E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIn the midst of America’s most devastated housing market, the real estate crisis was one obvious issue that wasn’t atop the agenda at the Republican presidential contenders’ debate in Las Vegas Tuesday night, leaving unclear the candidates’ opinions on whether the federal government ought to play a role in rescuing Americans who are stuck in homes that are worth less than their mortgage balance.
For the first hour of the debate Mitt Romney’s house in Belmont, Mass. loomed larger than the foreclosed houses which are only a short drive from the debate venue in Las Vegas. Texas Gov. Rick Perry sparred with Romney over whether he’d employed illegal aliens to do work at his Massachusetts home.
But Nevada voters were probably more concerned about their homes than Romney’s. In the third quarter of this year, Nevada had the nation's highest foreclosure rate.
Romney, businessman Herman Cain and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas all lauded free market principles during the debate but never really confronted one of those principles: prices can go down as well as go up. As many Americans have learned in recent years, a house is sometimes worth less than what you paid for it.
Should the government seek to regulate those price movements, and if so, when and why? The GOP contenders offered few answers Tuesday night.
Nevada’s housing bust followed an exhilarating boom: According to the Census Bureau, between 2000 and 2010 Nevada was the state with the highest percentage increase in the number of housing units, at 42 percent.
But Nevada has been also the state with the largest percentage-point increase in the housing vacancy rate, jumping from 9.2 percent in 2000 to 14.3 percent in 2010.
According to the financial data analysis firm CoreLogic, three out of five homeowners in Nevada are “upside down,” meaning that borrowers owe more on their homes than the houses are now worth and giving Nevada the dubious distinction of also leading the nation in that category.
Little was said about these facts during the debate – despite the efforts of a questioner in the audience who asked, “Those of us who own property here in Nevada have been devastated by the real estate bubble. What would you do as president to help fix the overall problem of real estate and foreclosures in America?”
The first contender to get a chance to answer that question was former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum. He came up with a restatement of the obvious, “the market has been decimated. So now you’re looking at: how do you repair?”
He never did answer his own question, instead veering off into a scrap with Perry for allegedly having supported congressional passage of the Troubled Assets Relief Program in 2008. (Some of the money for the federal aid to distressed homeowners, the Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP, comes from TARP.)
“People who did things that were wrong, invested in things, took risks, were bailed out. And the folks who acted responsibly are now getting hurt because their houses have gone down in value. We need to let the markets work,” Santorum said.
A few minutes later Romney echoed that idea, “the right course is to let markets work.”
Getting the economy growing faster is the right way to help distressed homeowners, Romney contended. But neither he nor Santorum grappled with the problem of the homeowner in the Las Vegas suburbs who may want to move to a state where the unemployment rate is lower than Nevada’s 13.4 percent– but cannot because he cannot sell his house.
None of the candidates dealt with the effect that the housing slump has had on worker mobility in America and none offered any opinion on whether the Obama administration’s HAMP or the Bush administration’s foreclosure prevention efforts were effective or not.
Romney has offered a 160-page economic program which does not offer any specific solutions to the housing crisis and in fact barely mentions it.
Romney was much more forthcoming earlier Tuesday by saying in an interview with the Las Vegas Review-Journal, “Don't try to stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom. Allow investors to buy homes, put renters in them, fix the homes up. Let it turn around and come back up. The Obama administration has slow walked the foreclosure processes that have long existed, and as a result we still have a foreclosure overhang.”
Romney’s approach brought him instant criticism from Democrats and it may reappear as an issue in 2012 if Romney is the GOP nominee. But it didn’t really get any kind of debate Tuesday night.
Leave a Comment:
Of course, they would not they are corporations; not people. Corporations don't talk.
Why would they "take on housing" when our own president won't?
At least they didn't spend the debate pointing fingers and labeling others, unlike Obama on his bus tour...
