What percentage of homes are owned by
Posted By: illegal aliens? on 2009-02-25
In Reply to: Hmmm..... Obama supporters suddenly quiet - interesting
Does anyone have numbers?
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
There are tons of homes on the market.
More homes for sale would bring the price down. The house would be appraised at a reasonable value. Only the sincere folks should be eligible.
Many were owned by private investors who bit off more than they can chew, trying to get rich fast.
My home went up in value by 120,000 from what I paid for it, to settle at $250,000. The guy across the street sold his for that and ours are identical. Now, it is back down to about 150,000. But that is cool cuz I got it for 80,000 (fixer upper). This is calif which means a lot.
I did try to refi twice - Central Valley Mtg offered me nothing but an ARM. He wanted me to take 20,000 of equity out (He said I needed a vacation). I turned it down. (I'm a Suze Ormon fan). He actually threw his pen across the desk when I told him.
Second time, the mtg broker offered me tiered payments, just principal first year, then a low interest rate the next and over 5 years, the interest rate sours. He wanted me to take 20 grand more out to invest in the stock market (lol). Then, refi before the huge interest rates kick in. I walked away on that. He did not even offer a fixed rate. When I requested it, he made it sound like it was out of the question.
Finally, went to WAMU (which is now JP Morgan...) and they refi'ed me with a fixed rate.
Predatory lending at its best.
I cannot imagine not knowing how many homes I have
They are just living in a parallel universe. He talks big but I can tell when McBush speaks that he really doesn't "feel" the pain of the middle class or heaven forbid, the poor or the seniors on fixed incomes. That is something he will never have to feel.
My definition: Someone who doesn't know how many homes they own LOL nm
nm
The percentage I saw was not all that impressive...
considering his income, and for someone who so wants to spread the wealth. I understand that you are not concerned nor alarmed by him. That's fine. To each his own. But I am concerned and alarmed. I guess we leave it at that.
Equal percentage is right, I think....nm
nm
Did the NYT try to 'out Cheney and Rumsfelds vacation homes?' sm
Right wingers must only not believe in conspiracy theories when they are brought up by what they percieve as the left. Because many of them believe the NYT is conspiring with al-Queda against America.
Yeah.
I first saw the vacation homes of John Kerry and Pres Bush on VH1. I think they had Cheneys on there too during the 2004 presidential campaign. Were these treasonous acts as well. Come on, the VP, Rumsfeld and their wives shopping spots are not top secret information. If these folks were not so serious about this, it would be funny.
--------------------------------------
Taken from DemocraticUnderground.com
Yes, the right is actually accusing the NYT of deliberately trying to get Rumsfeld and Cheney offed. Yesterday the Times published a perfectly innocuous fluff piece in their Friday Escapes section about the town of St. Michael's where R and C both have summer homes. It showed (gasp) photos of the driveway entrances to both houses. It was a typical travel type article, full of information about crabcakes and bed and breakfast establishments, but the idiots across the right wing web are in full howl, spurred on by the loathsome David Horowitz who wrote an article in front page magazine, accusing the NYT of giving directions to Jihadists so that they could assasinate Cheney and Rumsfeld. (Let me add, that I've read dozens of pieces about the Cheney Rumsfeld home purchases in the last year. The NYT hardly broke new ground with this article)
This full bore attack on the NYT is looking more and more orchestrated. Alas, a fair number of people on the left persist in believing that the NYT is an apparatus of the administration.
I find this unrelenting attack on the Times, and by extension on ALL of the press, more than a little disturbing, and wonder if it's not a harbinger of dangerous restrictions on the first amendment.
Sigh. They pay a higher percentage because they
thousands of times more wealth than each average Joe (and I DO NOT mean the plumber). We have a progressive tax system here, American as apple pie, and Obama only wants to adjust the rate back to where it was were 8 years ago....no socialist subversion in that. We all managed to survive the economic boom of the 90s, after all.
Furthermore, before pronoucing any judgements on this issue, check out the disparities in the (here comes that CAPITALIST phrase again) distibution of wealth in the US. If you do not want to research this yourself, just say so and I will post that information for the UMPTEENTH time.
Now, before you go off, Wikipedia is not the Communist Manifesto. Go to the link and scroll down a little better than halfway and read the section on the United States. If you are in the middle class, the information there will make your blood boil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
it's a lot higher percentage than McCain's - nm
x
Start with yourself - did you donate and what percentage?
