Comments on: Let Home Prices Fall

Declan McCullagh Says Further Government Intervention Will Do More Harm Than Good

[timothyone-2009]

When will these BLAME-THE-DEM Bush apologists finally shut up? Now it''s BARNEY FRANK''S fault and not the greedy and corrupt money changers who dwell deep within the rich Republican base. The unnecessary trillion dollar war had nothing to do with it either, did it?
I could sit here and name dozens of major multi-billion dollar economic crimes committed by these right-wing fools, and in Declan McCullugh''s mind Barney Frank is the man to blame. Idiot!

[presjfk]

A large part of the housing problem was caused by a, "bubble." A bubble that has burst cannot be fixed by manipulating the markets to continue with irrational values. The bottom must fall out of the housing market and replaced with the true market values. Anything less and the pain will continue on...

[wl7bzh]

You know what? I WILL enjoy drinking beer & watching football! You go ahead & enjoy biting your pillow & watching Dancing With the Stars.

I''''ll bet those mean jocks really did a number on you!! LOL!!!

Posted by easeup at 05:00 PM : Nov 26, 2008

Dancing with the stars? I''ve never seen it. Is this a jock thing?

"Did a number"? No, these are the alcoholic losers, with the bad knees, backs, marriages and old photos of themselves in uniform when "coach promised them they could go pro" if they gave it all for the team that I have to tolerate now.

You seem to be living in the past. It''s you deadbeats in the present making life miserable now.

[seafang]

That''s right let them crash. After all, when those people went to the bank and were told they couldn''t afforda $100,000 house but the bank would lend them the money anyway; and then turn the whole mess over to fanny mae, and let the taxpayers worry about it; they figured.
Well if this guy will let me buy a 4100,000 house I can''t pay for, I might as well go for a $500,000 house I can''t afford either.

So they are the ones who drove the house price up to where legitimate buyers couldn''t afford them; so let them fall, let them file for bankruptcy, along with the crooked banks that loaned them the money they knew would never get paid back.

After all of the bailouts of these deadbeats; who is going to be left to bail out the taxpayers.

[easeup-2009]

Whatsa matter yard ape-Not accustomed to someone talking back to you? Why don''''t you get the little woman to get you and the boys anuther beer cauz thar''''s probably a game on somwhar. eeeehaw

I bet life don''''t better than that do it bubba?

Posted by wl7bzh at 03:28 PM : Nov 26, 2008

You know what? I WILL enjoy drinking beer & watching football! You go ahead & enjoy biting your pillow & watching Dancing With the Stars.

I''ll bet those mean jocks really did a number on you!! LOL!!!

[bjcone8559]

"Any bailout punishes renters and Americans who were fiscally responsible by taxing them to benefit those who weren''t. "

This has forever been the battle cry of the greedy, religious? right. It is the same old, ''I''m not my brother''s keeper'' song. "I want everyone to have the best health care possible... as long as it doesn''t cost me anything." "Those people are homeless and starving because they choose to live that way." "Why should my tax dollars be used to pay for food stamps?"

It is high time that republicans come out of the closet and admit that they are NOT christians. To state, now, that the government should stay out of the mix and let the masses lose their homes and then, possibly, go hungry because of mistakes the government has made is simply evil. The majority of people who are losing their homes now DID NOT cheat to buy more home than they deserve (as republicans claim). They bought homes based on their optomistic expectdations of the future. It''s called the American dream! Their dreams have been dashed, not by their unwillingness to work to obtain it, but by those at the top who are greedy. Jobs have been moved to slave-labor nations by greedy corporations. In millions of households incomes have dropped or eliminated!

I sincerely wish that every one of you republicans (who place so little value on the dreams of others) lose your homes and your incomes, and your savings and your investments. You should get a taste of your own medicine.

[htcarter]

Part 2 of a 2 part comment: Isn%u2019t the truth that those folks in Washington right now decided that their relative wealth and power (and that of their business class brethren) is better preserved by attempting to avoid (postpone?) a depression marked by a reshuffling of the capital market deck (and particularly the financial services deck)? Of course, but are you better off? Why would the treasury not offer to lend to business people who have clearly demonstrated the ability and proper temperament to make overall sound investment and business decisions and let them find the bottom for all of these various asset classes rather than put money into companies that we know have bad assets and we know have flawed decision making and compensation systems? For every reason I have heard about propping up AIG and Citi, I can think of an alternative fix coming from outside this firms. Same with GM, Ford and the warranties. What I have not heard is a sensible argument about why we should price fix with housing housing (I know this is a result of Greenspan fixing the price of money at 1% and that was nuts too). Housing values are a function of incomes and interest rates. By fixing U.S. housing values we are by extension pretending to be able to fix U.S. incomes. Does anybody believe that we can fix (put a floor in on) U.S. incomes and at the same time participate honestly and sustainably in a global free market economy? I would like to be enlightened on this. Tom Carter

[htcarter]

Part I of a 2 part comment: I do not pretend to be the most studied person on the planet with respect to macro economics but I am a successful business person and investor and that success includes success in real estate and finance. Today I own and operate a firm that lends to growing businesses because that is a far less efficient market than even real estate. I think the author here is directionally correct. Should we not be absolutely outraged that politicians are deciding that it is better for all of us if we are propped up as consumers as long as we can be propped up whatever the tangible costs, ripple effects, or unintended consequences? If you are a capitalist, how do you now discount for that the fact that politicians are clearly willing to change even the basic free market principles that have been at our country''s core? Capitalists now have to weigh the wildcard of government bans on short selling, bailing out clearly flawed businesses and asset classes that are clearly overvalued. Do we really expect financial markets to more efficient today or going forward? How do we price the uncertainty of government action or inaction %u2013 with a higher discount rate or lower discount rate?

[stomarin]

Letting housing prices drop in theory sounds good but the problem is in the details. The issue is the "toxic" assets that have debt attached to them that now is so far under water it threatens the financial system. Then it is not just Wall Street''s problem, it is our problem if the financial system melts down. So we can''t just allow all the prices to drop without taking those toxic assets off the books of the stupid financial institutions that funded them. Or you have to do something to stabilize the housing pricing market which is what they are trying to do. Was the financial system tied to the debt associated with financing tulip purchases?

[fridak-2009]

Yeah, let them fall. So what if half the county is living under bridges. Chance to make a big fortune buying their forclosed homes and renting them back to them. (That''s what makes America GREAT!!)