"His strategy is to force Republicans to accept his proposals or be painted as obstructionists in the way of economic recovery as campaigning for the November 2012 presidential and congressional elections heats up."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44947151/ns/politics-white_house/#.Tp5T-XKOeMs
Do what I say or I'm telling everyone you're a big poopy-head... like a child.
His strategy is working.
Since the stated republican strategy is nothing more than make Obama a one term president, I doubt you can throw any stones. I remember them clearly running on a platform of creating jobs. Since the republicans and tea party have only been cutting jobs from the first day, I guess we can see that they obviously had no intention of addressing jobs. Well, they got jobs for themselves. Temporary, I'm sure.
And what happened to the "contract with America?" Didn't they break that contract when they pledged to uphold Norquist over the Constitution?
Look, they lied to get in, they've lied since they've been there, they lied in the previous administration. I'm sensing a pattern here, and I hate to be lied to by my employees.
I think the republicans are in for a really bad year, and like bush in '06, are in a deep state of denial on the subject.
We'll see. If young people will camp out in the cold of New York for progressive ideas, I think we can count on them to vote, and I don't think they are as dumb as people think they are. They will vote their interests, and kick out republicans in droves.
I hope your right, these debates are useless...
Do they lie, you bet they do. But one thing they haven't lied about is what to do with the foreclosure problem.
What they don't do is discuss the repercussions of that option and how it effects the displaced people and the long term problem of way to much supply for the demand. Republicans are not known for their compassion, clearly demonstrated in previous debates on discussions on the un-insured. They do know it should remain unspoken that the basic premise is "Screw the little guy" they are expendable.
The greed banks and morgage companies are at fault for 1. Financing what they knew were over priced homes and unqualified home owners. 2 The housing "bOOM would never have happened if the leaders had not lent the money to the speculating developers to begin with
Well Night Hawk you seem to forget old Barney (chubber) Frank claiming to sue the Federal Government unless more low income people (Those who couldn't afford their rent no less) had there own home.
Yes the bankers pushed the bad paper but the DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP (Controlled Both Houses) were watching and loving every minute of it.
Now the DEMOCRATS want to embrace this OWS crap (Fleabaggers) and act like they had nothing to do with this housing crash. WAKE UP BOTH SIDES WATCHED WHILE ROME BURNED! We're still on fire...
and the poor, helpless banks writing mortgages and engaging in absurd credit swaps that brought them to ruin and the country to the brink were all at the mercy of Barney FRANK and the democratic leadership??? Geez that's a new one. I guess your President Bush was watching helplessly from the sidelines at this debacle and gosh...who could blame him for all of that well-intentioned degregulation, look the other way stuff, right?? While you channel Dick Nixon and whine about "Fleabaggers" exercising their first amendment rights, we're all supposed to swallow the same BS you have? Put out your own fire...I'm guessing you're oblivious to that too
First, Flash6, you will never be able to tell people that the government MADE banks loan money (because they can't). That's just a lie. They loaned money because they made money doing it, then bundled and sold the loans to third-parties, never holding a risk in them. Fannie and Freddie held just 20% of the sub-prime loans when the collapse happened.
Ron Paul stumbled into an interesting take on the housing collapse last night : the government could have bailed out the homeowners and spent less money than all the money needed after the collapse.
Too bad the conservatives said they would never bail out someone who made a bad decision - unless of course, you're a bank.
We see what that decision by conservatives did - and now they complain all over again. That tells a lot about the ideas conservatives have - that they will let the American economy collapse if it means helping out anyone but the rich.
More connie BS..There has been a solution to the mortgage mess which unfortunately no one talks about. It is called CRAM DOWN legislation.
The legislation would allow bankruptcy judges for the first time to alter the terms of mortgages for primary residences. Under the proposal, borrowers could declare bankruptcy, and a judge would be able to reduce the amount they owe as part of resolving their debts.
The bill was passed by the democratic house and stymied in the senate by, you guessed it heavy lobbying by Wall street....Strange how no one wants to discuss this.
