Obama to tell country to 'take responsibility' for future

[AndrewC]

Obama to tell country to 'take responsibility' for future - CNN.com

President Obama will call on Americans to "pull together" and "take responsibility for our future" in his first speech to a joint session of Congress, according to excerpts of his address.

This really makes me mad. Instead of "take responsibility for our future". it should read "take money from our future". People who take responsibility for their mistakes usually pay for them. They don't steal money from people who make good choices or from their children or their children's children.

One day you tell us that spending money we don't have will cure our economy. They next you say that we need to get a handle on our finances before we hurt future generations. One day you give billions to businesses and families that made poor decisions. The next you say we all need to take responsibility for our future. You cannot have it both ways. Either debt will save us or it will crush us. You either allow people to take responsibility for their actions or you spend your days (and dollars) cleaning up after them. So which will it be?

 

[Arch Enemy]

Obama to tell country to 'take responsibility' for future - CNN.com



This really makes me mad. Instead of "take responsibility for our future". it should read "take money from our future". People who take responsibility for their mistakes usually pay for them. They don't steal money from people who make good choices or from their children or their children's children.

One day you tell us that spending money we don't have will cure our economy. They next you say that we need to get a handle on our finances before we hurt future generations. One day you give billions to businesses and families that made poor decisions. The next you say we all need to take responsibility for our future. You cannot have it both ways. Either debt will save us or it will crush us. You either allow people to take responsibility for their actions or you spend your days (and dollars) cleaning up after them. So which will it be?

Bold Section 1: Not really.

Bold Section 2: One day he was not President the next he was.


I could only imagine what people would be screaming and shouting if Obama did nothing.
Sure! Leave up all the choices to the corporations.. their executives are really the ones getting hurt by this recession, instead of of $50 million/ year they are only making $45 million / year.

the market will not fix herself, that's a fallacy.

 

[ARealConservative]

personal responsibility is the last thing on the mind of the obots.

 

[zimmer]

Obama to tell country to 'take responsibility' for future - CNN.com

This really makes me mad. Instead of "take responsibility for our future". it should read "take money from our future". People who take responsibility for their mistakes usually pay for them. They don't steal money from people who make good choices or from their children or their children's children.

One day you tell us that spending money we don't have will cure our economy. They next you say that we need to get a handle on our finances before we hurt future generations. One day you give billions to businesses and families that made poor decisions. The next you say we all need to take responsibility for our future. You cannot have it both ways. Either debt will save us or it will crush us. You either allow people to take responsibility for their actions or you spend your days (and dollars) cleaning up after them. So which will it be?

"Pull together" is another term for "It takes a Village" which are codes for... socialism.

He tells us to take responsibility, and then has government come in and throw wrenches into the gears.

Get out of our way Mr. Presidente.
We can do it without your intervention.

Take a good long vacation.
Chill.
Smoke something.
Read a little Marx and Alinksy.

Leave us alone... we don't need government "help"...
... to date we have done pretty much OK in spite of it.

When it has been worst is when your party has tried to "help".
:hammer: Just HELPING!
In case you're not sure, it's Dr. Government "helping" a plebe with one of its less intrusive tools.

 

[StandUpChuck]

I don't see a heck of a lot of personal responsibility in Obama's Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan. In fact, I see just the opposite.

 

[Renae]

Obama is better, and I find this hard to believe but it's true, then Clinton at saying what he thinks people want to hear while doing just the opposite.

My taxes are paying for other people's mistakes. I NEVER missed a mortgage payment with my house... seems like that wasn't the right way to do things.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Obama is better, and I find this hard to believe but it's true, then Clinton at saying what he thinks people want to hear while doing just the opposite.

My taxes are paying for other people's mistakes. I NEVER missed a mortgage payment with my house... seems like that wasn't the right way to do things.

Either your taxes pay for other people's mistakes, or your home value and the economy as a whole does. Out of principle, those that bought a home they could not afford, or under terms that they could not afford should pay for there mistakes by losing their home if they cannot pay for it. However, history is full of examples of individuals and entire societies riding their principles over pragmatism to ruin.

The fact is, if a significant number of homes in your community are foreclosed on, then your home value will plummet, your property tax rates will have to go up to make up for the lost revenue due to the sharp declines in home prices, more banks will go under, credit will continue to be severely constrained, and everyone will suffer.

So unfortunately, its in everyones interest to take steps to keep people in their homes if its possible to negotiate lower rates, or other measures that help them afford to keep making their payments, if possible. It's a bitter pill, but thats just the way it is.

 

[Renae]

Either your taxes pay for other people's mistakes, or your home value and the economy as a whole does. Out of principle, those that bought a home they could not afford, or under terms that they could not afford should pay for there mistakes by losing their home if they cannot pay for it. However, history is full of examples of individuals and entire societies riding their principles over pragmatism to ruin.

Since the government is to blame for those bad mortgages TO BEGIN with, excuse me if I'm leery of the fix by the same people that caused the problem.

I'm sorry but setting up a precedent and a system by which you are not to held for your mistakes, only increases the occurrence of such, and in the end, is just a short term solution.

The fact is, if a significant number of homes in your community are foreclosed on, then your home value will plummet, your property tax rates will have to go up to make up for the lost revenue due to the sharp declines in home prices, more banks will go under, credit will continue to be severely constrained, and everyone will suffer.

We'll have to suffer to get through this mess, we either do it the right way, or the wrong way. We are doing it the wrong way. You do realize that the number of homes in foreclosure is actually quite small against the number of homes out there don't you? And of course prices will fall, they were artificially high... it's called a bubble for a reason.

The fallacy of your entire premise is that taxes have to go up to make up for the shortfall, no... that's the wrong answer. Government spending must be restrained, local, state and nationally to ease the hit, not raise taxes.