Bet that is a big no, and $0. Seeing as you're so into helping others who cannot because of no fault of their own.
I don't think anyone on this board ever said we should not help the handicapped who cannot help themselves. Most people here whether they are liberal or conservatives have compassion. It's the ones who can help themselves, who are physically and mentally able to get jobs but they won't because it's easier to sit at home and receive that welfare check. By all means I am not saying everyone on welfare can get a job, but there are a good percentage of those that can (and pay taxes to help those who can't), but why should they when they are getting it for free. And now it will be even easier for them to get something for nothing.
Not everybody is only out for ourselves and screw everyone else. I donate money to a charitable cause - an Indian reservation in Arizona to help provide food and water to them. I wish I could donate more or to more charities, but I'm a one-income three person family, and I send money to my family back east who are having a hard time, which leaves me with nothing left over. Do I want government to take more taxes from me - no way....let me decide for myself which charities I want to donate to.
Not sure what the beef is here. I do not agree that we all are out for only ourselves, but in these economic times and people out of work and losing everything, how can you expect them to want government to take more money out in taxes.
So, I may be misinterpreting this message. Are you for the government taxing us more, or are you just mad at GW and his administration and want to vent. While your venting you should vent about what the Clintons did on their way out to include taking everything not nailed down not only in the WH but also on Air Force One.
So the thousands getting laid off weekly are to blame for losing their homes???? nm
1
If someone makes 100 mill a year, you think $20K earner should pay same percentage?
that's just kookoo
Minorities do make up a lopsided percentage of the prison population.
But just stating that as a fact which is self-evident pays no attention whatsoever to the root causes of minority tension in our nation, nor address the fact that rich people with their various crimes tend to be well-connected enough to keep their butts out of jail, thus disproportionately skewing the prison statistics. Many more reasons can be advanced to explain the sad state of America's penal system, but none of that matters in the subject at hand.
Bennett's conclusion (as a member of the wealthy, advataged and least-likely-to-go-to-prison-for-his-crimes club) is that mass genocide would solve our crime problems.
Don't you realize how frightening that is?
I did and I owned up to it . . .
If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. Not afraid to admit it.
Most newspapers are liberal owned
So, it's not big suprise. Newspaper circulation is down in this country for several reasons the biggest one being is that they are just mouthpieces for the liberal agenda. The NYT is a huge example, and their circulation is dropping weekly. Like liberal news they refuse to accept that most of the blame is due to the glaring bias they have. The internet has also taken a big bite out of their profits as people who care about news are bypassing newspapers and T.V. to search out their news from the internet. You're right. Ann probably is not batting an eyelash about losing newspapers. They are a dying breed anyway...mostly from political suicide.
Privately owned board??
Who owns it?? If it is private, why is it on MT Stars along with our company boards, and job hunting boards. I thought it was a part of MT Stars; if not, I don't think it should be here since it is an extremely biased forum. It seems to me to be a venue for a couple of people to espouse their very very conservative views and really that is about all. There is not much civil debate going on. There are only a couple of liberals left who post and most of us stay away a lot of the time because no matter what we say, we will be castigated. There is nothing liberal that is acceptable to this board. The conservatives carry on on their side and when they get tired of that, they come to the liberal side and lambast the liberals. Nothing that is not conservative (one single solitary definition of conservative at that) is acceptable. This has become almost a conservative blog. So, who do I write to to find out how this is run. I think this board ought to be removed from the auspices of MT. It has nothing to do with MT and it is privately owned by extremists. I am going to see what I can find out about ForuMatrix and how one goes about getting things changed. I don't think anything resembling the Drudge Report ought be on a **politics** board that appears on the surface to be all inclusive when it is not.
90% of Wall Street is owned and run by....sm
liberal democrats.
WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch who also owns Fox.....
"nuf said.
she didn't have a choice....stepfather owned everything
--
Government owned Amtrak did not work
I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK!!!!!!!!!!!
une 1st, 2009 12:45 PM Eastern
PHIL KERPEN: It Didn’t Work for Amtrak and It Won’t Work for GM, Either
By Phil Kerpen
Director, Americans for Prosperity
I cautiously cheered the Obama administration’s announcement 60 days ago that GM was on a path to bankruptcy court, because I was hopeful that it would represent an end to political manipulation of the company and a chance to get a clean balance sheet and a new shot as a private company. I couldn’t have been more wrong. Instead GM heads to bankruptcy court with a prepackaged deal that almost completely politicizes the company, with the U.S. government the new majority shareholder.
