Wednesday, October 08, 2008
|
|
Some Questions on McCain's ReSURGEance Home Plan
|
|
Posted by:
Amanda Carpenter at
1:45 PM
|
If you couldn't tell from my post below, I think the McCain housing plan is a disaster. It's Dodd-Frank on steroids. I didn't get the chance to ask any questions in the conference call earlier, but here is what was one my mind:
1. Why are you replicating the Dodd-Frank legislation bailout in your plan? Their plan gave $300 billion to FHA to guarantee failed mortgages. It passed in July. Shouldn't we give that some time to work? (or fail completely?)
2. Why does your plan empower the Treasury Secretary to buy up these failed mortgages and renegotiate them? Shouldn't that power be given to an existing housing agency, like FHA or HUD?
3. How does the program decide which mortgage holders to help? About 27% of US households have paid off their mortgages and 32% of households rent. How can you ask responsible borrowers and renters to pay for this program?
4. Many people cashed out equity and now carry second mortgages, will second mortgages be eligible?
5. Does the Senator think that the original TARP program does not need the full $700 billion? If so, wouldn't it be better to return this $300 billion to deficit reduction?
6. There's no evidence the housing market has bottomed out yet. What if housing prices drop another 15 or 20 percent after their mortgages are renegotiated and the homeowners are under water again?
|
|
I'm glad to see not everyone at TH is drunk on the GOP flavor of Kool-Aid.
This is socialism, pure and simple. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? I bought a house I could afford, make my payments on time and don't borrow to buy everything else. Living within your means may be so yesteryear, but it works.
I should not be penalized for others foolishnes. |
|
Campaign Finance Reform
Amnesty Bill
Bailout Bill
American Homeownership Resurgance Plan
McCain is a socialist with an authoritarian streak. On his quest to pick up Independents and Democrats he is losing his conservative base. He hates conservatives. Period. End of story.
|
|
|
|
Ding ding ding, we have a winner.
How does JM plan to bailout the irresponsible homeowner that kept getting home equity loans whenever his house went up 20%? Is he going to de-value the home equity lines as well. Or should we cut the persons first mortgage to a level that it, plus the home equity lines, equals the current value of the house.
Should we tax the bailout-ee for this little gift. After all, someone just paid for the difference in price.
What does he plan to do two or three years from now when that person’s property taxes go up another 20 or 30% and they are, once again, in a situation where they can't afford their house. Do we cut their mortgage / home equity loans yet again?
Is he going to force that person to stay in their house for the next 10 years or mandate the price they can sell their house in the future? After all, it doesn't seem very fair that we should bail out the person now so they can flip the house for a profit when the market comes back in a few years.
Like all campaign promises, it sounds really great. Unfortunately, all those little details get in the way.
|
|
While connected, the housing crisis and the credit crisis are not the same thing. Housing's problem is that there is about a 1 year supply of houses on the market. As supply of a good rises, the price gets pushed down. Renegotiating mortgages does little to stabilize prices, it just gives a huge handout to people who can't make their payments.
Renegotiating the interest rate is one thing, if the rate adjustments are what is pushing people into forclosure, and a fair interest rate can be arrived at for borrower and lender let's do it. Paying principle on loans that was used for too much house, cars, vacations, etc. goes way too far. |
|
Why did we work to allow poor people to join Bush's "ownership" society? And why did McCain claim to have the Treasury buy back the failed mortgages - when we thought that is what they already did do with the bailout?
Amanda is confused about Bush's idea of "ownership", and about McCain's ramblings of a man too old to be running for President. |
|
|
|
But he will lose to Obama.
You were wrong.
|
|
|
McCain was chosen because of his "electability"... whatever that means. Maybe I'm spelling it wrong. Maybe it was "elUctability"... whatever THAT means. |
|
|
Echoing VAPAT, you and Matt are sounding like 'uber right wingers' with your last two posts. Keep it up. The RINOs need to hear it from TH staff too. They can't as easily get away with dismissing TH columnists/analysts as 'extremist nut jobs' as they can regular folks like me. LOL |
|
Joe, the bailout was sold as an "investment", not as down the drain spending. The government was to buy and hold mortgages until they either paid out or were marketable. In theory we the taxpayers could even make money on the deal, if the mortgages get purchased at the right discount.
