Home builders bummed by stimulus plans

Lowered tax credit won't provide much stimulus, they fear

By Alan Zibel and Alex Veiga, Associated Press

Published February 13, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size

More Real Estate

Comments

February 13, 2009

4:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

RockiesWin writes:

This spendulous package isn't about us, it's all about the lunatic liberal left and all their idiological programs. This plan will not jump start the economy. Quite the contrary. Things are going to get much worse because of this plan. Pelosi, Reid, Frank....they all need to be ousted in the next election. They are only interested in themselves and are utterly inept at governing.
February 13, 2009

4:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

33y2get writes:

$8000.oo from @15000.oo just will do cr*p in the market I live in Las vegas now born and raised in Aurora CO. 49 years as Co and NV need help and Need help now . thank you Congress
February 13, 2009

4:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

33y2get writes:

I forgot to to say thank you prince Reid, I will see in the elections, but you will not be happy with my VOTE........
February 13, 2009

5:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Shadow writes:

Maybe the building association , if they are so desperate to get the economy going. Maybe they will drop the over inflated prices of these homes that they have flooded the market with. Instead of trying to make their retirement off each home they would consider an approach of a modest profit on each home. Then maybe some of these empty homes would sell.

You can not expect the government to solve all your problems.
February 13, 2009

5:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

sschow writes:

"You can not expect the government to solve all your problems."

Sadly, this seems to be the M.O. in today's world.
February 13, 2009

6:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

SanctuaryCity writes:

It will cut down on the illegals that the homebuilders hire. Great news. The stimulus package is the collapse of your kids, grandkids & the whole future of the country.
February 13, 2009

6:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

denverrose writes:

Who knew? Who knew that anyone that REALLY needed the stimulus was going to get left out in the cold? Conservatives knew.
February 13, 2009

6:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

dilligaf writes:

RockiesWin
Your comments are not valid. You are making comments base on your dislike for democrats. When you can post something constructive and based on facts other then THOSE DEMOCRATS you may be listened to. Arlen Spector (a highly respected republican) disagrees with you.
February 13, 2009

6:25 a.m.

Oh_Wise_One writes:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
February 13, 2009

6:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

Homebuilders and realtors have been slopping at the trough of public and tax subsidies for so long that they have no clue how to function w/o that. These are the biggest welfare queens on Earth. Why don't you people stop lobbying for special tax privleges and get bust actually working for the money??
February 13, 2009

6:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

WishingIwasinCO writes:

Amen Sschow. It's nice to see someone who realizes the government is part of the help. We (the people) have to step up and use a little financial wisdom now, and stop asking for a 100% handout. Work hard, and be responsible.
February 13, 2009

6:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

GK writes:

Thanks to Republicans. Why do they hate America??
February 13, 2009

6:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

INC writes:

with the republican watered down stimulus bill... more than one industry will be disappointed. republicans got what they wanted. If it were proposed by republicans, this stimulus bill would be twice as much without a penny spent domestically.
February 13, 2009

7:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

denverrose writes:

dilligaf: Alan Spector is so.... respected that he will be voted out come next election.
SheikYurBooty: Almost all recessions have started because homeowners default on their loans because of job loss...EXCEPT this time. You see Congress (Barney Frank, Barbara Boxer, etc.) continued to insist that home loans be extended to those who would not otherwise be able to own a home. The problem was that some of them had no income and most made NO downpayment... requirements in generations past as a good faith promise. Bush Administration went to them back in 2005 advising that these loans were being defaulted on but this oversight committee POOH-POOHed the Administration insisting that the Bush Administration was being "alarmist."
February 13, 2009

7:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

pete10000ft writes:

"Bummed"?!? nice RMN...what a hack paper
February 13, 2009

7:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

timeandagain writes:

RockiesWin -

Well put! These Dems are pandering to their wacko constituents and paying back their biggest lobbyists...

It is a pathetic waste of 1,000 BILLION DOLLARS (100,000 MILLION DOLLARS)! Shame on them!
February 13, 2009

7:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

wowlfie writes:

The black hole that is special interest greed will swallow the stimulus pork whole and nothing will change. The package does nothing to stop the foreclosure crises and the deflationary spiral underway in housing, cars, jobs, etc. Until congress gets real and shoves a couple trillion into a REAL foreclosure bill with teeth that does the following then were doomed:

--A 2 year moratorium on foreclosures
--Declare 'dumping' of foreclosed homes at firesell prices illegal (make it illegal to list a home at less than 90% of it's appraised value). This is to protect home values in every area.
--Force current foreclosed homes to be kept up same per HOA rules that are enforced in most areas of the country.
--Declare it illegal to board up homes and allow them to become 'urban blights'. This reduces the value of other homes in the area and must be declared illegal. The banks must keep up the properties or forfeit the home to homeless organizations (charity).
--Make it illegal for foreigners to buy up distressed properties.
--Fire all the CEO's of every bank. They are all corrupt.
February 13, 2009

7:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

wowlfie writes:

In addition, congress should increase the subsidization of ALL homes that are financed by doubling or tripling the mortgage interest deduction. This will encourage distressed homeowners to 'stick it out' AND it will help stabilize the job market by putting money IMMEDIATELY into 70% of all homeowners hands (by increasing their deductions they will increase their net take home pay and thereby add hundreds of billions to the economy). This is far more effective and fair to ALL homeowners instead of a 'first time buyer' credit. It will greatly increase the 'staying power' of current homeowners not to walk away from their homes because the difference between renting and owning a home will increased drastically and it will simply be too expensive to 'move down' and rent homes so many more people will choose to stick it out and this will slow down drastically the foreclosure rate. Even better is that congress can regulate this deduction by increasing or decreasing it if the housing industry recovers and begins to heat up too much. That's the best reason ever for doing it. The government can't control mortgage rates but it CAN control the desire for people to own their home by making it more attractive.
February 13, 2009

7:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

B1 writes:

This was the only part of the pork package that made any sense and would have created a measurable economic change.

Typical from the dems, they know better how to spend our money.
February 13, 2009

7:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

leavemealone writes:

Our LIBTARD Congress is
about to officially give away billions in pork
and will leave the real issues out to lunch...
Sure, we get an $8,000 tax credit for
first time home buyers, but that will do very little
to truly stimulate meaningful demand.

They kicked the $15,000 credit to any buyer to the curb.
Does this give you any idea how much ANY of these
clowns in Washington care about your money?
You ain't seen nothing, yet.

