“But but but ... those homeowners FORCED the banks to give them loans are were just irresponsible people! It was the CRA and Freddie and Fannie, and we should let banks do whatever they want because Teh Marketz demand it!
Or that's what conservatives keep telling me. They can't be wrong, can they ... ?
kelbob on Jun 13, 2012 at 13:03:29
“I have been a mortgage underwriter for over 20 years. I can't comment on anything other than what I have seen. If a minority came in, wanting to buy a home, but could not meet the guidelines that we as mortgage lenders were required to follow by FNMA, FHLMC and FHA/VA...they would be declined. Same as if they were white. However, you try telling someone they don't qualify. The first thing you hear is charges of discrimination, second you hear how the next lender down the street will do their loan. 99 times out of 100, the borrower felt entitled to a home and so if there was a program out there to enable them to buy the home, they took it. If they went into foreclosure, it is because what was originally discovered was true....they couldn't qualify and maintain home ownership. I am sick of being the bad guy when I was there and saw it. Maybe there are instances of deliberately steering someone into a bad situation, but mostly it is the borrower who is adamant they be allowed to purchase a home or else they will sue you.”
“I look forward to this Republican's resignation, just like the guy at the EPA had to for mentioning the Holocaust (back in 2010, no less) and Shirley Sherrod did for having her words twisted and distorted.
Wait -- what's that? Republicans almost never resign after making truly horrific statements (see: this guy, Inhofe, Bachman, and countless others) or even when being investigated for federal crimes (see: Ensign, John)?
“Actually the opposite: George Brett tipped a friend of mine $100 -- for a cup of coffee! (It was at the old restaurant at Royals' stadium). Servers would trip over themselves to get him in their section.
Joe Montana, OTOH, is cheap as hell.”
Sarahmorton on Mar 8, 2012 at 11:52:10
“^^^^^Royals fan since birth. I love to hear stories about players I love that confirm how cool they are :) Thanks TKE!”
“Once again, for conservatives the word "compromise" is defined as "give us everything we want while we give you nothing in return."
The American people have rejected what you and the rest of the right are selling. It's taken a while, but they've finally caught on to it, and you and the rest are flailing to act as it that's not happening.
Well, it is.
Enjoy being irrelevant while the rest of us move forward.”
“Except for the fact there has not been a "rapid growth of government." At least not in this reality. In fact, gov't is smaller under Obama than it has been in decades.
Our debt is caused by giving more and more tax cuts to the wealthy and handing the military industrial complex (that Ike tried to warn us about more than 50 years ago) more and more money for programs the DoD doesn't even want (see: the East Coast missile defense program).
Oh, and more than 70% was rang up under just three GOP presidents: Reagan and Bush I and II. It's a nice trick, too: they run up piles of debt while in charge, then turn around and blame the Democrats for it, and use it to justify cutting programs that help the middle class and the poor.
It's disgusting -- and would be impossible to get away with if we had a functioning media.
It's simple, really: Tax the rich like they were in the 1950s and 60s, cut the military budget in half, and **POOF** our deficit magically disappears and we can start paying down our debt. But that makes too much sense for our leaders ...”
“Here's a thought, then: Get rid of private insurance!
As you note, the average costs are $15K a year. The average American family actually makes around $40K a year but, for this case, let's use the median, which is around $50K.
So ... we raise everyone's taxes by 10% to pay for single payer.
"WAIT!" you might say, "THAT'S THEFT!!"
No, it's not.
Without private insurance costs, the avg. family saves $15K a year. With an additional 10% tax, they pay out $5K.
That's an extra $10K in their pockets each and every year. Hell, even if they got additional coverage for, say, $3K a year, they're STILL $7K ahead.
And as a bonus, their lives won't be destroyed if they get sick, they won't have to use the ER as a primary care facility, and every citizen has coverage.
But that makes too much sense, so the right will just yell about socialism and government take overs while millions of their fellow Americans go bankrupt or die because they couldn't afford to get sick.
“That would be true if the government were actually taking over the health care system.
But it's not. Not even close.
Moreover, the auto industry loan has paid HUGE dividends for them and our economy, and the U.S. already has more oil than it can refine.
Now, if you want to continue to spouse wholly incorrect talking points you heard on Fox or Rush, go right ahead. But over here in this reality, none of your claims are even close to the truth.