This new plan is throwing money at the problem that we will never see again. If your mortgage is $250K, and your house is only worth $200K, then Uncle Sam will be paying off $50K to the bank with a renegotiated rate to keep you from being foreclosed on. If people never feel the pain of making mistakes, those mistakes are likely to continue. |
|
I can not believe this plan. I will vote for McCain but no longer will I contribute or work for him (including walking precincts).
Unbelievable. |
|
I have been a very un-enthusiastic McCain supporter. I now have to drop the word supporter. He mentioned Leiberman 3 times in the debate last night without mentioning Palin once. All I heard was bigger-government, buying up bad mortages, and cuddling up to Democrats. He is not a conservative. I have never really trusted him. I have come to the conclusion that a vote for him has now become a vote against the direction the Republican party must re-shape itself. On principle, I cannot vote for John McCain. I will now put all of my time, money, and efforts into supporting Senate and Congressional candidates who stand for true conservative principles. They are the ones who need and deserve my support. I am convinced if there is an election to lose and maybe come out ahead in the long run, it could be this years presidential election. I think the current situation is such a mess that any new president will have sinking poll numbers very soon after taking office. I am confident Obama will sink himself and become a one-term lame duck president. Meanwhile we can regroup will REAL consevatives and make a big push to make substantial gains in both houses of Congress in 2012. If Mccain were somehow to win, I think the conservative momement could be watered-down way to much for a very long time, maybe decades. I also think we would have no chance of re-gaining control of Congress in 2012 if Mccain is elected. I am convinced he would further damage our party, maybe beyond repair. Sometimes you win by losing. In 2012 I believe the party can be completely focused on promoting candidates those of us on the true right can really believe in. I am sorry fellow warriors, my trust for John McCain has fell to the level of Henry Paulson. If we want our party to be what we think it should be, lets be heard. I for one will be focused on re-electing my Congressman John Porter here in Nevada. He is facing a tough campaign that has recently gotten close against a liberal nut.
NEWT 2012! |
|
Take heart. At least you are not alone. VAPAT, PasPhil, myself and many others that post here are with ya. Maybe, since the world is now broke, Barry will be unable to implement his socialist schemes, or more hopefully, maybe PasPhil is correct about Barry (personally I don't have his info so I can't express an opinion either way).
PasPhil, please give us your take on an Obama Presidency. Tango Yankee, Phil.
Wow. Now it would be great if Barry isn't as far left as many of us think. Would he lose his base if true? LOL. Nero would then be complaining about Barry being an unaccountable culture of greed rightwinger. |
|
|
|
|
Look, we can't afford to not vote for McCain for "true conservative principles". We have to be pragmatic and vote for the candidate who is the better of the two or at will do least harm - and that is NOT OBAMA with his plan to "Change" America into the "New World Order"! We have Newt (he is the smartest man I think), Romney, Palin, Jindal, Pawlenty, for 2012! But, we just can't let the Dems and Obama have 4 years, look what the Dems (Dod, Frank, Pelosi, Reid) did in just 2 years with creating the credit crisis via Fannie and Freddie!!! They will have control over both houses and the White House! We can't afford to have the Dems have complete control over the government!!! |
|
McCain doing something about the situation, other then Obama doing nothing about anything,
because Obama is worried about his assocites who are in question,
like, Ayers, Wright, Rezko, Pfleger, Farrakhan, and all who live in the same community,
whats up with that, wake up America. |
|
This afternoon, and through the weekend, my husband and I will be looking for a larger, and grander home than we can comfortably afford. Thank you for your kind offer to help me purchase this home. I'd like at least 4,000 sq. ft, 6 bedrooms and 4 baths. My current home of 3,200 and 5 bedrooms is just too small and not as pretty as the others. I know we cannot afford this home. But who cares? You said you would bail me out of bad decisions! I'm tossing personal responsiblity to the winds, and letting you be my nanny and bail me out when I do dumb things. And please, send my thanks to the responsible tax paying citizens of this once great country.
Ok, I do plan on doing one smart thing next month. I won't be voting for YOU. |
|
http://www.adn.com/front/story/550352.html
Get it out in the clean air. |
|
|
|