3 Steps To Change The Nation's Future
We are at a crucial time in our country's financial history. We need everyone's help! Here are 3 steps you can take that will change our nation's future:
1) Pray for your leaders in Washington. Pray for them to resist a spirit of FEAR and to embrace WISDOM. Even if you don't like them or agree with them, pray for them and tell them you are praying for them. There is a spirit over this problem that must be broken. Also, most of the media personalities are afraid as well and that is affecting their reporting. Pray for fear to be removed from them; they are making this worse.
2) Send The Common Sense Fix to your Senators and representatives, and tell them how you expect them to vote, and that if they put this nation in $700 billion of debt, that you will vote them out. Whichever presidential candidate or political party that champions this plan from their leadership down will likely become the next president. That is because this plan fixes the crisis while going along with the wishes of the vast majority of Americans.
- Download the PDF here.
- Send it to your Senator and representative.
3) Send a link to this page to everyone in your address book and tell them to urgently follow these three steps TODAY.
of Hawaii listened to what the Hawaiian people
had to say and this swayed his vote against the
$700 billion bail-out. It's refreshing to see
our elected officials listening.
For not engaging in scare tactics, and for giving us the tools we need to take action. I trust your opinions greatly and have already sent this to my local representatives. THANK YOU!!
and it will show you by clicking on the answer you would like to investigate.
It was great how you answered those questions on Cavuto last night! Why did they even bother to have the otheres on there? And, TAX WRITE OFFS?! What was that guy thinking!? He obviously doesn't watch Dave Ramsey!!!
Thank you for your steady and encouraging words to us all. This country needs more people like you to lead us into the future! You're a blessing!
on the bill.
ALABAMA
Democrats - Cramer, Y; Davis, Y.
Republicans - Aderholt, N; Bachus, Y; Bonner, Y; Everett, Y; Rogers, Y.
ALASKA
Republicans - Young, N.
ARIZONA
Democrats - Giffords, N; Grijalva, N; Mitchell, N; Pastor, N.
Republicans - Flake, N; Franks, N; Renzi, N; Shadegg, N.
ARKANSAS
Democrats - Berry, Y; Ross, Y; Snyder, Y.
Republicans - Boozman, Y.
CALIFORNIA
Democrats - Baca, N; Becerra, N; Berman, Y; Capps, Y; Cardoza, Y; Costa, Y; Davis, Y; Eshoo, Y; Farr, Y; Filner, N; Harman, Y; Honda, Y; Lee, N; Lofgren, Zoe, Y; Matsui, Y; McNerney, Y; Miller, George, Y; Napolitano, N; Pelosi, Y; Richardson, Y; Roybal-Allard, N; Sanchez, Linda T., N; Sanchez, Loretta, N; Schiff, N; Sherman, N; Solis, N; Speier, Y; Stark, N; Tauscher, Y; Thompson, N; Waters, Y; Watson, N; Waxman, Y; Woolsey, N.
Republicans - Bilbray, N; Bono Mack, Y; Calvert, Y; Campbell, Y; Doolittle, N; Dreier, Y; Gallegly, N; Herger, Y; Hunter, N; Issa, N; Lewis, Y; Lungren, Daniel E., Y; McCarthy, N; McKeon, Y; Miller, Gary, Y; Nunes, N; Radanovich, Y; Rohrabacher, N; Royce, N.
COLORADO
Democrats - DeGette, Y; Perlmutter, Y; Salazar, N; Udall, N.
Republicans - Lamborn, N; Musgrave, N; Tancredo, Y.
CONNECTICUT
Democrats - Courtney, N; DeLauro, Y; Larson, Y; Murphy, Y.
Republicans - Shays, Y.
DELAWARE
Republicans - Castle, Y.
FLORIDA
Democrats - Boyd, Y; Brown, Corrine, Y; Castor, N; Hastings, Y; Klein, Y; Mahoney, Y; Meek, Y; Wasserman Schultz, Y; Wexler, Y.
Republicans - Bilirakis, N; Brown-Waite, Ginny, N; Buchanan, N; Crenshaw, Y; Diaz-Balart, L., N; Diaz-Balart, M., N; Feeney, N; Keller, N; Mack, N; Mica, N; Miller, N; Putnam, Y; Ros-Lehtinen, N; Stearns, N; Weldon, Y; Young, N.
GEORGIA
Democrats - Barrow, N; Bishop, Y; Johnson, N; Lewis, N; Marshall, Y; Scott, N.
Republicans - Broun, N; Deal, N; Gingrey, N; Kingston, N; Linder, N; Price, N; Westmoreland, N.
HAWAII
Democrats - Abercrombie, N; Hirono, N.
IDAHO
Republicans - Sali, N; Simpson, Y.
ILLINOIS
Democrats - Bean, Y; Costello, N; Davis, Y; Emanuel, Y; Foster, Y; Gutierrez, Y; Hare, Y; Jackson, N; Lipinski, N; Rush, N; Schakowsky, Y.
Republicans - Biggert, N; Johnson, N; Kirk, Y; LaHood, Y; Manzullo, N; Roskam, N; Shimkus, N; Weller, X.
INDIANA
Democrats - Carson, N; Donnelly, Y; Ellsworth, Y; Hill, N; Visclosky, N.
Republicans - Burton, N; Buyer, N; Pence, N; Souder, Y.
IOWA
Democrats - Boswell, Y; Braley, N; Loebsack, Y.
Republicans - King, N; Latham, N.
KANSAS
Democrats - Boyda, N; Moore, Y.
Republicans - Moran, N; Tiahrt, N.
KENTUCKY
Democrats - Chandler, N; Yarmuth, N.
Republicans - Davis, N; Lewis, Y; Rogers, Y; Whitfield, N.
LOUISIANA
Democrats - Cazayoux, N; Jefferson, N; Melancon, Y.
Republicans - Alexander, N; Boustany, N; McCrery, Y; Scalise, N.
MAINE
Democrats - Allen, Y; Michaud, N.
MARYLAND
Democrats - Cummings, N; Edwards, N; Hoyer, Y; Ruppersberger, Y; Sarbanes, Y; Van Hollen, Y.
Republicans - Bartlett, N; Gilchrest, Y.
MASSACHUSETTS
Democrats - Capuano, Y; Delahunt, N; Frank, Y; Lynch, N; Markey, Y; McGovern, Y; Neal, Y; Olver, Y; Tierney, N; Tsongas, Y.
MICHIGAN
Democrats - Conyers, N; Dingell, Y; Kildee, Y; Kilpatrick, N; Levin, Y; Stupak, N.
Republicans - Camp, Y; Ehlers, Y; Hoekstra, N; Knollenberg, N; McCotter, N; Miller, N; Rogers, N; Upton, Y; Walberg, N.
MINNESOTA
Democrats - Ellison, Y; McCollum, Y; Oberstar, Y; Peterson, N; Walz, N.
Republicans - Bachmann, N; Kline, Y; Ramstad, N.
MISSISSIPPI
Democrats - Childers, N; Taylor, N; Thompson, N.
Republicans - Pickering, Y.
MISSOURI
Democrats - Carnahan, Y; Clay, N; Cleaver, N; Skelton, Y.
Republicans - Akin, N; Blunt, Y; Emerson, Y; Graves, N; Hulshof, N.
MONTANA
Republicans - Rehberg, N.
NEBRASKA
Republicans - Fortenberry, N; Smith, N; Terry, N.
NEVADA
Democrats - Berkley, N.
Republicans - Heller, N; Porter, Y.
