But, rather:
Not. Good. Because, you know? No only do I not feel like rearranging my wardrobe for Le Dictatorship, black is a suck ass color for my particular skin tone. So hang tough, Party People.
P.S. I just finished listening to some talking head in the mortgage industry drone on and on about how the Fail Out is necessary because lending requirements have gotten so tight lately, that no one can get credit without an exemplary record. "The bailout would allow lenders to loosen their requirements for credit."
Sweet Christian Louboutin on a cracker. Isn't that what got us in this mess in the first place, LOOSE LENDING PRACTICES? And isn't the only way out a tightening? What ARE these idiots thinking? Have we become so sloppy in our thinking that we now believe everyone has a "right" to credit?
15 comments:
We are in this "crisis" because the governemnt seeks to insulate fools from their folly.
No suprise that the "crisis" is a lack of insulation from further foolishness.
When we bought our third house fourteen years ago, we had to put 25 percent down because we're self-employed. The bank didn't just HAND US a loan. We've never missed a payment; never failed to pay our property taxes and, in fact, are trying to pay down our loan early. UGH! I'm so steamed about this mess. If my husband gets sick and can't work, is someone gonna bail me out?
And I love black, even though I'm too pasty for it. I promise, however, to stop wearing plaid.
Reckless lending to the feckless.
And to think debtors used to be clad in irons and condemned to prison!
I'll just go and order myself that custom-built Ferrari on the never-never. 'Cos you know, I'm worth it!
Having a Mister who has the same last name as his employer, we were pre-approved and then denied our home loan 19 years ago. And that was after we bought a house based on one income and well below our preapproved amount (you know, just in case something happened.) We had to jump through more hoops, but got the house. I never once thought I was entitled to anything.
Still don't.
I may be too pasty for black, but that has stopped me.
Iamnot: And no one breathes a word about the Fed. A drum I'm not going to stop beating any time soon.
Wendy: That is the bottom line, isn't it? Responsible people, who make up the majority of this country, wouldn't dream of squelching on a debt. And, bless you, for giving up the plaid. I had to do it once, myself.
Poet: And to think debtors used to be clad in irons and condemned to prison! That's because theft used to be regarded as a crime, not an oopsie.
AB: I remember when you practically had to be the Pope to get a house loan and interest rates were up around 11 percent. Which also meant, for years I could go on vacations based solely on the interest on Certificates of Deposit. Those whoo-hoo days are gone, baby, gone.
those outfits in the last picture are terrifying. even scarier than the "handmaids tale" which disturbed me greatly. we need to keep on our reps on the bail out. keep saying NO>
Moi should reprint that article she wrote about the folly of artificially low loan rates.
Back in the days of sanity when I bought my second house (first with spouse), they made her clean-up about 1200 dollars worth of crap on her credit-sheet. And made ME pay Blockbuster Video a whopping 37 bucks!
Maybe Barnett was a tad TOO tight, but the pendulum has swung WAY too far the other way.
And I SWEAR I dropped that copy of "Debbie Does Dallas" off at the night-drop!
All that was to get the "preferred rate" btw. They might have given us SOME sort of a mortgage without paying past debts.
K9: Heather Wilson is getting awfully tired of hearing from me. She was the one NM rep who voted YES. The other two – Udall and Pearce – are vying for Domenici's seat in the Senate so they're paying extra spayshul attention to us folks.
Troll: Hah! That had me laughing out loud. First home I ever bought, we had to satisfy a Blockbuster late fee, too. Of ten bucks and some change.
Exactly. What this country needs is TIGHT credit an' higher interest rates--say up to 6 % an' economics taught in pre-kindergarten. Yeesh!
What IAMNOT said PLUS the thieves buy votes with promises of free this and that and easy money.
On the TRUTH of mortgage fiasco see Back Porch's unearthed NY TIMES report on Clinton et al as carnival barkers fer the gang of hucksters. Oh gag.
But wait! Thar's more--yep, they are goin' to vote again tomorry night--and "minor changes" is all that has changed. Did ya see Troll's recap of the 116 pages--check it out an' call them freak heads up again an' again.!
(oh, mercy, is that me rantin' in that unladylike manner? Mercy.)
When did our entire economy become based on smoke and mirrors, anyway? Feh, I say. Feh.
Aunty: I don't care if they dress this thing up in Oscar de la Renta and call it sweetheart – it stinks. Keep after the bastids.
Wicked: Exactly. And you know what, it's not complicated. Economy on a nation-wide level is as simple as economy in your household: you spend more than you got and you keep doing it you're going to eventually get in trouble. Our congresspeople KNOW this. So why are they asking us to allow them to spend more money we DO NOT HAVE? Perhaps because there are things at stake for their Big Boy buddies and those stakes – not our economic soundness – is more important to those in power. Just say. NO.
Here's a quote from this morning's Washington Post article "A Two-Pronged Push To Aid Ailing Banks" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/30/AR2008093000799.html):
"Meanwhile, securities regulators and accounting rule-makers granted banks greater power to decide the value of their investments, even if market data suggest that prices should be lower. That could allow some banks to report smaller losses, perhaps comforting investors."
That's right folks - solve the problem of fraudulent accounting with MORE fraud! What an utter disgrace!!!
Moi, in our conversation the other night I forgot to tell you about another little gem our "leaders" (masters of deceipt and deception) have done for us - the unwitting public. When they bailed out AIG a couple of weeks ago, they slipped a little bombshell into the deal to "help" banks/brokerage firms with future "liquidity" problems. Can't find the article right now, but basically they are going to allow them to use/access assets in our private accounts if necessary. In other words, if one of them does this (pledges our money as collateral to creditors), then goes into bankruptcy, our formerly separate and shielded money would be tied up in bankruptcy proceedings for years.
Funny how that was not made public by any Main Stream Media that I'm aware of.
Also, in case you don't already know, proof is already in that the $700 billion bailout won't work. On Monday, the FED provided an additional $620-630 BILLION in liquidity - and the market still tanked 777 points. The FED has already pumped over 1.5 Trillion into this Ponzi scheme over the last month and it's had no real effect. You can't change garbage into gold - no matter how much fantasy you employ!
HeadBasher: Yes, isn't that funny (and not funny hah-hah). The Fed goes ahead and pumps out a bunch of fake funds regardless, and . . . crickets chirp. Unfreakinbelievable.
beats by dr dre rycgcwkd beats by dre phhcdejd beats dr dre swkxnijw beats for sale nzpadscl beats headphones uabskivf cheap monster beats bymhunoo dr dre beats jvavoqsw dr dre headphones zyvbkimu monster beats by dre ycdlkvuz monster beats headphones hdxupbmw monster beats nezehkry monster headphones vkawqiyk
coach outlet njibcsqe coach usa xjzntcdh coach factory outlet ymbbujdi coach factory mfwxicde
Post a Comment