———
Expect that, like Amtrak, GM will be government-run and subsidized to the tune of billions of taxpayers dollars for decades to come.
———
Taxpayers were already on the hook for $20 billion of bailouts to GM, and today’s deal puts us on the hook for another $30 billion. Even worse, that $50 billion could be just the tip of the iceberg, because the government is now committed to owning and operating an automobile company that could run massive losses for years, even decades, to come.
Today’s New York Times quotes an administration official saying: “We don’t think that after this next $30 billion, they will need more money, but the fact is there are things you don’t know — like when the car market will come back, and how much Toyota and Honda and Volkswagen will benefit from the chaos.” In other words, who knows how much taxpayers will pay. Sky’s the limit.
In 1971, Amtrak was created, the Nixon administration said, “It is expected that the corporation would experience financial losses for about three years and then become a self-sustaining enterprise.” The Obama administration now claims that GM will be a publicly traded company again in six to 18 months. Expect that, like Amtrak, GM will be government-run and subsidized to the tune of billions of taxpayers dollars for decades to come.
The worst part is that government entities are run according to political, not economic, considerations. Every decision—about dealerships and plant closings, about suppliers, about which vehicles to build—will have to pass the Washington tests of political and environmental correctness.
Saab, Saturn, Hummer, and Pontaic will be shuttered. At least nine plants will close. These changes might make economic sense. But with government calling the shots, we will never be sure why certain plants were closed and others were spared.
The Obama administration’s big announcement on fuel-economy standards a couple of weeks ago and the president’s endless drumbeat that Detroit needs to make smaller and lighter cars and stop making trucks and SUVs is proof positive of this theory. Trucks have big margins, and could be a path to profitability. GM does need to find a way to make money on smaller cars, too, but does anyone really have confidence that being overseen and run by government bureaucrats will make that more likely to happen? Instead expect some government-by-committee to turn out vehicles with a Yugo-like design that nobody will want to buy and that taxpayers will end up subsidizing heavily.
General Motors was once an icon of American capitalism, but is now an exemplar of outright government control of a major industry, something completely un-American. Someone alert Karl Marx—we have government ownership of the means of production.
The legendary GM President Charles “Engine Charlie” Wilson was famous for saying in 1953: “For years I thought that what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa.”
Today President Obama echoed those sentiments, ending his speech by saying that he hopes that once again what is good for General Motors will be good for the United States of America. We can only hope that he is wrong! — that somehow, what’s being done to GM will not spread to the rest of our country and its economy. That somehow, we will resist the inexorable pull of endless bailouts and government control if we are to restore the free market system that made our country great.
The same person owns this board who owned it when it was on MTStars. sm
She has made herself known on this board several times and stated her rules. There are not many conservatives who post anymore either, Lurker, because of the whip lashing we took from liberals over the years. But do you see us whining about that all over the place? I don't think so. You can't follow the rules, because the rules do not apply to you. FormMatrix is a host for ths board, but the same person still administrates it. I wish you WOULD talk to her and stop with all of this. You come on our board and post and you always have. There have been some pretty egregious things said here over the years about the President, some of which probably should have been investigated by the FBI.
It is an agency created by Congress, but is privately owned. sm
The stocks are owned by member banks, and they are private corporations. Every penny of income tax collected goes to private lenders for interest only on the national debt.
Quote from the Grace Commission report: "100% of what is collected is absorbed
solely by interest on the Federal Debt ...
all individual income tax revenues are gone
before one nickel is spent on the services
taxpayers expect from government."
I'll be PERFECTLY clear. MTStars is a PRIVATELY owned
website that contains posts made by the public. Because it is PRIVATELY owned, we reserve the right to operate the site how we see fit. If you have specific questions or concerns about this, you can email me directly at admin@mtstars.com.
Wall Street Journal is owned by Rupert Murdoch
same owner of Fox Noise
Well...if it puts Obama in a good light, it is probably owned by George Soros. nm
nm
Corporation owned media does not bash Bush, they bash those that bash Bush.sm
Google Bush and vote fraud and there is tons of information about how many Americans 'voted' for Bush. Poor us and poor troops.
|
