I feel it is the governments responsibility since they let it happen. They stood back while the rich are getting richer and the middle class is losing their homes. I feel like grabbing a gun and fighting for my house. Why can they bail out all the big banks and kick hundres of thousands of people out of their homes. While at the same time throwing billions of dollars away on war all the while donating billions to other countries. Complete BS that doesn’t even scratch the surface how the U.S government is doing it’s people wrong.

“I feel it is the govornments responsibility since they let it happen.”

It seems to me that the borrowers/consumers let it happen. I don’t agree with blaming the government on this issue because it begs the question, what about the responsibility of those people that took out loans without researching the terms, or through speculation? When you say that, “They stood back…” would you rather that a government official be present at every loan processed to make sure that the borrower is making the “right” decision?

I would argue that the government’s involvement in so many issues has made us forget, uh, relinquish the accountability of our own stewardship that we have on our choices as consumers. We think that since the government should be regulating an industry that we don’t have to do our due diligence in making sure that we’re informed enought to make ’self-interested’ decisions.

“…and the middle class is losing their homes.”

The language in this phrase, and in subsequent sentences you wrote, has a strong tone of entitlement. Why is it that just because someone qualified for a loan (that they probably shouldn’t have accepted), moved in their possessions, and now make (or in many cases, default on) monthly payments entitles them to a house? Isn’t it technically still the bank’s or lender’s home until the mortage is paid off? If it were truly “their home” they wouldn’t need worry about forclosure.

My wife and I did our due diligence when we took out a loan for our humble home. We could have received a larger, more creative loan and could have put it towards a much bigger house than we currently reside in. We knew how much we could safely afford per month and we weren’t willing to go any higher than that - even if it meant that we didn’t purchase anything. Doing so meant purchasing a smaller home in a smaller town, but one thing we don’t have to worry about is foclusure due to taking out a loan for more than we could reasonably (as deemed by my wife and I) pay back. I’m not writing this to pat myself on the back, but to demonstrate how if one lives within their means and does their due diligence, then they will be less likely to be affected by this mortgage “crisis”.

“Why can they bail out all the big banks and kick hundres of thousands of people out of their homes”

I agree with you here - the government should let the big banks fail as well (if those big banks are unable to sustain themselves in the free market).

Is the government kicking people out of their homes (who’s homes)? or are the people defaulting on their loans, therefore breaking a contractual agreement which results in the legal owners of the homes taking back their property?

There is a contradiction in what you want - the government to be involved - and what you are criticizing - government being involved. Why is it ok to let the government bail out borrowers and consumers, but not to bail out banks?

I admire your sense of passion regarding this issue and you bring up some good points but the government bailing out the consumers, whether they be rich, middle class or poor, is not going to solve the problem.

Quote: “Is the government kicking people out of their homes (who’s homes)? or are the people defaulting on their loans, therefore breaking a contractual agreement which results in the legal owners of the homes taking back their property?”

Since the banking system is fraudulent based on deception, I feel all loans under such a dishonest system of fraud should legally be considered null and void as contracts created under fraud are.

Yes corporate welfare for organizations, banks etc is another form of fraud in my belief, it certainly in my book is immoral, dishonest, and unethical.

quote: “My wife and I did our due diligence when we took out a loan for our humble home. We could have received a larger, more creative loan and could have put it towards a much bigger house than we currently reside in. We knew how much we could safely afford per month and we weren’t willing to go any higher than that - even if it meant that we didn’t purchase anything. Doing so meant purchasing a smaller home in a smaller town, but one thing we don’t have to worry about is foclusure due to taking out a loan for more than we could reasonably (as deemed by my wife and I) pay back. I’m not writing this to pat myself on the back, but to demonstrate how if one lives within their means and does their due diligence, then they will be less likely to be affected by this mortgage “crisis”.”

Great there are some who can make responsible wise decisions, however for others they are in a form of bondage because it is illegal to live just anywhere and you must pay the price for whats available. This is becoming a bigger problem in many places. People cant simply drop out of society that is in a self destructive downward spiral that continues to leave more and more downtrodden and opressed. Opportunity exists with Freedom and correct principles, including free market principles. The opposite is Bondage, Most of us fall somewhere in between the 2. With more and more being in the latter.