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Democrats - Hodes, N; Shea-Porter, N.
NEW JERSEY
Democrats - Andrews, Y; Holt, Y; Pallone, Y; Pascrell, N; Payne, N; Rothman, N; Sires, Y.
Republicans - Ferguson, Y; Frelinghuysen, N; Garrett, N; LoBiondo, N; Saxton, Y; Smith, N.
NEW MEXICO
Democrats - Udall, N.
Republicans - Pearce, N; Wilson, Y.
NEW YORK
Democrats - Ackerman, Y; Arcuri, Y; Bishop, Y; Clarke, Y; Crowley, Y; Engel, Y; Gillibrand, N; Hall, Y; Higgins, Y; Hinchey, N; Israel, Y; Lowey, Y; Maloney, Y; McCarthy, Y; McNulty, Y; Meeks, Y; Nadler, Y; Rangel, Y; Serrano, N; Slaughter, Y; Towns, Y; Velazquez, Y; Weiner, Y.
Republicans - Fossella, Y; King, Y; Kuhl, N; McHugh, Y; Reynolds, Y; Walsh, Y.
NORTH CAROLINA
Democrats - Butterfield, N; Etheridge, Y; McIntyre, N; Miller, Y; Price, Y; Shuler, N; Watt, Y.
Republicans - Coble, N; Foxx, N; Hayes, N; Jones, N; McHenry, N; Myrick, N.
NORTH DAKOTA
Democrats - Pomeroy, Y.
OHIO
Democrats - Kaptur, N; Kucinich, N; Ryan, Y; Space, Y; Sutton, N; Wilson, Y.
Republicans - Boehner, Y; Chabot, N; Hobson, Y; Jordan, N; LaTourette, N; Latta, N; Pryce, Y; Regula, Y; Schmidt, N; Tiberi, N; Turner, N.
OKLAHOMA
Democrats - Boren, Y.
Republicans - Cole, Y; Fallin, N; Lucas, N; Sullivan, N.
OREGON
Democrats - Blumenauer, N; DeFazio, N; Hooley, Y; Wu, N.
Republicans - Walden, Y.
PENNSYLVANIA
Democrats - Altmire, N; Brady, Y; Carney, N; Doyle, Y; Fattah, Y; Holden, N; Kanjorski, Y; Murphy, Patrick, Y; Murtha, Y; Schwartz, Y; Sestak, Y.
Republicans - Dent, N; English, N; Gerlach, N; Murphy, Tim, N; Peterson, Y; Pitts, N; Platts, N; Shuster, N.
RHODE ISLAND
Democrats - Kennedy, Y; Langevin, Y.
SOUTH CAROLINA
Democrats - Clyburn, Y; Spratt, Y.
Republicans - Barrett, N; Brown, Y; Inglis, Y; Wilson, Y.
SOUTH DAKOTA
Democrats - Herseth Sandlin, N.
TENNESSEE
Democrats - Cohen, Y; Cooper, Y; Davis, Lincoln, N; Gordon, Y; Tanner, Y.
Republicans - Blackburn, N; Davis, David, N; Duncan, N; Wamp, N.
TEXAS
Democrats - Cuellar, N; Doggett, N; Edwards, Y; Gonzalez, Y; Green, Al, N; Green, Gene, N; Hinojosa, Y; Jackson-Lee, N; Johnson, E. B., Y; Lampson, N; Ortiz, N; Reyes, Y; Rodriguez, N.
Republicans - Barton, N; Brady, Y; Burgess, N; Carter, N; Conaway, N; Culberson, N; Gohmert, N; Granger, Y; Hall, N; Hensarling, N; Johnson, Sam, N; Marchant, N; McCaul, N; Neugebauer, N; Paul, N; Poe, N; Sessions, Y; Smith, Y; Thornberry, N.
UTAH
Democrats - Matheson, N.
Republicans - Bishop, N; Cannon, Y.
VERMONT
Democrats - Welch, N.
VIRGINIA
Democrats - Boucher, Y; Moran, Y; Scott, N.
Republicans - Cantor, Y; Davis, Tom, Y; Drake, N; Forbes, N; Goode, N; Goodlatte, N; Wittman, N; Wolf, Y.
WASHINGTON
Democrats - Baird, Y; Dicks, Y; Inslee, N; Larsen, Y; McDermott, Y; Smith, Y.
Republicans - Hastings, N; McMorris Rodgers, N; Reichert, N.
WEST VIRGINIA
Democrats - Mollohan, Y; Rahall, Y.
Republicans - Capito, N.
WISCONSIN
Democrats - Baldwin, Y; Kagen, N; Kind, Y; Moore, Y; Obey, Y.
Republicans - Petri, N; Ryan, Y; Sensenbrenner, N.
WYOMING
Republicans - Cubin, Y.
representative that is quick and easy. Go to
http://www.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/100
We have been a fan of yours (paid for both our childrens and families to attend your courses) for years and have accepted the fact that you are a Republican. However, you were generally fair. But your criticism of Nancy Pelosi and the silliness of 12 Republicans blaming their votes on her comments is beyond the pale. Since when does a competent legislator- Democrat or Republican - cast a serious vote based on being slightly offended by a little ole lady? Sounds like something coming from windbags Limbaugh and Hannity!You're smarter than that and your listeners, both Democrat and Republican, deserve better in the future.
@Don: Why no chastizement of Pelosi for immature politics??
Don doesn't do that with Pelosi probably becos
she is not worth it.
Way to go. Keep up the great work!
I.a.1. A few words to change --
Rewrite any mortgage that is more than three months… Change to:
Rewrite all mortgages that are more than three months…
This will keep the companies from "cherry picking".
III. One sentence to change --
Remove the capital gains tax completely.
Change to:
Eliminate the capital gains tax of personal residences completely for two years.
This change would help all political parties agree with "The Common Sense Fix".
http://www.votesmart.org/official_five_categories....
First, I am not an economists or politician but I have learned a lot in my years of owning my own businesses and trying to survive in difficult times.
I am sharing my thoughts with you not to promote any political party but to hopefully inspire those who normally do not vote to get registered by this Saturday and participate in our democratic process. It has been said that all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men and women to do nothing. This is not the time to ?do nothing?. We must have our voices heard loud and clear!
Our Constitution starts out by saying ?We the People??. It is time that we the people started acting like we care about this country. The politicians would have us believe that the Constitution starts with ?The wee people??. Their elitists? attitude toward us and their constant idea that they can run our lives and know better what is good for us has got to stop. There is not one straight talking politician in our government. They tell us that governing is too difficult for us to understand and that we just have to ?trust? them to do what is best for us.
Now our part as the governed has also got to change. We must stop looking to Washington for cures of our ailments. We have accepted the Courts intervention into our lives by allowing them to legislate instead of interpret our laws. This is totally unconstitutional and must be stopped. The politicians are allowing it because they know that if they were to legislate the types of rulings that are coming through our courts then they would not be re-elected. So they turn their backs on the Constitution all the while trampling on our individual rights.
If the Congress was a Board of Directors in charge of a corporation and you were a stock holder would you allow them to make the kinds of decisions they are making or would you call for their resignation?
The role of politician was never intended to be a career. It was designed for service, not self-service, to the public. I know what would cure this aspect of politics but I also know that it will never happen because the ones it would affect are the ones who would have to vote for it ? TERM LIMITATIONS!