From everything I’ve read last night & this morning our great tax cut this year, "to stimulate the economy," is going to total about $400 per person. It will have the effect of taking away money that
might otherwise cover a growing deficit.

Moves like this only deepen the recession.
These morons in
Congress are not going to help you through this
economy...at least, not directly.

They will actually make things worse.
Welcome to the falsehood I call by name: OBAMA!
February 13, 2009

7:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

wowlfie writes:

If the government doesn't increased the subsidization of homeownership then AMERICA is doomed to repeat the Great Depression and probably will go bankrupt itself and bye bye social security, medicare, pensions, etc. You simply must increase temporarily the subsidization of home ownership because NOTHING else is going to work in this dire situation. This must be done to restore the trust in the system. Everyone is scared to death to purchase a home fearing it will just go down in value. If a person with reasonable finances puts 20% down on a $200,000 home right now there is a very high chance than in a years or two time that they will have no equity at all instead of the $40,000 in equity they put down. Who is going to make that kind of judgement call? Not many. That's why the spiral MUST be stopped or it has NO BOTTOM at all and were doomed to be slaves of foreign countries (probably arabs and asians). Remember over 50 years ago we began the subsidization of homes with the interest deduction and we have to do it again by doubling or tripling the rate --temporarily--to get control of the market. NOTHING else will work.
February 13, 2009

8 a.m.

Suggest removal

Marshdale writes:

wowlfie;

I'm not sure what side of the fence you are on with this, but I am one who deffinately likes your idea. I'm not intuitive or educated enough on tax code to see what the drawbacks are, or where they would be if such a plan were to be implimented, but I sure do like the way your idea sounds.
February 13, 2009

8:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

For the Billions being handed out to banks, and Wall Street Darlings and the Auto makers Seems to be the incentive tax credit for buying a home was poor place to make a cut, at least to cut it nearly in half.

There needs to more help for people and families - and less of it for business!
February 13, 2009

8:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

mrwiizrd writes:

"wowlfie writes: If the government doesn't increased the subsidization of homeownership then AMERICA is doomed to repeat the Great Depression and probably will go bankrupt itself and bye bye social security, medicare, pensions, etc. "

Maybe you should go back and study up on what got us into this mess in the first place. It was the government subsidizing home ownership through Freddie and Fannie that DIRECTLY CAUSED THE HOUSING BUBBLE. You're calling for more gas to be thrown on the fire and make things worse, just brilliant.
February 13, 2009

8:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

RockiesWin: Can you please explain your statement that things are going to get much worse because of the stimulus plan? I don't think it is going to have huge effect to turn the economy around and might only keep things from getting much worse - this thing now has to run it's course and it is going to get somewhat worse before it starts to get better - but I can't see where the bill will cause harm..
How did you get there?
February 13, 2009

8:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

mrwiizrd - Can you tell us what subsidizing that Freddy and Fanny were doing please? and how that created the whole thing?

There were a lot of factor going that got us into this mess and one common factor was greed...
February 13, 2009

8:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

V_twinMan writes:

The stimulus package was originally intended to help the economy,homebuyers,etc. Sadly the democrats forgot that,they do not need republican support, they have controll of the house, the senate, and now the white house.They have loaded this bill with millions of dollars in earmarks (pork) which the president said he would not let happen.
Ask the Democrat from California and speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi how her added pork of $30,000,000.00 to the marsh mouse habitat is going to stimulate the economy?
What a lose lose deal for the American people.
February 13, 2009

8:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

IRUNMAN writes:

Thank the Republicans for this watered down version.
February 13, 2009

8:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

wowlfie writes:
--A 2 year moratorium on foreclosures
--Declare 'dumping' of foreclosed homes at firesell prices illegal (make it illegal to list a home at less than 90% of it's appraised value). This is to protect home values in every area.
--Force current foreclosed homes to be kept up same per HOA rules that are enforced in most areas of the country.
--Declare it illegal to board up homes and allow them to become 'urban blights'. This reduces the value of other homes in the area and must be declared illegal. The banks must keep up the properties or forfeit the home to homeless organizations (charity).
--Make it illegal for foreigners to buy up distressed properties.
--Fire all the CEO's of every bank. They are all corrupt.

>Those have to be the most utterly STUPID set of ideas I have ever heard - and totally not doable!
Kind of sounds like a Dictator/fascist/communist form of government to me!
February 13, 2009

8:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

WarrenJimmyBuffett writes:

I think most of the builders are more bummed that they are going bankrupt. Most are dead men walking at this point.
February 13, 2009

8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

badbob writes:

Another $3 billion for GM! Everyone enjoy your $400 stimulus, except for the politicians (PORKERS) and their lobbyist friends, the rest of us will just be quivering with stimulation!
February 13, 2009

8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

mrwiizrd writes:

"Diff writes:

mrwiizrd - Can you tell us what subsidizing that Freddy and Fanny were doing please? and how that created the whole thing?

There were a lot of factor going that got us into this mess and one common factor was greed…"

Freddie and Fannie are GSE's that guarantee mortgage's against the risk of default. They artificially lower the risk (and the resulting interest rates of mortgage debt) for lending institutions and their customers.

While this sounds great in theory, in practice it has the disastrous unintended consequences of allowing lending institutions to take on more risk without risking large losses, so with gov't nudging and prodding from Barney Frank and his ilk lenders made loans to risky customers.

It's the equivalent of the federal government guaranteeing stock brokerage accounts using the FDIC. If you knew you couldn't lose would you invest in blue chips or start-ups? You would invest in start-ups hoping to reap larger gains since you have no risk of losing your initial investment. Anyone would.

You can't legislate human nature, no matter how many regulations are put in place. And there are just as many greedy people in gov't, and I think President Obama trying to appoint 3 Tax Cheats to his cabinet is clear evidence of this fact.

I keep hearing liberals say, "well, there's so much greed in private industry etc", but at least the greed is decentralized and can be contained through the forces supply and demand, in government the power is centralized (especially at the federal level) and can run rampant without anyone stopping it. I know this isn't how gov't is supposed to operate, but absolute power corrupts absolutely, always has, always will.
February 13, 2009

8:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

wyhammertime writes:

As the king doled out a mere pettence to the peasant's he told a govenor give them a little to keep them from a revolt !! Wow I sure don't know what I'm going to do with my 14.00 per month jeeze that will just about buy a gallon of gas or some milk jee than's goverment NOT!!!!
February 13, 2009

9:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Obama has a 4 step economic plan.