And what has Obama done to fix the housing market? What can he do? Not a whole hell of a lot. We have to many homes. The standards for credit have been reset to the pre Clinton standards. People who should not have met the standards for a home loan will now not tmeet the standards for a home loan. So, what can be done? Nothing.
Bev++
Neither do skirts.
you mean "talk"? Was that supposed to be some kind of comment on your view of women?
No, it was a gut response to the unintentional (maybe) comedy in the title of this article "Romney...skirts it".
Nothing to do with women at all.
Meant only as a jokey complement as well as agreement with Beverley's comment at the top saying "corporations don't talk".
I said and "skirts don't talk" either.
Ya had to be there.
Romney didn't skirt it Tuesday.
The people who lost their homes because of the 1% can now rent them from "investors". And the Republicans like to moan about the redistribution of wealth and "Class warfare" Well this is how it's done.
And by the way Romney is a two faced ginormous A$$ hole.
I know quite a few folks that would like to sell their present home, and buy a new one. They would often be willing to sell at a low price, because they can buy at a low price.
However the weak market, and more importantly, the economic uncertainty are holding them back. They don't want to spend down their savings, or take on more debt when they don't know what is going to happen.
Until the economy improves significantly, the housing market at best will be stagnant.
Unfortunately, I don't see a realistic plan from any political group to start creating an environment that encourages economic development. They're all stuck in their own dogma to appeal to their primary supporters.
Correct, their canned answer is "let market forces work" - yes, they've worked so well in the last 10 years - BS!
Mav--that's because there is no "free market" as the TPGOP like to call it. The market is highly manipulated. The "small" people don't stand a chance! It needs to be regulated, because guess what, the fox is guarding the henhouse and corporations will NOT do what is right unless their feet are held to the fire (so to speak). Rampant deregulation and low taxes have not produced any jobs--"trickle-down" version of an economic program is a failure--we have seen this over the last 30 years, escalated over the past 10 years. If deregulation and low corporate taxes really produced jobs, we would not have such a high unemployment rate. Face it folks, the TPGOP will just bring more misery to us "small people".
"We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo by Walt Kelly
Just another night of BS in the city of real BS, gamblers doing more gambling in Sin City. It's YOUR money that they are gambling with, not theirs......they protect their money while destroying yours.
Of course neither candidate is going to answer the question. Its sort of like cutting social security. Then again, the democrats and their so called love of the middle and poor class havent done squat or said anything either.
When you have the teabaggers/republicants holding the senate hostage, how do you expect any passage of helpful legislation.
Remember... according to Boner, McConnell, and the other criminally insane right wing, if it will make President Obama look even remotely good, we wont agree.
Just look back at last nights food fight.
"Romney, businessman Herman Cain and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas all lauded free market principles during the debate but never really confronted one of those principles: prices can go down as well as go up."
Problem is that free market principles created this housing fiasco because greed took over and caused the housing collapse. What would be the incentive for this fraudulent group to stop creating exotic mortgages and unregulated CDOs in another form if they are not regulated?
Excellent Post!
Very astute!
The banks get bailed out and they still get their bonuses, Bullcrap, take them away and yes government should step or force stockholders and board to change their pay which is outrageous and downright appalling. I bought a home thinking this is ridiculous prices but thought I would never own one since never saw prices drop. I lost over $60.000. At least allow me to buy another if my credit was ok still besides the home. Now I say is to hell with banks and could care less about them. Free markets do not work and we need to get back to a mixed economy. Big corporations create these deregulation's since buy off politicians and more so with Republicans. We need a third party being built from ground up, free TV for political election discussions and band TV media ads for propaganda lies and now going to be worse due to Supreme Court ruling by a conservative majority and justice Stevens saying the ruling ignored common sense as well as a hundred years of settle law. Or course we now how conservatives are today for the last forty years and letting evangelicals have their way while most of us are in the middle. Public financing which even Obama did not abide by. We need to hear more intelligent discussions versus this childish debates we have today. Good people would run if they do not have their souls to $$$$$$$$$ We have complex problems and these gusy are not the answer and sorry to say Obma can't due to money and lobbyist influence. Wale up America, once the election is over back to same old system still in place and media manipulation
You're right "djj" they would simply let that continue. None of them are for Wall Street reforms, even basic common sense ones like regulating derivative products - truly absurd. It's like their asking a crack addict to regulate their own dosage...
