Who will help the Renters?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Ps104_33, Sep 28, 2008.

  1. Ps104_33

    Ps104_33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well it seems like the idiots finally reached a deal. Socialism is here. I was in favor of just letting the chips fall where they will. But I have a question. Below is a provision in the bill:


    The summary issued by Ms. Pelosi’s office said the legislation will include provisions giving Treasury the ability to work with cash-strapped homeowners whose mortgages are purchased by the federal government to refinance into a more affordable mortgage. Other foreclosure-prevention measures included in the agreement are an extension of the tax holiday for homeowners who face foreclosure, as well as a tax break for community banks who held shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The rescue plan will allow affected banks to take an immediate tax deduction on losses from investments in the two firms, which were taken over by the federal government earlier this month.


    Now my question. If you rent a house, pay your monthly payments faithfully and on time, and your lease is up your landlord can decide for whatever reason not to renew your lease, you will have to find another domicile.
    Now you have another individual who gets a sub-prime mortgage, puts nothing down, falls behind on the payments, gets forclosed on and the government steps in to help.
    What is the difference between these two people and why does one get preferential treatment? Cant these people just rent like many other people do who made the right decision?
     
  2. dragonfly

    dragonfly
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,594
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very good question! The truth is that the rich always prey on the poor, period!
     
  3. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,429
    Likes Received:
    72
    Exactly. Renters like me don't get preferential treatment when we make the wise decision not to buy homes we can't afford.
     
  4. Ps104_33

    Ps104_33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    0
    Right. The people who fell for these sub-prime deals are just as guilty as everyone else involved in this house of cards. These filthy democrats need to quit trying to lay the blame squarely on Wall Street. There is plenty of blame to go around. They strong-armed the banks into giving these bad loans in the first place.
     
  5. dragonfly

    dragonfly
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,594
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe if we could stop pointing to the democrats or to the republicans and realize that both parties are responsible, we will find a solution.

    Partnership is one thing that perpetuates the problems we now face.
     
  6. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    For once I agree with you!...
    And I have seen amazing agreement on this board between the dems and reps that this bailout is the stupidest thing this country has done.

    And when talking to the general public.. they are in agreement...

    DON'T BAILOUT THE GREEDY!

    Let the chips fall...

    If someone got into a mortgage they couldn't afford and knew going in... they deserve to lose their home...
    If a banker lost money because he got greedy...So what...

    Why do I have to bail out people who can't budget or bankers that make more money than I do... Heck, I live on $300 a week... what Banker does that?!!!

    I couldn't afford to buy a house if I had to...
    I thank God for the parsonage!

    but without it.. I would be renting...
    Because I AM WISE ENOUGH to not go into debt for something I can't afford!

    Why does the wise have to bailout fools...

    I think we as the public should raise up in Nov. and throw every incumbant out of office... vote in new people... they can't do as bad as Pelosi, Bush, McCain, or Obama are doing!

    If the economy fails... at least our churches would be full...

    This may be what is needed to drive people back to God..
    It worked in the 1930s...
    It worked after WW2

    Let the economy fall... People will see all along they should have been trusting in God instead of trusting in their bank accounts...
     
  7. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,127
    Likes Received:
    221
    DF, you are only looking at one side of the issues.

    How about irresponsible renters. Here in NY, the landord is required to pay the water bill. Suppose there is leak in the toliet, the tenant says " I dont care, I'm not paying the bill " or he damages the apt above "fair wear and tear, or he goes months without paying the rent; ect, ect ect.
    I agree there are the "rich" who take advantage of the poor, but there are those "poor" who take advantag of the rich.

    Salty,

    ps, I rent, and am by no means rich!:praying:

    pps, my toiliet is having a probem today, and I fixed even though I do not pay the water bill:saint:
     
  8. exscentric

    exscentric
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,253
    Likes Received:
    16
    The government bails the farmers out if they have bad years, they bail the salmon fishermen out when the season is lacking, they bail out the timber workers when the gov. stops logging, why not bail the rest of the country. Soon everyone will be on the bail out roles and nobody paying taxes and someone might realize that all this free money is coming from tax payers rather than some unlimited fund in the sky. :laugh:
     
  9. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Free Money!!! haha... LOL!
     
  10. ktn4eg

    ktn4eg
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,517
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thanks for citing some of the main reasons why so many churches back in the 1930's, '40's, & 50's had the kinds of prayer meetings, revivals, & faithful attendance that they did!

    Too many folks who lament over why there isn't this general, nation-wide spirit of Bible-based concern for things as there may have been back then fail to consider what America in general was going through during those decades:

    1. An economic depression that was felt in not only the US, but also in many other nations throughout the world [and was probably even more severly felt in these other countries than it was in the US],

    2. A World War that was fought on several continents, and,

    3. A subsequent economic down turn--which usually happens after most wars anyway.

    The nearest thing that most Americans today can recall that might have been anything similar to what I'm referring was the very short-lived outburst of general interest in spiritual things was that which occurred immediately after 9/11/01.

    For better or worse, America is now no longer basically an agrarian society comprised of small, closely-knit family farm-based communities scattered throughout the land.

    One person I can recall told me that, "back in those days," the overt results of these revivals lasted far beyond both the times of the scheduled meetings and the confines of the four walls of the building in which the meetings took place.

    Back then (according to him, anyway), all of the bars and houses of ill repute, etc., in that and in the surrounding communities were closed and stayed closed.