Step 1 - Lie to the American people about his plan. Proof of this is ABC News revealing Obama's lies about his plan.... http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpun...

Step 2 - Push through a fraudulent bill with a bunch of useless spending for special interest groups that will do nothing to help the economy.

Step 3 - Rely on the idiot Obamatrons to blindly defend Obama's lies and fraudulent policy schemes.

Step 4 - Hope that as the economy gets worse under Obama (guaranteed to happen) that voters will forget how the economy was so much better under ALL Presidents that came before Obama.
February 13, 2009

9:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

BJG writes:

How about giving those of us who pay their mortgage payments on time an $8,000 tax credit?
February 13, 2009

9:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

BJG writes:

Oh....my mortgage compay is Chase and they only got $25 billion in TARP money. And their CEO only made $27.5 million in salary and bonusus. So forgive me for asking for $8,000 in tax credit.
February 13, 2009

9:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

wowlfie writes:

Mr Wizzrd:

Im saying temporarily USE the subsidization to CONTROL the market tempo. Mr Bush himself overheated the market by trying to drive up the homeownership ratio from about 68% when he took office to almost 73% at the height of the boom. Were not in ANY danger of overheating the market RIGHT NOW for god's sake you idiot--look at the facts new homes rate is down from 1.3 million to 330,000 that's where a lot of jobs have gone.

We need to push it back in the positive direction (new homes being built and foreclosure rates way down to normalcy) and then MONITOR it for health.

You can easily control this using the subsidization RATIO for interest deductions. The government has NO control over mortgage interest rates but it sure as heck can control the INITIATIVE and interest in owning a home and thereby control the market TEMPO.

Get my drift?

Your completley wrong if your assuaging that I'm recommending uncontrolled PUSH & SHOVE. I'm postulating that you CAN control the tempo by periodically adjusting the deduction and making it more lucrative to own a home (that's called subsidization).

Set the mortgage deduction for interest initially at 200% of mortgage interest paid and if that's not enough increased it to 250 to 300% and when things begin to get rolling again--and prices stabilize and new homes are being bought in increasing number then you ROLL back the deduction so moderate the market and homeownership DESIRE.

This is the ONLY way you can control the situation by controlling DESIRE. It's not permanent. Just like AMT taxes are not permanent congress can regulate the level at which people pay AMT they can regulate and control the demand for homes.

If people had never gotten the subsidization 50 years ago after the great depression homeownership would never have recovered and kept up it's almost universal increase in values as it has done. So now we have to give that a boost. temporarily.
February 13, 2009

9:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Willy writes:

"Federal banking regulators reported in December 2008 that fully 53% of consumers receiving loan modifications were again delinquent on their mortgages after six months. "

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20090213/b...
February 13, 2009

9:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

mrwiizrd, OK. So they lowered the risk on some loans, I can see that as a least somewhat of problem yes - but Freddy and Fanny are not behind every home loan - in fact, as far as I can look up quickly it is less than half. I also see the "subsidy" averages about a .5% point savings in a mortgage interest rate. plus low and or no down payments. I thing the latter was perhaps the largest mistake made. plus they work with persons most likely to defaut so it could look like they were a bigger influence than they actually were.

That said I don's see Freddy and Fannie as the cause of the housing market and Mortgage crisis.. A factor yes, but not alone the cause.

As far as tax cheats - well I am not happy to see that as well, and at least calls into question Obama's supposed thorough and careful vetting of apointees. None of those were hughe transgressions however in the larger view of things.

You cannot legislate morality, I am not sure that greed is human nature tho - that said I agree there are greedy people in all walks of life. It is the checks and balances that should help to weed it out of government - i.e. regulation - and that is one area that was sorely lacking in the past administration. A serious mistake on the part of GW - yes, motivated by bad faith intentions - maybe, but I think not.
February 13, 2009

9:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

mrwiizrd writes:

Wowlfie,

Temporarily, yeah right, nothing is temporary in government genius. The housing is market is taking a pounding right now for reason. It is maladjusted, what you are proposing is more maladjustment. The decline HAS TO HAPPEN. What you are propsing will only make the housing recession LONGER and MORE SEVERE.

"look at the facts new homes rate is down from 1.3 million to 330,000 that's where a lot of jobs have gone."

Did you even consider that maybe this is because too many houses were built in the last decade? People aren't buying because supply grossly exceeds demand.

"The government has NO control over mortgage interest rates"

You lost all credibility with statement, go read up on Freddie and Fannie.
February 13, 2009

9:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

BJG writes:

And another TARP bank told me yesterday, after I went in to cash a payroll check that I only had a "savings account" with them and if I had six transaction against my savings account in a month I would be charged with a "class A" violation. ????? It's my money. And WF just got billions in TARP funds. Who do they think is fronting the $$ to them? I am someone who actually has money in their bank. I didn't come begging for a bad loan.
February 13, 2009

9:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

wowlfie writes:

And increasing the subsidization is the FAIREST way to apportion help to all homeowners who are distressed. Most of those overpaying on their loans due to mortgage sharks would benefit the most as they have the highest ratio of mortgage interest to income. So the worst off benefit the greatest amount. And since 70% of all homes have a mortgage then 2/3rd's of the homeowners would receive a big boost and stimulate the economy more than ANY tax credit. And for those owing a home, they should get a TAX credit in all fairness. You simply cannot STIMULATE the economy so that one group benefits at the expense of another (some yes, a lot , no) else you risk REVOLUTION. Remember the tax revolt and the Boston Tea Party Obama is treading a fine line here but not apportioning a bailout for EVERYONE.

For the people, by the people, of the people. Right now it seems the only one benefiting is the black hole banks and CEO's and that's outrageous and upside down. The home ownership dream is going down the tubes because idiots who own their home don't like the subsidization in the first place because they don't benefit from it and that's just too bad. But remember most of them DID benefit until they got their home paid for. My parents did. So did theirs. But our generation is a lost cause if we don't see the value of home subsidization. That's what got the American dream rolling in the first place--and kept it rolling until bureaucrats messed things up by not regulating things to keep things under control (and stopping the frauds) and by loaning money to many people who should have never owned a home and by allowing for the credit swaps and packaging of loans such that most of our homes are owned by overseas investor which must BE OUTLAWED. Or be slaves. Your choice.
February 13, 2009

9:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Diff writes:

"Can you tell us what subsidizing that Freddy and Fanny were doing please? and how that created the whole thing? There were a lot of factor going that got us into this mess and one common factor was greed..."