So unfortunately, its in everyones interest to take steps to keep people in their homes if its possible to negotiate lower rates, or other measures that help them afford to keep making their payments, if possible. It's a bitter pill, but thats just the way it is.

No, you throw those people out and sell the homes to people that CAN afford them...

Damn, imagine that concept.

 

[ARealConservative]

The fact is, if a significant number of homes in your community are foreclosed on, then your home value will plummet

The fact is home values have already plummeted. The rise in these values were artificial based on the notion that an ownership society was more important then making individually sound decisions. All you are calling for is to continue on the failed ideas that originally created an artificial rise in the value of homes for as long as possible, but your ideas are not sustainable as they are built on quick sand.

 

[StandUpChuck]

Either your taxes pay for other people's mistakes, or your home value and the economy as a whole does. Out of principle, those that bought a home they could not afford, or under terms that they could not afford should pay for there mistakes by losing their home if they cannot pay for it. However, history is full of examples of individuals and entire societies riding their principles over pragmatism to ruin.

The fact is, if a significant number of homes in your community are foreclosed on, then your home value will plummet, your property tax rates will have to go up to make up for the lost revenue due to the sharp declines in home prices, more banks will go under, credit will continue to be severely constrained, and everyone will suffer.

So unfortunately, its in everyones interest to take steps to keep people in their homes if its possible to negotiate lower rates, or other measures that help them afford to keep making their payments, if possible. It's a bitter pill, but thats just the way it is.

This isn't the first time you've shown a lack of understanding of the real estate industry. A very simple solution to get foreclosures off the market is to loosen the ridiculous red tape involved in selling them. Bargain seekers are lined up to buy those crapped on houses, but it takes so long to get bank approval for their offers (oft times full list price!) that the buyers end up walking away and either buy something else or forget buying all together.

Then you get the Freddie Mac new regulations that are currently making it harder for people with good credit to get a mortgage to purchase a bigger home in a market with great prices.

OBama's new plan is going to backfire. Mark my words. I told my mortgage broker the other day that I now wish I had bought a house I couldn't really afford. I could refinance and get a fabulous rate. But since I was stupid enough to build equity and pay my mortgage on time every month, I wouldn't qualify for the great rates losers are going to get. All in the name of progress, right? But what's the cost? Honey, if you think the biggest bad wolf causing property taxes to rise is foreclosures, then you haven't considered the cost of some of these feel good programs. The money will get generated somewhere. And it will be off our backs.

 

[zimmer]

Obama is better, and I find this hard to believe but it's true, then Clinton at saying what he thinks people want to hear while doing just the opposite.

My taxes are paying for other people's mistakes. I NEVER missed a mortgage payment with my house... seems like that wasn't the right way to do things.

Welcome to the... Third Way.
Where my decision is your responsibility.

Isn't it nice to know you have a partner to look out for?

 

[danarhea]

Obama is better, and I find this hard to believe but it's true, then Clinton at saying what he thinks people want to hear while doing just the opposite.

My taxes are paying for other people's mistakes. I NEVER missed a mortgage payment with my house... seems like that wasn't the right way to do things.

Looks like you should have bought yourself a McMansion you can't afford. If you had done that, then you would be in like Flint, and your realtor would be thanking you for the money he is getting at taxpayers' expense too.

 

[Truth Detector]

The fact is, if a significant number of homes in your community are foreclosed on, then your home value will plummet, your property tax rates will have to go up to make up for the lost revenue due to the sharp declines in home prices, more banks will go under, credit will continue to be severely constrained, and everyone will suffer.

This is a specious argument at best and lacking in any credible facts to support it.

Can anyone here name one community where this is actually occurring? "a significant number of homes in your community are foreclosed on"

 

[ARealConservative]

This is a specious argument at best and lacking in any credible facts to support it.

Can anyone here name one community where this is actually occurring? "a significant number of homes in your community are foreclosed on"

Mesa, Ariz.: Poster child for foreclosure - Feb. 18, 2009

Mesa Arizona

of the 3,149 current active home-for-sale listings on the market, 25% are bank-owned properties taken back from homeowners in repossessions or given back by borrowers unable to keep up with their mortgage payments.

Another 27% are short sales, in which lenders agree to accept a repayment amount less than what is owed on the mortgage and forgive the difference. That means more than half the homes on the market are so-called "distressed properties."

 

[Truth Detector]

Mesa, Ariz.: Poster child for foreclosure - Feb. 18, 2009

Mesa Arizona

So you think this Mesa AZ makes the case for the hyperbole surrounding the Housing Foreclosure debate?

As of 2007, Mesa's population is 447,541 people. Since 2000, it has had a population growth of 12.91 percent.

The median home cost in Mesa is $275,400. Home appreciation the last year has been -0.92 percent.

Compared to the rest of the country, Mesa's cost of living is 3.37% Lower than the U.S. average.

Mesa public schools spend $4,617 per student. The average school expenditure in the U.S. is $6,058. There are about 22 students per teacher in Mesa.

The unemployment rate in Mesa is 2.40 percent(U.S. avg. is 4.60%). Recent job growth is Positive. Mesa jobs have Increased by 3.32 percent.

So let me do some math here; there are approximately 146,643 houselholds in Mesa. We have 787 households or speculators who have been foreclosed on. That means that about .50%, one HALF of a percent of the households in Mesa AZ are in foreclosure.

Is this your argument? I know it sounds more dramatic to use a figure like TWENTYFIVE PERCENT of current active listings sounds more devastating; but when looked at honestly, it is less than one percent of all households in a damned strong market.

Mesa, Arizona (AZ) - Sperling's BestPlaces

Mesa, Arizona Relocation - Relocation information for the great area of Mesa, Arizona

“There were 146,643 households”
Mesa, Arizona - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia