Bernie Sanders: We Will Raise Taxes On Anyone Making Over $29,000 To Fund Government Health Care

[NightFox]

Why should it cause taxes to skyrocket? Are we paying for things now?

If we don't have to raise taxes to pay for bombs and bail outs, why do we for health care?

When the hell has anything that the filthy government done that the cost didn't skyrocket? the government fucks up everything it touches. Just look at the corruption and mismanagement of the VA system, as an example. Trump had to go to the private sector to help fix that problem.

Their ain't no such thing as a free lunch. If you are going to give the stupid government control of your health care you are going to pay up the ass for it.

It is comical to see how naive you stupid Moon Bats are about the government. You dumb mutherfuckers think the government is your friend.

Everything has skyrocketed. Trucks are now $60-$80k in many cases. What do you consider that?

I consider it another one of your diversions. Health Insurance Inflation

You ignoring that everything has gone up but only condemning it one area is the one doing the diverting.

Did Obamacare address any portion of costs? No, it was a total failure and a sell out to wall street.

Inflation is not the cause of increased health care costs.
Health care costs are rising at over twice the rate of inflation.
Health care costs are rising due to insurance companies deliberately creating prepaid medical monopolies that prevent people from being able to shop around and get reasonable prices.

That's only part of the root cause (and a small part of it), the majority of the price increase goes back to good old SUPPLY AND DEMAND, namely supply isn't keeping up with accelerating demand, in part because the consumer has been decoupled from the COST (leading to over consumption) and in part because the citizenry is FAT, SICK AND NEARLY DEAD due to poor lifestyle choices (diet and exercise).

If we keep going the way we're going with our lifestyle choices, health care costs due to treatment of chronic diseases and lost productivity will be so high that the nation will be bankrupt no matter what "system" of health insurance we adopt.

 

[pknopp]

No it's not. Not if you don't ask.

Trust me, I seen what the housing bubble did to my suburb. I know what kind of people got those loans. For them, it was a free pass out of the projects or ghetto. They didn't know what was up because they didn't care. All they knew is sign these papers, and you get a house in the suburbs.

They were irresponsible people from the get go. They didn't care about their credit because they either never had credit before, or it was terrible. They had nothing to protect. O% down, and so what if the bank comes back in a couple of years to take your house away? You only end up right back where you started. It was a paid vacation from the ghetto for a couple years.

They didn't pay on their house because they never had any intention of doing so.

Many of the people in these neighborhoods could have stayed in and paid for these homes but the same banks that misled them refused to refinance.

Now those homes sit boarded up. Does that really make sense?

Absolutely not. That's why you should never cater to these people. If government stayed out of it, and left banks to make their own lending rules, those people would have never had the opportunity to buy a home in the first place. Yes, they would have continued to cry and charge racism, but in the end, it would have served them better.

The government got involved by trying to lure those people to buy houses for political advantage. What they really ended up doing is screwing those people.

Minorities' Home Ownership Booms Under Clinton but Still Lags Whites'

The banks were indeed also culpable for what went on. See, I don't try and hide the government's involvement here unlike you and others do with the banks.

So how did we address the mess? We kicked people out of their houses, sometimes illegally, sometimes people who could have stayed but then gave banks billions.

The loans were mostly paid back.

The loans were mostly paid back.

The US Treasury made tens of billions on bank TARP.

No they didn't. We've done this already. Tarp was paid back in large part by Harp. It was all a scam.

 

[Rigby5]

No bank was sued to make a bad loan. When you start like this, I stop.

From 1998


"They would not have qualified for loan, but for this affirmative action by the banks."
"To take a greater risk."
"which will be a higher risk, and I'm sure will be a higher default rate than the rest of the portfolio"

HUD being led by Andrew Cuomo,



Bill Clinton, openly saying that the money lent to people who did not qualify, was mostly done under his administration.

Obama 2007 at NASDAQ "Subprime lending started off as a good idea - helping Americans buy homes who couldn't previously afford to."
https://2008election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Obama20070917.pdf

How Obama Bankrupted Black Homeowners | Investor's Business Daily

The pressure worked. In 1994, Clinton's top bank regulators signed a landmark anti-redlining policy that declared traditional mortgage underwriting standards racist and mandated banks apply easier lending rules for minorities.​

John Allison wrote a book:
https://www.amazon.com/Financial-Crisis-Free-Market-Cure/dp/0071806776&tag=ff0d01-20

In this he describes how he was an executive at a bank in the late 90s, and had regulators say that their standards were discriminator, and how they had to change them. The regulators never explained how they were discriminatory, nor what they should do to improve, only that they needed changed.

The fact that the Clinton Administration was suing banks to force them to make bad loans, is beyond debate. It is a documented, video'd, recorded and published fact.

Once again, you have the right to be wrong... .but if you deny this, that's all you are..... is wrong.

I haven't argued that the government didn't push for lower standards. The banks did it when they were freed up and the government gaurantees the loans.

Greenspan said his biggest mistake in trusting that the banks would do the right thing.

Greenspan, was a brilliant idiot. You can't trust people to do the right thing, when government is directly suing people to do the wrong thing.

The banks did it when they were freed up and the government gaurantees the loans.

And there is where the rub comes. If the government guaranteed the loans..... then the banks didn't do it.

The banks were always 'freed up'. There was never anything that prevented banks from making a sub-prime loan. Any bank could have made a subprime loan before the 90s, or the 80s, or even the 70s. Nothing ever prevented a bank from making a bad loan.

They simply didn't. Why? Because it was a bad loan. Without government backing the loan, they would have lost money. So they simply didn't make the loan.

It was government, not the banks, which changed the market incentives, which caused banks to make bad loans.

This is why I say it's 99% government. You are pointing to 1% of the cause. If government had not guaranteed those loans.... we wouldn't be discussing a subprime crash, because it never would have happened.

Before 1997, when Freddie Mac guaranteed sub-prime loans, and allowed them to be bundled with prime loans.... subprime was a niche market. Flat growth from the graph I posted before.

At least I am grateful you are aware of the issue unlike others.

Yeah, quite the polished presentation. Of course there's some truth to every assertion. Way beyond Andy's normal capabilities though so vastly lifted from a Koch Bros think tank bucket no doubt. Problem is some of us were quite alive and aware throughout. Typical rw nutjob rewriting of history. Corporate corruption? Oh np, we'll just skip ahead to everyone freaking out over the outcome and look back very selectively so as to put all the blame on govt. Greedy private lenders, bundlers, financial advisors, investors, insurers? All innocent as the driven snow. Govt made me do it! Bad govt, BAD! Government changed the market incentives causing banks to make bad loans!

Yeah, right. Cry me a river. Who corrupted the govt officials to play along? No higher govt position or salary is lucrative enough for any professional to take on such huge personal risk. It takes a system wide concerted effort by groups of private shitheads with deep, deep pockets and a common commitment to steal all they possibly can in order to keep gaining vastly more. We corrupted them and then they helped us. See? Their fault! We're victims!

First you get some money, then you corrupt some power, then you get boatloads more money! Want to know who's really to blame? Same as ever.. duh!.. follow the money! Proof that greed uber alles capitalism has been attempted enough and run its course. The supposed "free market" is and always was bullshit doomed to fail. Significant public transparency and oversight is absolutely required. Legal ability to hide and take zero responsibility is the problem.

Agreed.
Government was only responsible for the real estate collapse in that they had repealled Glass-Steagall, and allowed banks to make incredibly risky loans to each other, knowing the government would then be forced to bail them out.
The claim banks were forced to make risky loans to poor and Blacks through prosecution of discrimination cases again banks is a lie.
None of those prosecutions were to help unqualified buyers.

Unqualified buyers had nothing at all to do with the 2008 real estate collapse.
The buyers were not defaulting on payments until after the the ARM rates almost doubled, and no ordinary person could have made those increased payments.
And the defaults were caused by the banks refusing to refinance at fixed rates.

 

[pknopp]

Many of the people in these neighborhoods could have stayed in and paid for these homes but the same banks that misled them refused to refinance.

Now those homes sit boarded up. Does that really make sense?

Absolutely not. That's why you should never cater to these people. If government stayed out of it, and left banks to make their own lending rules, those people would have never had the opportunity to buy a home in the first place. Yes, they would have continued to cry and charge racism, but in the end, it would have served them better.

The government got involved by trying to lure those people to buy houses for political advantage. What they really ended up doing is screwing those people.

Minorities' Home Ownership Booms Under Clinton but Still Lags Whites'

The banks were indeed also culpable for what went on. See, I don't try and hide the government's involvement here unlike you and others do with the banks.

So how did we address the mess? We kicked people out of their houses, sometimes illegally, sometimes people who could have stayed but then gave banks billions.

The loans were mostly paid back.

The banks? At least we are no longer claiming they were all paid back.

They were paid back in part with other government programs that were never paid back. (HARP)

• HARP was a government program designed to help underwater homeowners—with homes worth less than the outstanding mortgage balance—refinance their loans.
• The program expired on Dec. 31, 2018.
• HARP allowed mortgagors to either lower their monthly mortgage payments or to pay down the loan faster by lowering their interest rates, and allowed them to build more equity.
• After it expired, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac rolled out high LTV programs for distressed homeowners.

Right. That is what it was designed to do (so we were told). It was not what it did.

 

[pknopp]

Why should it cause taxes to skyrocket? Are we paying for things now?

If we don't have to raise taxes to pay for bombs and bail outs, why do we for health care?

When the hell has anything that the filthy government done that the cost didn't skyrocket? the government fucks up everything it touches. Just look at the corruption and mismanagement of the VA system, as an example. Trump had to go to the private sector to help fix that problem.

Their ain't no such thing as a free lunch. If you are going to give the stupid government control of your health care you are going to pay up the ass for it.

It is comical to see how naive you stupid Moon Bats are about the government. You dumb mutherfuckers think the government is your friend.

Everything has skyrocketed. Trucks are now $60-$80k in many cases. What do you consider that?

I consider it another one of your diversions. Health Insurance Inflation

You ignoring that everything has gone up but only condemning it one area is the one doing the diverting.

Did Obamacare address any portion of costs? No, it was a total failure and a sell out to wall street.

Inflation is not the cause of increased health care costs.
Health care costs are rising at over twice the rate of inflation.
Health care costs are rising due to insurance companies deliberately creating prepaid medical monopolies that prevent people from being able to shop around and get reasonable prices.

Yes, that also.

 

[pknopp]

Suing a local bank made Countrywide, Goldman Sachs, etc make bad loans?

Nope. Suing a local bank made a local bank write bad mortgages.
While Glass-Stegall was still law......weird.

Of course you have no proof of this. There were banks sued for redlining. As they should have been.

Of course you have no proof of this.

You want proof that Obama sued banks in Chicago?
Or that he forced them to make more loans in black neighborhoods?

There were banks sued for redlining.

Banks must make loans to poor people with bad credit scores.

What's the worst that could happen?

Banks were turning down loans for people who would otherwise qualify for a loan based solely on the neighborhood.

Now you may argue a business should be able to do this. Overall I would agree......except for when they take money from the government which they all do.

Banks were turning down loans for people who would otherwise qualify for a loan based solely on the neighborhood.

The data doesn't support your feeling.

I can provide many examples but this one stuck out because it is Trump's justice Dept doing the suing.

Justice Department Sues KleinBank for Redlining Minority Neighborhoods in Minnesota

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Many of the people in these neighborhoods could have stayed in and paid for these homes but the same banks that misled them refused to refinance.

Now those homes sit boarded up. Does that really make sense?

Absolutely not. That's why you should never cater to these people. If government stayed out of it, and left banks to make their own lending rules, those people would have never had the opportunity to buy a home in the first place. Yes, they would have continued to cry and charge racism, but in the end, it would have served them better.

The government got involved by trying to lure those people to buy houses for political advantage. What they really ended up doing is screwing those people.

Minorities' Home Ownership Booms Under Clinton but Still Lags Whites'

The banks were indeed also culpable for what went on. See, I don't try and hide the government's involvement here unlike you and others do with the banks.

So how did we address the mess? We kicked people out of their houses, sometimes illegally, sometimes people who could have stayed but then gave banks billions.

The loans were mostly paid back.

The loans were mostly paid back.

The US Treasury made tens of billions on bank TARP.

No they didn't. We've done this already. Tarp was paid back in large part by Harp. It was all a scam.

You're so dumb.

HARP was about $20 billion.
Bank TARP was $245 billion.

Even a liberal should be able to see the difference.

 

[Rigby5]

Liberal morons think the same people that can’t get homeless people in shipping container houses for less than 600k a unit are going to get them cheaper healthcare.

Fricken idiots.

That is just a lie.
The shipping container tiny home route is working fine and costs less than $20k per unit.

Tiny Home Village

Government is running Medicare and the VA now, at administrative costs about only 10% of what insurance companies and medical provider corporations charge.
One of the main reasons for this is that currently, tens of billions are wasted on all the insurance form paperwork and the admin expertise on how to fill it all out.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

From 1998


"They would not have qualified for loan, but for this affirmative action by the banks."
"To take a greater risk."
"which will be a higher risk, and I'm sure will be a higher default rate than the rest of the portfolio"

HUD being led by Andrew Cuomo,



Bill Clinton, openly saying that the money lent to people who did not qualify, was mostly done under his administration.