You should look into the role of Fannie and Freddie to see how they sparked the subprime crisis, which was the spark that created the entire economic crisis we have today.

Here are some great examples....

“Fannie and Freddie are fundamentally sound. They are not in danger of going under. Looking at the financials, they’re solid.” - Barney Frank on July 14, 2008

6 weeks later, the Federal government had to use billions in taxpayer funds to bailout the collapsed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

"“We’re doing three separate things that make it much less likely -- very, very unlikely -- that we’ll have this kind of a housing crisis six months or a year from now.” " - Barney Frank on July 14, 2008

The housing crisis not only continued, but it got much worse over the following 6 months.

Franklin Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who has since become one of Obama's advisors on economic issues, received the following accolades from Democrat Maxine Waters....

"“We do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Franklin Raines. The mission of Fannie Mae has seen innovation flourish from desk-top underwriting to 100 percent loans.”

Zero down housing loans to people who could not afford to pay for them? That is "outstanding leadership"?

Within days of Waters claiming that 100% loans on homes by Franklin Raines was "outstanding leadership", Fannie Mae had to restate earnings back to 2001, erasing $6.3 billion in previously reported profits. And Obama is now relying on this guy for economic advice?

As for the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, here is a good example of how both fueled the current economic crisis through their subprime loans....

"Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are two government agencies who created, and remain highly involved in, the secondary market for mortgage-backed securities. They now own or guarantee about $1.4 trillion, or 40%, of all U.S. mortgages, with $168 billion in subprime mortgages. Find out how the two agencies support the secondary market, which is supposed to help low-income families realize the dream of homeownership, and how that turned into the nightmare of the subprime mortgage crisis."

Note the key words..... "how that turned into the nightmare of the subprime crisis"

http://useconomy.about.com/od/grossdo...
February 13, 2009

9:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Nobama writes:

Where is that DenverTed guy who insisted a couple of days ago that "every economist he had ever heard" was in favor of this "stimulus"? I'm assuming he doesn't exactly have his ear to the ground. (Or maybe his head is just in a place that constricts his hearing.) Check out this article, DenverTed, and all you other Liberals who are lapping up the Kook Aid. Then, bend over and get ready to be "stimulated" and "porked". If this wasn't so serious, it would be laughable. How many Henryettas are out there, anyway?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/...
February 13, 2009

9:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

mrwiizrd writes:

Diff , Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac own or guarantee almost 31 million mortgages, about 58 percent of all single-family loans. That's more than half, and I'm sure you can understand that directly effecting 58% of all home mortgages has a profoundly indirect effect on the other 42%. I have to go to work, but go read up on the Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS) market and the effect Freddie and Fannie had on the housing market as a whole, I'm sure you'll be just as shocked as I was on how our legislators (democrat and republican) led us right off the cliff into recession.
February 13, 2009

9:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

sunshinestate writes:

Most newer homes look like prison cells with open space between them- a metaphor.
Not worth much $$.
The 'home builders' and closely related are part of the problem.Die on the vine.
February 13, 2009

9:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Elwood writes:

ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!

Well what about me too. I'll see about $8 per week out of this stimulus package and end up paying a lot more than that to all the other freeloaders out there.
February 13, 2009

9:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

mmannino writes:

The economy is on a bad spiral and Democrat legislation is making it much worse. Government is not the solution. Government will only postpone the economic pain. The stimulus is a spending orgy with most spending becoming permanent welfare increases. We will not be able to finance the debt from the bank bailout, Porkulus, and the coming entitlement tsunami. The Democrats are risking total economic collapse with their Utopian plans.

We have had housing bubbles in the past. Housing prices fall and eventually the market stablizes. We had a nasty housing bubble in the 80s in Colorado. The attempt to prop up the housing market will not work. Attempts to prop it up will destroy property rights and permanently harm the housing market.
February 13, 2009

9:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

wowlfie writes:

mr wizzrd:

Please go back to the back of the class as you flunked logic 101.

I acknowledge that government often appears permanent but we have as the people the right to vote and change the way things are.

The problem is the short sightedness of the people in charge can't see the forest for the trees that's what got us into this mess.

Fannie and Freddie have almost ZERO control of interest rates. It's a fear thing. If inflation is running high the investors want a higher return and if fear is high they want a higher rate to cover the risk. Right now the risk is high but inflation is mostly nil. Congress and freddie and fannie have almost NO control and it's well documented fact. They can only control SHORT term interest rates get your facts right you dimwizzrd.

Supply and Demand can be regulated mr dimwizzrd. That's why we have tariffs. That's why we have had subsidization for the last 60 years for homeownership. What happened is BUSH lost his head and tried to make himself look good and overheated the market and look how it collapsed. While Rome burned, Nero fiddled away. Same thing with BUSH.

And for your info I generally vote republican but BUSH blew it.

And so did all the experts as they 'special interests' are the trees in the forest and they could not see the forest for the trees.

My incentive will work. It's the only one that will. But it has to be put in place carefully with timeouts (e.g., it returns to the default level once a certain level of supply demand normalcy).

Right now it's all out of whack and if you and people like you can't see that mr dimwizzrd I feel really sorry for this country. It's going down.
February 13, 2009

9:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

glowrock writes:

My problem with the "solutions" discussed here is that people who are NOT homeowners would end up subsidizing (heavily!) either current homeowners in or near foreclosure, as well as heavily subsidizing anyone looking into buying a home! Why should only homeowners get the subsidies? Not to mention, what about people who ARE continuing to pay their mortgages? Is it always the case where the honest get screwed? Is it always the case where the renter gets screwed?

I definitely think that a fundamental change needs to be made to many of these subprime mortgages, and that some consideration needs to be made for those in or near foreclosure, but it should be in terms of a loan restructuring, perhaps for a longer term, perhaps at a lower interest rate, something like that. And fine, if the homeowner STILL defaults, then it's their own damn fault! One strike and you're out, one chance to refinance, and that's it!
February 13, 2009

9:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

rickg19611 writes: "They now own or guarantee about $1.4 trillion, or 40%, of all U.S. mortgages, with $168 billion in subprime mortgages"
Mrwiz writes:
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac own or guarantee almost 31 million mortgages, about 58 percent of all single-family loans.

