Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SD Realtor
ParticipantIt was a foreclosure that had a tenant in the home. During the eviction process the tenant decided to purchase the home. This was the best deal for the bank because the tenants rights in a foreclosed home are pretty strong now and it takes awhile to get them out. Yes it was an all cash offer as well.
ParticipantIt was a foreclosure that had a tenant in the home. During the eviction process the tenant decided to purchase the home. This was the best deal for the bank because the tenants rights in a foreclosed home are pretty strong now and it takes awhile to get them out. Yes it was an all cash offer as well.
ParticipantIt was a foreclosure that had a tenant in the home. During the eviction process the tenant decided to purchase the home. This was the best deal for the bank because the tenants rights in a foreclosed home are pretty strong now and it takes awhile to get them out. Yes it was an all cash offer as well.
ParticipantThe market has been disconnected from the economy for a long time peter. Making money has nothing to do with the economy.
ParticipantThe market has been disconnected from the economy for a long time peter. Making money has nothing to do with the economy.
ParticipantThe market has been disconnected from the economy for a long time peter. Making money has nothing to do with the economy.
ParticipantThe market has been disconnected from the economy for a long time peter. Making money has nothing to do with the economy.
ParticipantThe market has been disconnected from the economy for a long time peter. Making money has nothing to do with the economy.
Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
Participantdbapig the autoinsurance example fails. You have to pay autoinsurance because when you drive you can kill someone and damage thier property. You must have autoinsurance to be able to drive. You should not be forced to pay health insurance to live. Come on now lets at least argue in a fair manner.
As far as ramming it through, you don’t ram something through that has alot of inherent problems just because you have tried to do it 12 years ago and failed. The dems have control for another 18 months.
Really now, with so much at stake, and I mean ALOT IS AT STAKE here, why can’t this be done with care and analysis. To say something that sucks is better then nothing becuase nothing REALLY sucks is something I don’t agree with.
Participantdbapig if the coverage is so great why don’t federal employees have it?
My beef is not with affordable health care or a national plan. My beef is not even with higher taxes to support it. My problem is all the controls being implemented for it. Read what Arraya posted, the plan is so rife with special interests that it is pathetic. Do you know how much money AARP will get because they are an insurance provider? Cant you see why they are pushing it? AARP members could receive reduced care but AARP will make a MINT because they will be able to peddle the policies.
I am okay with a plan believe me. Why the hell does it have to be slammed through in a matter of 10 weeks? What is the rush? When Mass went to a plan it took them 2 years of studying and working with the industry to implement.
Can’t a plan be crafted that is a little less Orwellian? Can’t people at least choose to participate in it rather then be fined? Can we at least choose to not undertake insuring people who are not legal citizens of the USA?
Wouldn’t you think that if we are going to undertake such a plan that perhaps it should be as well thought out as possible and crafted with diligence and care over a bit longer period of time?
What
is
the
rush?
-
AuthorPosts
