WOOOOWWWW!!!!!
- Thread starter crmarti
- Start date
oscarluvr;2255684; said:
Maybe we shouldn't help out those businesses that should have known better. Maybe we shouldn't help out those individuals that accepted the risk to try and flip properties for a quick buck. Big business is to blame on many levels, but so are the greedy and or stupid individuals who bought into it. Lot of people went for the idea of refinancing at inflated values, kind of like buying everything on credit, positive they could recoup their money and then some. Know people personally who did that, and not out of greed necessarily, thinking this was kind of like a home loan without the downside. When home prices fell, they got stuck with a mortgage they couldn't afford and started losing their homes. The banks were also stuck with them and the spiral continued around the country and the world. So, if we shouldn't help out the big , greedy businesses that should have known better, who has a plan to decide which individuals actually deserve help, and the simply greedy ones that should have known better.
dragonfish;2255723; said:
The problem started with the banks, not the individuals. The banks began doing a TON of NINJA loans. (No income, No Job, No Assets, NO PROBLEM!)
The "individuals" of which you speak were all stuck with mortgage's that they couldn't afford b/c the banks did not do their checks properly.
EDIT: In today's economy, we need to help the big boys, which in turn helps the average joe. The "plan to decide which individual's actually deserve help" is simple: You help the the greedy/big companies. Do not assume that every company that is large is greedy. Without the big companies, so many smaller companies will collapse. Our economy, how it is currently setup, would collapse. Yes, they should have known better. Yes, they did know better. However, where were you 15 years ago, when the companies were taking risks with your money, but succeeding with those risks? You (figuratively) weren't complaining, because you were loving the economy.
rmorse;2255737; said:
For some of the people simply buying their first house, possibly. I refer to people refinancing or putting minimum down thinking they could flip the house quickly to make a buck. For most of them it was like gambling with money you can't afford to lose. Not saying the banks are blameless, but some personal accountability needs to be in place also. We refinanced, for a lower rate and enough to consolidate credit cards. After lowering our monthly debt, we did not run out and run it up to the max again. At a local new model home show some people with very little money were trying to buy multiple homes with minimal down payments. The idea was that they could afford it long enough to resell for a profit. These are the people I'm talking about. Can't blame everything on the banks. And no, I don't work for one, or any type of financial institution. I'm just talking about accountability all the way around. Now take your shots.
EDIT: I agree with the idea of helping the big companies to help the economy. I'm just disagreeing with the it's all their fault posters.
dragonfish;2255787; said:
I agree with that. I just think that more responsibility lays in the hands of the banks. That, in no way, negates your points. But once again, we only care about the people flipping when it hurts. Flipping houses is *arguably* fine. Its just some people gambled too much, at the wrong time.
A casino is actually a very good analogy. We have the gamblers. Nothing wrong with doing a little gambling. However, we also have the gamblers pushing too much too fast. The house (banks) should have flagged them before it got too far. But they never flagged them. Who is to blame? Both. The house for not stopping it (even encouraging it) when it was in motion, as well as the gamblers for pushing it too far.
dragonfish;2255918; said:I agree with the esteemed gentleman from College Park.
Thanks. I enjoy have an intellectual conversation on forums once in awhile.
Off topic: My idiot Jack Dempsey is trying to kill his reflection...
rmorse;2255952; said:
My pleasure, an adult conversation is an enjoyable,albeit rare, treat.
To continue your off topic: Sorry about your idiot, haven't had mine long enough to know if they are stupid or not. Besides they are in the pond, no reflection.
I'm sorry I missed the "good" discussion. 
Anyway, you guys made some great points, I share a lot of views with rmorse, and this is one of them. I cringe when I hear the promises of some candidates that "we won't tax you, we'll just tax big business" well, what do you think "big business" will do with that tax increase? Pass it on to us! And not because their evil or greedy, but because that just the way you do business, no big deal.
Also, Rmorse I especially liked when you made the statement "should they have known better, yes. Did they know better, yes." Very true, these people aren't dumb, they are just very headstrong. Also, if the possibility of a bailout wasn't an option, I believe that you wouldn't be seeing so many bankruptcy's, the market would just force them to work harder, and more efficiently.
Anyway, you guys made some great points, I share a lot of views with rmorse, and this is one of them. I cringe when I hear the promises of some candidates that "we won't tax you, we'll just tax big business" well, what do you think "big business" will do with that tax increase? Pass it on to us! And not because their evil or greedy, but because that just the way you do business, no big deal.
Also, Rmorse I especially liked when you made the statement "should they have known better, yes. Did they know better, yes." Very true, these people aren't dumb, they are just very headstrong. Also, if the possibility of a bailout wasn't an option, I believe that you wouldn't be seeing so many bankruptcy's, the market would just force them to work harder, and more efficiently.
hamato, glad you could join for the grown up conversation. Agree with you on some points, but not 100%. Yes, if big business is taxed more, the cost will trickle down to the consumer. On the flipside, do you really believe if the other politicians get in and give big business tax breaks that they will decrease the cost of goods to the end user, no. Not being evil or greedy, just the way you do business.