“Since the banking system is fraudulent based on deception, I feel all loans under such a dishonest system of fraud should legally be considered null and void as contracts created under fraud are.”

Paul, I can’t help but read this as the language of a thief.

How is the whole banking system fraudulent and deceptive? Sure, I agree that fraud is occurring in some areas, and the whole lending out more money than you have to lend out, then profiting from those loans, is fraudulent. Also, aren’t there many hard-working Americans who have their hard-earned dollars invested into other people’s mortgages?

And even if your premise were true, that all loans were fraudulent, would annulling them help? That would be devastating to our economy and put us much deeper in debt. Rather than “returning” these fictional dollars created out of thin air, a huge deficit would be left in its stead. That money, which represents present or future economic product, would have to be repaid some how. You can not just wish it away.

Let me correct a prior statement: loaning out more than you have to loan out in some situations could be fraudulent, not necessarily that the act of doing so is in and of itself fraudulent.

Is it not the fraudulent Federal Reserve Notes, that are leading the economy to self destruct?

It was concieved in secrecy it was implimented by conspiracy and deception, It robs the future generations and supports a reckless taxing system of vote buying and selling, it is used to the advantage of a minority at the expense of the majority even if it is 51% to 49%.
It supports theft of labor through socialism etc.Wickedness never was happiness. The current Federal Reserve debt note system was concieved in wickedness with willfull intent to decieve. It is nothing less than fraud.
quote :
“And even if your premise were true, that all loans were fraudulent, would annulling them help? That would be devastating to our economy and put us much deeper in debt. Rather than “returning” these fictional dollars created out of thin air, a huge deficit would be left in its stead. That money, which represents present or future economic product, would have to be repaid some how. You can not just wish it away”

Suppoting the fraud is what is destroying and leading to economic collapse as we speak.

Thank you for politely explaining your position further - I’m in complete concurrence with you on the issue of the Federal Reserve being conceived in wickedness and that it’s a plague to mankind. The book “The Creature from Jekyll Island” clearly outlines how and why it was created. Carl Marx knew of the a need for a centralized government banking system in order to overthrow capitalism (see the Communist Manifesto). Also, there’s the study by Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz which reveals that the it, along with poor government policy, helped perpetuate and worsen the great depression.

Amen on the Federal Reserve should be abolished!

Now, my reasoning for not annulling the loans is as follows: that money, created out of thin air, was borrowed from every American citizen that uses the US currency system as a principal medium of exchange. Annulling the contracts of repayment for all loans issued by the Federal Reserve would create a huge economic whiplash: prices would inflate like crazy!

In my eyes (and there is still plenty room in my mind for further enlightenment on the subject, debate is welcome) the road to restoration would be as follows: put a complete halt on any new Federal Reserve activities: no new loans can be made from it. Any currency going towards paying off the debt created by federal reserve is taken out of circulation and destroyed. This way, the Americans that have been robbed and plundered by the Federal Reserve are gradually given back their savings accounts, their retirements, and their purchasing power. Prices would get lower, rather than higher. Sure, with that, interest rates to borrow money would likely increase as the money supply would gradually decrease. However, since they’ve been artificially kept low by the Federal Reserve’s manipulating and controlling the money supply, this would be merely restoring them to free-market prices. That would certainly be for the better!

I am certain based on your arguments we both agree that it would be a difficult road, but ultimately the best road, to go back to the gold standard. It would be like a thief learning to stop stealing and learn to work. There would need to be time to allow American to heal from the parasite that has inflected it and it has become dependent on. Private clearing houses would need to be given time to establish themselves as a natural procedure for bail out banks from failing. For sure some change would be needed to be learned. It wouldn’t solve all economic problems, but it would solve many. Ah, the sweet bliss which awaits to meet the faithful traveler at the end of the road!

I could be totally and utterly missing the point here, so if someone can enlighten me with rational debate I’d be delighted.

Tim, thank you for your picture and profile on the Gravatar feature. For all those who leave comments, we would greatly appreciate you visiting gravatar.com and creating a profile with a picture. It will look so much nicer to see your faces rather than that twisted blue G.

Thanks,

Jason

Quick note about Gravatar: I went there and set up an account, but it didn’t seem to be working. It turns out that it automatically puts everything in small caps. By habit, I capitalize my name in my email address, so the system didn’t recognize it. So, note that you need to put your name in small caps.