Meanwhile, those of us who realize that all the rightwing wants is to make government small enough to package up and sell to the highest bidder will continue to fight this move toward fascism (which is EXACTLY what we're heading toward, given the right's love of handing over functions of government to corporations).”
squalis on Mar 28, 2012 at 14:46:58
“Ah, so the call for single payor is not an attempt to take over health care? So, the Federal Government's takeover of GM and Chrysler, and then essentially handing those corporations to the unions, (the hell with the bond and stock holders) and the government directing GM to manufacture the unprofitable Volt is not a takeover of the auto industry?
Those auto companies would have restructured quite nicely under the conventional bankruptscy laws without government interference and tax payor dollars.”
“Anyone else think it's not so horrible that nearly 80% of kids between the ages of 5-13 can't build a fire?”
Trompe loeil on Mar 16, 2012 at 17:52:36
“It's a skill worth having. Any time a kid masters something, whether it's learning how to tie a shoe, build a fire or bake a cake, their self esteem increases.”
Absolon on Mar 16, 2012 at 15:46:16
mothergrace on Mar 16, 2012 at 15:43:56
“Actually, unless they don't know how to strike a match or click a lighter, I think I might rather they know how to deal with a fire properly. Honestly, I am not being contrary but it has been my experience that if kids have a healthy respect for fire they aren't so inclined to think of it as a toy and learning how to cook, barbecue or build a campfire turns it into a tool.”
“Of course, if Obama did something to fix the problems addressed in the post (which are real) there would be cries of how he is a dictator just waiting to shackle us all together in re-education camps.
Funny how that works, ain't it?
And funny how Congress keeps getting a free pass for the stuff THEY are responsible for, and that Obama can't do much about without violating the Constitution. It's all magically the President's fault Congress is a dysfunctional mess.
I don't get it ...”
rksnj67 on Feb 1, 2012 at 12:54:58
“Should the President have pushed more for the working class/small business owners? Sure!!! Am I happy he seems to kowtow to the GOP and their demands? Nope! But blame also has to be put on the shoulders of congress. These are complex issues with no simple answer or singular blame.”
“Well put! The idea of the FDA is fantastic and needed.
The cutting of funding for it (and the EPA, and a host of other agencies) is why it has become much less effective.
Of course, that's EXACTLY what the right loves to do: cut funding for some agency so it can't do it's job, then turn around and scream and point at the agency about how it's not doing its job, and why not get rid of it all together?
It's a repulsive tactic that enriches those at the top at the expensive of our nation ... which, combined with "doing stuff we think will piss off liberals," has become the ideological foundation of the modern GOP.
I wonder what it's like to live in a sane country ...”
“Some great advice -- most of which The Mrs and I have been following for coming up on 12 years (tho the separate vacations things is ... well, not sure about that one. Couple definitely need time to not be couples every once in a while, but not sure about full-on vacations).
The other thing we did: Take divorce off the table. It's simply not an option, ever. That makes one work things out, instead of giving up. (Of course, not doing something worthy of divorce helps ... )”
“"And some fear it could make things worse by unleashing high inflation and disrupting financial markets."
Ya know, there have been economists screaming about how we're thisclose to having massive inflation, and that any increased government spending in an attempt to create jobs will unleash this beast.
Except ... well, they've been wrong for two years now. Repeatedly. Over and over and over again. And a little inflation would not be a bad thing.
Oh, and anyone who thinks all we need to do is sit calmly and wait for the housing market to recover is insane. Millions lost all of their equity and/or are underwater, and the market ain't coming back enough to change that any time soon. It will take DECADES.
The notion that we just need to wait until people pay down enough personal debt to make a real difference is also the pinnacle of stupidity. Why? Because debt isn't the problem.
A lack of jobs, which is leading to a lack of spending, is the problem.
Get people back to work -- whether through government spending or otherwise -- and the economy will recover. Everything else that we're doing is helping companies make more money now than pre-crisis, all while further helping those at the top at the expense of the rest of us.”
ta8ersalid on Jun 14, 2011 at 18:34:22
“The only thing I would like to add to your discussion, since the dollar value has tanked, it means more dollars available, in theory.
Therefore, house prices are lower by default of the wekaer dollar.
The problem is peoples wages are not adjusting the the weaker dollar. People should be making more money to be able to afford the higher costs in gas, food, energy and even Houses.