Here is a truth that stands today ? ?The borrower is servant to the lender.? We need to have this drilled into our collective heads over and over. As I have learned over the years, you can not borrow your way out of debt. Why is it that we don?t expect the same action from the government that we have to implement in our own lives just to survive? No, we say well the government will help us through this crisis. It is high time that we woke up to the reality that WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT! The government earns no money but we have given them the power to confiscate money from our earnings. Programs that are funded by the government are paid for from our earnings. There is saying, ?When you find yourself in a hole ?STOP DIGGING!? Fiscal restraint is called for, not more ?government funding?.
That brings me to my final thought. These bailouts are not good for America. These bailouts fly in the face of capitalism and move us closer to nationalism. I am so concerned about the issues facing our nation that I sat down this morning and read all 110 pages of the proposed ?Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.? (www.speaker.gov). The first rule of getting someone to buy into an idea is to use the fear of loss. The fear of loss is more powerful than the potential for gain. So our politicians, along with the media, have set out on a campaign to invoke fear in each American and then say that they have a plan for relieving our fear. And of course we like sheep are led to the slaughter without opening our mouths. Well it is time to open our collective mouths and speak loudly and clearly. Here are some things I found interesting in this latest 700 TRILLION DOLLAR bailout.
The politicians knew that this was going to be a problem over 2 years ago but chose to do nothing preemptive to avert the situation. Why? Because they saw an opportunity to grab more power for themselves at our expense if the system failed and they could use fear to get us to blindly accept their solution. No rational person believes that the politicians have our interest at heart in this bailout. They see an opportunity to grow government by trillions of dollars through this program. The name the politicians have given this program is the ?Troubled Asset Relief Program? or ?TARP?. I think this is a great name because, just as a tarp is used to cover-up things, the politicians are covering-up their real motives in voting for this program.
I did a little research into the ?mortgage crisis? and found that only 2.75% of mortgages are in some stage of the foreclosure process. I also found that there is 10.5 TRILLION DOLLARS in mortgage debt. That means that if all properties in foreclosure are NEVER sold to anyone for any amount of money then the amount of bailout would only be 288 BILLION DOLLLARS. Why are we committing to 700 BILLION DOLLARS?
If this deal is so good for the taxpayer why not let the private sector purchase the underlying assets and benefit directly from the future gains. Why do we need a middle man? Here are exact words from the plan:
(underlining added)
Section 113 Authority, Paragraph 2
(A) ?Hold the assets to maturity for resale for and until such time as the Secretary determines that the market is optimal for selling such assets, in order to maximize the value for taxpayers, and
(B) Sell such assets at a price that the Secretary determines, based on available financial analysis, will maximize return on investment for the Federal government.?
Is it just me or does it seem to you that this deal is about ?holding? the assets for the taxpayer but ?selling? the assets for the benefit of the Federal government. Their intention is not to return the profit to you and I as taxpayers but to use the profits to grow government. The plan gives Congress the power to increase our federal debt to $11,315,000,000,000 DOLLARS. That?s right it is TRILLION! Also in Section 113 Paragraph 3 they call for the private sector to be involved. Here are the exact words-
?Private Sector Participation ? The Secretary shall encourage the private sector to participate in purchases of troubled assets, and to invest in financial institutions, consistent with the provisions of this section.?
In my humble estimation this proves that this is a power grab and not a move to benefit the taxpayer. If the private sector is going to be involved why not just let the private sector (capitalism) operate and leave the government out.
The banking and mortgage industry must bare some consequence for the loans they made. In my simple mind as a business man, if I had a mortgage holder that could not pay what they agreed to in the original loan I would look to renegotiate the loan before I would foreclose. My logic for this is that the person who is defaulting is going to have to live somewhere and pay somebody something for their housing so why not work with them and keep them in their home. But there I go being logical again. I guess it really is too complicated for me so please Mr. Government help me understand what I should do.
BOTTOM LINE ? VOTE!, VOTE!, VOTE!
they go to their rich children to bail them
out not all their grandchildren. Why don't
we go to the states and ask them to contribute
their budget surpluses? Texas has a $10 bill.
surplus the country needs to borrow now.
Thanks for ignoring the fear tactics of the Congress and the media. I think your plan is great. I sent it with the comment that I am a small businessman. If I do stupid stuff and my business is in trouble, nobody will bail me out. Why should I bail out the big boys who have done stupid stuff?
Glenn
You can suspend honesty in accounting rules all you want and wait 2 years, 10 years, or 50 years -- these securities will continue to be worth pennies on the dollar.
I agree that time is needed to figure things out -- but the only thing I can think of is to spend thousands of work-hours and totally unravel the underlying debt items and repackage them as a different type of security backed by the govt.. Even then -- because these securities are highly leveraged in their current form -- the end result will still be pennies on the dollar.
It was great to hear you on Glenn Beck this morning! I had been feeling confused with his saying we have
to get ready for a depression and your saying you think things are going to be okay. I'm glad you met
together to share with the American public!
This will
1) Eliminate the remaining sub-prime mortgages from causing an additonal crisis next year
2) Not punish the people who are acting responsible. The current proposal only provides financial relief to the individuals who are not paying their sub-prime mortgage, while those who are making payments on outrageous interest rates get left behind.
baby steps will correct the problem(s). The bailout plan as it was proposed, is as
much a shot in the dark as anyone elses plan is, including this one. I also firmly
believe and trust in the people that are pulling the strings and those who are
elected and appointed to make decisions in America's best interest. More than one
comment here alleges misconduct and conflict of interest by Paulson. That is
precisely the conspiracy theorist attitude that creates the media frenzy what is our
American media today. Give it a rest, to sit back and expect something to change on it's
own is irresponsible and ridiculous. Furthermore, I am as forgiving as anyone, but to
completely forgive someone because their mortgage payment is 90 days late, catch it
up and lower their APR to 6% is LUDICROUS. Yet again, the midde-class (who actually pay their bills on time) are forced to bail everyone else out.
Your plan reduces all loans that have been delinquent for 3 months to 6% interest rate. It is designed to help borrowers who have been lured into accepting loans that they can't repay. But remember, the lender is not the only one to blame. The borrower is ultimately responsible for their inability to repay a loan, particularly one that they should have never agreed with in the first place.
Your plan rewards borrowers who default, but give nothing to those who diligently pay on time or ahead of time.
There are plenty of people who are barely making ends meet but hold true to their values, that they should repay their debts first and foremost. Those are the people who end up losing with this plan.
That part of your plan also does nothing to account for people who default simply because they are irresponsible, not because they have no money.
Please rewrite your plan to reduce ALL loans to 6%, or some reasonable value that is available for every borrower, not just those who do not pay on time.
I really appreciate Dave and his team for all they do advance the cause of fiscal soundness in both our personal and national lives.
1 item I heard about the Subprimes is that 60 to 70% of the borrowers could have qualified for standard loans but were "steered" into the subprimes because of a higher commision structure and bonuses for the brokers. Anybody else hear that?
being financed entirely by the taxpayers,wall
street and the big banks needs to pony-up with
some money through a program such as dave
ramsey has proposed,its not right to dump all
these bad assets on the taxpayers.
The plan is simple. Create a market for the assets. Nobody will be the first to step in, so the gov't must be the catalyst.
As far as the insurance idea listed, all I have to say is that gig worked out great for AIG...
Ryan
BUSINESS AND NO ONE BAILED ME OUT I SOLD SOME
ASSETS AND LEARNED A HEARD LESSON.
$ 680 billion into the market 3 days ago and it did diddly squat. This bailout is only for one reason, to bankrupt the middle class.
