Political Insider

By What now???

February 9, 2009 2:18 PM | Link to this

I’m divorced and over the $75,000 cap, so I get little if anything in this bill other than to pay for someone’s bad judgment and excesses. So my question to Mr. Klugman is “what do you call a government that takes substantially more taxes from “producers” and gives it to the “nonproducers”…oh wait, I know, a marxist/socialist government.

There would be NO mortgage crisis if everyone paid their mortgages. Instead, they made unwise (read STUPID) decisions about buying more house than they could afford, thinking that inflation would bail them out. Now they are wanting those of us who bought what we could afford to pay for their bad judgment. How is that fair? I’ve lived for the last six years in a modest suburban home, and often struggling, while I saw many people get those adjustable rate mortgages, then got 2nd mortgages, on house much nicer than mine, while they had half of my income. Now THEY get rewarded at my expense, again.

Is there anyone out there other than me who think people should reap the rewards or the consequences for their good/bad judgment?

By Greg

February 9, 2009 2:21 PM | Link to this

Whats Krugman smoking??..”a $15,000 bonus to affluent people”. The bill is for owner- occupied properties only…..10% of the sales price up to $15,000 I hardly call the rich……….we talking $150,000.

By Big t

February 9, 2009 2:22 PM | Link to this

‘WHO CAN WE TRUST IN WASHINTON’ ???

By NoMarxFan

February 9, 2009 2:23 PM | Link to this

Well if Paul Krugman is against this then I am all for the measure. Did Mr Krugman list who or what entity was paying for his opinion this time?

If the goal is to jump start the economy, make work jobs from the government dole 18 months out will do nothing. Real stimulus will come from returning the siezed money from those who earned it so they can in fact decide for themselves what to spend. Sort of eliminate the inefficient middle man.

By big t

February 9, 2009 2:24 PM | Link to this

‘Who can we TRUST in Washington’ ??

By One Man's View

February 9, 2009 2:24 PM | Link to this

I’ve been saying it to my friends for the last year, the economy is just not bad enough to break the stranglehold that the rich and their lackeys have had on the rest of us for the last 15 yrs or so. I guess when we get to 20 % unemployment, maybe we can get the fat cats out of the Senate and we can start some redistribution downward instead of the upward form. But I won’t make a bet on that. Obama does not stand a chance in this climate. Maybe Jeb Bush can turn us around. How about Newtie? I wonder what Lincoln thinks looking down at all the foolish people.

By oogabooga

February 9, 2009 2:25 PM | Link to this

Why do people cite the Nobel Prize like it’s something special. Heck, even Al Gore got one for selling snake oil. Er, it’s 65 in the ATL today, it must be that global warming, again. LOL

By big t

February 9, 2009 2:26 PM | Link to this

‘Who can we TRUST in Washington’ ??

By mc

February 9, 2009 2:27 PM | Link to this

Amen to “What now?” Why did people imagine inflation would bail them out when, at the time, the inflation rate was very low? Were they already planning on this inflationary mega-spending plan?

By MP

February 9, 2009 2:30 PM | Link to this

The problem with Paul is he’s never really happy with much and he view most things through a partisan lens. He’s also never had to make the tough decisions around line item budgeting - he’s on the sidelines and not happy with Democrats or Repubs. He is not a dumb guy by any means, he just often overstates his argument and is so partisan that his arguments seem one-sided and provincial. I do realize that controvery sells and balanced thinking is not exactly exciting. We need to reward prudence and proactivitiy - not the opposite. It’s hard to argue that people don’t have free-choice and volition.

By kellyp

February 9, 2009 2:31 PM | Link to this

As a renter (20 years) that has been saving and saving looking for a home to buy that i can afford with a fixed rate loan this will help me greatly with the purchase of a home. I have never gotten a loan for anything else. I have bought several new cars with cash, put myself through college including graduate school without grants or loans and have always used my credit card like a debit card (traditionally they have certain consumer protection features that debit cards have not had).

I bet that a lot of people will figure out how to abuse this proposed amendment and claim these homes they are flipping as their primary residence (they may even live in them while they are fixing them up with new paint).

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 2:34 PM | Link to this

The bill was supposed to work in conjunction with this idea.

Time to Bailout Main Street

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/time-to-bailout-main-street

Yet the Dems refused to even let this idea come to a vote.

By Jeffisonline

February 9, 2009 2:34 PM | Link to this

hehe, NYT. That says it all. A struggling newspaper who makes money off donations instead of sales. No wonder they have a skewed sense of economics.

By not for the thugs

February 9, 2009 2:36 PM | Link to this

I think it would be fine if it was adjusted on ONE HOME PERIOD Like first time buyers. Not Multi homes, there are people out there buying up as many homes as they can. If this has it where they can get the 15K on each there is a problem. Sorry rethuglicans you can’t have it all. You already messed the nation up enough.

