DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on May 19, 2010, 11:51:37 AM
-
(http://l.yimg.com/ds/orion/us/y_news/logo/ynews.gif)
Mortgage delinquencies, foreclosures break records
May 19, 2010
(http://d.yimg.com/a/p/afp/20100513/capt.photo_1273757535105-1-0.jpg?)
AFP/Getty Images/File ? A pre-foreclosure sign is displayed outside a home in Miami,
Florida in 2009. US home foreclosures have ?
By ALAN ZIBEL
Ap Real Estate Writer - 8 mins ago
WASHINGTON - The number of homeowners who missed at least one payment on their mortgage
urged to a record in the first quarter of the year, a sign that the foreclosure crisis is far from over.
More than 10 percent of homeowners had missed at least one mortgage payment in the January-March
period, the Mortgage Bankers Association said Wednesday. That number was up from 9.5 percent in
the fourth quarter of last year and 9.1 percent a year earlier.
Those figures are adjusted for seasonal factors. For example, heating bills and holiday expenses tend to
push up mortgage delinquencies near the end of the year. Many of those borrowers become current on
their loans again by spring.
Without adjusting for seasonal factors, the delinquency numbers dropped, as they normally do from the
winter to spring.
More than 4.6 percent of homeowners were in foreclosure, also a record. But that number, which is not
adjusted for seasonal factors, was up only slightly from the end of last year.
Jay Brinkmann, the trade group's chief economist, said the foreclosure crisis appears to have stabilized,
as the seasonal adjustments may be exaggerating the change from the previous quarter.
"I don't see signs now that it's getting worse, but it's going to take a while," he said. "A bad situation
that's not getting worse is still bad."
Economic woes, such as unemployment or reduced income, are the main catalysts for foreclosures
this year. Initially, lax lending standards were the culprit. But homeowners with good credit who
took out conventional, fixed-rate loans are now the fastest growing group of foreclosures.
Those borrowers made up nearly 37 percent of new foreclosures in the first quarter of the year,
up from 29 percent a year earlier.
The risky subprime adjustable rate loans that kicked off the foreclosure crisis are making up a smaller
share of new foreclosures. They made up 14 percent of new foreclosures in the January-March period,
down from 27 percent a year earlier.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100519/ap_on_bi_ge/us_home_foreclosures;_ylt=Ahm1S904gYLQeAcOkEGZur2yBhIF;_ylu=X3oDMTJsbWhnZzljBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNTE5L3VzX2hvbWVfZm9yZWNsb3N1cmVzBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMgRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNtb3J0Z2FnZWRlbGk- (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100519/ap_on_bi_ge/us_home_foreclosures;_ylt=Ahm1S904gYLQeAcOkEGZur2yBhIF;_ylu=X3oDMTJsbWhnZzljBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNTE5L3VzX2hvbWVfZm9yZWNsb3N1cmVzBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMgRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNtb3J0Z2FnZWRlbGk-)
-
You think he is doomed, anyway.
This is based on the number of recent mortgages: homeowners who are not upside down can sell, and avoid foreclosure.
It is not a good thing, but it is not going to continue for three more years.
There is really very little any president could do to alleviate this. GOPers are better pals to the bankers than the Democrats, and had McCain been elected, this would be no better.
-
"GOPers are better pals to the bankers than the Democrats"
Barack Obama
Donations By Industry 2008 Election:
Securities & Investment $14,891,735
Commercial Banks $3,316,351
John McCain
Donations By Industry 2008 Election:
Securities & Investment $8,698,635
Commercial Banks $2,293,748
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638 (http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638)
-
d'oh......doncha just hate when facts keep getting in the way of a good rant?
-
And so you think that ONLY the presidential candidates count when I say that banks are better buddies of the Republicans?
Who is trying to prevent a consumer protection agancy?
Who fought credit card reform?
-
Goldman Sachs the largest political "heavy hitter"
in the banking/investment industry donations by party/year.
2010
Democrats $515,525
Republicans $282,800
2008
Democrats $4,468,388
Republicans $1,459,961
2006
Democrats $2,148,361
Republicans $1,276,455
2004
Democrats $3,956,253
Republicans $2,436,285
2002
Democrats $2,292,040
Republicans $1,194,795
2000
Democrats $2,763,185
Republicans $1,662,292
Citigroup the next largest banking/investment industry
contributor also gave more to Democrats in the last 4 election
cycles as did JPMorgan Chase give more to Democrats
in the last 4 election cycles.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/index.php (http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/index.php)
-
Goldman Sachs is hardly all the bankers, and there are lots more donations than just to the presidential campaign.If it is true that donations are equivalent to influence, then you would need to supply the total amount of all donations to all candidates of both parties. And it isn't really provable that donations = influence in any concrete way.
According to your novel theory, the only political party that could be hostile to bankers would be the impossible political party than donates nothing to any banker. Bankers donate based on the probability that they think a candidate will be elected, as well as favors they might receive. There are no guarantees written for any favors, ever.
And NONE of this has a damned thing to do with the fact that a president cannot prevent foreclosures on people who cannot pay off their mortgages
-
"Goldman Sachs is hardly all the bankers,"
Didnt say they were but Goldman is the biggest "heavy hitter"
in political contributions in the banking/investment industry
according to OpenSecrets.org and they gave more money
to democrats across the board.