The middle class has no concept of debt, and the fact that the housing boom happened is proof of this.
In 1999, I paid $145,000 for my home. In 2005, it was "worth" $268,000, an 85% increase.
You can probably guess that my salary did not increase 85% over that same time period.
Based on the attitude of most people, I guess they think that in the 6 years since 2005, the house should have increased another 85% to $495,000.
Do you people have any idea what a $2000 a month increase in a mortgage payment does to the buying power of a middle class family?
The word "decimate" comes to mind.
Well considering "most people" still have their homes and their jobs, I wouldn't be so quick to assume you are the one walking human with a job and a home who did NOT let the banks talk them into economic suicide. The word "decimate" comes to mind in contemplating the assets of that hardworking careful middle class who nonetheless saw their 401k's and other assets plummet on the gambles of the financial industry.
AP:
Correct, I am not the only one. But enough people did so that the buying of products is significantly less, as that portion of the population chokes each month on their "moron mortgages".
About 28% of homeowners are "underwater". This means that a signifcant swath of people bought or hocked during the boom. Being underwater by itself isn't that harmful, but it is an indication on how much that mortgage is hitting them each month.
If I bought my current house at the height of the market, I would be about $60,000 in the hole and be stuck with paying $2150 a month. This is the fate of a boom-buyer or a boom-hocker. I would need $150,000 household income minimum to comfortably afford this house. I do not have this money, nor do most boom buyers.
My cutoff for a sane fiscal decision: By a house for no more than double your household income. Easily done for many decades prior to the boom.
That's their answer? Just leave it alone. The lenders got bailed out. So it's tough beans for the little guy again. Does anyone see anything unique about any of these candidates? I sure as hell don't
PB
The lenders should have never been bailed out. Sadly, what goes up, must come down. People that bought houses for investments, or just got caught up buying at the top of the bubble are hurting, but how do you buy out one person but not buy out all of them? There is not enough tax payers in the US to do that, even IF millionaires were taxed at 60 %. If they started forgiving loans at current market value, everyone would want their share, including me. There might be some way to extend the bill for some time in the future,maybe the extension could be interest free, but the loans could not be forgiven. Some one, not the banks, got paid for the property. The buyers agreed to the asking price, not the banks, and the original owners or builders were paid. Everyone who owns property took some sort of a loss so it is not feasible to pay off home owners.
I live in the third home of my life. I made money on the first, broke even on the second due to some creative selling, and I am sure that if I tried to sell now, I would lose money. But I am in the last home of my life, so I don't care what the market value is. I will stay here until I die.
The hard hit areas such as LV do have it bad and the "little" people are the ones paying for the speculation on home ownership. But, like I said before, you can't just forgive the mortgages on some but not all. Extensions with smaller payments for a few years with no additional interest added would help many get past the recession. The loan value would still be there and would at some point have to be paid back, but it would give people time to recover.
I thought Paul stood out as unique, good or bad, but unique. And Bachman as well, but uniquely bad. There are at least 3 of these people that need to get out of the race. Huntsman, Bachman, Santorium and probably Perry and Gingrich, as well so that more time gets spent on people who at least have a chance.
Not only did they not have a solution but they lacked compassion as well. "Let the market correct itself" they say. What they don't say is that it could take 10 years or more to sort this mess out.
Without a doubt, most of them skirted the issues. They are still in Campaign mode and not in Debate Mode. None of them want the Job bad enough to take off the gloves.
They just don't have it in their hearts.