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 2:36 PM | Link to this

The bill was supposed to work in conjunction with this idea.

Time to Bailout Main Street

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/time-to-bailout-main-street

Yet the Dems refused to even let this idea come to a vote.

By GaLiberal

February 9, 2009 2:39 PM | Link to this

By What now??? There would be NO mortgage crisis if everyone paid their mortgages. Instead, they made unwise (read STUPID) decisions about buying more house than they could afford, thinking that inflation would bail them out.

Oh really? What are your facts? How do you back up your assertions that stupid people caused the banking crisis? Like a typical Rethuglicon butt-sniffer you can’t because it simply isn’t true. The run-up on housing prices was caused in large part from the low (subprime) rates being offered by banks. These banks were looking to cash in on 1) higher returns from loans when they adjusted and 2) higher housing prices if they foreclosed. But you can only do that for so long and then like a Ponsi scheme it crashes. Yes, people were lured into buying more home than they needed, but at the time they could afford the payments. Only when the payments when up and they couldn’t refi without more money did it become a problem. I certainly don’t blame people that were making an honest effort to keep up their payments, but at some point it becomes too much and you’re forced to default. Much of it is being driven by people losing their jobs. Some is due to high medical costs and they have no health insurance. Of all the defaults, only a very small portion was due to unqualified buyers. But, that’s what everyone focuses on because the Rethuglicon-controlled media (web, talk radio, print, and Faxu News) keeps pushing it as the cause. And good little butt-sniffers like you believe them.

When you vote Rethuglicon, you vote against your own best interests. And What now??? is living proof.

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 2:39 PM | Link to this

The bill was supposed to work in conjunction with this idea.

Time to Bailout Main Street

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/time-to-bailout-main-street

Yet the Dems refused to even let this idea come to a vote.

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 2:39 PM | Link to this

The bill was supposed to work in conjunction with this idea.

Time to Bailout Main Street

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/time-to-bailout-main-street

Yet the Dems refused to even let this idea come to a vote.

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 2:40 PM | Link to this

The bill was supposed to work in conjunction with this idea.

Time to Bailout Main Street

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/time-to-bailout-main-street

Yet the Dems refused to even let this idea come to a vote.

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 2:41 PM | Link to this

The bill was supposed to work in conjunction with this idea.

Time to Bailout Main Street

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/time-to-bailout-main-street

Yet the Dems refused to even let this idea come to a vote.

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 2:41 PM | Link to this

The bill was supposed to work in conjunction with this idea.

Time to Bailout Main Street

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/time-to-bailout-main-street

Yet the Dems refused to even let this idea come to a vote.

By Jcy

February 9, 2009 2:42 PM | Link to this

The problem that they will run into is people don’t have the 3.5% or 5% to put down due to (401k is worth crap, unemployed perhaps or fear of) the markets and fear losing their jobs. Guidelines are already strict now to get a loan so, people that shouldn’t be buying a home won’t be approved now anyway. They need to help out with the downpayment and link it that way. The bill also states I believe that you cannot sell the home for 2yrs otherwise you have to pay back the $15k.

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 2:42 PM | Link to this

The bill was supposed to work in conjunction with this idea.

Time to Bailout Main Street

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/time-to-bailout-main-street

Yet the Dems refused to even let this idea come to a vote.

By GaLiberal

February 9, 2009 2:43 PM | Link to this

By What now??? There would be NO mortgage crisis if everyone paid their mortgages. Instead, they made unwise (read STUPID) decisions about buying more house than they could afford, thinking that inflation would bail them out.

Oh really? What are your facts? How do you back up your assertions that stupid people caused the banking crisis? Like a typical Rethuglicon butt-sniffer you can’t because it simply isn’t true. The run-up on housing prices was caused in large part from the low (subprime) rates being offered by banks. These banks were looking to cash in on 1) higher returns from loans when they adjusted and 2) higher housing prices if they foreclosed. But you can only do that for so long and then like a Ponsi scheme it crashes. Yes, people were lured into buying more home than they needed, but at the time they could afford the payments. Only when the payments when up and they couldn’t refi without more money did it become a problem. I certainly don’t blame people that were making an honest effort to keep up their payments, but at some point it becomes too much and you’re forced to default. Much of it is being driven by people losing their jobs. Some is due to high medical costs and they have no health insurance. Of all the defaults, only a very small portion was due to unqualified buyers. But, that’s what everyone focuses on because the Rethuglicon-controlled media (web, talk radio, print, and Faxu News) keeps pushing it as the cause. And good little butt-sniffers like you believe them.

When you vote Rethuglicon, you vote against your own best interests. And What now??? is living proof.

By ama duggal

February 9, 2009 2:43 PM | Link to this

Right now every thing is on freeze. With congressman’s plan, at least Rich will get help ! at least it unfreezes the system !!! Poor belong in refrigerator any way !!