"and there are lots more donations than just to the presidential campaign"
The donations I listed by Goldman, CitiGroup, & JP Morgan Chase were
not to just the Presidential Campaign, they were the entire election
cycles in all races.
"According to your novel theory..."
What is a "novel theory" or more like a now proven bullshit theory is your
erroneous claim that the GOP is "better pals" with banking than the Democrats.
Democrats are on the "bigger take" from contributions/lobbyist from the
banking/investment industry.
-
But you offer no proof that the sum of all donations to Democratic candidates exceeds that of all Republican candidates.
And even of this were so, if the idea is to buy influence, then the fact that the Democrats have more people elected at this time would likely cause the donations to Democrats be larger.
And still I say, that the President can do very little to stop foreclosures, and there is little evidence that the current rate of foreclosures will continue.
-
"But you offer no proof that the sum of all donations to
Democratic candidates exceeds that of all Republican candidates"
In this discussion I have certainly provided more sources & proof than you have!
Plus I didn't make the claim...you did!
It is quite clear you have made a typical erroneous leftist talking point
that pretends/implies Democrats are not in bed with Wall Steet/Big Banks
when in fact they are.
"And even of this were so, if the idea is to buy influence, then the fact
that the Democrats have more people elected at this time would likely
cause the donations to Democrats be larger"
The sources I provided covered 5 election cycles and for much
of that time Republicans controlled the Executive and Legislative
branches of government.
"And still I say, that the President can do very little to stop foreclosures"
Doesn't matter...the President will be blamed and
thus my original statement of this thread is in fact true.
-
Everything you say is true, of course. You are Christians. Jesus is on your side. Plus, you claim the icon of Reagan, the Great Wrinkled One. This gives you the Power of Prophesy, and the Talisman of Truth.
-
Everything you say is true, of course. You are Christians. Jesus is on your side.
Plus, you claim the icon of Reagan, the Great Wrinkled One. This gives you the
Power of Prophesy, and the Talisman of Truth.
X0...I don't know about all that...but I do know....I loves me new sticker on my SUV!
(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y273/ItsZep/Politics/d39a1fbd-1.jpg)
-
I wonder if John Hinckley has one of those. Perhaps in the past tense.
Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
-------------------------------------
I fail to see any purpose in bumper stickers: they won't change anyone's mind, and if someone mean disagrees, your car could get keyed. The fancier the car, the greater the temptation, I imagine.
Funny bumper stickers can sometimes be amusing, but I prefer to tell jokes in person.
-
i was well aware of some leftwing whackjob keying my car
i would have much preferred a more direct shot at Obama
but i did worry about vandalism
so that is actually the reason i choose the one i did
much more indirect shot at Obama
and with Reagan's popularity i think i'm safe
The Wall Comes Down (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPv-AHwJY9Q#)
-
Reagan is popular among a part of the geriatric set.
I cannot imagine why you care that people think you miss the Wrinkled One.
And I saw it on TV: Gorbachov did not tear down that wall, the Germans did that.
-
the fact that the Democrats have more people elected at this time would likely cause the donations to Democrats be larger.
Thus they are bigger buddies to the bankers than Republicans.
-
No, I do not think it works that way.
Goldman Sachs donated a pile of money to Obama, and yet Obama has charged Goldman Sachs with fraud. That does not sound like all that money bought them the influence they would like to have.
The banks contribute because what they think they are going to get.The candidates need the money, and since officially, they get it with no strings attached, they simply take it. Perhaps if Goldman Sachs phones Obama he will have his calls returned, and I'd get an e-mail from a secretary. But that does not guarantee favors.
Republicans hate regulations and taxes on general principles. Small government and lower taxes is most of their platform.
-
"Reagan is popular among a part of the geriatric set"
According to Gallup President Reagan is popular among Americans period.
(http://media.gallup.com/POLL/Releases/pr040607iv.gif)
"I cannot imagine why you care that people think you miss the Wrinkled One"
Of course you don't X0, hatred and contempt blinds more people than diabetes.
"And I saw it on TV: Gorbachov did not tear down that wall, the Germans did that"
Yeah sure Gorbachev didn't have anything to do with the Berlin Wall coming down! ::)
http://205.188.238.181/time/time100/leaders/profile/gorbachev.html (http://205.188.238.181/time/time100/leaders/profile/gorbachev.html)
-
I never liked Reagan. He was an intellectual featherweight the oligarchy hired to play the role of president while they figured out how to grab an ever larger share of the wealth of this country. He was good at acting the role he was hired to do. Most presidents have no acting skills, and after watching movies for 30 years, people preferred fantasy to reality, as do you.
-
Goldman Sachs donated a pile of money to Obama, and yet Obama has charged Goldman Sachs with fraud. That does not sound like all that money bought them the influence they would like to have.
Obama charged Goldman with fraud to get his banking bill passed. It was a cynical ploy. Obama would have given the money back if Goldman were so bad. He would also give the money he got from BP back if they were so bad rather than bypassing regulations and letting them drill without all of their proper permits in order. The CEO of Goldman had 4 private meetings with Obama in the Oval Office prior to this so called charge of fraud. Goldman got their money's worth. This banking bill benefits large banks at the expense of small banks who will not be able to comply with the onerous regulations. This means even more profits for Goldman, and they have done quite well on Obama's watch.
-
How many of Obama's aides and secretaries have worked -trained at Goldman Sacks?