One thing is for sure, Perry just does not have much depth, not much in the way of Legacy Knowledge, he keeps repeating himself on Energy and does not answer questions directly. At least he wasn't falling asleep this time, although there were some bouts of inattention.
Hmmmm, who else is in Campaign mode and not talking about housing.... when he is actually in charge of the economy??
Obama in campaign mode on swing-state jobs tour
"His strategy is to force Republicans to accept his proposals or be painted as obstructionists in the way of economic recovery as campaigning for the November 2012 presidential and congressional elections heats up."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44947151/ns/politics-white_house/#.Tp5T-XKOeMs
Any 10 year old can tell that the Republicans have been sitting on their well manicured hands like spoiled rotten brats ever since Obama was elected President. He was elected by a large majority of Voters that included a Majority of Republicans and Independents.
The Republicans just shot down the Jobs Bill and continue to try and put Obama in the worst light possible by constant obstruction.
As far as I am concerned, I wish Obama had the same Killer Instinct that Republicans have, but that is just not his make up. He has given Republicans every thing they wanted to get them to play ball to include extending the Bush Tax Breaks that were set to expire by their own hands and yet they still continue to obstruct him at every turn.
This is the price for Voters putting Republicans back in control of the House in 2010.
GRIDLOCK!
It's nice to SAY Obama is "in charge of the economy", but does it make ANY sense to follow it with a grump about him saying it has to be done as outlined in his plan?
It is among the silliest of all the postings I've seen here - and there have been some doozies, but pjam, if you are going to say opposite things within the confines of a single post, it really didn't make sense to say anything at all!
The fact is he isn't "in charge" of the economy. He is limited in the scope of his powers and to actually make anything happen to benefit the country substantially he has to be the adult in the room that insists the Republicans quit hogging the ball and play nice...if he were solely "in charge" of the economy, the Bush "temporary" tax cuts would never have been passed and the debt would have started to come down.
So Obama doesn't get the blame because he is not "in charge" of the economy, but Bush gets the blame because he was?
Bush wasn't in control of it either but his policies exacerbated the mess. He got stuck in a "perfect storm" during his terms. However, when you champion deregulation and tax cuts and add two wars on to a fragile economy, boom! Those were things in his control and Paulson made the crappy bailout deal. They didn't give a damn about the "free market forces" then...
Thank you Mav. I happen to agree with you, I just get annoyed when people say the economy is all Bush's fault then, but it is now Congress's fault.
"So Obama doesn't get the blame because he is not "in charge" of the economy, but Bush gets the blame because he was?"
It's like this --- NOBODY --- Democrat, Republican, independent can fix the mess Bush and his Republican Congress created in only 3 years. And it doesn't matter who wins in 2012, the economy will still be slow at best. It's going to take years to dig ourselves out of this and the only answers Republicans have -- tax cuts and deregulation --- are the main causes of it in the first place.
"people say the economy is all Bush's fault then, but it is now Congress's fault."3
Try BOTH.
I didn't say it was Bush's fault, I said it was the fault of a policy that did not support debt reduction.
Wow talk about duck and dodge....perfect example.
Romney said:
And I suppose he would like to give them the 10 year tax credit being bandied about to help out those poor investors. Tax dollars for investors while kicking out the actual homeowner. Maybe we should ask them all if they support this idea. Their idea of free market???
Cain blamed the victims on the issue of Occupy Wall Street.
He blamed people working in banking for gullible sheep believing that class warfare is a "solution" rather than a distraction? Hardly.
No, we heard him right. Cain thinks if you are without, you are just dumb. (even he doesn't understand his own 9-9-9 so I'm not sure his success is due to any economic brilliance.) OWS isn't about class warfare. It's about protesting against being powerful enough to game the system until you control it. Illegally control it. That's something any American regardless of class ought to be against.
