****ing inept it can't see through the ploy. Either way, a forceful expulsion is required.
Now go get your pitchfork and torch.
Originally posted by Bardock42
You must have missed where I said that giving them a security is fair enough...honestly, it seems like you haven't watched the video, nor read anything in this thread and rather went off on a pet peeve of yours. That, by chance, the case?
Deary me...OK Bardock. Yes it's a shitty situation that the banks have far smarter people than the government and can flesh out deals for themselves to a ridiculous extent in terms of profit? Yes it is...
Let me ask you a question though.
If you were offered a house at say half it's market value and then were offered a mortgage for the full value and then the government said to you that they would also cover you for 80% of the full value...What would you do?
You know what my pet peeve is?...Idiots...Idiots that seem to think these issues are in isolation from one another.
They're not....Which was the point I was making...It's easy to say "OMGZ THE CORRUPTZ GOVERNMENTZZZZZ AND EVIL BANKKKZZ!!!!!!" When in large part neither of them had anything to do with debts going bad and causing the collapse in the 1st place except in the case of those unscrupulous lenders that I previously mentioned.
Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
That doesn't make it okay
I never said it did, but seriously, if this is the issue that makes you think "oh, those terrible rich people", I'd say you should have been paying more attention
This doesn't make me mad because I'd expect nothing less
Originally posted by Bardock42
Just because it isn't a new phenomenon (though many are close to oblivious about it), doesn't mean it isn't valid, interesting or necessary to talk about.
but what are we talking about? some limited scope issue where we can specifically identify monetary gains by a bank at the taxpayers expense?
I hardly think that is the heart of the issue. The recession didn't start the collusion between government and capital
As an aside, regulation has often been cited as the reason the banking system gets away with screwing the government and it's a simply matter of money.
If you are a top level expert in finance then who would you work for?....The government on a salary of $50,000 a year working for a financial regulatory body or for a bank where you could potentially earn millions?
So what happens?...The A grade top level graduates with the real financial aptitude go in to the banking sector and the idiots who spent their university years getting drunk and not going to the classes at their shit college end up working for the government's regulatory bodies.
Years down the line the government has to ask the successful banks to buy up the debt of other collapsed banks and offer to guarantee the debts to a certain extent...Who's going to come out on top of those negotiations? Especially when the banks have the government over a barrel as they can simply refuse to buy up any of the debt. What would happen then?...Things would get worse and worse and worse...The government would be buying up bad debt all over the place with no way to ever recover the money....Except for begging other banks to buy it.
I find specific examples to be a good thing to know about in order to point to them and show them as proof of what is otherwise only discussed in theory.
Originally posted by jaden101
Deary me...OK Bardock. Yes it's a shitty situation that the banks have far smarter people than the government and can flesh out deals for themselves to a ridiculous extent in terms of profit? Yes it is...Let me ask you a question though.
If you were offered a house at say half it's market value and then were offered a mortgage for the full value and then the government said to you that they would also cover you for 80% of the full value...What would you do?
You know what my pet peeve is?...Idiots...Idiots that seem to think these issues are in isolation from one another.
They're not....Which was the point I was making...It's easy to say "OMGZ THE CORRUPTZ GOVERNMENTZZZZZ AND EVIL BANKKKZZ!!!!!!" When in large part neither of them had anything to do with debts going bad and causing the collapse in the 1st place except in the case of those unscrupulous lenders that I previously mentioned.
Well, I am with you on that really. I am all for blame and credit where it is due. Like how we should blame the FDIC here...
I think I see where you are coming from, I'm not particularly blaming the bankers, I'd do the same if offered the deal, I just don't think it should be possible, and yeah, that is a bigger issue, but this isolated example points to it and is easily understandable to most people, imo.
Originally posted by jaden101
If interest rates go up then your mortgage payments go up and the overall value of your mortgage goes up...If this happens at the same time as the value of your house going down then you go into negative equity. You can then get into the situation where you can't pay your mortgage because the repayments are too high but the value of your house isn't enough to cover the remaining balance of the mortgage.
AHA now I know what negative equity is thanks for the simple but clear explanation.
I´ve never thought of buying a house, or getting a mortgage etc so don´t really know much about this financial arena. Mainly due to built in "itchy feet" which gives me a constant feeling Im going to move soon, probably comes from moving a lot as a kid.
It amazes me the depth and complication of things. That banks actually give people big loans even if they know the person will most definetly default. I was under the impression it was important for the banks to loan money to reliable people so they are sure to get the money back.
Originally posted by jaden101
THEY WOULDN'T BE HAVING TO GIVE THE BANKS MONEY IF THE PEOPLE DIDN'T DEFAULT ON THEIR MORTGAGES IN THE 1ST PLACE