So which is it? and if
( in either case) only 10-15% of those are in the supprime market - how did that have a large enough affect to "be the whole cause" of the melt down?
And by the way - that ocured under the lack luster leadership (lack of over sight and regulation) of the past administration! who once touted very highly the new level of home ownership..
February 13, 2009

10:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

rapelje writes:

In an article I read this morning, I quote: While campaigning for passage of his economic stimulus plan at the Caterpillar, Inc. plant in East Peoria, Illinois, yesterday President Barack Obama again claimed that "if Congress passes our plan, this company will be able to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off." But after the President had hopped back in his motorcade, ABC NEWS asked Caterpillar CEO Jim Owens if what the President said was true: "I think realistically no. The truth is we're going to have more layoffs before we start hiring again." Owens is not the only one casting doubt on the Obama Administration's audacious job creation numbers. The White House has ALREADY retreated from the "4 million jobs" number Obama repeatedly cited in his press conference this Monday and is now claiming the stimulus plan will creat or save 3.5 million new jobs. But as the Washington Post today, most other estimates are FAR below that number.

Global Insight estimates the plan will only create 2.5 million jobs and Macroeconomic Advisers puts the number at just 2.3 million. With some welcome humility, the CBO is only offering a range of job creation that stretches from 1.3 to 3.9 million. Even the Obama Administration's favorite point man on economic forcasting, Mark Zandi, is projecting that the bill will only create 2.2 million jobs. But these estimate are all based off of different versions of the plan. The MA numbers are based off the ORIGINAL House Bill. The GI numbers off the Senate's $838 billion versoin. The CBO numbers off the Senate's $887 billion version. The Post is not clear, but it appears that Zandi's numbers are based upon the current version of the bill that is scheduled to be voted on today. We're glad he was able to get his hands on a detailed enough version of the bill to run his scientific projections, because THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY HAVE TO VOTE ON THE PLAN DID NOT GET THE FINAL TEXT UNTIL 11 PM LAST NIGHT!
February 13, 2009

10:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

nevminer writes:

Oh_wise _one
You should learn to read. The following are excerpts from the article you quoted.
"While the stimulus bill is a necessary condition for economic stabilization and recovery, it is hardly sufficient," Galston wrote. "As the lesson of Japan in the 1990s shows, fiscal stimulus without financial rescue yields stagnation — at best."
With the economy in a tailspin, doing nothing isn't an option, however.
"The bottom line is that at the end of the day, we're going to support the legislation. Why? Because with the markets functioning so poorly, the government is the only game in town capable of jump-starting the economy," Donohue said.
February 13, 2009

10:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

rapelje writes:

I continue from the article of this morning:

The House Democrats have previously PROMISED that all conference reports would be made publicly available for 48 hours before consideration. LAST NIGHT HOUSE DEMOCRATS VOTED TO BREAK THAT PROMISE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. Clocking in at 1419 pages, a Member of Congress would have to read 2.63 pages a minute without taking a break to read the whole bill before the House begins proceedings. Meanwhile, it appears that select LOBBYISTS HAD FINAL VERSIONS OF THE BILL HOURS BEFORE OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE DID.

Federal lawmakers are not the only ones frustrated by the rushed and completely nontransparent process. In Idaho, Canyon County Commissioner Steve Rule tells the Los Angeles Times: "The answers that we're getting are rather oblique. 'We don't know.' That's the part that's frustrating for us....We're told to put our name on a list and see what comes out of Washington to the state and see what happens." Democrat Richard Thompson, who is coordinating the State of Washington's lobbying efforts, adds: :Anybody who thinks they can tell you definitively what's going on is conning you."

The more news that comes out about this stimulus bill, the less it makes sense. The Politico reports today that the projected local job creation numbers the White House is using to lobby for the bill simply do NOT add up. And the Wall Street Journal reports that federal agencies simply do NOT have the contracting manpower to manage what is a truly unprecendented explosion of government spending. The final version of the bill includes $8 Billion in earmarked funding for a super train between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDIES ALONE WILL TAKE MORE THAN FIVE YEARS TO COMPLETE. Would it really be a CATASTROPHE if all this long term spending were properly reviewed, debated, and voted on? Or maybe President Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was speaking the truth when he said: NEVER LET A SERIOUS CRISIS GO TO WASTE. WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THINGS YOU COULDN'T DO BEFORE."

End of the article
February 13, 2009

10:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

underthebusinvestments writes:

25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis

http://www.time.com/time/specials/pac...
February 13, 2009

10:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

action_now writes:

It's both, they cover 40% of value but 58% of number, because they don't cover the jumbo loans (most expensive).
February 13, 2009

10:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Triumph writes:

The home builders aren't the only ones bummed with president Obummer. The tax breaks people will see on their paychecks is less than twenty dollars. Another crumb off of this elitists table. This socialist pork filled joke of an economic stimulus package only shows that Obama for the true Marxist he really is and with the help of the rest of the Democrats will finally turn America into a fledgling communist country with all the government control of business and social programs attached to this stimulus package.

Try as he and his supporters may the people of this country are starting to see what a deciever he really is and the '"change" they will receive is not what they voted for. Only the hard core far left is pleased with this incompetent empty suit. Heaven help us these next four years.
February 13, 2009

10:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

conniesz writes:

Ah the wingnuts are out in full force today. It's pretty clear that crafting insults on a newspaper blog is all the steam they've got left. We're going to get out of this economic mess in spite of the Republicans - and when that happens, they will lose even more seats in the Senate. I believe Arlan Specter will be re-elected because of his support for this bill. He may have to run as an independent if the Republicans in Pennsylvania are stupid enough to select someone else - but he will win. Pennsylvania is a blue state and only truly moderate Republicans have ever had a chance there - the wingnuts will dig their own graves if they abandon Specter.

It's fun to watch the dying howls of the GOP and it's fervent supporters - that's why I love this blog. We won, you lost. Get used to it.

President Obama is going to lead us out of this mess - he's tried to include Republicans, but most of them don't want to be a part of the solution - they just want to be obstructionists and hope for failure. Here's some news for all of you. The economy will start to improve within a year - and there are just three Republicans who will be able to share any credit in that recovery - the rest will be toast. Oh, wait a minute, I forgot all those Republican governors who are desperate for stimulus money - perhaps they actually care about the people in their states, unlike the Republican representatives in Congress who view their constituents as pawns to be used in their political games - but I digress.

