- This topic has 72 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 2 months ago by temeculaguy.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 22, 2007 at 8:28 AM #79016August 22, 2007 at 8:32 AM #79173OzzieParticipant
Edwards claimed he would divest all his funds from the hedge fund that invested in subprime loans and personally help out those who are getting foreclosed which makes no sense. He’s the one taking a hit on those loans and now he’s going to bail out the people who already stiffed him?
Hmmm, that’s a guy I’d like leading our country.
August 22, 2007 at 8:32 AM #79025OzzieParticipantEdwards claimed he would divest all his funds from the hedge fund that invested in subprime loans and personally help out those who are getting foreclosed which makes no sense. He’s the one taking a hit on those loans and now he’s going to bail out the people who already stiffed him?
Hmmm, that’s a guy I’d like leading our country.
August 22, 2007 at 8:32 AM #79152OzzieParticipantEdwards claimed he would divest all his funds from the hedge fund that invested in subprime loans and personally help out those who are getting foreclosed which makes no sense. He’s the one taking a hit on those loans and now he’s going to bail out the people who already stiffed him?
Hmmm, that’s a guy I’d like leading our country.
August 22, 2007 at 8:35 AM #79156bsrsharmaParticipantwho wants to bail out everyone
By sending blank checks? Is it too much to expect a Presidential candidate of a major party to speak with a little more clarity.
August 22, 2007 at 8:35 AM #79176bsrsharmaParticipantwho wants to bail out everyone
By sending blank checks? Is it too much to expect a Presidential candidate of a major party to speak with a little more clarity.
August 22, 2007 at 8:35 AM #79028bsrsharmaParticipantwho wants to bail out everyone
By sending blank checks? Is it too much to expect a Presidential candidate of a major party to speak with a little more clarity.
August 22, 2007 at 8:42 AM #79165bsrsharmaParticipantSen. is right in asking for the limits for Fannie and Freddie to be raised
Even the GSEs have to recycle money by securitizing mortgages. If too many Dodds & Edwards's have their way, market will lose faith in GSE securities too and all hell will break loose. There is a reason why the US Government wants to limit GSEs overall portfolio.
August 22, 2007 at 8:42 AM #79185bsrsharmaParticipantSen. is right in asking for the limits for Fannie and Freddie to be raised
Even the GSEs have to recycle money by securitizing mortgages. If too many Dodds & Edwards's have their way, market will lose faith in GSE securities too and all hell will break loose. There is a reason why the US Government wants to limit GSEs overall portfolio.
August 22, 2007 at 8:42 AM #79037bsrsharmaParticipantSen. is right in asking for the limits for Fannie and Freddie to be raised
Even the GSEs have to recycle money by securitizing mortgages. If too many Dodds & Edwards's have their way, market will lose faith in GSE securities too and all hell will break loose. There is a reason why the US Government wants to limit GSEs overall portfolio.
August 22, 2007 at 8:50 AM #79168Nancy_s soothsayerParticipantThe focus of this thread is totally misleading. Why are we putting the spotlight and raising our ire towards bit and almost-innocent characters? Obama, Clinton, Edwards, etc. were not the main architects of this whole Ponzi scheme? They are just highlighting the fact that there exists a HUGE PROBLEM now, and something has to be done about it. So far, there is a lot of dribble, jawboning, and yet, really, nothing is done yet, except the bailout to the enablers once AGAIN. The Democrats have nothing to do with the current bailout, either.
The OP should direct the flashlight to put the glaring focus towards those who were at the helm who steered this whole country into a cluster-fraud.
August 22, 2007 at 8:50 AM #79188Nancy_s soothsayerParticipantThe focus of this thread is totally misleading. Why are we putting the spotlight and raising our ire towards bit and almost-innocent characters? Obama, Clinton, Edwards, etc. were not the main architects of this whole Ponzi scheme? They are just highlighting the fact that there exists a HUGE PROBLEM now, and something has to be done about it. So far, there is a lot of dribble, jawboning, and yet, really, nothing is done yet, except the bailout to the enablers once AGAIN. The Democrats have nothing to do with the current bailout, either.
The OP should direct the flashlight to put the glaring focus towards those who were at the helm who steered this whole country into a cluster-fraud.
August 22, 2007 at 8:50 AM #79040Nancy_s soothsayerParticipantThe focus of this thread is totally misleading. Why are we putting the spotlight and raising our ire towards bit and almost-innocent characters? Obama, Clinton, Edwards, etc. were not the main architects of this whole Ponzi scheme? They are just highlighting the fact that there exists a HUGE PROBLEM now, and something has to be done about it. So far, there is a lot of dribble, jawboning, and yet, really, nothing is done yet, except the bailout to the enablers once AGAIN. The Democrats have nothing to do with the current bailout, either.
The OP should direct the flashlight to put the glaring focus towards those who were at the helm who steered this whole country into a cluster-fraud.
August 22, 2007 at 9:39 AM #79198jimmyleParticipantactually i like the idea of making the conforming loan higher. May be not as high as $500K but may be $450K. I might need it.
August 22, 2007 at 9:39 AM #79177jimmyleParticipantactually i like the idea of making the conforming loan higher. May be not as high as $500K but may be $450K. I might need it.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.