There are people all over my state (Mississippi) who are against this $700 billion bail out and they are contacting our senators and congressman. I have and my statement is don't do it. They will not get my vote ever again if they do.
This will
1) Eliminate the remaining sub-prime mortgages from causing an additonal crisis next year
2) Not punish the people who are acting responsible. The current proposal only provides financial relief to the individuals who are not paying their sub-prime mortgage, while those who are making payments on outrageous interest rates get left behind.
# Posted by dillon-bert | 10/1/08 3:13 PM
Sounds like a plan that actually brings Americans along who were victimized by the predatory lenders. What's wrong with that?
I was home with 3 kids at the time and we sacrificed in order to stay current
What I'm seeing here in the Common Sense Plan (although most of it's great) is that lug nuts who bought WAY more house than they could afford and have
now become delinquent get not only a "free fix" by rolling their delinquent payments back and a waiver of the pre-payment penalty they were silly
enough (and not forward-thinking enough) to sign BUT they get a better rate than I have.
Wait a minute - I bought what I could afford, worked my tail off to make sure I kept my house and THEY get a "get out of foreclosure free" card?!
I understand that most of them are in over their heads and I DO have empathy for them and their families but why are they who don't pay their
bills, don't budget and don't think ahead suddenly get a bailout? At the risk of sounding angry and selfish: what's in it for me? Why do non-payers
get benefits and bill-payers get the shaft?
Senator Cornyn of Texas has yet to make a statement (unbelievably!) as to how he will vote, even though the vote is within a few hours...c'mon man!
I have contacted both of them by phone and email to indicate how this package is inappropriate. Thankfully, my congressman, Sam Johnson...Texas 3rd, has a brain and voted the NO to the House version.
According to the U.S. Department of Treasury guidelines issued in 2001, "Subprime borrowers typically have weakened credit histories that include payment delinquencies, and possibly more severe problems such as charge-offs, judgments, and bankruptcies. They may also display reduced repayment capacity as measured by credit scores, debt-to-income ratios, or other criteria that may encompass borrowers with incomplete credit histories."
I believe that the fixed 6% rate should be extended to ALL loans, subprime or not. Rewarding people with a bad or incomplete credit history, while not rewarding those who have a good credit history (meaning that they have proven responsibility) is akin to the current proposal.
Karen Early
TX
Besides Dave's common sense solution, we need to give the next president the line item veto to cut pork belly spending. And, again "We the people" can hold the next president accountable for his actions in office.
"i like the first 2 bullet points but I don't understand what eliminating the capital gains tax will do to clean up this mess. Won't that just enable the wild-eyed gamblers to go crazy again?"
I'm not sure what eliminating capital gains taxes will do at this point. We have a huge deficit and we need all of the revenue we can get to service this debt. Cutting the cap gains tax now would probably not be a good idea.
The bottom line is that home prices need to fall back in line with incomes. We need to get back to requiring 20% down and a 36% (max) backend DTI to buy a home. The folks in Washington seem to think that falling home prices are the problem, when in fact that is the solution to this mess. Let the prices fall quickly instead of mucking around in the market and prolonging the agony for years.
I also hear the stories that business can only run based on a line of credit -- once they sold stock, and sold items -- and yet they have a great, wonderful businesses... why can't a small business raise money by stock? It's got a thousand regulations... because some people will try to rip you off. But there are many businesses, include such folks as Dave Ramsey, and Chick-fil-a, who can rest on Sunday, and shockingly... stay in business. Practically, how did Microsoft make it for YEARS without debt, if it was so important to have credit... no, as my father-in-law says, Quality wins out.
Growth maybe slower, and the profits not as large, and fewer games played with our crazy tax code... but a line of credit isn't the only thing needed to be successful.
I also hear the stories that business can only run based on a line of credit -- once they sold stock, and sold items -- and yet they have a great, wonderful businesses... why can't a small business raise money by stock? It's got a thousand regulations... because some people will try to rip you off. But there are many businesses, include such folks as Dave Ramsey, and Chick-fil-a, who can rest on Sunday, and shockingly... stay in business. Practically, how did Microsoft make it for YEARS without debt, if it was so important to have credit... no, as my father-in-law says, Quality wins out.
Growth maybe slower, and the profits not as large, and fewer games played with our crazy tax code... but a line of credit isn't the only thing needed to be successful.
My question is what reason do we have to believe that, by pouring money and/or other government assurances into them, they will then proceed to open up the credit pipelines?
Took about 40 minutes to send & I have cable
internet. Hope that means a lot of people are
sending the same message. Thanks Dave!
Carrie in Flower Mound Texas
We need to concentrate on the House again now.
What can we do if it passes in the House?
Some ideas:
* General Strike: shut the country down like they do in France
* Consumption Strike: buy only essentials and whenever possible buy used. No eating out. No coffee at Tarbucks.
Actually, the consumption strike helps those who are striking by enabling them to save more.
Other ideas?
Good point steve schmitt. If anything we need to encourage saving. I'd rather see no taxes on interest income for a few years in order to encourage saving.
People who have bad credit should not be able to get loans. That is what has put us in this situation and now congress is trying to pass this bill to free up credit. FREE Credit is the problem!!
If a person or business has bad credit they should not get a loan. If you can't come up with 20% down then rent and save your money. Don"t spend more money than you earn and save money every month. OUR GOVERNMENT AND THE PEOPLE ARE OVER EXTENDED !!!
That can't work over the long term. If you spend more than you have you go broke and hopefully you learn your lesson and don't do that again.
I make 35000 a year and my house is paid for in full I have 12 months money for an emergency fund in the bank and I fully fund my Roth every month. How did I do that? I pay cash . I Pay No interest to credit cards. I bought a house that I can afford put 20% down and paid extra every month. WATCH DAVE RAMSEY. PEOPLE GROW UP!!!
Vote For this wasteful spending bill and I don't vote for you.
1) To insure these things you have to know how likely they are to default. No one knows. It is doubtful anyone can know. If we did know, this problem would be much easier to solve.
2) For insurance to work you have to charge people what it's worth. If there's a 20% chance of default per year, the value has to be about 20% of what you'd pay out. Let's assume we could figure out what the default chance was and charged that amount. The people who need it most couldn't afford it, it would be too much. The reason they're in danger of going bankrupt is because the probability is too high.
3) The house is on fire already. In many cases, these things are already effectively in default, it's just that no one has said "uh, I don't think the emperor is wearing any clothes." This would be the equivalent of calling up the insurance company and saying "Hey, I'd like to buy homeowner insurance because my house is on fire." They'd laugh you off the line. If they did decide to insure you they'd say "how much would it cost to replace your house Mr. Smith? We'll charge you that much premium." In other words, there's no point.
4) What this means is that either the government doesn't charge them enough to afford to insure them, or it does. If it does, they can't afford it. If it doesn't, then the cost of the banks claiming their insurance payouts will be more than the cost of the premiums.
5) This means that the House bailout is actually the largest bailout suggested by anyone. What they're saying is "minus premiums, we will pay for every single bad mortgage backed security in the system." I guarantee that will run to trillions and trillions of dollars.
Now, the idea of insuring certain types of securities is not a bad one. But the current crop of mortgage backed securities are not a good candidate because they include such a high proportion of fraud and because they include a lot of exotic variations that make them too hard to value. If the government (or anyone else) is going to insure something it has to be simple enough to understand and relatively fraud proof. The current batch is neither. Insuring something like money market funds, on the other hand, would make sense.