We appear to be living in a time where these rightwing candidates talk up Capitalism/free market/no government, until something goes wrong, which it ALWAYS does, then bring on Socialism/government/big money bail outs, but just for a select group/which we all pay for....then its back to Full On Capitalism with minimal or no regulations/oversight until the next time they need to fill up the coffers..How do they get more than 2 or 3 people to vote or believe in them...
Yes, the free market has served us so well over the last 10 years. They chose to bailout Wall Street but complained to high heaven when president Obama bailed out the auto industry which actually had jobs on the line...
Notice that RP said two things: let the free market work (which needs to be done at some point regardless of your ideology -- unless you're a Communist) and let any bailouts go toward the people struggling with mortgage payments and not Wall Street. Sounds like a good combination to me.
Don't you alll realize: There is NO "free market"? It is highly manipulated by wall street! I am so sick and tired of people using this as an excuse to deregulate and allow huge corporations to bilk the "small people" of their retirement, savings, and investments! They use our money, gamble it away, and still take away mega bucks for themselves, while we are left with little to nothing! At some point, the "small people" will have nothing left to lose...
"We have met the enemy and he is us! Pogo by Walt Kelly
Pathetic
Very, very pathetic
The free-market is cool, but for them to be so against regulations and lawsuits?
I agree, freemarket is the natural state of things and will always rule. I can understand the GOP being against regulation, but I can't see why so many regular people are against it. Is there too much Talk Radio convincing people?
there is to much talk radio drilling on their emotions, mindless blah, blah, blah till they think it makes sense
Underwater mortgages is definitely something they shouldn't be skirting if they give a dam about us middle class people. Gov't bailed banks now bail us underwater mortgage holders now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
American taxpayers bailed out the banks... now you want them to bail out irresponsible homeowners too?
Oh, right YOU don't care because you are the one holding your hand out.
A house is a house, it is property to be used for living in, not a freaking ATM machine. YOU wanted it, YOU borrowed someone elses money to get it, YOU are responsible for it.
My sister lost her house, but you know, her and hubby refinanced almost every 2 years and always drive 2 new cars, still do. I never refinanced, only owe $15,000 more on my house and have 3 paid for used cars. I pay all of my bills with one weekly check.
Why would they "take on housing" when our own president won't?
At least they didn't spend the debate pointing fingers and labeling others, unlike Obama on his bus tour...
"His strategy is to force Republicans to accept his proposals or be painted as obstructionists in the way of economic recovery as campaigning for the November 2012 presidential and congressional elections heats up."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44947151/ns/politics-white_house/#.Tp5T-XKOeMs
Do what I say or I'm telling everyone you're a big poopy-head... like a child.
pjam: If the Republicans can't take the heat, then they should stay out of the kitchen. Clearly you can't...Calling the Republican party of No what they are is pointing fingers and 'labeling'? Let the labeling begin. Clearly not everyone can figure out when they've been had by the same people who created this mess.
Mitt Romney finally came out of his cage and struck back hard. I guess you can only ridicule a man's religion and lie about his record so often. Perry made Romney a better candidate. Mr. Nice Guy has turned into Mr. President. There is fire in his belly now. Obama better be taking notes, he's next.
Please, Mitt is always the same flip flopper if he wants to defend the rich and corporations during debates with Obama - bring it on!
Do the republicans know there is a housing slump?
Not in the Hamptons...
Just think of the reverse mortgage on a 50 million dollar hunk of property. That would be lots and lots of paycheckes.
There is not enough money anywhere, to re-inflate the housing bubble.
Mr. Cain wrote in 2005 that housing prices would not come down, and in 2008 that the financial panic was the invention of the Democrats. (The Koch brothers do not know much about economics.)
The second problem is that the three institutions that know the least about real estate are (in no particular order) Wall Street, commercial banks & the Federal Reserve.
If the Fed had hired a junior S&L Loan Officer from Grand Rapids MI, in 2002--and listened to her--she would have told it that cranking down interest rates, jacks up real estate prices.