By reality is liberal-based

February 9, 2009 2:47 PM | Link to this

What now, what do you call someone who is so uninformed about where his/her tax money goes/spent? I called them “a typical whining and self-centered authoritarian following conservative”

The “producers” you idiot are those of us who work for a paycheck! Without us their isn’t a vibrant economy as we are seeing now. Fliping a house does not make you a “producer”. In fact, peddling overvalued houses is what help accelerate the current housing mess. People with no intentions of staying in homes, buying them, driving up the price….and cost of the crazy loans….and then taking the money.

Well the money is all gone now, the bubble has burst, and what do these so call “producers” do…they come to the government and ask for tax money just like the banks. They should take their losses just like many working families have had to do.

You also forgot to mention that banks, who we now let also be investment houses, created these sub-prime loans, not the working people who dared to want a home. You also fail to mention, and the Wall Street Journal and government and bank records show, that most of the people who got those sub prime loans, some 60%, had the credit to get prime loans. But they were given those crazy loans because brokers, and investors made tons of money making securities out of the loans.

You need to know the facts. I know conservatives are fact-averse, y’all like to keep repeating whatever some hack on Fox or Limbaugh tells you, but it’s truth time now. Stop blaming the housing crisis on minorities and poor people, and start sharing the blame with your definition of “producers”. This “the rich can do no wrong, let’s give them more tax breaks so we working people pay more taxes” is dumb dumb dumb.

But things are going to be fixed. The country is tired of trickle-down. The country understands now that Wall Street and the so call free market are greedy messes and cannot be trusted with essential things that government must do.

You conservatives can obstruct only so long, because reality is painful right now for so many people. And conservatives, still angry from their defeat, and always angry at something, are once again in the way. You folks don’t want to do anything but the same things that got us into this mess. That way y’all can run in 2010 saying nothing has changed.

But in 2010 you will lose badly, just as you did in 2006 and 2008. You will loses enough Senate seats so that working people can have their tax dollars work for them and the non producing, thieves we’ve been giving every break to will now have to pay their fare share.It’s coming, y’all can joke and say all the typical nasty things y’all love to say, but people are done listening and are going to reject you time and again so long as you don’t recognize and take care of the real “producers” and that working people.

By What now???

February 9, 2009 2:52 PM | Link to this

GALiberal

People bought more house than they could afford. They KNEW that ARM’s could rise and they did it anyway and now want to blame everyone but themselves for the mess THEY put themselves in. You repeatedly demonstrate that liberals think that no one should be responsible for themselves, that the government should try to fix every bad mistake THEY make.

It doesn’t work that way GALiberal. IFor the record, I’m not a Republican or a Democrat…but I am smart enough to know that people should not spend more than they make, and that if they want more, they should do like I have and work for it. And before you start with your “rich, born with a silver spoon in your mouth white boy crap”, my father died when I was 7, and I grew up in an 8” by 45” foot trailer. I got through college working and sacrificing, and my total inheritance so far in my 50+ years is $123. What I have, I had to work and sacrifice for. I did not hope the government would come along with a spare boob to feed me and clothe me. Your liberal friends ought to try work sometime…instead of expecting those of us who have to just give it to them.

By Drew

February 9, 2009 3:00 PM | Link to this

Paul Krugman is an avowed socialist and doesn’t believe in private property (except his own). There’s no news here.

By bigdawg88

February 9, 2009 3:06 PM | Link to this

After thinking about it, I don’t really like Isakson’s idea. Home prices are so low now that you save more than $15K due to the lower prices. The point of a stimulus bill is to encourage spending that wouldn’t normally take place. I don’t think this is going to push anyone to buy a home who wasn’t already thinking about it anyway.
Lower interest rates and prices will eventually stimulate home buying. If you already own a house, who the heck wants to buy one now?

AND you can still use this to flip a house. All you have to do is buy a house, live in it for 2.5 years (while renting your old house), then when the economy picks up you sell it and move back into your old house. Pocket $15K in tax cuts plus the profit you made. Come on guys, Johnny is a realtor. And his logic behind the bill is flawed.

By Paul

February 9, 2009 3:10 PM | Link to this

Krugman is an idiot. Both Arafat and Gore won the Nobel Prizes so don’t hand me this _ .

By reality is liberal-based

February 9, 2009 3:10 PM | Link to this

What Now, you may not be an official Republican, but you obviously support their ideology and policy. So what is the point of saying you aren’t one? Give us break. It if talks and acts like a Republican, that’s what it is.

Spare us your story. There are millions of hard working people that didn’t come from money and they have gotten hurt due to Republican policy.You are one of those who believe the government does nothing but gives it to minorities(who work too).