Obama 2007 at NASDAQ "Subprime lending started off as a good idea - helping Americans buy homes who couldn't previously afford to."
https://2008election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Obama20070917.pdf

How Obama Bankrupted Black Homeowners | Investor's Business Daily

The pressure worked. In 1994, Clinton's top bank regulators signed a landmark anti-redlining policy that declared traditional mortgage underwriting standards racist and mandated banks apply easier lending rules for minorities.​

John Allison wrote a book:
https://www.amazon.com/Financial-Crisis-Free-Market-Cure/dp/0071806776&tag=ff0d01-20

In this he describes how he was an executive at a bank in the late 90s, and had regulators say that their standards were discriminator, and how they had to change them. The regulators never explained how they were discriminatory, nor what they should do to improve, only that they needed changed.

The fact that the Clinton Administration was suing banks to force them to make bad loans, is beyond debate. It is a documented, video'd, recorded and published fact.

Once again, you have the right to be wrong... .but if you deny this, that's all you are..... is wrong.

I haven't argued that the government didn't push for lower standards. The banks did it when they were freed up and the government gaurantees the loans.

Greenspan said his biggest mistake in trusting that the banks would do the right thing.

Greenspan, was a brilliant idiot. You can't trust people to do the right thing, when government is directly suing people to do the wrong thing.

The banks did it when they were freed up and the government gaurantees the loans.

And there is where the rub comes. If the government guaranteed the loans..... then the banks didn't do it.

The banks were always 'freed up'. There was never anything that prevented banks from making a sub-prime loan. Any bank could have made a subprime loan before the 90s, or the 80s, or even the 70s. Nothing ever prevented a bank from making a bad loan.

They simply didn't. Why? Because it was a bad loan. Without government backing the loan, they would have lost money. So they simply didn't make the loan.

It was government, not the banks, which changed the market incentives, which caused banks to make bad loans.

This is why I say it's 99% government. You are pointing to 1% of the cause. If government had not guaranteed those loans.... we wouldn't be discussing a subprime crash, because it never would have happened.

Before 1997, when Freddie Mac guaranteed sub-prime loans, and allowed them to be bundled with prime loans.... subprime was a niche market. Flat growth from the graph I posted before.

At least I am grateful you are aware of the issue unlike others.

Yeah, quite the polished presentation. Of course there's some truth to every assertion. Way beyond Andy's normal capabilities though so vastly lifted from a Koch Bros think tank bucket no doubt. Problem is some of us were quite alive and aware throughout. Typical rw nutjob rewriting of history. Corporate corruption? Oh np, we'll just skip ahead to everyone freaking out over the outcome and look back very selectively so as to put all the blame on govt. Greedy private lenders, bundlers, financial advisors, investors, insurers? All innocent as the driven snow. Govt made me do it! Bad govt, BAD! Government changed the market incentives causing banks to make bad loans!

Yeah, right. Cry me a river. Who corrupted the govt officials to play along? No higher govt position or salary is lucrative enough for any professional to take on such huge personal risk. It takes a system wide concerted effort by groups of private shitheads with deep, deep pockets and a common commitment to steal all they possibly can in order to keep gaining vastly more. We corrupted them and then they helped us. See? Their fault! We're victims!

First you get some money, then you corrupt some power, then you get boatloads more money! Want to know who's really to blame? Same as ever.. duh!.. follow the money! Proof that greed uber alles capitalism has been attempted enough and run its course. The supposed "free market" is and always was bullshit doomed to fail. Significant public transparency and oversight is absolutely required. Legal ability to hide and take zero responsibility is the problem.

Agreed.
Government was only responsible for the real estate collapse in that they had repealled Glass-Steagall, and allowed banks to make incredibly risky loans to each other, knowing the government would then be forced to bail them out.
The claim banks were forced to make risky loans to poor and Blacks through prosecution of discrimination cases again banks is a lie.
None of those prosecutions were to help unqualified buyers.

Unqualified buyers had nothing at all to do with the 2008 real estate collapse.
The buyers were not defaulting on payments until after the the ARM rates almost doubled, and no ordinary person could have made those increased payments.
And the defaults were caused by the banks refusing to refinance at fixed rates.

Government was only responsible for the real estate collapse in that they had repealled Glass-Steagall, and allowed banks to make incredibly risky loans to each other, knowing the government would then be forced to bail them out.

Glass-Steagall didn't prevent banks from writing bad mortgages.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Nope. Suing a local bank made a local bank write bad mortgages.
While Glass-Stegall was still law......weird.

Of course you have no proof of this. There were banks sued for redlining. As they should have been.

Of course you have no proof of this.

You want proof that Obama sued banks in Chicago?
Or that he forced them to make more loans in black neighborhoods?

There were banks sued for redlining.

Banks must make loans to poor people with bad credit scores.

What's the worst that could happen?

Banks were turning down loans for people who would otherwise qualify for a loan based solely on the neighborhood.

