The Economy

[RoadToad]

Yea, you are REQUIRED by law to have auto insurance as a condition of DRIVING.....I guess by FORCING folks to purchase health insurance.......that is now a condition of LIVING........gotta love your thought on the matter.

Actually no, you're required to purchase auto insurance as a condition of registering a vehicle, not of driving. Yeah, I'm splitting hairs (one thing I'm good at ). Seriously though, Devil's Horse is absolutely right on that point. There's no way on God's Green Earth the government can legally require citizens to purchase healthcare insurance. In his comments yesterday, President Obama talked about "tweaking" ObamaCare (not that he called it that, of course ). That is one provision that will definitely be "tweaked" away!

[pontooner]

Guess I should have expanded my auto insurace reply, I was refering to "the government cannot legally force us" part not comparing buying auto and health insurance.


As Road Toad pointed out the Bush tax cuts have been in place for 10 years, heck he even sent everyone out a nice little check in what 2008 but here we are today with the economy in the toilet. Also it's a bad idea to start two wars and then cut taxes.


Now to DJD's claim that "getting low income/poverty folks loans for houses" and that they are they problem is not entirely true.

Did you know the rich (I know you guys hate that word) were the biggest defaulters on homes. I think it was something like 1 in 7 homes valued over $1,000,000 was defaulted on , which brings us back to what Mr. Splitshot was saying about a vast majority of people live beyond their means.

Article talking about it
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/bu...my/09rich.html

[DJD]

I read that article and it's from July 8th 2010. The housing crash didn't just happen and as the article states it started in working class and is now striking the upper class. Interesting that it never mentioned low income? I guess noone in that bracket defaulted on loans?

My point was and I believe we all saw it when it happened that when the housing bubble popped years ago people lost their shirts and jobs.

My thought would be that a person making less money and getting into a loan they couldn't really afford would default much quicker than a rich person who could hang on for years and I think that article supports that.

I guess I read that article different than you?

[pontooner]

I read that article and it's from July 8th 2010. The housing crash didn't just happen and as the article states it started in working class and is now striking the upper class. Interesting that it never mentioned low income? I guess noone in that bracket defaulted on loans?

You were the one that said "getting low income/poverty folks loans for houses" caused the problem, I was just pointing out that it went beyond that. Again just lots of people living beyond their means.

My point was and I believe we all saw it when it happened that when the housing bubble popped years ago people lost their shirts and jobs.

My thought would be that a person making less money and getting into a loan they couldn't really afford would default much quicker than a rich person who could hang on for years and I think that article supports that.

I guess I read that article different than you?

I would hope someone making enough $$$$ to afford a million dollar plus home could hold on to the home a littler longer but in the end some were just cutting them loose and moving on where as your average home owner would fight tooth and nail to save their home because losing it would be devastating.