On top of that, I understand these fools want to decrease the capital gains tax to zero, which as Think Progress points out is completely pointless (people aren't not investing because they are worried about taxation, they are not investing in these companies because they think they'll lose everything they put in.) Heck, private equity firms raised 323 billion this year, it isn't even that there isn't plenty of capital slopping around, it's just not interested in helping out insolvent financial institutions. The phrase "good money after bad" is probably going through a lot of investors minds.
And then there's the deregulation foolishness, the idea being to allow companies to keep securities on book at their "maturity price" rather than their "market price". Since most of those securities are not going to mature at those prices, which is why the market price is so low, this is the equivalent of saying "let's all just pretend that these securities are still good and that you're not bankrupt. lalalalala, if I plug my ears and close my eyes the big bad financial crisis will go away!"
It is also a version of how the Japanese crippled their economy for going on 20 years now, by keeping zombie assets on the books of zombie banks, which then shuffled along unable to lend enough money to get the economy going.
So yes, Republican bailout ideas. Stupid. Doesn't mean that what seems to be the current consensus Democratic plan is very good either, but at least it isn't brain dead.
(Oh, and in the meantime the House Republicans stopped a 56 billion dollar bill which would have extended food stamps, employment insurance and so on. Glad to see they have their priorities straight.)
To preface, I own a business. I acquired an attractive line of credit this very day. My wife bought a car last week at 4.7525% interest. A Credit Card company enticed me to move one of my personal cards to them on Monday because of their lower interest rate (wait til they figure out I pay in full every month). You see, if you are responsible and pay your bills there is no shortage of credit.
The proposed bill being voted on this evening seems to protect the ability to make loans that make no sense from a business perspective... And to cover the behinds of those financial institutions that were stupid enough to participate in lending to those that had no business borrowing in the first place.
A large resounding NO should be what the Senate does this evening..
I would vote to put you, Donald Trump, Steve Forbes, Sean Hannity, Jack Welch and I would say Warren Buffet until I found out he was advisor to Obama in Congress and get rid of the $160,000 per person that sits in Congress now. I really believe you guys are American and we could probably save on salary by putting you in. For sure we would get real answers and a good return for our money. God Bless you and the others for putting this together. I just pray Congress will listen.
State of MD governor Martin Omalley just this year increased our taxes on everything.... it's killing the economy and the little people.... while the fat cats in government have plenty! They have OUR money. It's time for government to live on a budget like I have too. Raising taxes is no longer a valid way to fix their money shortfalls. The people are paying way too much now to live here.
Time to start analyzing the programs that are currently in place and cost money. If they no longer work, stop tossing money at it and CUT the program or service. Period. If something does not work, tossing more of MY money at it is not the answer.
Barbara Mikulski needs to go... Ben Cardin needs to go.. .and Steny Hoyer.
Here's the tally:
Voted no: (NOTE: I'm missing one, not sure who)
Allard, Wayne
Brownback, Sam
Bunning, Jim
Cantwell, Maria
Cochran, Thad
Crapo, Mike
DeMint, Jim
Dole, Elizabeth
Dorgan, Byron
Enzi, Mike
Feingold, Russ
Inhofe, Jim
Johnson, Tim
Landrieu, Mary
Nelson, Bill
Roberts, Pat
Sanders, Bernie
Sessions, Jeff
Shelby, Richard
Stabenow, Debbie
Tester, Jon
Vitter, David
Wicker, Roger
Wyden, Ron
Voted yes:
Akaka, Daniel
Alexander, Lamar
Barrasso, John
Baucus, Max
Bayh, Evan
Bennett, Robert
Biden, Joe
Bingaman, Jeff
Bond, Kit
Boxer, Barbara
Brown, Sherrod
Burr, Richard
Byrd, Robert
Cardin, Ben
Carper, Tom
Casey, Bob, Jr.
Chambliss, Saxby
Clinton, Hillary Rodham
Coburn, Tom
Coleman, Norm
Collins, Susan
Conrad, Kent
Corker, Bob
Cornyn, John
Craig, Larry
Dodd, Chris
Domenici, Pete
Durbin, Dick
Ensign, John
Feinstein, Dianne
Graham, Lindsey
Harkin, Tom
Hatch, Orrin
Hutchison, Kay Bailey
Inouye, Daniel
Isakson, Johnny
Kerry, John
Klobuchar, Amy
Kohl, Herb
Kyl, Jon
Lautenberg, Frank
Leahy, Patrick
Levin, Carl
Lieberman, Joe
Lincoln, Blanche
Lugar, Dick
Martinez, Mel
McCain, John
McCaskill, Claire
McConnell, Mitch
Menendez, Bob
Mikulski, Barbara
Murkowski, Lisa
Murray, Patty
Nelson, Ben
Obama, Barack
Pryor, Mark
Reed, Jack
Reid, Harry
Rockefeller, Jay
Salazar, Ken
Schumer, Chuck
Smith, Gordon
Snowe, Olympia
Specter, Arlen
Stevens, Ted
Sununu, John E.
Thune, John
Voinovich, George
Warner, John
Webb, Jim
Whitehouse, Sheldon
Not voting, or I missed their vote:
Grassley, Chuck
Kennedy, Ted
Gregg, Judd
Hagel, Chuck
You know what to do.
added a bunch of junk on to seeten the pot.
Typical Washington
problem I guess we need a write in...Maybe we
should vote for Hank Paulsen He seems to have
all of the answers.
anomalous peak in home prices was and then allow people to have their mortgages rewritten for some reasonable percentage lower. This could prevent imminent foreclosures. This could also
prevent those foreclosures not seen coming down the line with the current state of affairs. Also, for the people who bought during that peak who are faring fine with their payments,
well hey, they'd have extra money every month to spend in our economy. That would be like myself, and I'd feel like I got a more fare deal -- not just bailing someone else out. The
lenders would take the losses from this type of plan, but could the losses be as bad as what's happening now? Overall, what I see, is that housing prices inclined way faster than
salaries did, and those two graphs should rate upward similarly given our homes eat up the bulk of our incomes. I'm not an economist, but I feel if we have any kind of "bailout", it
should be one that takes us back in time a little and trends those graphs properly and helps the people in this country who apparently were drawn into a crazy market created by the
big companies, or we won't really stabilize for quite a long time.
You would have my vote!
Thanks for everything. On your home page, you have a link to a list of how representatives voted on the bailout plan. Can you put one up for the Senators that just passed that garbage?
1. Foreclosures are the problem that lead to banks' diminshing asset balances (and subsequent FDIC seizure). Fixing the deliquent mortgage rates to 6% won't help decrease foreclosures, especially if the teaser rates were reset upwards to somewhere around 6%.
2. Changes in accounting rules don't solve the foreclosure problem.
3. Eliminating the capital gains tax completely doesn't cost "nothing". It lowers the amount of money that the government collects - thus increasing government debt. Guess who gets to pay that increased debt back later?
No more stimulus checks backed by asian banks. I run a mahcine shop with 21 employees of which 17 of them makes less than $30,000.
These people spend all of their take home income trying to get thru life. It would be the right thing to let them use their gross
income. The government will get their money thru sales tax.
Looks as if the senators and representatives got scared and voted the way that they wanted, and not the way the people wanted them to vote. Take for Example McCaskill, "stated that the bill was a lousy bill, but she had to vote for it" That is the most absurd thing that I have every heard. Once again for sharing your information about this topic in a way that everyday individuals can understand it. Since the passed bill, I have written the senators and representatives again, and told them not to forget my shareholder check every month, you can bet your sweet _____, that I won't be counting on that check. And the senators and representatives that voted yes on the bill, can for sure kiss their Sweet ______, by counting on being voted out of office.
