Christian Democrats in the United States
Domestic Issues - Jobs and Taxes We demand a living wage for all workers in America and object to attempts to establish a flat tax because of the comparative value of one dollar to one's total capital. We insist on closing tax loopholes for the wealthiest people and corporations, and support tax incentives for corporate programs with substantial public benefit. America must find a way to increase manufacturing exports since service jobs add less to the economy in the long term. We support a shorter, smarter work-week for all Americans. Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
12:41 AM
Is this all a manifestation of the cultural attitude of Wall Street that the bank always needs to screw the customer in every way it can?
What would happen if the firms holding these bad debts fail? Other firms would buy up those defaulted mortgages for pennies on the dollar. What Congress needs to make sure of is that the new lender shares some of this good fortune with the mortgage holder. It seems like interest rates on mortgages would go down if the original lenders failed. If Congress does buy up the assets, they should insist on a good deal so that everyday people can get a good deal.
Credit would be harder to get in the future, but so what, maybe that would be good for us. The unrestrained spending of the 1920's started when credit was invented, and really it was the unrestrained marketing of credit that led to the depression of the 1930's.
It seems to me that companies that cannot manage to pay their salaries without borrowing huge amounts of money are in a precarious position anyway. Companies need to make money. Otherwise they should not be in business.
It's not the taxpayer's responsibility to hold up businesses with unequal salary schemes as a form of welfare, supporting non-productive jobs and egregious salaries. If we're going to be paying for welfare and state-supported jobs, cut out the middle man and do it directly, like in the 1930's. That would save money.
Another thing that bugs me is the Republicans in the house insisting on tax cuts accompanying the spending bill. We're already borrowing from foreign countries and investors to pay for the bailout in the first place. And they want to increase our interest costs EVEN MORE for the long-term future by telling us we don't have to pay for it now. It is a strategy for completely bankrupting the United States.
I thought Republicans thought they were patriots or something, that they wanted "small government." I seriously doubt that if they thought about it, they would want "no government." It's ridiculous. It doesn't add up. It's treason by stupidity.
bailout skepticism - maybe it is not needed, maybe it is bad
Fears about the market sent the market down. But only a few percentage points. And then it came up again the next day. So are we really concerned about a panic?Is this all a manifestation of the cultural attitude of Wall Street that the bank always needs to screw the customer in every way it can?
What would happen if the firms holding these bad debts fail? Other firms would buy up those defaulted mortgages for pennies on the dollar. What Congress needs to make sure of is that the new lender shares some of this good fortune with the mortgage holder. It seems like interest rates on mortgages would go down if the original lenders failed. If Congress does buy up the assets, they should insist on a good deal so that everyday people can get a good deal.
Credit would be harder to get in the future, but so what, maybe that would be good for us. The unrestrained spending of the 1920's started when credit was invented, and really it was the unrestrained marketing of credit that led to the depression of the 1930's.
It seems to me that companies that cannot manage to pay their salaries without borrowing huge amounts of money are in a precarious position anyway. Companies need to make money. Otherwise they should not be in business.
It's not the taxpayer's responsibility to hold up businesses with unequal salary schemes as a form of welfare, supporting non-productive jobs and egregious salaries. If we're going to be paying for welfare and state-supported jobs, cut out the middle man and do it directly, like in the 1930's. That would save money.
Another thing that bugs me is the Republicans in the house insisting on tax cuts accompanying the spending bill. We're already borrowing from foreign countries and investors to pay for the bailout in the first place. And they want to increase our interest costs EVEN MORE for the long-term future by telling us we don't have to pay for it now. It is a strategy for completely bankrupting the United States.
I thought Republicans thought they were patriots or something, that they wanted "small government." I seriously doubt that if they thought about it, they would want "no government." It's ridiculous. It doesn't add up. It's treason by stupidity.
> detail, links and comments >>
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< HomeArchives May 2007 / September 2008 / October 2008 / November 2008 / December 2008 / February 2009 / September 2009 /