Mortgage Defaults May Be Driving Consumer Spending

[scaredyclassic]

if you kick the 8 million people out one per day, you’ll barely notice its effect on the economy. should be accomplished in about 70 years…

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb][quote=Arraya]
lol.. yes, I understand. and those 8 million people living for free are pumping additional money into the economy that will not be there when the leave.[/quote]

Oh, undoubtedly. Do you think when some of those 8 million people are out of their mortgage-free houses that the economy may suffer?[/quote]

I think they are a domino in a chain of negative events once they leave

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb][quote=Arraya]
lol.. yes, I understand. and those 8 million people living for free are pumping additional money into the economy that will not be there when the leave.[/quote]

Oh, undoubtedly. Do you think when some of those 8 million people are out of their mortgage-free houses that the economy may suffer?[/quote]

I think they are a domino in a chain of negative events once they leave

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb][quote=Arraya]
lol.. yes, I understand. and those 8 million people living for free are pumping additional money into the economy that will not be there when the leave.[/quote]

Oh, undoubtedly. Do you think when some of those 8 million people are out of their mortgage-free houses that the economy may suffer?[/quote]

I think they are a domino in a chain of negative events once they leave

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb][quote=Arraya]
lol.. yes, I understand. and those 8 million people living for free are pumping additional money into the economy that will not be there when the leave.[/quote]

Oh, undoubtedly. Do you think when some of those 8 million people are out of their mortgage-free houses that the economy may suffer?[/quote]

I think they are a domino in a chain of negative events once they leave

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb][quote=Arraya]
lol.. yes, I understand. and those 8 million people living for free are pumping additional money into the economy that will not be there when the leave.[/quote]

Oh, undoubtedly. Do you think when some of those 8 million people are out of their mortgage-free houses that the economy may suffer?[/quote]

I think they are a domino in a chain of negative events once they leave

[jpinpb]

Okay. So TPTB counted on Americans and their insatiable consumerism and expected that if they were allowed to live for free, they would continue to spend unabated, consequently helping our economy. What can we anticipate to happen next? I don’t see TPTB just letting everything collapse. Will it just be a trickle of people getting booted for 70 years w/soaring taxes and inflation?

[jpinpb]

Okay. So TPTB counted on Americans and their insatiable consumerism and expected that if they were allowed to live for free, they would continue to spend unabated, consequently helping our economy. What can we anticipate to happen next? I don’t see TPTB just letting everything collapse. Will it just be a trickle of people getting booted for 70 years w/soaring taxes and inflation?

[jpinpb]

Okay. So TPTB counted on Americans and their insatiable consumerism and expected that if they were allowed to live for free, they would continue to spend unabated, consequently helping our economy. What can we anticipate to happen next? I don’t see TPTB just letting everything collapse. Will it just be a trickle of people getting booted for 70 years w/soaring taxes and inflation?

[jpinpb]

Okay. So TPTB counted on Americans and their insatiable consumerism and expected that if they were allowed to live for free, they would continue to spend unabated, consequently helping our economy. What can we anticipate to happen next? I don’t see TPTB just letting everything collapse. Will it just be a trickle of people getting booted for 70 years w/soaring taxes and inflation?

[jpinpb]

Okay. So TPTB counted on Americans and their insatiable consumerism and expected that if they were allowed to live for free, they would continue to spend unabated, consequently helping our economy. What can we anticipate to happen next? I don’t see TPTB just letting everything collapse. Will it just be a trickle of people getting booted for 70 years w/soaring taxes and inflation?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=jpinpb]FormerSanDiegan – the reason why I don’t completely agree w/your comments is b/c the banks/lenders, although not receiving money on the note, are still being compensated by the government, I mean the taxpayers.
[/quote]

The banks still took huge losses. 140 banks closed their doors in 2009, so their lending went to zero. Lack of available funds for lending shrunk across the board. Loans for businesses dry up.

Lenders, real estate and construction jobs were reduced/eliminated due to people not paying their mortgage.

How could the net effect be positive ?

Now, top it off with the taxpayer now having less after tax dollars to spend. The net result is negative.

Example:
Suppose there is an increase in theft in the city of San Diego. The thieves now have extra money to spend on TVs, electronics, booze, crack, or other consumer goods. This is good for the economy, right ?

Mr. Jackson’s analysis only looks at one side of the equation.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=jpinpb]FormerSanDiegan – the reason why I don’t completely agree w/your comments is b/c the banks/lenders, although not receiving money on the note, are still being compensated by the government, I mean the taxpayers.
[/quote]

The banks still took huge losses. 140 banks closed their doors in 2009, so their lending went to zero. Lack of available funds for lending shrunk across the board. Loans for businesses dry up.

Lenders, real estate and construction jobs were reduced/eliminated due to people not paying their mortgage.

How could the net effect be positive ?

Now, top it off with the taxpayer now having less after tax dollars to spend. The net result is negative.

Example:
Suppose there is an increase in theft in the city of San Diego. The thieves now have extra money to spend on TVs, electronics, booze, crack, or other consumer goods. This is good for the economy, right ?

Mr. Jackson’s analysis only looks at one side of the equation.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=jpinpb]FormerSanDiegan – the reason why I don’t completely agree w/your comments is b/c the banks/lenders, although not receiving money on the note, are still being compensated by the government, I mean the taxpayers.
[/quote]

The banks still took huge losses. 140 banks closed their doors in 2009, so their lending went to zero. Lack of available funds for lending shrunk across the board. Loans for businesses dry up.

Lenders, real estate and construction jobs were reduced/eliminated due to people not paying their mortgage.

How could the net effect be positive ?

Now, top it off with the taxpayer now having less after tax dollars to spend. The net result is negative.

Example:
Suppose there is an increase in theft in the city of San Diego. The thieves now have extra money to spend on TVs, electronics, booze, crack, or other consumer goods. This is good for the economy, right ?

Mr. Jackson’s analysis only looks at one side of the equation.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=jpinpb]FormerSanDiegan – the reason why I don’t completely agree w/your comments is b/c the banks/lenders, although not receiving money on the note, are still being compensated by the government, I mean the taxpayers.
[/quote]

The banks still took huge losses. 140 banks closed their doors in 2009, so their lending went to zero. Lack of available funds for lending shrunk across the board. Loans for businesses dry up.

Lenders, real estate and construction jobs were reduced/eliminated due to people not paying their mortgage.

How could the net effect be positive ?

Now, top it off with the taxpayer now having less after tax dollars to spend. The net result is negative.

Example:
Suppose there is an increase in theft in the city of San Diego. The thieves now have extra money to spend on TVs, electronics, booze, crack, or other consumer goods. This is good for the economy, right ?

Mr. Jackson’s analysis only looks at one side of the equation.

[Author]

Posts