Sorry, but you aren’t special. Your bitterness about your circumstances is misdirected. It is the conservatives who screwed things up, not liberals.You need to understand that basic fact, but your bitterness is blocking your thinking.

Look at who the Republicans are benefiting in this stimulus package, it mostly rich people and rich people who got greedy and now are wanting government assistance(your tax dollars) to keep them from feeling the pain you and many of us feel.

Liberal is no longer a dirty world outside a few southern and plain states. Look at the map, people are waking up and want change and don’t give a hoot about political labels. It’s the policies that matter. And the truth is, when given control over all the government, Republicans failed in a massive way domestically and in foreign policy. That’s the truth.

Those who failed are not going to be trusted with governing until they come up with some new ideas, not new tax cuts for the rich, but new ideas that help working people, even ones like yourself who don’t recognize you’re on the wrong side.

By GT 81

February 9, 2009 3:14 PM | Link to this

Look you guys, if we provide for the rich investors, then benefits will trickle down to everyone else! Haven’t you been paying attention? Why is that so complicated to understand?

By Oh Boy

February 9, 2009 3:19 PM | Link to this

I love you morons somehow insinuating that the Nobel Prize means nothing because Al Gore won it. Personal feelings aside, Al Gore is a brilliant man. The people that decide upon the Nobel prize are much brighter than some rubes in Marietta. For those disparaging Gore who i do not even much care for i ask you this: What is the last book you read? Romance novel? Michael Savage? A Tom Clancy page turner??

By Oh Boy

February 9, 2009 3:22 PM | Link to this

I love you morons somehow insinuating that the Nobel Prize means nothing because Al Gore won it. Personal feelings aside, Al Gore is a brilliant man. The people that decide upon the Nobel prize are much brighter than some rubes in Marietta. For those disparaging Gore who i do not even much care for i ask you this: What is the last book you read? Romance novel? Michael Savage? A Tom Clancy page turner??

By Oh Boy

February 9, 2009 3:23 PM | Link to this

I love you morons somehow insinuating that the Nobel Prize means nothing because Al Gore won it. Personal feelings aside, Al Gore is a brilliant man. The people that decide upon the Nobel prize are much brighter than some rubes in Marietta. For those disparaging Gore who i do not even much care for i ask you this: What is the last book you read? Romance novel? Michael Savage? A Tom Clancy page turner??

By Paul

February 9, 2009 3:28 PM | Link to this

Krugman is an idiot. Both Arafat and Gore won the Nobel Prizes so don’t hand me this _ .

By phil

February 9, 2009 3:28 PM | Link to this

GT, the Laffer curve and supply side economics have never worked. It is eveident from the financial crisis the US is in, now. give money to the wealthy and it does not trickle down, it goes into their pocket.

By JLK

February 9, 2009 3:35 PM | Link to this

It’s the rich house-flippers, and other assorted investor types, who’ll be donating generously to Senator Isakson’s re-election campaign. Senator Isakson’s people are always very polite in acknowledging letters and emails. But make no mistake: If you can’t attach a check or guarantee a congregation or organization’s vote, ASK NOT FOR WHOM SENATOR ISAKSON SERVES, it ain’t you.

By markscottmusic.com

February 9, 2009 3:42 PM | Link to this

From unwed mothers popping out new babies every year to people who bought houses they couldn’t afford to Wall Street execs ruining their companies and the economy and still getting bail out money — I’m tired of paying for other people’s bad choices. It seems if you play by the rules, pay your bills and manage your family size, budget, etc. well, you get nothing. Mess up repeatedly and make one bad choice after another and you get a bailout. Guess what — people who are given hand outs — from the richest to the poorest — never learn. Let them live with their mess until they figure out how to make better choices.

By reality is liberal-based

February 9, 2009 3:43 PM | Link to this

Folks there is no Nobel Prize for Economics! You’re all kinda wrong. The Nobel people who gave Jimmy C and Gore and MLK their prizes, and gives out prizes for Science and stuff, does not sanction or give out a prize for economics. So it really is a quasi-Nobel Prize he won.

Look it up, it’s just called a “Nobel Prize” for Economics.

By What now???

February 9, 2009 3:44 PM | Link to this

Reality

*It’s the policies that matter. And the truth is, when given control over all the government, Republicans failed in a massive way domestically and in foreign policy. That’s the truth.

Those who failed are not going to be trusted with governing until they come up with some new ideas*

Actually, I would not totally disagree with this statement. I think both sides of the aisle have done an atrocious job the last eight years. I personally do not agree with tax cuts for the rich, nor do I agree with giving tax credits to people who paid no income taxes. I do not agree with Johnny Isakson’s proposal, nor do I agree with those who have espoused reducing the amounts of the mortgages for those who are facing foreclosure. I do not believe in massive bailouts of the banking industry without CEO’s giving up their unconsciousable salaries and bonuses, but I do not believe in funding abortion clinics either.

