And this is why I don't like McCain

[Tex]

Just when I think I've heard enough pansy talk from Obama and Hillary to move to McCain's defense, he goes and does something like this:

McCain will unveil plan to help homeowners who have 'burdensome' mortgages

During a business roundtable today in Brooklyn, Republican presidential candidate John McCain will propose what he calls a HOME plan that would give "every deserving American family or homeowner the opportunity to trade a burdensome mortgage for a manageable loan that reflects the market value of their home."

As one reader on the Corner said: "I have a plan for people with burdensome mortgages: Sell the house and move into something you can afford."

Amen.

The nanny state is upon us.

[Venkman]

Originally Posted by Tex

Just when I think I've heard enough pansy talk from Obama and Hillary to move to McCain's defense, he goes and does something like this:



As one reader on the Corner said: "I have a plan for people with burdensome mortgages: Sell the house and move into something you can afford."

Amen.

The nanny state is upon us.

I don't see how he can call himself a Reagan conservative with a straight face.

[exUte]

Originally Posted by Tex

Just when I think I've heard enough pansy talk from Obama and Hillary to move to McCain's defense, he goes and does something like this:



As one reader on the Corner said: "I have a plan for people with burdensome mortgages: Sell the house and move into something you can afford."

Amen.

The nanny state is upon us.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/10/news...ex.htm?cnn=yes

$25B to homebuilders? $150B for counseling? Couldn't the homebuilders have saved some of their huge profits for a rainy day. Hey, for $1B I'll give every homeowner some counseling on a single postcard: don't spend money you don't have and don't spend more than you earn.

And McCain's solution is to readjust the devalued value of homes and readjust? Who pays for the writedown in value? The mortgage company (which they will then step in to bail out) or the taxpayer?

This is friggin joke.

[Tex]

David Freddoso:

Mind you, the banks stand to lose money if people default. They already have an incentive to help out homeowners with marginal finances through short-sales or restructuring. But now the government will make the banks' job easier by guaranteeing the bad loans they made in boom-times. If the mortgage-holders default, the taxpayer is on the hook. And if they don't default, then (at least as I read the above) the government somehow starts owning part of their home or receiving part of their payment. In the best case, Uncle Sam will go into the business of realty and/or usury.

McCain says that his plan would be limited to primary residences and to those who apply for the program. This is only to say that it is a bad idea with a more limited scope and fewer perverse incentives than the Democrats' plan, which could actually encourage homeowners to default.

The solution to the mortgage "crisis" is to let the banks lose money and let homeowners who took bad risks become renters with deservedly bad credit ratings. They had their chance, didn't they? If we want to "bail them out," simply forgive them the taxes owe on the difference between their loan and foreclosure sale price. Then we'll finally find a bottom, and worthy borrowers and longtime renters with good credit will have a shot at owning a home for a reasonable price.

We're wanting the federal government to insure against market loss and protect us from the business cycle.

This is socialism, folks.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Venkman

I don't see how he can call himself a Reagan conservative with a straight face.

Nor do I.

Perhaps he's counting on the general masses not knowing what a Reagan conservative really is.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by Tex

David Freddoso:
We're wanting the federal government to insure against market loss and protect us from the business cycle.

This is socialism, folks.

Correction. They want to protect the poor and "middle class" from the business cycle and make the "rich" pay for it. And now "rich" is apparently defined as an AGI of $110K if you're married. Give mea freakin' break.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

David Freddoso:



We're wanting the federal government to insure against market loss and protect us from the business cycle.

This is socialism, folks.

Is there some sort of conservative class you people attend entitled "What socialism isn't, and how to totally misapply the term"?

[MikeWaters]

I'm very much against a bailout. It is DAMAGING to prop up prices. For the real estate market to be healthy, the prices have to move. And they need to move down. The prices had gotten out of control.

[Tex]

More on this from Larry Kudlow today:

Why does it seem to me that all Washington ever seems to talk about these days is bailouts? Bailout Freddie Mac. Bailout Fannie Mae. Bailout Wall Street. Bailout homeowners. Is it possible in America today that no one is allowed to fail?

You know, Phil Gramm was right. We are a nation of whiners. No one wants to believe that failure is an option anymore. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Or learning from your mistakes? Or going through transformative difficulties that just might change your life and your behavior? But it seems like failure is off the board nowadays and that it’s government’s job to rescue everybody.

And:

Of course, the great thing about America is that you can fail many times, pick yourself up, keep on trying, and then succeed beyond your wildest dreams. But this whole process is being subverted by the political attitude that no one must ever be allowed to fail. I don’t like it. It’s socialism, isn’t it? Perhaps it’s big-government socialism. Or maybe it’s corporate socialism. Or maybe (with Fan and Fred) it’s Republican socialism.

No, I guess it’s really bipartisan socialism.

Amen, brotha.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...M4YmU2MDQ2ZTI=

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Tex

Just when I think I've heard enough pansy talk from Obama and Hillary to move to McCain's defense, he goes and does something like this:



As one reader on the Corner said: "I have a plan for people with burdensome mortgages: Sell the house and move into something you can afford."

Amen.

The nanny state is upon us.

as long as he gets your vote he doesn't care what you think. He won't get my vote. Neither will Obama.