Our Changing Globe

Archive for the ‘home mortgage’ Category

The Obama Plan to Redistribute Housing | Libertarian Party

www.lp.org10/29/11

First Obama tried to redistribute wealth before he was President, by leading the charge to force banks to make loans to lower income Americans who could not afford to own homes (through the Community Reinvestment Act). …

Applying Obama's “redistribution of wealth” to school grades …

usamericanfreedom.com11/19/11

That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan”. …

Obama and the liberals could perhaps have achieved both growth and redistribution, but they chose only the latter, and they will pay heavily for their error on Tuesday!

Will Obama change direction after the elections?

No He won’t!

During his election campaign Obama said:

“What people really want is fairness”.

“They want people paying their fair share of taxes”.

“They want that money allocated fairly”.

Redistribution Of Wealth

People thought it sounded good and they voted for him, but they didn’t know that he would immediately attempt redistribution of wealth, and he went for it full throttle in spite of the recession.

What the vast majority of Americans believe in however is economic growth, and they understand full well that the threat of having more and more money taken away as you get richer and richer is simply a demotivator.

The result, motivation went down, small businesses stopped hiring and unemployment went up and stayed up; and in some states it’s still getting worse.

Then Came ObamaCare

With motivation down, the Obama administration then committed another horrendous error of judgment – they rammed ObamaCare down a mostly unwilling nation’s throat.

Obamcare essentially subsidizes health insurance for low and middle-income groups and attempts to recover the cost by taxing high-earners even more, which in turn lowers motivation and causes people to hunker down instead of trying to grow their businesses.

And what makes it even worse is that low and moderate-income workers now feel no need to earn money because they can now maintain the same standard of living with even less effort.

Obama’s Response?

Seeing popularity wane both for him personally and for his policies Obama set out a stand and tried to sell the public his unwanted wares.

Expanding health care coverage was somehow going to somehow drive down costs.

Handouts to state and local governments became a stimulus package.

Climate change legislation became a “green jobs” bill, and so on.

When the voters didn’t buy his arguments his response was to tell them that, “They are confused and not thinking clearly” and that one statement will cost him dearly.

You don’t tell people that you want to vote for you that they are basically stupid if they don’t understand you, do you?

Harry Reid just said something equally stupid and it might cost him re-election in Nevada, “He saved the world economy!”.

Doesn’t he know that Oblamer is the One?!

Could Obama Have Played It Differently And Maybe Won?

Yes, he could have!

Obama could have embraced at least two policies that would have enhanced both equity and economic performance simultaneously, and some of them might well have bridged the ideological divide.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Loan guarantees should not have been provided for Fannie and Freddie because they shifted risk from participants in real estate transactions to taxpayers, and the caused capital to flow into the industry under very favorable terms.

Creating the guarantees allowed mortgage lenders, realtors, homebuilders, developers, securities traders and others to reap enormous gains during the boom, only to later dump their losses on taxpayers during the ensuing bust.

Cutting off all federal support for Fannie and Freddie would have sent a completely different message.

It would not only have greatly enhanced equity, but would also have helped steer investment away from ever more conspicuous McMansions and into productive endeavors like building newer, more-efficient factories, all of which would have stimulated economic growth.

* “McMansion” is an originally pejorative term used to describe a large house, particularly in the United States, that is constructed using modern labor-saving techniques and materials

The Tax Code

Another area that was ripe for reform would have been the loophole-ridden tax code.

Today, the proliferation of carve-outs means that only around 40% of personal income is taxed!

The loopholes should have been removed as much as was possible and the tax base broadened, after which the Obama administration could have slashed rates, enhanced equity, and provided a huge stimulus to the economy.

Instead, the administration did exactly the opposite; it added even more loopholes and promised to raise rates!

Right now we have a situation where similarly situated families often face vastly different tax burdens depending on their ability to game the system, and it also means that investment is steered away from companies that are adept at building better products, to those with the knack for lobbying.

Will Obama Move The Goal Posts?

Obama was a member of the New Party (communist) just 13 years ago, and he was no teen.

Michelle is a Black separatist of the worst kind as her Princeton thesis shows.

Obama is on record as saying that he’d rather be a great one term President than an ineffectual two termer, so we can sadly expect him and Michelle to continue to try and force their socialist/communist on America!

Will the Central Bank Bailouts Ever End? « Multiplier Effect

www.multiplier-effect.org2/24/12

Will the Central Bank Bailouts Ever End? L. Randall Wray | February 24, 2012. (cross posted at EconoMonitor). Guess which US bank holds assets equal to a fifth of US GDP. Now guess what percent of its assets have extremely long maturities …

Aftermath of Bank Bailouts: More Risk

www.strategy-business.com12/9/11

Loans and investments got edgier when U.S. aid was given.

“The Bank Bailouts Have Created More Risk in The System”.

Neil Barofsky, who is the special inspector general for  TARP (The Troubled Asset Relief Program)  states quite clearly in a quarterly report that was released to Congress last Sunday, January 31, 2010 that the problems that led to the last financial crisis have not yet been addressed, and in some cases have actually grown worse.
“Even if TARP saved our financial system from driving off a cliff back in 2008, absent meaningful reform, we are still driving on the same winding mountain road, but this time in a faster car”.

And referring to the “Too big to fail approach” he added, “The government’s bailout of financial institutions deemed “too big to fail” has created a risk that the United States could face a worse fiscal meltdown in the future, and the $700 billion financial bailout has encouraged more risk-taking because bank executives, who are still receiving massive bonuses, figure the government will come to the rescue the next time they steer their ships nearly aground”.

The report warns that these supports mean the government has done more than simply support the mortgage market, and in many ways has become the mortgage market, with the taxpayer shouldering the risk that had once been borne by the private investor.

“The government has stepped in where the private players have gone away and if we take government resources and replace that market without addressing the serious underlying concerns, there really is a risk of artificially pushing up home prices in the coming years”.

The report also revealed that, while the Obama administration pledged to spend $75 billion to prevent foreclosures, that only a tiny fraction of it amounting to just over $15 million has been spent so far and figures indicate that under the Making Home Affordable program, only about 66,500 borrowers, or only 7% of those who signed up had completed the process as of December.
And it might be worth noting that even though there are growing calls for another stimulus bill, in spite of the fact that only 30% of the first $700 billion has so far made its way into the system and the real jobless rate is now at 17.5% if the jobless that have given up looking for work are included.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who is the ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee said, “The market mentality now seems fixed that the U.S. government will continue to step in and bail out giant financial institutions. The IG’s findings confirm my decision to oppose releasing $350 billion in TARP funds last year and my recent vote to terminate the program altogether”.

And Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who is the ranking member on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee added, “The SIGTARP’s report is just another reminder of how Congress and the administration have ignored the role that politics and government played in causing the housing crisis and the economic collapse while pursuing other regulatory reforms will not fix the underlying problem”.