The plain fact is that I believe there should be a flat tax, and I believed that even when I did not earn that much. I believe that people should be on a level playing field tax wise, and that people should be rewarded for contributions, not irresponsibility.

Bottom line, I believe that people should not expect anything they are not willing to work for unless they have some physical disability. I do not believe that the rich nor the poor should be exceptions. People should be rewarded for hard work, not entitlement.

Now, I have to go back to work.

By Reality

February 9, 2009 3:46 PM | Link to this

Working for a business that provides your name on your shirt is not what we would call drivers of the economy. These people are certainly not going to pull us out a recession. These people can’t park cars much less aspire to anything greater…….

By caz1158

February 9, 2009 3:47 PM | Link to this

If we listen to GayLiberal (thank god some of us have brains),he would have you believe that the mess we are in (country)is largly in part due to republicans. GayLib, get a clue. It has been well documented that the mess was due to the incompetance of both parties and greedy people in the private sector. Next time do all us a big favor and research before speaking. A brain is terible thing to waste,try using the one God gave you!!!

By What now???

February 9, 2009 3:50 PM | Link to this

markscottmusic.com

That is the point…people should not be rewarded for bad choices, whether Democrat or Republican, Liberal or Conservative. Where is the bailout line, maybe we should just “drink from the poisoned well” too.

By Yikes

February 9, 2009 3:51 PM | Link to this

Hey markscottmusic,

Country music like yours sucks and way to pimp your crap on political blog. What a douche.

By Mr Fury

February 9, 2009 3:58 PM | Link to this

I would wager that Paul Krugman does his taxes the same way our esteemed treasury secretary does his. This blowhard is nothing but an idealistic nut job who wants government to control everything. The real sad thing is that we have a tax system written for tax dodgers. It is laughable when they say they are raising taxes then they write about 20 different laws for tax write offs that only the rich can use. just goes to show how many suckers there are in America.

By G'TOWN DUDE

February 9, 2009 3:58 PM | Link to this

Good grief…

We’re doomed.

By caz1158

February 9, 2009 4:04 PM | Link to this

Lets see-Trickle up economics, oh yeah that’ll work. Poor creates jobs as opposed to people with wealth. It used to be said that if you work hard,mind your P’s & Q’s that success was achieveable. Now the thaought is,do what you can and the government and the rich will be responsible for the rest. Success is no longer something to strive for.If you’ve succeeded you must be a bad person unless you make sure everyone else succeeds. The American Dream has just gone up in smoke!

By David

February 9, 2009 4:09 PM | Link to this

Reality Liberal

The real reality is that many people don’t actually pay taxes.

So if you don’t pay taxes how can you receive a tax cut?

That is why as the media likes to say people who make more money get bigger tax cuts. Oh that and the simple math that a percentage down from a large number is bigger than that same percentage down from a smaller number.

If if you believe in product differentiation and having the ability to choose what you want to buy… give employers a differentiated product and improve yourself in some fashion that warrants that they pay you more money….

and then turn around and give the government that difference….

By New Contributor

February 9, 2009 4:15 PM | Link to this

I have never felt compelled to write anything on these blogs. Most of the time I’m ashamed of myself for even reading them. They tend to be idealogues on both side slinging mud. Not sure why they’re even allowed since there is next to NO journalistic value to any of the posts. Which brings me to why I feel compelled to write so that those that guiltily read these blogs are not influenced by the erroneous charges both sides are spewing.

1) The $15000 tax credit is for any home buyer (first time or not) that buys a home within 12 months of the ratified law. 2) It is only used ONCE for a primary residence (cannot be used for multiple homes as suggested). 3) The home must be held for two years or it must be repaid (thus it eliminates “flippers” as suggested) 4) Not sure how this “benefits the rich”. I don’t think a one time $15,000 tax credit is what people are referring to when they say “the rich get richer”. Don’t get me wrong, to me $15000 is a lot of money, but I believe to those to whom you show such disdain it really isn’t.

Again, I apologize (mostly to myself) for reading this dribble. I feel like I am dumber for it.

By itpdude

February 9, 2009 4:20 PM | Link to this

Houseflippers should not be the main beneficiary’s of this mess, for sure. But fact of the matter is if it does motivate houseflippers to buy homes and fix them up, that stimulates the economy. The drywallers, the painters, the HD and LOWES and all that. That means jobs.

I don’t know if this is the most effective use of the money, but it does go to stimulating the economy.

