B U M P
Not just bad, but terrible...
Why should the federal government bail out people who cannot afford their homes? Who bails them out next year and the next and the...
Look, people who can afford mortgage payments will pay them. Those who can’t won’t be able today, next month, next year or ten years from now.
Face the music. Get on with your life. Don’t be so gullible next time. Chalk it up to life experience.
Bill Gross is self-identified “lib”-ertarian, who wants a bailout not for homeowners but for himself, as he is sitting on largest stockpile of US bonds - if interest rates are lowered by Fed, their value goes up and he stands to make a bundle in a very short period of time.
EXTREMELY bad Idea.
Dang. I don’t think I can highlight just one of those issues.
Nobody seems to be responsible for anything, anymore.
However, I’m responsible for my commas. ;o)
B.S. panic alert from a dubious source; U.S. “liberal”
News and Socialist Report.
Bad timing as the July report shows a 2.8% jump
in new home starts. The sub-prime sector is nominal.
Sorry, Mr. Zuckerman. The pro-Clinton Article is hogwash!
F#$% that.
The people that bought these homes with nothing down have little to lose. That have little invested. On the other hand we have stupid lenders that lent money where they shouldn’t have and created this mess to begin with. They should pay the consequences. After all they did it in the first place to make more money. Their greed got them where they are. Now comes reality. To erase the consequences for their greed only invites more of the same at others expense. A big fat NO!
Good grief! Is this assclown Gross serious?
He wants the GOP to be more socialist than the rats and pander to society's losers in order to buy their votes??
(rubbing eyes) This HAS to be a joke.
Fred Thomspon v Obama or Hilary puts California in play, but trying to buy it is as useless as trying to ‘reach out to the Latino vote’ through amnesty.
Meanwhile, wages and the cost of goods and services go up. This means that homeowners are now paying their mortgages with much cheaper dollars, which ain't so bad. Those sitting on money today are forced to invest in order to (hopefully) compensate for the ravages of inflation.
If I'm Bill Gates I don't care for it a bit. If I'm on a fixed income I feel vulnerable to the government's largess. If I'm Joe Sixpack I hate it - but only because I haven't thought it all the way through and hate watching prices go up. If I'm a business owner I just raise my prices (the very definition of inflation) - besides, it's great having all these rich investors looking good business opportunities.
Whether one should be concerned is simply a function of their circumstances.
Seriously is this being illustrated as Bush winning/bailing out all the young voters involved in construction/mortgage/speculation business?
More so this is an argument on what level of risk the Government (ie/you and me) will back/buy.
Mae and Mac were well done. They are not the argument to add Curly in this market.
I’m sorry however I voted for W twice
He (GW) needs to distance himself from the GOP and try to let us rebuild what he destroyed.
REAL bad idea.
So the GOP can "save itself" by "one upping" a great lot of rotten socialists? That's going to endure the GOP to it's conservative base, the same base that didn't even bother to show up at the last election because the GOP was acting too much like corrupted socialists?
Great thinking there...
Now I know why I constantly run across articles like these regarding Bill Gross:
June 13, 2007 Pimco's Bill Gross has been grossly off
Quote : "Why am I so entertained by Gross's predictions? Because if you look at Bill Gross's track record as a market prognosticator, the reaction to the PIMCO don's latest call should be hoots of laughter, not a panic to sell. In fact, for the past few years, you could have made plenty of dough betting on the opposite of whatever Big Bill said was about to happen."
LOL!
The strong will survive, new companies without intractable bureaucracy will get a chance to rise up, capital will be allocated to those who can make better use of it!
For me the fact President Bush hasn't done anything really ups him in my book... and makes me happy to have voted for him twice. And his choice for the federal reserve Bernake seems to have a level head about him, and carefully thinking through his actions. Versus the ECB which seems to have panicked nearly.
Ownership of a home is, in terms of eternity, a deception. It is really borrowed money for 30 years, and then the owner is in his 50’s or 60’s when it is paid off.
The real truth is that it is borrowed time. You don’t get it and neither does anyone else.
For everyone gets to die and after that there’s a judgment.
And you can’t take it with you.
Vanity & deception. Better for a “homeowner” with a bad loan and a low income to rent. We’re all just renting anyway.
I remember you just mentioned this recently. Maybe a better assumption is that tax hikes are inflationary.
The article is contradictory. Did Bubba make a bad assumption or did he take bad acvice? Otherwise, I think using the bond market as an indicator is a pretty good idea. And apparently so does the author, who cites the jump in rates after the tax increase.
Who would take advice from a guy who is the head of a corporation called PIMPCO?
Oops! It’s PIMCO. My bad!!!