I can't wait to hear what our president has to say when he stops by to talk directly to the people here in Colorado on Tuesday. I'm sure his event will be well attended by real people who want to be part of the solution. It will be a good day.
February 13, 2009

11:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

mmannino writes:

wowlfie,

You have lost all credibility by claiming that Bush blew it in the mortgage fiasco. Any careful reading about the origins of the crisis indicate that the blame is widespread. Bush, Clinton, Congress (both Democrats and Republicans), bankers, investors, home owners, credit rating agencies, real estate professionals, and government sponsored agencies (Fannie and Freddie) have plenty of blame. Some of the most outrageous statements were made by Democrats. The most amazing thing to me about this fiasco is how so many were so wrong for so long. Any other interpretation does not reflect careful reading of the crisis.
February 13, 2009

11:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Diff writes:

"So which is it? "

Depends on what time period you want to know about.

"and if
( in either case) only 10-15% of those are in the supprime market - how did that have a large enough affect to "be the whole cause" of the melt down? "

Simple mathematics and economics 101.

I’ll show you how just 5% of a bank’s loans being subprime can destroy the bank.

Diffbank is a bank that provides auto, mortgages, and other loans. Diffbank has $1 million in equity capital. Diffbank decides it wants to make a lot more money next year, so that Diff, the CEO, can get a giant bonus.

Banks are required to maintain adequate capital reserves in order to stay in business. If Diffbank has $1 million in equity capital, then it can lend up to $19 million for car loans, mortgages, personal loans, etc. This would mean a capital reserve of 5%. Banks are required by the Federal Reserve to maintain a capital reserve, in order to ensure they don't loan out more money than the Fed considers safe. It varies from bank to bank based on size and other factors, but 5% is a good midrange point for our example.

So… imagine it is Feb 13, 2005. The housing market is continuing it’s decade long boom that started in the 1990s. Diffbank has $1 mill in equity capital, and has $18 million in loans outstanding. Diff knows that if he can get loans up to the max of $19 million, he’ll get his bonus.

Diff looks around and sees that the housing market is hot, so everyone who wants to own a home already has one. But there is a part of the market that is untapped. Low income people. Subprime loans to low income people. But Diff hesitates. Lending money to people who may not be able to pay it back is risky. But he knows that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, government created organizations designed to encourage lending to low income borrowers, will purchase his loans in the secondary market if things start to look too risky. Also, Freddie and Fannie will "guarantee" the loans, if Diffbank doesn't want to sell the subprime loans outright. This makes Diff think the risk of these subprime loans is a lot lower. And since the borrowers are subprime, Diffbank can charge higher interest rates and make even more money!

So Diffbank plunges into the subprime market so that Diff can get his bonus. Diffbank loans out another $1 million in subprime loans, which means that subprime makes up only 5% of the total loans outstanding.

As long as the economy stays strong, and housing prices don’t decline, Diffbank will make money and Diff will get his huge bonus.

(see next post)
February 13, 2009

11:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Diff....

(continued)

But wait. The economy slows just a bit. Housing prices stop rising. The low income bear the initial brunt of the slowdown. Suddenly, those subprime borrowers who were already barely able to afford their bills, can’t pay their mortgages. These loans become what bankers call “nonperforming loans”. Now, Diffbank has $1 million in subprime loans that aren’t being paid. The values of the homes continues to drop. The market value of the loans have to be written down. Even prime loan values start to deteriorate creating more non-performing loans. Suddenly, the equity value of Diffbank starts to plunge.

Bank regulators see that Diffbank has $19 million in loans on its books, but only $17 million is performing loans (i.e. loans that borrowers are repaying). However the value of the equity in Diffbank has collapsed to $500,000. The capital reserve ratio has dropped to 3.4%, well below the legal requirements. Diffbank is in trouble.

Diff tries to sell off his subprime loans to Freddie or Fannie. But they have already bought trillions in other shoddy loans and now they’re tapped out. They can’t purchase the subprime loans from Diffbank. They can’t guarantee them either, as Freddie and Fannie are already struggling with insolvency themselves.

Diffbank is in serious crisis mode now.

If more borrowers stop repaying their loans, or are merely late in repaying, Diffbank will become insolvent, meaning its equity has been wiped out completely. This will happen if just another $2 million in loans become delinquent, even though $15 million in loans are perfectly fine and performing. With capital reserve requirements below 5% (which have to be reported to the Fed daily), banking regulators arrive to take over Diffbank to protect the depositors since Diffbank is unable to meet its capital reserve requirements, and may become insolvent and unable to repay its depositors.

Diff is done. By loaning just 5% of his banks loans to subprime borrowers that ran into trouble and couldn’t repay their loans, he set the stage for insolvency of his bank. His bonus is gone. And Diffbank is no more.

Ever see the movie “It’s a Wonder Life”? That’s what is happening there. The loss of $8,000 dollars in cash deposits, means that the capital reserves of the Bailey Savings and Loan is below it’s loan to capital requirements set by the Federal Reserve. If the bank examiner finds out that they’re below, they’ll shut down the Savings and Loan. The infusion of cash at the end of the movie is to help George ensure that the capital of the S&L is enough to meet the reserve requirements.

A 5% loss, when you're leveraging 95% of your assets, means you are broke. Welcome to the ugly side of the double edged sword of debt.
February 13, 2009

11:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

WestminsterJ writes:

ricky1961- Step 4 - Hope that as the economy gets worse under Obama (guaranteed to happen) that voters will forget how the economy was so much better under ALL Presidents that came before Obama.

Uh, the economy CRASHED under Bush. Idiot.
February 13, 2009

11:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

robbyr2 writes:

"You can not expect the government to solve all your problems."

When they caused most of it, maybe they should. The $2.5 trillion borrowed by the Republicans in the WH and Congress for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan caused interest rates to go up. That led ARMs to adjust pricing many subprimers into foreclosure. Then the Bush Administration decided that those subprimers needed to pay back their credit cards 50-100% faster. Then both parties decided that bankruptcies were costing the banks too much money. Both parties encouraged people to buy homes that were larger than their wages supported (how did the average new home go from 1600 sq ft in 1970 to 2500 in 2005 when median family income adjusted for inflation didn't go up at all?)- if there are still questions about the Republicans' part, google the Bush campaigns crowing about the "ownership society" in 2004. Speculators were allowed to take out "liars loans" and Alt-As, leading to the latest wave of foreclousres. We allowed the banks to create the so-called voluntary "Hope" program to slow foreclosures in 2008 that instead of helping 400,000 homeowners has helped 25 homeowners. Both parties allowed banks to immorally sell what they knew to be bad loans to investors. Both parties allow banks and investors to bet on the horses so to speak, the "derivatives."