By Kennesaw Dave

February 9, 2009 4:28 PM | Link to this

“Now What” There is someone who believes people ought to reep what they sew and that’s me. You hit the nail on the head with your post. But don’t let that columnist get you too riled up. After all, it’s The New York Times, what do you expect from the leading liberal rag. I don’t know if it would take an act of congress to do what I think should be done or if Obama could order the tresury dept to do this on his own, but if Obama wanted to get his presidency started off on a good note and stimulate the economy at the same time he’d be wise to lower the tax that’s imposed on businesses to do business over here. We have the 2nd highest business tax in the world. If we lowered to say 20-25% More businesses would establish themselves over here. And gee let’s see more businesses open in the US= more jobs=better economy=lower unemployment rates. Wow, I’m not even a Harvard grad like Obama and I figured that one out.

By Leon Logan

February 9, 2009 4:31 PM | Link to this

WHAT NOW blames our fiscal problems all on the sub prime mortgages. What now needs to do some studying of serious economic evaluation. According to the majority of main stream economists the primary factor of our problems was caused by the so called ‘shadow banking’institutions that were not regulated indulging in risky behavior.Rush Limbaugh and conservative talk shows are NOT a source of information. How many of them have been awarded the Nobel Prize. Tea Sipper

By MRTRUTH

February 9, 2009 4:32 PM | Link to this

First to OHBOY: Jimmy Carter, Yasser Arafat, Al Gore - all Nobel Prize winners. Need I say more!

For all of you with your hand out: If you took all the money from the producers and gave it to you leftist all of the money would flow right back to people who work hard.

Tax cuts for the rich: If you believe in such a thing then you are an idiot. Go to the IRS.gov web site and see who pays the taxes.

The 15,000.00 tax cuts are for people who will live in the houses three years

By Concerned oldtimer

February 9, 2009 4:43 PM | Link to this

Since when can debt be paid off by borrowing more money. The morgage issue was caused because banks were forced to give loans to people unable to pay for them. Or even people who acctually commited fraud to get them. I know if we were allowed to spend our own money, we the people could do a better job than government. All we are doing is creating another generation dependant on the government and unable to help themselves.

By Justine

February 9, 2009 4:45 PM | Link to this

Want to solve the home problem quick. congress should mandate that interest on homes be calculated the same way it is on car loans and other loans. This would put $100s a month in the pocket of home owners.

The $15K tax credit is just that a tax credit. You will have to owe $15K in taxes for it to make a difference. Not too many people making under $75k owe that much. Why not give $15K to every homeowner to exlusively pay down their mortgage or catch up on their payments.

First of all middle class people are now learning how hard it is for those who have lived for years off minimum wage. They are also learning how hard it is for those who WORK and receive assistance because things are so high. In the 1960s we were raised on minimum wage and it was a livable wage. However, what many do not understand is that many of these government “assistant” plans help the rich get richer. Rent is high in Atlanta because Section 8 pays so much. Who benefits from Section 8 - landllords.

But this is about home loans and foreclosures. He is the problem. Home builders and banks made a fortune during the real estate boom. Now that it is over they are crying about the foreclosures. But many of these foreclosures became that way because the banks refused to work with the homeowner because the loan was government insured. Here is my answer, pay the banks 40% of the price of the foreclosed home.

By oh boy

February 9, 2009 4:49 PM | Link to this

Mr. Truth,

You just proved my point you retard. Your personal political feelings do not take away from the brillance of another. All three of the people you mentioned are obviously very inteligent. The fact that you can not diferentiate between the two shows exactly how high your inteligence is.

By Bigdawg 96

February 9, 2009 4:51 PM | Link to this

What now

Everybody played a part in this economic mess, not just the subprime borrowers. They couldn’t take money that wasn’t offered in the first place by the lenders.

Greed by everyone caused this mess.

You, me, and our neighbor caused this mess. Housing is just one part of it.

As employees, we want to get paid and get benefits and the whole nine. However, that is overhead for a business owner. If you haven’t taken a look at health insurance costs, you should. It isn’t cheap. Then, some companies matched retirement funds such as 401K or profitsharing. That is more overheard. Then, we want the most vacation days off. That is more overhead. Last, but not least, we want our salary. That is more overhead.

The business owner still has to get the materials for the product(s) sold. That overhead is also rising. It leaves the business owner with no choice but to look elsewhere for cheaper labor. The owner wants to get paid, too.

The free market system put the American worker against the world labor force. WE LOST. We don’t manufacture most of our own stuff own stuff. Clinton (Democrat) signed NAFTA and opened up the borders for our jobs to leave the US but stay in the same continent.

Greed by lenders. Greed by workers, Greed by borrowers, Greed by business owners caused this mess. In other words, we all caused it and we all have to pay for it.

By Datominator

February 9, 2009 4:53 PM | Link to this

The problem is, Krugman/Reid/Pelosi are playing to the crowd that gets excited when they hear words like income redistribution, socialism. The types that think that anyone who is rich inherited it or cheated their way to it (forget their having worked hard for it - doesn’t even enter into their fevered little brains). Why give a credit to people buying a house (which would generate more housing starts, which would be the single biggest factor in any recovery, imo) when you can give $4 billion to ACORN?