Missouri
You would have my vote.
Thanks for all you do Dave.
Your three steps make perfect sense but it is hard to quantify results, Will it be enough in time? How about adding a 4th measure. Sell government bonds (like war bonds) to cover the need for immediate liquidity at say 6%. I think Americians would think it was patriotic to invest in a fix to the mess we have and they would be rewarded by a reasonable return. This way the necessary funds come from all of us rather than eventually being paid for by printing money which has led to the ruin of numerous countries. Tell me that the government wont be forced to print huge piles of money money to cover the $700B.
1. Allow a person to withdraw from their retirement accounts to pay off a mortgage or to by a house (must be their primary and only home). The withdrawals would be tax free with no penalties.
2. Reduce the corporate income tax to zero. This would make the United States the corporate tax haven of the world. You would not have enough people to fill all the jobs.
You have a lot of power I think you should pray that your advise is correct.
to remove the capital gains tax. When you
or I sell something and we make a profit,
I may or may not reuse that capital gain
to make more profits. If I don't, then
it's just a profit, and I don't necessarily
have an objection to keeping the profit.
However, if I then reuse that gain to make
further gains, then that capital has become a
tool to make more money--just like the tools
a craftsman uses to make money with. Why
should we tax the money the craftsman makes
with his tools, but not tax the money the
investor makes with his tools? That doesn't
seem equitable to me.
Thank you for sharing the Common Sense Fix.
http://mikepence.house.gov/UploadedFiles/RSC_Econo...
Contact your Congressman to support this now.
Thank you.
In sending on his plan to our? gov't reps/senators,I found the following article at the site of the US Joint Economic Committee - Sept 16, 2008, I don't think I need to comment:
New JEC Analysis: American Families Are Spending Twice As Much On Household Basics Than 8 Years ago, But Incomes Are Stagnant
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
September 16, 2008
NEW JEC ANALYSIS: AMERICAN FAMILIES ARE SPENDING TWICE AS MUCH ON HOUSEHOLD BASICS THAN 8 YEARS AGO, BUT INCOMES ARE STAGNANT
From 2000-2007 Food, Gas, and Health Care Bills Rose, While Incomes Fell
Schumer, Maloney, Emanuel Slam Bush Economic Record As Another Gov’t Report Shows High Prices for Consumers
Washington, D.C. – Senator Charles E. Schumer, Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee (JEC), along with Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, JEC Vice Chair, and Rep. Rahm Emanuel, Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, released a new JEC analysis showing that families are spending twice as much on household expenses than they did in 2000, even though incomes were stagnant. The lawmakers released this new JEC analysis as the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported the new Consumer Price Index (CPI) for August, which showed that despite the small decline in prices from the previous month, prices are up 7.4% over the past two years.
Sen. Schumer said, “Under the Bush administration over the last seven years, families’ pockets have been picked at the grocery store, the gas pump, and each time they make their home energy, health care, and mortgage payments. The Bush administration has presided over an unprecedented middle class economic squeeze -- household living expenses have more than doubled, while incomes have actually shrunk. The consumer price index released today reminds us of this stark reality for middle class families – we’re doing worse under the Bush administration than we were doing under the Clinton administration.”
Rep. Maloney stated, “Families are being squeezed in a vise grip of stagnant wages and rising prices for basic necessities. With inflation hovering at highs not seen in decades, buying groceries, filling the gas tank, and paying health care premiums are making it tough for families to make ends meet. The drain on family budgets is more evidence of the failure of the past eight years and the need for a new direction on economic policy. Americans can’t afford not to change course on the economy.”
Rep. Emanuel said, "The Bush Administration has given middle class families smaller paychecks and bigger bills. While gas, health care, food and energy prices have skyrocketed, median household income has decreased since George Bush took office. Middle class families are struggling to get by and get ahead. Republicans shouldn't continue to stand in the way of a plan to get our economy back on track.”
The Joint Economic Committee analysis also found that:
• The increase in cost-of-living expenses for the average American household between 2000 and 2007 is more than double the increase during the first 7 years under President Clinton. In addition to the dramatic increases in food and gasoline expenses, health care spending was about $3,400 higher in 2007 than it was in 2000 – more than twice the $1,500 increase between 1992 and 1999. American households recently have been feeling the pain at the pump and the pinch at the grocery store checkout, but the average household has also seen many of their other living expenses rise dramatically since President Bush took office.
• Incomes have not kept pace with the recent rise in basic living expenses. From 1992 to 1999, real incomes for the average household rose by over 20 percent - an average of 2.8 percent growth per year. In contrast, the average household was making half a percent LESS in 2006 (the most recent year for which household income is available) than they were in 2000. The 2000s economic recovery was the first since World War II where the typical household saw net income losses. In other words, the typical household has not recouped their income losses from the last recession as they face the current economic downturn. Real household incomes were $324 lower in 2007 than they were in 2000 (the last year for which we have data), according to new Census figures.
The Joint Economic Committee, established under the Employment Act of 1946, was created by Congress to review economic conditions and to analyze the effectiveness of economic policy.
www.jec.senate.gov
# # #
I had planned on voting for McCain for his stand on earmarks. But last night he
voted for wooden arrows, rum makers, and Hollywood producers. Now I have no one
fiscally responsible to vote for. I hope the House stands strong and votes this
thing down. Being debt-free means I can live with the after-math (if any).
find it hard to make ends meet. I have 2 jobs and no social life. I did get my house through Fannie Mae
and then got caught with an adjustable rate, which I have now, after several months of red tape, have a
FHA Loan. I have never missed a payment and struggle every month. But my complaint is not to the Mortgage
Companies and Banks. It is with the Home Insurance Companies. I pay $2800 a year for Insurance, just
because I live south of Interstate 10 in South Alabama. And because of Hurricanes in the past few years
it is difficult to pay my insurance. My mortgage is no big deal. It's the insurance that is so much. Why are
they not bringing these scum balls into the mix? Why just because I live south of an imaginary line do I
have to pay so much more. My house appraised at $126k but it is insured for $208k. Why? So they can make
more money!!! The Government should look more closely at the Insurance Companies as well as the Mortgage
Companies and Banks. Thanks, Susan
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/economy/v...
Alexander, Corker and Gordon with no avail. I do
not plan on every voting for either of them
again. Dave, please help the people come with
plan to get term limits passed. I fear that they
will never pass a bill that limits their power.
Our nation needs help. Thanks for being a patriot.
We need economic cleansing!
The House voted against it, the market dipped, then recovered. A few banks have closed or been bought, but these were all, pretty much, institutions that were in trouble months ago.
Now, the Senate passed a steaming pile of pork last night, but only 1/3 of them are up for election in 30-some days; our Representatives are ALL up for election.
They are asking us, taxpayers, to co-sign on a debt-consolidation loan to make up for Wall Street's and Congress' frivolous spending/legislation.
I ain't buyin' it!
Now, more than ever, you need to write (email) and let your Representative know what you think.
government was established for. I do not want
to burden my children with this, I would
rather help them through a depression. I will
fire anyone who votes in favor of the bail out
on November 4th.
bailout proposal. I have done my part in sending The Common Sense Fix to my House Representative and made
it very clear that I am tired of fixing everyone else's stupid tax!! This country has become a country of
no consequences and it has to stop!! My husband and I have made our fair share of financial mistakes but
we are also NOT looking to anyone else to fix them. We made our own bed and now we have to not only lie in
it, but get up and fix it!! Americans need to do the same. Quit rellying on tax payers to bail you out
when you made the mistakes!! The cycle needs to stop and Congress needs to remember who they work for!!
