- This topic has 100 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 4 months ago by
cr.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 5, 2008 at 3:17 PM #253083August 5, 2008 at 10:24 PM #253090
Anonymous
GuestPeople talk about walking away as if there aren’t any ramifications. If they walk away and are under water by 100,000 or more which is common in Ca. they’ll have to pay the tax on this amount. Add 100,000 to your income and see what tax bracket your in and then see how much you would owe the IRS. It’s a scary thought.
August 5, 2008 at 10:24 PM #253252GuestPeople talk about walking away as if there aren’t any ramifications. If they walk away and are under water by 100,000 or more which is common in Ca. they’ll have to pay the tax on this amount. Add 100,000 to your income and see what tax bracket your in and then see how much you would owe the IRS. It’s a scary thought.
August 5, 2008 at 10:24 PM #253261GuestPeople talk about walking away as if there aren’t any ramifications. If they walk away and are under water by 100,000 or more which is common in Ca. they’ll have to pay the tax on this amount. Add 100,000 to your income and see what tax bracket your in and then see how much you would owe the IRS. It’s a scary thought.
August 5, 2008 at 10:24 PM #253320GuestPeople talk about walking away as if there aren’t any ramifications. If they walk away and are under water by 100,000 or more which is common in Ca. they’ll have to pay the tax on this amount. Add 100,000 to your income and see what tax bracket your in and then see how much you would owe the IRS. It’s a scary thought.
August 5, 2008 at 10:24 PM #253324GuestPeople talk about walking away as if there aren’t any ramifications. If they walk away and are under water by 100,000 or more which is common in Ca. they’ll have to pay the tax on this amount. Add 100,000 to your income and see what tax bracket your in and then see how much you would owe the IRS. It’s a scary thought.
August 6, 2008 at 10:17 AM #253328cr
Participant[quote=PadreBrian]To be fair to the US tax payer, the bail-out was designed to repay the tax payers. If you want a 40% reduction in your loan, spiting the profit when you sell it is only reasonable…they are like a silent partner in this. [/quote]
Not sure what you mean about repaying tax payers. This bill is at the expense of the tax payers, in the form of a blank check for FNMA and FMAC to guarantee toxic waste bought by Chinese shareholders so they don’t dump their US bonds and implode our economy.
August 6, 2008 at 10:17 AM #253494Participant[quote=PadreBrian]To be fair to the US tax payer, the bail-out was designed to repay the tax payers. If you want a 40% reduction in your loan, spiting the profit when you sell it is only reasonable…they are like a silent partner in this. [/quote]
Not sure what you mean about repaying tax payers. This bill is at the expense of the tax payers, in the form of a blank check for FNMA and FMAC to guarantee toxic waste bought by Chinese shareholders so they don’t dump their US bonds and implode our economy.
August 6, 2008 at 10:17 AM #253501Participant[quote=PadreBrian]To be fair to the US tax payer, the bail-out was designed to repay the tax payers. If you want a 40% reduction in your loan, spiting the profit when you sell it is only reasonable…they are like a silent partner in this. [/quote]
Not sure what you mean about repaying tax payers. This bill is at the expense of the tax payers, in the form of a blank check for FNMA and FMAC to guarantee toxic waste bought by Chinese shareholders so they don’t dump their US bonds and implode our economy.
August 6, 2008 at 10:17 AM #253560Participant[quote=PadreBrian]To be fair to the US tax payer, the bail-out was designed to repay the tax payers. If you want a 40% reduction in your loan, spiting the profit when you sell it is only reasonable…they are like a silent partner in this. [/quote]
Not sure what you mean about repaying tax payers. This bill is at the expense of the tax payers, in the form of a blank check for FNMA and FMAC to guarantee toxic waste bought by Chinese shareholders so they don’t dump their US bonds and implode our economy.
August 6, 2008 at 10:17 AM #253562Participant[quote=PadreBrian]To be fair to the US tax payer, the bail-out was designed to repay the tax payers. If you want a 40% reduction in your loan, spiting the profit when you sell it is only reasonable…they are like a silent partner in this. [/quote]
Not sure what you mean about repaying tax payers. This bill is at the expense of the tax payers, in the form of a blank check for FNMA and FMAC to guarantee toxic waste bought by Chinese shareholders so they don’t dump their US bonds and implode our economy.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