The entire Country subscribed to The Greater-Fool Theory--"I will overpay for this property, and re-sell it to a greater fool than myself, at a profit."
Eventually, we ran out of fools. The amount that all of those mortgages were underwater, equaled the net capitalization of the US Financial System.
If we can get the Tea Bag wing of the GOP out of Congress (and re-elect the responsible guy with the big ears) a long-term rebound in US manufacturing will allow real estate prices to slowly rise. This is best soft landing we can hope for.
As much as it makes me sick to say so, I agree with Perry...Romney does not have a heart...a big bobble head yes... but no heart and neither does Rick Santorum.
and Perry's heart pumps OIL, his lungs breath GAS, lumps of COAL? not going to go there.
It was not a debate, but it was quite a tallywacker exhibit!
Bailing out the banks was wrong, but predictable given the allegiances that exist between Washington and the financial sector. However, the disaster is not over, as many banks are holding mortgages that are worth less than the properties that guarantee them. The banks are not willing to liquidate many of these properties at market prices because their balance sheets would be decimated, they would become under-capitalized and many would face bankruptcy. They are holding these underwater mortgages hoping (and lobbying) for more government intervention that will either bail them out once again, or re-stoke the real estate bubble so that prices begin rising again.
This is all bad for consumers. Prices must be allowed to fall, and this will only happen when the bad debt created during the bubble is liquidated. That means the banks must take a haircut, and those that are holding too many bad mortgages must suffer the consequences of their actions, including bankruptcy.
Consumers who are "underwater" and cannot afford to pay their mortgages need to default and move on. Falling real estate prices will make buying and renting more affordable for these people.
Housing is a good/service like so many other things we buy. It is no different. It is not "special". To treat home ownership as sacrosanct or some kind of right will only extend the current crisis and cause us to repeat our mistakes. This madness fueled by government policy and the Fed's easy credit must come to an end!
I really don't understand all the panic. These elected aholes continue to allow these economic conditions to continue we are or will have the following happen;
1. Occupy Wall street - already happening all over the world
then
2. When this doesn't work - rioting in the streets
then
3. Society breaks down - the law of the old west re-asserts itself
then
4. The military steps in
then
5. The military breaks down because the people making up the military won't kill their parents
then
6. The Government collapses
then
7. We start all over again -debt free - new nation
then
8. We elect the same aholes that killed the USA to start us down the same old path.
This is the short history of the USA.
The End.
Now do you people both inside and outside the beltway understand - if not read the news of the past year - elements of the above are happening in the middle east and elsewhere throughout the world so don't tell me it can not happen here!
Can't see obama invoking martial law he's pissed of the general's.
I do see the violence in the streets, I really didn't expect to see it until next spring. my bad!
It can't happen here.
There. I said it.
Fed UP: It can't and it won't happen here. There's a long line of those betting against the US and predicting it's collapse. Always has been. Always will be.
They skipped the housing slum simply due to the fact it is not hurting the mega rich of America or Corporate America! Republicans don't give a damn about everyday working Americans except to lie to them trying to get their vote every four years.
Now that's not fair, they do care about us hard working Americans. After all they seem to like screwing us every chance they get. Thats got to be love right? No, but they are equal opportunity haters and don't forget, "corporations are people too". At least that's the teapublican line....
So did anyone catch that Cain's "empowerment zones" are a fancy way of saying Redline?
He intends to identify neighborhoods that are needy, offer a lower tax in those neighborhoods? Now I ask you, once those neighborhoods are identified as having minimal resources and incomes would you expect businesses to move in so they only had to pay 3-3-3 or would you expect them to move OUT because the area has been determined to be too poor to support businesses?
Pretty fancy dancin' there Mr Cain. It won't fly.
Thought that was a good little tap dance around the issue. Propose an across the board flat tax to eliminate all loop holes, then add in new loop holes when you get informed your plan is pure crap. Yea, this guy is someone we should really get behind. After all he is magic, he can talk out of both sides of his face... funny stuff