Whether readers want to admit it or not, Romney is right. Home values will
continue to fall until the foreclosures have run their course. By artificially
propping them up we are actually prolonging the pain and at the same time
putting our nation deeper into debt and thereby pushing our national government
that much closer to a financial meltdown.
Harsh, but best. I wonder how the economy would be faring at this point had
there not been any bailouts. If banks and the other bailout recipients had not
been proped up there would have been job lost and all that but I think the
economy would have recoveryed faster. The pain would have beeb significant but
over quickly. I doubt we'd be looking at the possibility of a second recession.
Who knows, if Clinton hadn't been so anxious to create ways for more people to
buy houses we might not have had all those sub-prime loans out there to go bad
or get bundled and sold off as investment instruments. Maybe we could have
skipped this whole mess.
Maybe Mr. Mitt will allow some of the homeless to set up their tents on his
numerous estates, until "it hits bottom"(kind, generous, fabulous
individual that he is).
Mitt Romney is absolutely correct in this. Where I may differ with him is if he
thinks the solution to housing, after the needed clearing of the foreclosure
pipeline, is strictly in the private sector. The FHA was set up because the
private market did not work. There were no long term amortized loans with
affordable down payments until the Government stepped in. It was the
privatization of Fannie Mae that led to its following the Wall Street crowd into
the risky sub prime mortgage backed securities. Fannie Mae should return to its
public purpose of promoting home ownership where the conventional loans were not
feasible. The problem with Republicans in general is that they cannot see a
money flow without sucking out part of it. The private market does not make
housing nor health care more affordable to the average person.
I believe that Reid can only be termed a socialist, which is unfortunate for
someone who by his own admission is a christian. I think being a christian and
a socialist are contradictory. Although Jesus can not be described as either a
capitalist or socialist, I'm certain that he would be opposed to any government
that takes away someone's unalienable rights-since those rights were given by
Him-all of which socialists countries do! Reid is on the wrong side of history.
Government is not the answer to our most pressing problems.