CNBC vs. CNBC

Mike Barnicle (sp?) shilled for BO throughout the primaries and GE, I believe.

Cramer is right when he suggests offering everybody a 4% interest rate refinance on their home mortgage.

http://www.DailyPUMA.com

EVERYBODY benefited from the subprime mortgage fiasco BEFORE it collapsed because it spurred on the economy before it collapsed. The problem was the monthly payment of the mortgage should not have shot through the roof overnight, that is what I put on the banks, those monthly payments should have slowly escalated.

I love Rick and I am all for his Chicago Tea Party.

Hail Santelli!!
How soon b4 u r called racist for opposing the pork”us bill??

how about yesterday?

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/19/clyburn-opposing-the-stimulus-is-racist-or-something/

Barnacle was far less of an Obama rump-swab then Matthew or Olbermann during the primary.

If i had to choose between Barnacle or Matthews as the host of NoNuts, formerly known as HardBall, I’d choose Barnacle.

Rick is right… I live in my house and I am here to stay and I do not have to worry about selling it. If it appreciates, that is my reward, if it doesn’t I still get my reward because I am enjoying living in my own home. So if my neighbors’ houses are foreclosed, it should not be my problem.. That is their problem and my government should not come in and start convincing me that it is for my own good that I should support the bailout.. It is not my problem…

If housing is the real problem, why the tax cut only for first time buyers? Why only if you are going to live in it? What are they crazy? Only owners need a nice house? What about people who rent? The issue is there is too much “merchandise” for sale. The fastest way to solve that is to get people to buy. Buy! Buy! If you have the cash or credit, you should get the same benefits. This is a shell game of the worst order. This is smoke and mirrors. They are trying to keep people stupid and poor.

me too…I just wrote to CNBC AND NBC AND CNN telling them all what a great job Rick did yesterday and how much I applaud his guts and integrity to stand up against the crap coming out of washington! way to go rick! I’ll be there for the Chicago Tea Party! People let NBC AND CNBC know you support Rick! email them today!

From the “mad as hell” category being seen more and more — even in the comment section at liberal places like the NYT. I hope the Democraps(sic) are reading.

If the elections in two years divide roughly along the lines of angry responsible homeowners on one side, and grateful not so responsible homeowners on the other, often depicted in the media as minority, then Obama and the Dems will take a heavy hit, losing seats in the House and Senate. We are not quite all in this together–equally.

When Hillary Clinton proposed her mortgage rescue plan based on the depression era intervention…There were cheers here. Fickle aren’t we.

And in debt slavery forever.

Some of us saw this collapse coming. I sold my house in 2005 and have been renting ever since, much to the dismay and protestations of friends, relatives, who without exception – have been telling me NOW IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY – ever since I sold my house. And in my area home values have dropped ten per cent since 2005.

Some of us never had to prove our self-worth by going in hock for too much house. I’ve seen the character of my area change with the addition of these McMansion communities, huge houses cheek to jowl on tiny lots. And you never see anyone outside them except the lawn cutting crew. A good percentage of these owners have to be overextended, all you have to do is check melissadata to see the average HHI for your zip code. 65k/year does not support a $600,000 house.

So add to the list of those with their hands out white collar people who are into “lifestyle” more than they comprehend the nuts and bolts of economic reality.

Didn’t we like Hillary Clinton’s plan for home mortgage rescue based on FDR’s depression era intervention? Didn’t we support Hillary Clinton’s concern to call for intervention at least 6 months ago?

People who are losing their jobs cannot pay their mortgage. Is that being a irresponsible homeowner? This crisis has gone beyond the “sub prime” mess. Why is everyone stuck in old information? Did we forget what $4.00 a gallon for gas did to families budgets? Did we forget that “core inflation” is not real inflation and the “consumer inflation” is now figured and tinkered with to the point of being meaningless?

What about the people who wanted a house but were too responsible to get into something they could not afford?

The problem was the monthly payment of the mortgage should not have shot through the roof overnight, that is what I put on the banks, those monthly payments should have slowly escalated.

And anyone who signed mortgage papers for an ARM should have made it JOB ONE to fully understand the terms of their loan. (Not referring solely to the uneducated who were intimidated into signing loan documents which they did not understand). There was plenty of greed on the part of the homebuyer as well. So many bought the claptrap of the NAR – National Association of Realtors – without heeding time tested affordability formulas and market fundamentals. This was just a replay of the tech bubble except in a different asset class.

Blame to be shared on many fronts, not limited to the evil banksters and money lenders.

The “must have a house at all costs” mentality is exactly why houses skyrocketed beyond the reach of most Americans.

We’ve always lived in apartments, because giving our kids a great education at a top college had higher priority.
I remember feeling great sympathy for a woman weeping that her family was having to give up the house for an apartment, then I thought “welcome to the club, lady.”

Normally, I’m not a fan of CNBC. They were dumping all over Apple, and victimizing Steve Jobs about his health. Cramer and all of CNBC was pushing RIMM. Then, I noticed a hefty number of commercials for Verizon mobile phones, and figured out what was going on.
When Apple stock went through the roof, they were exposed as idiots and whores.

Given that, great comments from Rick.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29286993/

I’m with Santelli all the way! And, the link above is why: This “homeowner rescue” plan is nothing but a sham. It’s to save the BANKSTERS, not the homeowners. These bankster bastards are criminals!

Yes, exactly. And it wasn’t just any old house that was a must-own, it was required to outshine the home of the buyer’s sister-in-law.
I worked in marketing for new homes, I witnessed the mentality firsthand. Prices on the same property or community were going UP UP UP. At one point I asked the Sales Manager: How are the young people going to be able to afford their first home? I don’t think any of them cared.

(I wasn’t a realtor, I worked in the art department). There are things I miss about having a house, namely the space. (too much stuff in storage). And I love to garden, which my current situation does not permit.
However, the longer I rent, the more I dread the prospect of all the work it takes to own and maintain a house. It’s so much easier to call the landlord when something goes wrong!

I replied to Alessandro’s post above with remarks about buyer responsibility re: understanding loan docs, but post hasn’t appeared yet.

>>> They are trying to keep people stupid and poor.

Seems to be working QUITE well…

Excellent post Susan.

Will be anxious to see Cramer’s town hall with Sheila Bair.

Many first time homeowners were ridiculed into buying a home.

“you want to rent for 1,200 a month when you could own for 1,500 hundred a month. are you nuts!” Throw in your interest payments on your home as being a tax deduction and your going to be paying the same either way.”

“In five years time your home will go up 100,000 dollars and you can just sell the home if you like, but you’ll score almost a hundred thousand in profits.”

It was that kind of brow beating that got people into homes and kept the economy artificially strong. When the five year mark happened, those payments jumped a ton, doubling and even tripling overnight.

If the payments had started to slowly rise, people would have had time to sell their homes and more importantly, they would have kept making their payments until they did sell their home.

I don’t think it is fair to call someone greedy for being in a home when the banker is showing them that the cost is almost identical to renting, plus they supposed to get five years worth of property increases in the value of the home.

Cramer made the comment that the 4% mortgage should be made available to everybody, at which point there is no favoritism being shown to anybody.

I read a comment at a one of the news(sic) blogs that went a little like this:

Why should I bail out a guy in California who saw his $300K house go to $650K in “value,” took $350K out, spent it and now when the house is only valued at $150K wants me to help him out? What about the $350K?

That’s where I am. Anyone want to help me with the $500 gone from my IRA? And. If I try to use any of it to cover my current expenses, I get a 5% penalty on early withdrawl. Anyone going to help me with that?

You know whether you can afford it or not. You know what the ins and outs are. Sorry. I am tired of living in the “not my fault” world. I want to hear “yeah, I should have known better” responsibility. What a nice change that would be. The banker made me do it is about as honest as the dog ate my homework. Not buying it if you signed it.

Oh, and not the kind of it was a “knuckleheaded,” insincere BS Obomba spouts, real, meaningful confession.

The “One” is charge. You Obots can’t blame it on HC.

Yep. I forgot.

I forgot when it was more important to sign legislation by the calendar rather than to make sure that it was the best legislation for the nation.

You don’t get a redo. This was the chance to make it right. He’s a poser. I have no patience for him, his supporters and the millions of irresponsible who will benefit — whether they are large wealthy banks or small impoverished families. My empathy is plum tapped out.

This is a hard one to sort out. I hate seeing people lose their homes. And there are some people who got taken by sales pitches.

At the same time, there are a lot of people who took the ARMS fully expecting to refinance or sell depending on the market. They gambled, they lost and I am not interested in paying off gambling debts.

I saw this article, AGI, the other day and frankly thought those comments were appalling. Clyburn accused the Clintons of racism, so as far as I’m concerned his voice has been made irrelevant. If the administration’s shills pull out the race card everytime their policies are pushed against, they’ll kill whatever chance they/we have to move forward.

I’m so weary of this canned victimizaton nonsense.

I did laugh at Santelli’s comment: my 401k is now a 201k. Most of us know exactly what he means. And I think he’s expressing the anger and frustration the majority of the population is feeling. Plus, I do think this class warfare meme is being manufactured deliberately. And that’s something I deeply resent.

That is pretty much right, by taking the ARM you were betting that the rate would not go up, and if it did you could just take profit from the house and refinance later. It stung a lot of people, but it was a gamble, a calculated gamble but a gamble nonetheless. The loans were misused in many ways. First, people used the lower ARM payment to buy more house then they could have bought with a higher fixed rate loan. Second, many people who had bad credit to begin with… they could not get a good rate in a 30 year fixed loan. ARM’s were sold as a way for people to repair their credit and they could refinance in 2-3 years into a fixed loan. Third, many people used piggyback loans 80-20 to finance 100% of the home with nothing down. The piggyback financed the 20% that was the traditional down payment to finance into the longer good rate fixed loans. So, a lot of people bought homes with no sacrifice of savings. In my Florida neighborhood, these folks who now have negative equity because prices have fallen 40% in the past two years… they have mostly walked away from them. They had nothing in the homes, and often the payments were the same or lower than rent. To me, rewarding folks who took out 100% financing is wrong. Help the people who put at least 5% down to stay in the homes sure, provided they don’t turn around and sell the homes within a reasonable period.

Well for us, we get totally tooled for living within our means. And it gets glossed over with “we’ve got to do something.” Yeah, we do have to do something: learn from mistakes, take responsibility, and move on. Unfortunately not this time.

Don’t have home insurance? Someone else’s problem. Cable instead of health insurance? Someone else should pay. House too expensive? What? What’s an ARM?

The responsible, and the producers won’t take this crap indefinitely.

The ‘banksters’ have zero power over me until DC extracts my money to pay them back. It’s not the banks, the bankers, or anyone else with the power. It is the state. Period.

I saw a replay of the outburst this morning, and wow, would I have loved to be in the room!
Probably would have landed me in jail! LOL!
There is no valid excuse for the majority of people in this mess!
I do have some concerns for those responsible people who lost jobs, thus leading to their situation. However, they are the very ones who will pull themselves through their difficulties.
It is not my responsibility to pay for the greed of others, and I deeply resent it, regardless of the consequences!

Are any others here reminded of the young woman who said before the election that Obama was going to pay her bills for her? Is this coming true? Seems the structure of the proposed mortgage bailout is designed for people like her. in spite of the feature that says each case will be decided in part by credit worthiness, the provision about qualifying for help if faced with a crisis beyond one’s control sounds vague enough to include something like perceived racism, non-citizenship, single-parent status, etc. The fact that Fannie and Freddie are being given a major role in all of this isn’t reassuring. I can anticipate an expanding bureaucracy will be required to oversee the process. To add insult to injury, it’s expected that most of the adjusted-mortgage rate holders will eventually default anyway.

Like the “stimulus” bill, this bailout seems designed to pay off political patrons.

And here’s the really important point Santelli made: 90% of Americans are paying their mortgages right along. All the hysteria is for about 10% of the country.

Friend of mine laughed and said Obama’s stimulus plan is to bail out California, Florida, Arizona, and Nevada (where most of the subprime shysters went), because Obama needs those 4 states to get re-elected.

my parents worked in a factory every day saved for years and finally bought their house and put 4 kids thru college and there are many americans like them. they dont need the government to help . obama is not happy with these people. he wants needy people who are too lazy to help themselves so he can expand government.there are some legitimate concerns out there but for the most part people took out loans they couldnt pay back because they felt entitled.the concept of working for the american dream is dead.

No, Barnicle was just as bad as the rest of them. Expecially on Morning Joe. I can’t watch him.