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 4:54 PM | Link to this

Krugman Again Proves The Nobel Committee Clueless; Isakson Demonstrates Markets Do Work

Today’s New York Times features Paul Krugman continuing his role in the Obama propaganda machine while pretending to be an Economist. In today’s installment of “I have a Nobel, so I must know Economics”, Krugman lashes out at “The Destructive Center”.

Before I spend a few paragraphs taking issue with Krugman’s direct points, I think we first have to reflect on how far we’ve come as a country. Just one decade ago, it was a “vast right wing conspiracy” that was the enemy of the left, the only thing holding them back from a collectivist utopia. Today, the “destructive center” is thwarting their attainment of nirvana. These poor guys just can’t seem to catch a break.

Krugman first frames the stimulus bill as a bill that “eliminates hundreds of thousands of American jobs, deprives millions of adequate health care and nutrition, (and) undermines schools”. It’s usually rich enough when the government can’t spend enough crowd calls a reduction in the growth of next year’s trendline a “cut”, but seriously, we’re now resulting to calling trimming $900 Billion in off-budget, new spending to a pittance under $800 Billion a cut? Really? Spending $800 Million on pet projects of the democratic machine is depriving millions of adequate healthcare? Blowing almost $1 Trillion “undermines schools”? Why exactly must we pass this bill today if it will “eliminate hundreds of thousands of American jobs”?

As usual, these guys would be hysterically humorous if they weren’t trying to see how fast they could crater what’s left of our economic system. [click to continue…]

http://www.peachpundit.com/2009/02/09/krugman-again-proves-the-nobel-committee-clueless-isakson-demonstrates-markets-do-work/

By John Konop

February 9, 2009 4:56 PM | Link to this

Krugman Again Proves The Nobel Committee Clueless; Isakson Demonstrates Markets Do Work

Today’s New York Times features Paul Krugman continuing his role in the Obama propaganda machine while pretending to be an Economist. In today’s installment of “I have a Nobel, so I must know Economics”, Krugman lashes out at “The Destructive Center”.

Before I spend a few paragraphs taking issue with Krugman’s direct points, I think we first have to reflect on how far we’ve come as a country. Just one decade ago, it was a “vast right wing conspiracy” that was the enemy of the left, the only thing holding them back from a collectivist utopia. Today, the “destructive center” is thwarting their attainment of nirvana. These poor guys just can’t seem to catch a break.

Krugman first frames the stimulus bill as a bill that “eliminates hundreds of thousands of American jobs, deprives millions of adequate health care and nutrition, (and) undermines schools”. It’s usually rich enough when the government can’t spend enough crowd calls a reduction in the growth of next year’s trendline a “cut”, but seriously, we’re now resulting to calling trimming $900 Billion in off-budget, new spending to a pittance under $800 Billion a cut? Really? Spending $800 Million on pet projects of the democratic machine is depriving millions of adequate healthcare? Blowing almost $1 Trillion “undermines schools”? Why exactly must we pass this bill today if it will “eliminate hundreds of thousands of American jobs”?

As usual, these guys would be hysterically humorous if they weren’t trying to see how fast they could crater what’s left of our economic system. [click to continue…]

http://www.peachpundit.com/2009/02/09/krugman-again-proves-the-nobel-committee-clueless-isakson-demonstrates-markets-do-work/

By reality is liberal-based

February 9, 2009 5:08 PM | Link to this

Look, to all the Conservatives and Libertarian enablers, and “Republican-leaning” Independents, you FAILED!

I believe nothing much you say, and I certainly don’t want you running the government again until you accept responsibility for your actions. Yes, that’s right, political choices and their consequences is behavior just like smoking crack.

When you people show enough character to ‘fess up to what y’all have done, and how we got into these messes, then I will give you a listen.But you can’t practice what you preach about responsibility so New Contributor, is right, shame on me for even bothering to try and discuss things with you.

Look, people don’t care about labels anymore and bashing the poor really is so 1980’s. Few politicians even talk about the poor anymore. Obama rarely mentioned them. It’s all about the Middle Class, and that’s ok because thanks to Republican policies, more hard working, god-fearing folk are joining the ranks of the poor every day.

You people are addicted to your angry and hatered of poor people, minorities, etc… But they didn’t mess things up. Change is coming and you need to start dealing with that.

Come 2010 the number of Republican Senators will decrease to the point where you are practically irrelevant. You guys are making sure of that with your behavior so far. See you in 2010!

By zack

February 9, 2009 5:15 PM | Link to this

Wow, so proud to be from Georgia !! Most uneducated selfish responses…oh, that’s right, God said not to help the poor or less fortunate…they are just lazy and should get up and get a job…didn’t he give his money for a new car and Starbuck coffee/ I hope enough hick republicans lose their jobs so that they will remember what it like not to have family and be done and out !! They sure will take that unemployment from the government then though, won’t they !!