Now you may argue a business should be able to do this. Overall I would agree......except for when they take money from the government which they all do.

Banks were turning down loans for people who would otherwise qualify for a loan based solely on the neighborhood.

The data doesn't support your feeling.

I can provide many examples but this one stuck out because it is Trump's justice Dept doing the suing.

Justice Department Sues KleinBank for Redlining Minority Neighborhoods in Minnesota

Thanks for the link.
Where is the part that showed the minority borrowers had lower default rates than other borrowers?

 

[Rigby5]

From 1998


"They would not have qualified for loan, but for this affirmative action by the banks."
"To take a greater risk."
"which will be a higher risk, and I'm sure will be a higher default rate than the rest of the portfolio"

HUD being led by Andrew Cuomo,



Bill Clinton, openly saying that the money lent to people who did not qualify, was mostly done under his administration.

Obama 2007 at NASDAQ "Subprime lending started off as a good idea - helping Americans buy homes who couldn't previously afford to."
https://2008election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Obama20070917.pdf

How Obama Bankrupted Black Homeowners | Investor's Business Daily

The pressure worked. In 1994, Clinton's top bank regulators signed a landmark anti-redlining policy that declared traditional mortgage underwriting standards racist and mandated banks apply easier lending rules for minorities.​

John Allison wrote a book:
https://www.amazon.com/Financial-Crisis-Free-Market-Cure/dp/0071806776&tag=ff0d01-20

In this he describes how he was an executive at a bank in the late 90s, and had regulators say that their standards were discriminator, and how they had to change them. The regulators never explained how they were discriminatory, nor what they should do to improve, only that they needed changed.

The fact that the Clinton Administration was suing banks to force them to make bad loans, is beyond debate. It is a documented, video'd, recorded and published fact.

Once again, you have the right to be wrong... .but if you deny this, that's all you are..... is wrong.

I haven't argued that the government didn't push for lower standards. The banks did it when they were freed up and the government gaurantees the loans.

Greenspan said his biggest mistake in trusting that the banks would do the right thing.

Greenspan, was a brilliant idiot. You can't trust people to do the right thing, when government is directly suing people to do the wrong thing.

The banks did it when they were freed up and the government gaurantees the loans.

And there is where the rub comes. If the government guaranteed the loans..... then the banks didn't do it.

The banks were always 'freed up'. There was never anything that prevented banks from making a sub-prime loan. Any bank could have made a subprime loan before the 90s, or the 80s, or even the 70s. Nothing ever prevented a bank from making a bad loan.

They simply didn't. Why? Because it was a bad loan. Without government backing the loan, they would have lost money. So they simply didn't make the loan.

It was government, not the banks, which changed the market incentives, which caused banks to make bad loans.

This is why I say it's 99% government. You are pointing to 1% of the cause. If government had not guaranteed those loans.... we wouldn't be discussing a subprime crash, because it never would have happened.

Before 1997, when Freddie Mac guaranteed sub-prime loans, and allowed them to be bundled with prime loans.... subprime was a niche market. Flat growth from the graph I posted before.

At least I am grateful you are aware of the issue unlike others.

Yeah, quite the polished presentation. Of course there's some truth to every assertion. Way beyond Andy's normal capabilities though so vastly lifted from a Koch Bros think tank bucket no doubt. Problem is some of us were quite alive and aware throughout. Typical rw nutjob rewriting of history. Corporate corruption? Oh np, we'll just skip ahead to everyone freaking out over the outcome and look back very selectively so as to put all the blame on govt. Greedy private lenders, bundlers, financial advisors, investors, insurers? All innocent as the driven snow. Govt made me do it! Bad govt, BAD! Government changed the market incentives causing banks to make bad loans!

Yeah, right. Cry me a river. Who corrupted the govt officials to play along? No higher govt position or salary is lucrative enough for any professional to take on such huge personal risk. It takes a system wide concerted effort by groups of private shitheads with deep, deep pockets and a common commitment to steal all they possibly can in order to keep gaining vastly more. We corrupted them and then they helped us. See? Their fault! We're victims!

First you get some money, then you corrupt some power, then you get boatloads more money! Want to know who's really to blame? Same as ever.. duh!.. follow the money! Proof that greed uber alles capitalism has been attempted enough and run its course. The supposed "free market" is and always was bullshit doomed to fail. Significant public transparency and oversight is absolutely required. Legal ability to hide and take zero responsibility is the problem.

Very nicely written with one caveat. Just because you are bribed does not excuse your dirty work.

Except that you can investigate and vote out government corruption, while private industry, like insurance companies and companies that create medical monopolies, not only are exempt from anti-trust laws, but impossible to investigate, prosecute, or vote over.