The current inflationary track is unsustainable at the current levels. If inflation continues on its pace, alot more people are going to go BUST!”
Jon Dadde on Jun 14, 2011 at 13:08:49
“You must be a little confused today. Housing prices will recover when people find it affordable to buy a house again. Prices are still too high and we were in a bubble so prices have to revert to the mean and the market needs to clear the excess inventory before the housing market will take off again. That is a fact. Anything you try to do to prolong that will just kick the can down the road. We tried the home buyer tax credit and all it did was boost sales for a couple months and then it continued its downward slope on prices and more inventory. Second, debt is the problem we face right now. Our consumers are WAY OVER levered and stilll paying down their debts. That is why stimulus hasn't worked. This is a balance sheet recession. People with jobs are still retrenching so it's not just a matter of getting people back to work. When debt/income ratios are still in excess of 119%, then the consumer still has a long way to go. No inflation? 3.2% y/y on the headline #. Have you been to the gas station? Have you been to the grocery store? You pay for tuition? Healthcare? Only in your head is there no inflation. I'm not saying there is a lot of inflation but c'mon. The dollar has plunged and you sound happy about that. Lower standard of living.”
statementOfIncensed on Jun 14, 2011 at 12:04:21
“Yeah, but, they surveyed 36 economists, apparently all working for various international banks in some capacity... obviously, that tiny, well correlated sample somehow speaks for the entirety of economic thought?”
Jun 13, 2011 at 13:47:47
“There's simply no way to make it through life with an autistic kid WITHOUT having unconditional love -- at least, not with one's sanity intact.
I mean ... when most of us find out that we're going to parents, we start dreaming about all the things we want for our kids. What we want them to become, where they'll go school, what they'll do for a living, and other such thoughts run through our heads. Sure, we wish for good health, etc., but we also dream. And why the heck not -- isn't that part of being a parent? After all, it's OUR kid(s) who will be the one(s) to change the world!!
But, as you noted, a lot of the stuff you might have wanted for your kids won't happen due to the autism.
And that's okay.
Yes, there are times it's just so absurdly frustrating. You sit there and do what the experts say to, yet it doesn't matter. The kid is going to yell, or throw a fit, or whatever, and there's not much anyone can do.
So enjoy all the good times and ... well, heck, even enjoy the not-so-good ones. It's also good to remember that those with ASD do see the world differently than the rest of us—and that it's okay for all of us to sometimes take a different peek at it.
“So ... according to Mr. Dimon, regulation is killing the recovery, despite the fact that:
a.) He and his cohorts are making more money now then they were pre-crisis. So how in the holy heck can regulation be the problem? (I also want to know where is that money going.)
b.) The Dodd-Frank Act does NOTHING WHATSOEVER to prevent banks like Mr. Dimon's from destroying our economy once again, and has so far done nothing to hamper their profits.
c.) Most of the Dodd-Frank Act doesn't go into effect for another few weeks!
This is just more lies and obfuscation from the very people who almost totally wiped out our economy -- and it seems as though they're mad they didn't get to finish the job.”
realanswers on Jun 8, 2011 at 16:32:01
“c.) Most of the Dodd-Frank Act doesn't go into effect for another few weeks!
Why do you think Dimon is speaking up now. It is because Dodd-Frank Act goes into effect in another few weeks. As weak as this Act is, the bank still want it destroyed...why? Because the banks are going to have to set aside their own money (I can not remember how much) as a safety net. Does it prevent a financial meltdown? No, but it makes them likely to gamble less precariously.”
“FINALLY! A Republican who finally admits that the GOP doesn't give a damn about anyone but themselves and their rich benefactors.
I can't wait to see his comments in ad after ad after ad after ad in 2012 -- or is this another case in which quoting someone accurately would be considered not true simply because some callous, morally abhorrent monster says so?”
“I find a lot of that very, very reasonable -- except we've already tried to lower taxes on companies to encourage investment.
In fact, companies got an tax holiday a while back and brought billions of profits back to the U.S. totally tax free, with Pfizer being one of the biggest beneficiaries, getting tens of billions of dollars in profits tax free.
They then went on to lay off thousands of people.
So while it's great in theory, it's yet another area that just hasn't worked as we thought -- though definitely something to keep working on, since the theory is sound. Maybe penalize companies who don't re-invest that money in some way, remove other tax breaks for offshoring work, etc. ... ? Just something.