By reality is liberal-based

February 9, 2009 5:34 PM | Link to this

I hope enough hick republicans lose their jobs so that they will remember what it like not to have family and be done and out !!

They are zack, that’s why places like Indiana and North Carolina went blue. And the Republicans stalling progress now means more of them are going to be hurt and you’ll see Georgia go blue too. It’s just taken longer for the pain to hit down here, but it’s hitting now and coming more and more.

Let them talk stuff now, it’s their last gasp, their in their last throes.People can only take so much before they are forced to change.

By Steve

February 9, 2009 5:55 PM | Link to this

A perfect example of irresponsible one-sided journalism. As many others have pointed out here, Krugman’s statements are full of idiocy.

The sad part is not that Krugman is an idiot, it’s that so many people in this country will read the headline and blame Republicans, without even trying to understand the issue or think for themselves. Then again, the way most Liberals think, it’s probably a good idea that they don’t try to think for themselves.

By vuduchld

February 9, 2009 6:18 PM | Link to this

This proposal is just another give away program to people who have already taken way more than they could handle. Two years is more than enough time for an individual to still flip a home. When I bought my condo in 2005 no one gave me anything, I put down some cash, and when the time came to refi I did with no problems at all. I’ve always looked at my home as a LONG TERM investment which meant I looked in areas where I felt I could get the most bang for the buck. People got greedy, buying way too many properties while banks and builders put on their blinders. This proposal will bring back more of the same. It’s time to get real people, there is no free lunch..sorry!

By John

February 9, 2009 6:40 PM | Link to this

By GT 81

Nothing. It has not worked and it will not work. Provide for the richest and they will widen the gap between them and the poor. You and many GA posters probably think you are middle or upper class, but in reality you are closer to being poor than you are of being rich.

By David

February 9, 2009 6:59 PM | Link to this

Did Mr. Krugman even read this bill. It’s for owner occupied homes!!

By Jake

February 9, 2009 7:19 PM | Link to this

Krugman looks like a ferret. He is a big lib hack and is to be ignored. You know to stop listening to folks win they win the Nobel Peace Prize. Like Owl Gore and that collossal tool, Jimmy Carter. No, he didn’t read the bill, he just opposed the proposal because a Republican offered it. It is that simple, just like Krugman, himself.

By Jose

February 9, 2009 8:06 PM | Link to this

Bravo…now me and the rest of my illegal friends can get some immediate equity in a home. We can use that $15,000 to buy beer for a couple of months.

By Thinkwell

February 9, 2009 8:15 PM | Link to this

$15 K to buy beer? what r ya drinkin? Michelob?

By yelladawg

February 10, 2009 12:34 AM | Link to this

Contemplate this!

We are in the early stages of a world-wide depression! You people need to wake-up. The stimulus will not work. It is not enough. It should be at about $6 Trillion and nobody, not even China, has that amount to lend us. We can prop up this economy for awhile and let the air out slowly through ineffectual actions. Already, we are in the spiral brought on by a contracting economy and ideological disputes only make the process quicken.

You can be Republican, Democrat, liberal or conservative — no one will be spared by this one. We’ll have plenty of time to figure out the culprits that brought this about and there is blame within both political parties.

To get out of this, we will have to print lots of money that no one else in the world will want. Your dollars will become like water and will diminsh in value.

If you are still in stocks, slowly sell and go to cash and use it to secure your land and house — your base.

If the government offers a cheap mortgage interest rate ( 3-4%), do everything you can to obtain it — hunker down.

You may not like Obama, but he’s the smartest guy of all the choices that we had and he will steer the ship as well as anyone.

We have stormy seas ahead and if you don’t protect yourself, you will suffer.

I have some recommendations that are ideologically unacceptable now. I will post them later. Stay tuned. Selah!

If you are close to owning your home, pay it off if you can

By Copyleft

February 10, 2009 9:05 AM | Link to this

Right. We need to stop listening to smart people who know what they’re talking to. We should listen instead to supply-side idiots who CAUSED this mess in the first place.

Hey—I hear they have a great solution to this problem. Tax cuts for the rich! Great idea, huh? Huh?

By rightofcenter

February 10, 2009 10:47 AM | Link to this

Kudos to New Contributor - my vote for post of the decade! I am in full agreement with you - it is embarassing to admit that I waste my time reading these blogs where so little is contributed that is either a) intelligent b) accurate c) civil or d) original. Perhaps we can start another blog for all of the rational and courteous folks out there. Count me in!

By GA VALUES

February 10, 2009 11:40 AM | Link to this

The Washington Post today calls this a “dubious provision” that will “do little to reduce swollen inventories” of homes. But what a bonanza for real estate agents!