 

[Thinker101]

Liberal morons think the same people that can’t get homeless people in shipping container houses for less than 600k a unit are going to get them cheaper healthcare.

Fricken idiots.

That is just a lie.
The shipping container tiny home route is working fine and costs less than $20k per unit.

Tiny Home Village

Government is running Medicare and the VA now, at administrative costs about only 10% of what insurance companies and medical provider corporations charge.
One of the main reasons for this is that currently, tens of billions are wasted on all the insurance form paperwork and the admin expertise on how to fill it all out.

Not in California
Letter: $600,000? For a container house? – The Mercury News

 

[Flash]

When the hell has anything that the filthy government done that the cost didn't skyrocket? the government fucks up everything it touches. Just look at the corruption and mismanagement of the VA system, as an example. Trump had to go to the private sector to help fix that problem.

Their ain't no such thing as a free lunch. If you are going to give the stupid government control of your health care you are going to pay up the ass for it.

It is comical to see how naive you stupid Moon Bats are about the government. You dumb mutherfuckers think the government is your friend.

Everything has skyrocketed. Trucks are now $60-$80k in many cases. What do you consider that?

You are really dumb Moon Bat, aren't you? Either that or confused about everything, which is evident.

Of course pathetic little Moon Bats like you don't worry about cost because you want the government to control health care so you can get it for free. You are a greedy Moon Bat that thinks you are entitled to free health care simply because you are alive and the government will give it to you.

I have a much better idea than the fucking government doing health care. I'll provide for my own health care and you provide for yours and we leave the corrupt bloated oppressive government out of it. How does that sound Sport?

That's right, rather than address my point get triggered and call me names.

Typical.

You should be called names because you are confuses about this big time. You don't get a pass when you take idiotic positions. It doesn't get any more idiotic than advocating that the fucking government control our health care.

I did answer your confusion by saying that the right thing to do is for you pay for your health care and I pay for mine and we leave the worthless corrupt bloated oppressive government out of it.

Do you think any politician would ever get elected on running on ending Medicare?

I would vote for anybody that ran on that platform.

You would be an idiot if you didn't also vote for him/her.

It takes courage to do the right thing and undo government screw ups. Too bad we don't have very many politicians with courage. Those same gutless assholes are the ones that you stupid Moon Bats want to run your health care. Then you wonder why we ridicule you so much.

 

[Rigby5]

Why should it cause taxes to skyrocket? Are we paying for things now?

If we don't have to raise taxes to pay for bombs and bail outs, why do we for health care?

When the hell has anything that the filthy government done that the cost didn't skyrocket? the government fucks up everything it touches. Just look at the corruption and mismanagement of the VA system, as an example. Trump had to go to the private sector to help fix that problem.

Their ain't no such thing as a free lunch. If you are going to give the stupid government control of your health care you are going to pay up the ass for it.

It is comical to see how naive you stupid Moon Bats are about the government. You dumb mutherfuckers think the government is your friend.

Everything has skyrocketed. Trucks are now $60-$80k in many cases. What do you consider that?

You are really dumb Moon Bat, aren't you? Either that or confused about everything, which is evident.

Of course pathetic little Moon Bats like you don't worry about cost because you want the government to control health care so you can get it for free. You are a greedy Moon Bat that thinks you are entitled to free health care simply because you are alive and the government will give it to you.

I have a much better idea than the fucking government doing health care. I'll provide for my own health care and you provide for yours and we leave the corrupt bloated oppressive government out of it. How does that sound Sport?

That's right, rather than address my point get triggered and call me names.

Typical.

You should be called names because you are confuses about this big time. You don't get a pass when you take idiotic positions. It doesn't get any more idiotic than advocating that the fucking government control our health care.

I did answer your confusion by saying that the right thing to do is for you pay for your health care and I pay for mine and we leave the worthless corrupt bloated oppressive government out of it.

First of all, anyone claiming that single payer or public health care takes control of anyone's health care, is just lying.
The whole rest of the civilized world has single payer or public health care, and no where has government taken control.
You can still buy whatever private health care you want in any nation.
All public or single payer does is provide a minimal medical safety net, to break private monopoly and ensure there is at least SOME competition, to bring down prices.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Glass-Steagall didn't prevent banks from writing bad mortgages.

 

[flack]

Absolutely not. That's why you should never cater to these people. If government stayed out of it, and left banks to make their own lending rules, those people would have never had the opportunity to buy a home in the first place. Yes, they would have continued to cry and charge racism, but in the end, it would have served them better.

The government got involved by trying to lure those people to buy houses for political advantage. What they really ended up doing is screwing those people.