I think the government has an obligation to help clean up the mess it has created.
February 13, 2009

11:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

rapelje writes:

How can Obama NOT KNOW that he was lying to the people at the Caterpillar factory, when the CEO behind Obama knew? We are now seeing really how a Chicago politician acts when he gets his hands on the National Treasury!

The CBO estimates that there would be approximately 2.5 million jobs created even if Obama does NOTHING! So why the rush? Are there so many dense people out there that can't see that what Obama is actually doing is to push has hard as he can to pass this bill BEFORE anyone REALLY knows what is in it, not to give immediate help as he claims, since this claim is not true as we see now. Members of Congress will not have any complete knowledge about this bill and they will be voting on it today! Is there anymore evidence that people need to see that this is a bill that is extremely hastily prepared, is being pushed through with a dump truck load of lies by the President, has VERY QUESTIONABLE impact upon the economy, but is loved by the extreme left because it pays back the Special Interest groups that the Democrats have been wanting to help for a long time and Obama and his friends are hiding this all under the banner of a "Stimulus Bill" and we have to pass it now or else!!!! Nancy Pelosi, "for every month that nothing is done, 500,000,000 jobs are lost" (see the video). There are EARMARKS in the bill even though Pelosi and Obama lied and said there weren't any. How about a $2 Billion earmark for a Power Plant in Obama's home state? I hope the people at the Caterpillar factory didn't get their hopes of getting their jobs back anytime soon?

This bill creates a huge amount of financial liability to this country for generations to come. This bill is being rushed through soooo fast that there are NO CONTROLS being put in place as to watch and make sure that the money goes to the right place (listen to the Democrats that complained about Bush's bill that there were no controls) and the Democrats are doing the EXACT SAME THING AS THE REPUBLICANS did, no controls and there will be huge amounts of waste. The people around the country are told to line up like cattle in front of a trough for WHAT THEY REALLY HAVE NO CLUE, as they do not REALLY know how much money will be available and for what purposes, this is to ALL BE DECIDED by Obama and his team of crooks! Doesn't it make you happy to know that so many TAX CHEATS are handling this huge Political Payback bill? I am sure nothing wrong will happen and there will be no "missing money" or "unaccounted money"!!!

After this humiliating scene being pushed on us, the liberals and Democrats can NEVER complain about anything that the Republicans do, because it would pale in comparison to the "size of the robbery taking place, the lack of controls being put into place, the Chinese Fire Drill mentality of pushing it through, and most of all the number and size of liberal special interests pockets that are being lined" by this bill that is being pushed up people's backside!
February 13, 2009

11:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

WestminsterJ writes:

"Uh, the economy CRASHED under Bush. Idiot."

Apparently, you've never read any economics history textbooks, or even political history books for that matter.

Try using the "Democrats been in full control for 2 or more years but our failures to improve things are not our fault" in future elections.

See how well voters respond to your campaign slogans of...

"Sure unemployment was 7.2% when we took over, and now its 10%, but stick with us. We promise to correct the mistakes we've made in not fixing it by now!"

Or how about...

"Ok, two years of making things WORSE haven't worked out. We have a better idea this time, so give Democrats another shot to get it right this time!"

Or perhaps this will be convincing....

"Are you better off today than you were when we took office? Oh wait, don't answer that because we know that it's a lot worse now. How about ignoring Democrats failure to improve the economy and just blame people who have not been in power for years instead? Please? Please? Please?"
February 13, 2009

11:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

mmannino writes:

robbyr2,

The only problem with your analysis is the conclusion. The government will only make the situation worse especially with legislation like Porkulus (perhaps more aptly called Welfarulus). This terrible piece of legislation gives the incredible illusion that government will solve the problem by running enormous deficits and handing money out like candy.
February 13, 2009

11:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

rapelje writes:

Robbyr2, I see that you selectively forget that it was Bush and McClain that attempted to pass a bill in 2004 to clean up the mortgage industry, but who blocked it? Not the Republicans....the Democrats, like Maxine Waters, Barney Franks, and Nancy Pelosi.

Who was it that berated the auditor that came before Congress in 2004 to warn them of trouble with the books at FannieMae and FreddieMac, who were BOTH being run by Democrats? Try Maxine Waters (I loved the sound clip where she was berating the auditor for "how dare he question the management of FannieMae and FreddieMac when they are doing so much for the people of this country") and Barney Frank and other Democrats! NOT Republicans!

Here is a link to "another" of Obama's advisors that was forced to quit in 2008, Jim Johnson who had favorite treatment by Countrywide. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/...

By the way who was it that was "cooking" the books at FannieMae to the point that he got millions and millions in bonsuses that were not deserved? My gosh it couldn't be one of Obama's chief advisors NOW could it be? Yes, it is, Franklin Raines, the same Franklin Raines that Maxine Waters praised in 2004 and the same Franklin Raines that paid a $2 MILLION dollar fine as well as incuring a huge fine for FannieMae.

Please tell me of ONE Republican that profited from the Mortage Loan Crisis and One Republican that covered up for another Republican? I will answer this now, you can't because NO REPUBLICAN did what Maxine Waters, Barney Frank, Chris "I get a sweetheart mortgage deal" Dodd, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid did! Bush made a speech trying to build confidence in the mortgage industry and you try to say he was in it! I am not saying that the Republicans couldn't and shouldn't have made a bigger stink about the corruption that was going on under the Democratic leadership, but the main stream press doesn't cover the Republicans like they do the Democrats, the Republican message didn't and still doesn't get out with the same fanfare by the main stream press. How can you ignore the efforts by the Democratic leadership to block all attempts by the Republicans to introduce legislation to correct or fix the mortgage industry? The Democrats were the ones that ridiculed the auditor that came before Congress in 2004, NOT the Republicans. You should REALLY listen to Maxine Waters praise to the highest degree the leadership of Franklin Raines (yes, the same Franklin "$2 Million dollar fine" Raines for cooking the books at FannieMae), it would make you sick to see how much notice was given to the Democrats and they ignored it! The crimes within the mortgage industry were ALL done by the Democrats, sorry but this is a fact!
February 13, 2009

12:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

rapelje writes:

conniesz, I love how you characterize Obama as "trying to bring the Republicans in"....Let me see, did the Democrats allow any amendments by the Republicans to be heard? No. Did the Democrats effectively shut the Republicans out of having any influence as to how the bill was being shaped? Yes.