    Now days, even if a well-known evangelist succeeds in conducting a week long series of meetings in a major metrolpolitan area wherein the arena's seats are filled to capacity every night, as a general rule, over all not that much in the way of apparent, tangible results for the good of society as a whole really seem to occur in the eyes of most onlookers:
    • The very same bars and houses of ill-repute that were flourishing prior to the week of meetings for the most part continue to flourish not only during the week of services but also after the evangelist and his associates have been long gone.
    • Nor does the crime rate for that particular metropolitan area see a significant decline over the long run in all of the major types of reported crimes for that city.
    Yep, "things aren't like they used to be," and it's not likely they will be in the foreseeable future.

    So, are we then to stop conducting prayer services & vigils, evangelistic meetings, and the like? Of course not!

    We are still commanded to "...Occupy till I come." (Luke 19:13)

    And if anyone belives that word "occupy" merely means to sit idly by, doing little or nothing beyond fretting over why people aren't beating down the doors of the church house, have I got news for you.

    Ask any person who spent time in the military serving as part of an "occupying force" what that involved. We had such an occupying force in Japan for several years after the end of WW2.

    Some say what we now have in Iraq is very similar to an occupation force. (NOTE: I'm not going to argue over whether or not our military people over in Iraq does, in fact, constitute an army of occupation. That's been hashed out in other threads.)

    My point is that we are still under orders to occupy, and to the best of my knowledge, that order hasn't yet been rescinded.

    So, let's "keep on, keeping on"!

    Yes, we as a nation are not only reaping what we've collectively sown, but, sadly a national drought that set in has affected even those who tried their best to stick to the biblical principles of self-discipline and counting the cost. The adage that, "If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is," has been either forgotten or ignored.

    I, too, believe that I owe nothing in the form of monetary compensation to the greedy bankers or to the gullible individuals that somehow now feel entitled to be bailed out by Uncle Sugar (read: the US taxpayers).

    And this belief of mine extends far beyond that of this immediate crisis with which we are now faced.

    It also extends to such things as seeing no reason why I am forced to fund the retirements of other people that I don't even know.

    Why should I (or any other individual for that matter) be compelled to hand over to the federal government part of my earnings so that others can receive their so-called Social Security checks?

    Is it my fault if another person is short-sighted enough to fail to plan for his/her financial future such that I am required to foot the bill for his/her retirement?

    Given the track record of how well the government down through the years has fared when it manages our money, my complete confidence that my so-called Social Security benefits will always be there for me when I need it is, shall we say, somewhat less than 100%.

    If an individual would put the same amount of money that the government compels him to do so into some form of diversified private investments over the same period of years, I tend to believe that he would probably be somewhat better off financially when it comes time for him to retire than he would under the current set up of Social Security.

    (NOTICE: END OF RANT! :thumbs: YOU WILL NOW BE RETURNED TO YOUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED PROGRAM, "MORE OF THE SAME OLD, SAME OLD," WHICH IS ALREADY IN PROGRESS! :tear: )
     
  11. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is government policy to encourage house buying and thus it is government policy to discourage renting houses. Can't have it both ways.
     
  12. exscentric

    exscentric
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    4,253
    Likes Received:
    16
    My wife works in a large den of democrats and she hasn't found any of them that feel the bailout is the right thing to do. All feel that congress is out of control. Maybe some of them will consider who they vote for next time around but I doubt they will remember that long. :laugh:
     
  13. ajg1959

    ajg1959
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    1,383
    Likes Received:
    0
    One huge disadvantage that genuine evangelists have today is they have to compete against too many fakes. It is hard to have a spiritual awakening in a society that is influenced by Benny Hinn, Rod Parsley and the like.

    There is one guy on our local religious station this past week (I dont know his name but he looks like Stephen J Cannel) that said if I have credit card debt that I couldnt pay, that I should use that credit card, as an act of faith, and send him $1000, and that the Lord will bless me by cleaning up my debts and give me extra in abundance. He says that charging $1000 more to a credit card that I cant pay now, and sending it to him will result in a financial windfall for me.

    It is hard to get folks to listen to truth when they are bombarded with false teachings.

    And yes, I know people that actually send clowns like this their money before they pay their mortgage or rent.

    Its no wonder the world opposes christianity.

    AJ
     
    #13 ajg1959, Sep 28, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 28, 2008
  14. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I blame the independents for remaining silent while the other two parties were messing things up.

    Seriously, we are all in this thing together. We will rise or fall together. I just hate the thought of the investors being bailed out while the homeowners still get evicted and put out on the streets. One day someone will hear our voice.
     
  15. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,258
    Likes Received:
    4
    In the other thread, it looked like you wanted the bailout to happen ???!?!?!!!!?!?!
     
  16. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wanted the government to buy the actual tainted loans so they could work with the homeowners and get them in a better loan. One with payments they could afford even if it took them 100 year to pay it off.
     
  17. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,258
    Likes Received:
    4
    Hmmm. That sounds like a bailout, to me.

    How about we get the money from the folks who actually benefited by driving these companies into the ground ? There must have been a lot of illegal booty gotten, out there, if they need $700 billion.
     
  18. dragonfly

    dragonfly
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,594
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe we could sell Montana to the Canadians. It should be worth...oh, is that all. Never mind. :laugh:
     
  19. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm for that, instead of waiting 5 year for them to possibly pay a penalty why not penalize them now while they still have the money.
     
  20. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,258
    Likes Received:
    4
    They must be pretty easy to identify, wouldn't you think ? With a little co-operation from Frank, Dodd, & Schumer, we ought to be able to find these guys, right ?

    But no, let's just keep blaming Bush, shall we ? It requires much less thought, and you get a warm fuzzy, knowing yer in the same camp as all the others.....
     

Share This Page

Loading...