Thank you for a common sense solution!! Loans and new regs, way to go!!!
I have forwarded your link and contacted my Reps. I am so upset that they are voting this in I could scream. My husband and I own THREE small business, Manufacturing, E-Retail and Real Estate...and I will have to say that we are surviving...not due to bailouts...but due to hard work, sound decisions, not living beyond our business or personal means and simply working really hard.
American is becoming a service based economy and that is scary. We need to bring manufacturing back to the US. Not the other way around. I do as little importing from overseas as possible.
Bailing out those that have created the problem is insane. Yes something that needs to happen..but not this...
Greed is going to be our downfall....pure and simple.
$122B seems really low amount. If those investors were allowed to keep what they earned, they would likely invest more.
Want proof? How much money did Buffet just invest in Goldman Sachs and GE? $18B!!! AND IN THIS "ECONOMIC CRISIS" TOO!
Investors generate capital - generates jobs with workers (following the Total Money Makeover, of course) who pay income taxes, buy things that pay sales taxes creating even more demand that continues to circulate more capital, collecting more taxes, and so on...
You cannot point to any prosperous time in US history that was the result of taxation.
the bailout/government intervention does nothing but kill off another piece of America and replaces with USS of Amerika.
I've heard a few congressmen and senators making the argument that this is an investment that will be paid back to the treasury with interest. WHOA.... Borrowing money to invest it???? Not a good idea for individuals, really not a good idea for the federal government.
Bolton and others we may have a chance.
REGARDLESS, "WE" all need to VOTE those who
voted "YES" out of Washington (and I wish,
out of the Country--they ARE NOT AMERICANS)!!!
Keep up the good fight!!!!
in thinking this bailout sucks! I am a homeowner, have owned my own
business and pay my taxes. I feel like a responsible citizen and it
makes me cringe to think this bailout could pass. This is just stupid.
Why reward bad behavior. I mean, the bailout truly is a reflection
of this nation's attitude. Everyone wants it Now. Whatever "it" is,
they have to have it and have it now. Our country is being ran like
we have limitless credit cards...but instead of creditors coming after
you if it doesn't get paid, we are in debt to other nations. Yikes.
It's been said many times, but seriously, the government needs to be as
far away as possible from my finances.
I have been praying.
Our Senate didn't listen, I guess cause they think we are all idiots.
I am so upset about how stupid our government is being right now. So, I guess I will keep on praying,
cause only Jesus can fix this now!
I enjoy listening to your show and it's good that you are calming your listeners.
After being in the mortgage business and then subsequently the investment advisory and wealth management business I have come to realize your idea's won't work with regard to your instructive letters to Congress. Many of the subprime loans are priced at artificially low payment rates, many at 2%. Some are interest only. These people can't afford a 6%, fully amortized payment
Many of the other aspects of your plan aren't rational either. This "bailout" plan as produced on Monday could have worked. As it is now there have been many special interests added BUT, most are extensions of current plans, not new, bad ideas. If the loans are purchased from the lenders by the U.S. at correct pricing the lender could possibly stay afloat, the loan could be re-worked out and the taxpayer could end up making money and then the national debt could be paid down.
As you know, 1.2 trillion dollars disappeared Monday (obviously, if everyone sold out). Current ISM figures, jobless claims and other fundamental economic as well as technical indicators point to further loss. I agree with a long term outlook, but if you protect assets now and buy in at further reduced prices you're better off. The sale isn't over yet.
I've had hard times but I've never been bankrupt and don't really want to be.
with a balloon payment at the end. I know, why did I do that? I did it with the assurance of my mortgage broker that after 2 years
could refinance to a conventional mortgage with no problem. My two years will be up in January. I've made perfect payments, though
I've sacrificed in other areas to meet my obligations. Your plan only offers aid to someone who is behind. Judging from the plans I've
been hearing about my situation would be better if I was in default. I don't think I should have any special treatment, but certainly
don't think that leaving people who are current on a bad loan out of the deal is fair.
1. What percentage of voting taxpayers have $250,000 in a bank or financial institution?
2. How much money (from investments) do the "Politicians, their families, and their Cronies" stand to lose if this does not Pass?
What do you think of the government taking over or buying home mortgages then refinancing them back to the homeowner.
It would be done in two parts. 50% would be a silent second with no interest and due upon sale.
The other 50% would be a regular loan at 6% over 30 years to include taxes and insurance. I think this is a great idea.
some of that $700 billion would be in real estate.
If you must vote for the bill add two poison pills to the bill.
POISON PILL 1:
Have Homeland Security vet all Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., and American International Group Inc. management down to Accounting Managers for violation of 18 USC 2381 , namely, for Al-Qaeda ties.
POISON PILL 2:
Do a Praeto Analysis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle) of all the accountants and lawyers at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., and insurer American International Group Inc. Determine from which schools 80% of the accountants and lawyers graduated and have Homeland Security vet the Schools of Accounting and Law for violation of 18 USC 2381 , namely, Professors with Al-Qaeda ties.
WHY SHOULD HOMELAND SECURITY VET FOR THESE GROUPS FOR AL-QAEDA TIES UNDER 18 USC 2381?
September 11, 2001 was only 7 years ago, mortgage terms extend to 50 years (http://www.housinginfo.com/choosing-the-right-mort...) and Car Loans extend to 84 Months – 7 years (http://www.carsdirect.com/auto-loans/car-loan-calc...) . A mere blink of an eye to people of the Middle East. Executing a plan over a 100 year period would not be unthinkable. The Plan would place moles in Schools of Accounting and Law to teach the flawed ideas which lead to the currfent bankruptcy problem at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., and American International Group Inc.
The Strategy of Al-Qaeda (http://www.ypfp.org/the_strategy_of_al_qaeda)
This article was written by YPFP member Joshua Alexander Geltzer. It was first published in The Transnational and Non-State Armed Groups Project on November 12, 2007.
Bin Laden has expressed his strategic intent to “spread out U.S. forces” and “make America bleed to the point of bankruptcy. ” To do so, al-Qaeda plans “to expand the conflict throughout the region and engage the US in a long war of attrition,” The failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., and American International Group Inc. seem to indicate America has bleed to the point of bankruptcy as stated by Top Government Officials.
WHY 7 YEARS IS A BLINK OF THE EYE
The Battle of Baghdad in 1258 by Mongol leader Hulagu Khan, in which, Baghdad was captured, sacked, and burned is still discussed in Baghdad offices. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Baghdad_(1258)). The Christian force, Georgians, lead the destruction library of Baghdad.
“The Muslims suffered many setbacks, including mass slaughter at the hands of the crusaders and their allies (such as the Mongols), and the Muslims had to survive their divisions, and the murder of their leadership. Yet, no sooner one leader fell, another took his place. No sooner one group, one place, became exhausted by war and destruction, another rose to continue the fight. Regardless of the losses, the Muslims were stirred by the call for jihad, and held by the firm belief that victory was ultimately to be theirs. And so it was. In 1291, after two hundred years of war, culminating in hundreds of battles, the crusaders were removed from the Muslim lands.”
Quoted from: The Crusades http://www.islamworlduk.com/scripts/prodView.asp?i...
Coming forward in time, Winston Churchill CREATED the current problem by creating Iraq, Iran, Jordan and Palestine from the Ottoman Empire. He handpicked kings, Abdullah and Faisal, the sons of the sharif of Mecca.