If you see a stinky mess that someone else is trying to sell to you connie, are you going to buy it no matter what? No. The Republicans saw the issues with this fiasco of a Special Interest bill and like they were supposed to, they raised the alarm but some people wouldn't listen...I guess you don't think the Republicans have the right to do that???Only the Democrats in reverse, right???

Obama pushed this stinking pile of thievery through Congress and only wanted to Republicans "on board" so later on he could say, see the Republicans were in on it too! Transparency was the LAST thing that Obama did in this bill, and you know this, it is just too hard for you to admit the truth!

This Obama bill arguably the most corrupt bill that I have seen in my lifetime. There are NO controls in it to make sure that the money isn't wasted, there are more special interest groups included in this bill than in any bill ever within the history of this country and again without controls to see how the money is spent that, this bill is being pushed through as if it were a fire sale and in fact the Members of Congress who are voting on it today have NOT been allowed enough time to even read it through completely once before having to vote on it and this is in direct contradiction to what Obama and the Democrats just a few weeks ago said would NOT happen! The amount of huge financial burden that is being put on the future generations of this country for as little proven positive return to this economy is unheard of! No wonder Obama wanted to share the blame when it goes south! Sorry Obama, the Republicans were too smart for you, and wouldn't start pulling the pile of manure through the Legislature with you!
February 13, 2009

12:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Denver7 writes:

Just give all the housing money to Habitat for Humanity. Jimmy
Earl knows what to do with it.
February 13, 2009

12:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

MBR693 writes:

What conniesz meant to say:

"We're going to get out of this economic mess in spite of the Democrats' stimulus package."
February 13, 2009

1:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Diff writes:

rickg19611 - Well I like your explanation - and the big bonus for Diff!!!

I can't I am sure I fully agree with all of what you said - but I'll take it into consideration and do some more reading on my own -
BTW -thanks for the thoughtful, respectful and intelligent reply!
February 13, 2009

1:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

JMaster writes:

Funny how spending $3 Trillion dollars on Iraqis is OKAY with some of you folks but spending $780 Billion on Americans is pork spending. You all can't do a thing to stop this bill and all I have to say is HA HA!!!!!
February 13, 2009

1:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

mmannino writes:

JMaster,

Your accounting is way off. A large part of the money would have been spent irregardless of the Iraqi conflict. Most Democrats voted for the war so the authorization was bipartisan. The Democrats only opposed the conflict when they sensed it may help them win the next election. Further, I believe the conflict was necessary but unfortunately very difficult.

Regardless of the amount of money spent that could have been avoided, your logic makes no sense. The country is clearly broke. The bank bailout and recession have emptied the coffers. When money is tight, the logical response is to tighten your belt until the storm passes. Porkulus is a welfare spending orgy that will involve permanent spending. The huge debt cannot be financed because of the world-wide economic difficulties.
February 13, 2009

2:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

INC writes:

ya know... the republicans are spewing all day and night about how Democrats are going to turn America into a communist country.
well if we had not done so by now with at least half of last century under Democratic control...

what makes y'all so sure now?
or is it really just fear mongering using lies and propaganda?

in spite of the republicans, Democrats will save America yet again.
February 13, 2009

4:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

coarizona writes:

"Connie:It's fun to watch the dying howls of the GOP and it's fervent supporters - that's why I love this blog. We won, you lost. Get used to it."... bo is going to be in town soon. Are you going to ask for a house too? Queen for a Day is back in production. You post the same blog in every article. Get some fresh material or go back to Kos and get a new script.
February 13, 2009

5:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

rapelje writes:

JMaster, you used a number that liberals throw around a lot like it is a fact, and in reality it is a bogus piece of useless liberal fantasy. I am talking about the $3 Trillion figure for the cost of the war in Iraq. In ACTUAL numbers the war in Iraq has cost the U.S. (through 6/2008) $646 Billion NOT the $3 Trillion: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budg...

When you said that the war in Iraq was way more than Obama's bill, you were spreading a lot of BS. In reality Obama's ONE TIME appropriations bill is over $100 Billion MORE than ALL the money we have spent in the Iraq war up to this time!

In addition to the actual costs there are future costs, i.e. Veteran Affairs and Future Operations. Future operations is no longer a valid number due to a change in administration. The Veterans Cost is $717 Billion, this cost item will be spread out over the next 70 years, so to say that it has been spent is not correct. Obama's bill will be OVER $1 Trillion after the interest has been added, and there are going to be more "emergency" stimulus bills coming down the pike. If you want to add the future costs like veteran affairs it is only appropriate to add the cost of future emergency stimulus bills and they would probably cancel each other out.

Your bogus information came from an opinion piece in the Washington Post by Linda J. Bilmes and Joseph E. Stiglitz. Bilmes is an economist at the JFK School of Economics and Stiglitz is an economist at Columbia (a school with many open Marxists on the staff) and both are rabid anti-war and used wild numbers to support their political aims. They gave NO SUPPORT for their numbers, other than a qualifier, "Believe me, we have done the math." Even in their numbers they admit that they throw in all "future" costs of the war, veterans affairs, revamping military equipment for as long as the eye can see, cost of each of the insurance policies paid out to families of deceased personnel, the cost to the Iraqi people, etc. They threw in EVERY cost for the next 70 years, and then added something on to that for good measure. Even after all this they ONLY came up to $1.5 Trillion. Where did the other $1.5 Trillion come from? Some undefined and undisclosed amount attributed to what they call a "sputtering economy". How this can be directly or even indirectly calculated is pure voodoo science. Just some number to throw in to make them feel good! Wow, this is what is considered to be sound economics? Not by ANYONE that is considered to be a real economist. Your $3 Trillion number is made up of costs for the next 70 years and then some added on to that for good measure and then some $1.5 Trillion for a totally uncalculable number for a "sputtering economy". This is how liberals make numbers lie and then weakminded fools like you repeat it. What a bogus bunch of worthless numbers you tried to put on this board!
February 13, 2009

7:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

coarizona writes:

JMasters are you submitting this garbage on your mom's computer in the basement? Go to bed and let the adults talk.

Home › Business › Real Estate

Home builders bummed by stimulus plans

Lowered tax credit won't provide much stimulus, they fear

By Alan Zibel and Alex Veiga, Associated Press

Published February 13, 2009 at 12:05 a.m.

More Real Estate

Share

Comments

Featured

Columns & Blogs