Minorities' Home Ownership Booms Under Clinton but Still Lags Whites'

The banks were indeed also culpable for what went on. See, I don't try and hide the government's involvement here unlike you and others do with the banks.

So how did we address the mess? We kicked people out of their houses, sometimes illegally, sometimes people who could have stayed but then gave banks billions.

The loans were mostly paid back.

The banks? At least we are no longer claiming they were all paid back.

They were paid back in part with other government programs that were never paid back. (HARP)

• HARP was a government program designed to help underwater homeowners—with homes worth less than the outstanding mortgage balance—refinance their loans.
• The program expired on Dec. 31, 2018.
• HARP allowed mortgagors to either lower their monthly mortgage payments or to pay down the loan faster by lowering their interest rates, and allowed them to build more equity.
• After it expired, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac rolled out high LTV programs for distressed homeowners.

Right. That is what it was designed to do (so we were told). It was not what it did.

Qualifying
More than 3.2 million homeowners took advantage of the benefits of HARP. But there was a set of criteria homeowners must have met before being approved for the program.

• The loan must have been owned or guaranteed by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae. Although Fannie and Freddie don’t originate loans, they do guarantee them. Anyone whose loans didn't go through either of these companies could still qualify by verifying whether their guarantor programs was involved with their loan.
• Mortgage must have been advanced on or before May 31, 2009. Anyone whose mortgage was taken out after that date didn't qualify for HARP.
• Another consideration for qualification was the homeowner's current loan-to-value ratio (LTV). When the program began, homeowners weren't able to refinance if their LTVs were above 125%. This changed in the later part of 2009, taking the limit off the LTV. However, a homeowner's LTV must be greater than 80%. In most cases, having a high loan-to-value ratio isn’t a good thing, but when it came to HARP, the higher the better.
• Loans must have been current. A homeowner could not have delinquent payments of 30 days or more. There was also a limit —only one late payment in the preceding 12 months.

The program didn't actually lend money. Instead, it worked with lenders to offer HARP loans. Homeowners were able to check with their current lender to see if it offered HARP loans. Another option they had was to go to HARP website and see if the lender participated in the program.

 

[flack]

When the hell has anything that the filthy government done that the cost didn't skyrocket? the government fucks up everything it touches. Just look at the corruption and mismanagement of the VA system, as an example. Trump had to go to the private sector to help fix that problem.

Their ain't no such thing as a free lunch. If you are going to give the stupid government control of your health care you are going to pay up the ass for it.

It is comical to see how naive you stupid Moon Bats are about the government. You dumb mutherfuckers think the government is your friend.

Everything has skyrocketed. Trucks are now $60-$80k in many cases. What do you consider that?

You are really dumb Moon Bat, aren't you? Either that or confused about everything, which is evident.

Of course pathetic little Moon Bats like you don't worry about cost because you want the government to control health care so you can get it for free. You are a greedy Moon Bat that thinks you are entitled to free health care simply because you are alive and the government will give it to you.

I have a much better idea than the fucking government doing health care. I'll provide for my own health care and you provide for yours and we leave the corrupt bloated oppressive government out of it. How does that sound Sport?

That's right, rather than address my point get triggered and call me names.

Typical.

You should be called names because you are confuses about this big time. You don't get a pass when you take idiotic positions. It doesn't get any more idiotic than advocating that the fucking government control our health care.

I did answer your confusion by saying that the right thing to do is for you pay for your health care and I pay for mine and we leave the worthless corrupt bloated oppressive government out of it.

First of all, anyone claiming that single payer or public health care takes control of anyone's health care, is just lying.
The whole rest of the civilized world has single payer or public health care, and no where has government taken control.
You can still buy whatever private health care you want in any nation.
All public or single payer does is provide a minimal medical safety net, to break private monopoly and ensure there is at least SOME competition, to bring down prices.

You could do the same thing by allowing hospitals and doctors to advertise their prices and services. Paying cash, by allowing Health Savings Accounts, is another way to lower cost.

 

[Rigby5]

Many of the people in these neighborhoods could have stayed in and paid for these homes but the same banks that misled them refused to refinance.

Now those homes sit boarded up. Does that really make sense?

Absolutely not. That's why you should never cater to these people. If government stayed out of it, and left banks to make their own lending rules, those people would have never had the opportunity to buy a home in the first place. Yes, they would have continued to cry and charge racism, but in the end, it would have served them better.

The government got involved by trying to lure those people to buy houses for political advantage. What they really ended up doing is screwing those people.

Minorities' Home Ownership Booms Under Clinton but Still Lags Whites'

The banks were indeed also culpable for what went on. See, I don't try and hide the government's involvement here unlike you and others do with the banks.