“In Churchill's time, radical Islamic Wahhabi tribes ruled by a desert sheik named Ibn Saud caused trouble. After incessant warfare with his rivals, Saud prevailed and Saudi Arabia was born. That country continues to this day to be the most determined promoter of an extreme form of Islam that is virulently antiSemitic.
Wahhabism, then and now, is at the heart of the Arab nationalist resistance to foreign influence. It brings grief to those who try to Westernize the Middle East, whether to bolster the empire as was Churchill's goal, or to protect Western interests as is Bush's. It is at the heart of Osama bin Laden's crusade to get rid of the Sauds, who he believes have sold out to the Americans just as the sherif and his sons sold out to the British.”
Quoted from: Churchill also confounded by Middle East (http://www.spokesmanreview.com/breaking/story.asp?...)
How many of the "Yea's" are up for re-election this year?
And, how many of the "Nay's" are up for re-election this year?
Wouldn't it be interesting if the vast majority of those who voted FOR this bill are 'safe' from the ire of voters?
And wouldn't it be interesting if the vast majority of senators who voted AGAINST it, were afraid of losing their cushy jobs next month?
I just thought this might be an interesting comparison, and a good reason to develop a looong memory... the next senate voting cycle is in two years... then another two years to finish cleaning them out...
We need to continue to let our "elected officials" understand how we really feel about the direction this country in going in. WE need to become the loudest, biggest "special interest" group and let our representatives know how we feel.
Keep sending it to your congressment everyone. Keep up the good work.
panic and rollercoasting in the markets strikes
me as manipulation by people determined to
change the election. Please keep working to
instill uncommon sense, Mr. Ramsey. Throwing
money at this mess will NOT fix it.
"...begin to shape the financial stability of our country and the economic security of our people."
This horrendous pile of dung thrown at the American people is not merely a "solution" to the current "crisis". The intent is crystal-clear: this legislation is but the first step down a longer road where economic freedom becomes a faint memory. Marx and Engels are laughing uproariously, while our founders are furiously spinning in their graves.
The government can fix everything. You've done such a swell job so far!
Social Security works and pays for itself...right? OK, well medicare works and it's self sufficient.....right? OK, well the billions spent on the Superconducting Super Collider that was built here in Texas worked and paid for itself....right? Ok, so why can are representatives not fix this problem? But, they balanced their house checking accounts, oops.
A couple of years ago the Clintons were broke...and now they are rich. Believe me....the government can fix the financial markets just like they have fixed their own finicial problems. Add in enough pork in which will go out the front door and return in the back door, and some don't care about anyony else. How do these people sleep at night?
Show me where to sign up for recall votes for these financial wizards like they did in California.
You know, cream rises to the top, but SCUM does too!
I will vote against Republican Texas senators Kay Bailey Hutchison, John Cornyn, and presidential canidate John McCain. If I am going to get democratic policies I am going to vote that way or some other way.
Carolyn Maloney (D) on Fox Business say's she voted yea beacause her party leaders told her everthing would fail. She is on the economic committee which should know what is going on....can you say dah, what's going on! Maybe someone who is awake during meetings should be on the committee.
I am so very thankful for the nay vote fom my rep. Republicans Joe barton, fellow and Jed Henserling, and all the others from the house Dem. or Rep. I know you can all sleep well knowing you did the right thing.
Lary, Texas
P.S. Sorry Palin, but you will just be VP which is not enough. If you were only running for president now.
country WANT more than they can afford. What's even more troubling is the fact that many banks and lending
facilities are willing to look the other way and grant these irresponsible people their WANTS. In the
process many elite bank CEO's and mortgage lending CEO's are making millions off of loans they process to
people who can't make the payments. To me and many other responsible people who live within their means,
I find it appalling that they are all getting breaks because of their irresponsible behavior. It is simple,
don't spend more than you make. If you do you deserve to suffer the consequences. Let's try this, why not
reward all of us who make all of our payments on time every month,every year, with a big bonus at the end of
the year. We need to start rewarding the responsible not the irresponsible.
Fannie Mae caving in to pressure from the Clinton administration to ease credit requirements...all
to improve the home ownership percentage of lower-income citizens who couldn't qualify otherwise.
Just Google "New York Times Steven Holmes" and #1 on the returned list is an article from September
1999 announcing the plan, but already with warnings predicting government "bailouts" and "rescues".
Rather than tackling hard issues like improving education and creating jobs so these people could
increase their standard of living and live the American dream, they simply changed the rules to agree
with their objectives and garner votes. Leave it to our government to constantly lower the bar for
instant gratification rather than raising it to promote hard work and accountability.
Does any of this sound familiar, you Dave Ramsey fans out there??? Children do what feels good, and
adults learn to delay pleasure to accomplish long-term goals for the greater good. By this definition,
Washington is FULL of selfish little pre-schoolers fighting in the sandbox. They need more than a
"time out"...they need to be taken behind the woodshed and given a dose of old-school.
Voters it's up to you.
enjoy their days in Congress. I will become
part of the group that sees that these 2 knucle
heads get voted out of office after giving more
of my hard earned money away
We are in a tough financial time, and there are legitimate concerns it could get worse fast. But it’s enough of a problem and concern that we should have taken a little more time and looked at legitimate alternatives – particularly more market-based approaches. We were told that the original proposal was the best we could do. But when people said no it got better. We were then told that the bill we had to vote on last Monday, which was an improvement, was the best we could do. But when the House said no, it got better. Finally, we were told that the bill before us today, which was indeed better, was the best we could do. The bill got better over time, but we’ll never know how much better it could have become because of the locked down process in the House. If Speaker Pelosi had allowed an open process, we could have explored better options.”
I am amazed at the things Pelosi has done in her career! I hope the people of her state fire her butt! If there was ever a politician that needed firing, it is her. Her little speech before the first vote was pathetic. I do not vote one main party, but those that are not afraid to cross party lines and make America better. Driving our country into more debt and/or printing gobs of more money will not help long term. History will show that those that voted yes only delayed the inevitable. Warren Buffet even says an additional ONE TRILLION will be needed in the next 18 to 24 months! We all need to buckle down and prepare for the soon to come recession. Even if the banks have money to loan, who is going to borrow? Americans have less spendable income from higher energy costs and the associated inflation! Fire every politician that said yes, and in my humble opinion do not replace them with the "other" main party candidate; but rather go for an independent or smaller party candidate!
If anyone has a loan over 6%, it would be advantageous to default on your loan, and thus be elligable for the Dave's 6% government backed loan.
upholding the constitution? Isn't the Federal
Government a not for profit organization? Why
are they dabbling in private industry?
This is just a bogus notion and it stuns me how many people of modest means support this clap-trap. Trickle down economics is as dead as Reagan, whose administration was nearly as fiscally ruinous as the Bush II years.
Let me be clear that I am definitely a supporter of the DRS and its affiliates and in fact, I too live in conjunction with the basic teachings here. Nevertheless, this financial mess is far larger than most understand and there has to be some drastic action taken.
We have just added your latest post "3 Steps To Change The Nation's Future" to our <a href="http://www.creditca-rd.info"> Directory of Credit Cards</a>. You can check the inclusion of the post <a href="http://www.creditca-rd.info/story.php?title=3-steps-to-change-the-nations-future"> here </a> . We are delighted to invite you to submit all your future posts to the <a href="http://www.creditca-rd.info"> directory </a> for getting a huge base of visitors to your website and gaining a valuable backlink to your site.
Warm Regards
Credit car-d Team
http://www.creditca-rd.info