So how did we address the mess? We kicked people out of their houses, sometimes illegally, sometimes people who could have stayed but then gave banks billions.

The loans were mostly paid back.

The banks? At least we are no longer claiming they were all paid back.

They were paid back in part with other government programs that were never paid back. (HARP)

• HARP was a government program designed to help underwater homeowners—with homes worth less than the outstanding mortgage balance—refinance their loans.
• The program expired on Dec. 31, 2018.
• HARP allowed mortgagors to either lower their monthly mortgage payments or to pay down the loan faster by lowering their interest rates, and allowed them to build more equity.
• After it expired, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac rolled out high LTV programs for distressed homeowners.

And lets not forget that HARP was a government bail out intended actually to help the banks, because the assets banks held in real estate were losing so much value due to the glut of backlogged foreclosures, that the banks could no longer make an loans without something like HARP.
Slowing down foreclosures was intended to help the banks, not the homeowners.

 

[Flash]

When the hell has anything that the filthy government done that the cost didn't skyrocket? the government fucks up everything it touches. Just look at the corruption and mismanagement of the VA system, as an example. Trump had to go to the private sector to help fix that problem.

Their ain't no such thing as a free lunch. If you are going to give the stupid government control of your health care you are going to pay up the ass for it.

It is comical to see how naive you stupid Moon Bats are about the government. You dumb mutherfuckers think the government is your friend.

Everything has skyrocketed. Trucks are now $60-$80k in many cases. What do you consider that?

You are really dumb Moon Bat, aren't you? Either that or confused about everything, which is evident.

Of course pathetic little Moon Bats like you don't worry about cost because you want the government to control health care so you can get it for free. You are a greedy Moon Bat that thinks you are entitled to free health care simply because you are alive and the government will give it to you.

I have a much better idea than the fucking government doing health care. I'll provide for my own health care and you provide for yours and we leave the corrupt bloated oppressive government out of it. How does that sound Sport?

That's right, rather than address my point get triggered and call me names.

Typical.

You should be called names because you are confuses about this big time. You don't get a pass when you take idiotic positions. It doesn't get any more idiotic than advocating that the fucking government control our health care.

I did answer your confusion by saying that the right thing to do is for you pay for your health care and I pay for mine and we leave the worthless corrupt bloated oppressive government out of it.

First of all, anyone claiming that single payer or public health care takes control of anyone's health care, is just lying.
The whole rest of the civilized world has single payer or public health care, and no where has government taken control.
You can still buy whatever private health care you want in any nation.
All public or single payer does is provide a minimal medical safety net, to break private monopoly and ensure there is at least SOME competition, to bring down prices.

Bullshit. No wonder you Moon Bats are so confused.

When you have the filthy government take your money and then decide how they are going to pay it out for your health care then that is sure as hell taking control of your health care.

We see the destructiveness of that in these stupid countries that have nationalized medicine. We see the government making priorities on who gets health care and what kind of health care they get. It is not the patient that makes the decision but the government bueracrats that control the payoff.

Dispicable!

Never put your well being in the hands of government bureaucrats whose bosses are corrupt politicians elected by special interest. You will get screwed. Even if you are sorry ass welfare queen getting free shit that somebody else has to pay for.

 

[Rigby5]

Many of the people in these neighborhoods could have stayed in and paid for these homes but the same banks that misled them refused to refinance.

Now those homes sit boarded up. Does that really make sense?

Absolutely not. That's why you should never cater to these people. If government stayed out of it, and left banks to make their own lending rules, those people would have never had the opportunity to buy a home in the first place. Yes, they would have continued to cry and charge racism, but in the end, it would have served them better.

The government got involved by trying to lure those people to buy houses for political advantage. What they really ended up doing is screwing those people.

Minorities' Home Ownership Booms Under Clinton but Still Lags Whites'

The banks were indeed also culpable for what went on. See, I don't try and hide the government's involvement here unlike you and others do with the banks.

So how did we address the mess? We kicked people out of their houses, sometimes illegally, sometimes people who could have stayed but then gave banks billions.

The loans were mostly paid back.

The banks? At least we are no longer claiming they were all paid back.

They were paid back in part with other government programs that were never paid back. (HARP)

They were paid back in part with other government programs that were never paid back. (HARP)

HARP was a give away to home owners.
Who was supposed to pay it back?

No, HARP was no giveaway.
Home owners paid just as much as before, but just slowed down foreclosures, so that banks would not get stuck with lots of worthless real estate they could not sell and therefore had no money to loan out.
HARP was to help banks, not homeowners.