Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama dishes out yet more corporate welfare

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 10:29 AM
Original message
Obama dishes out yet more corporate welfare
It just doesn't stop, and much of it has to do with having Wall Street suckups like Geithner and Summers as advisors. TARP (enthusiastically endorsed by Obama) and the trillion-dollar giveaway to insurance company CEO's (i.e. HCR) apparently weren't enough.



http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/114349-banks-to-benefit-most-from-white-house-program-to-stave-off-foreclosures

Banks to benefit most from White House program to help fight foreclosures

Banks will get the biggest benefit from an Obama administration housing program designed to help unemployed homeowners escape foreclosure.

Housing experts expressed concern that banks, not homeowners, will be helped by the White House's $3 billion funding infusion -- $2 billion from the Treasury Department and another $1 billion from the Housing and Urban Development Department -- going to those states hit hardest by the housing market crash and unemployment.

snip

If the recently announced program is expected to work there has to be a reasonable expectation that at the end of the two-year program homeowners will have some equity in their property.

"If that's not the case, then it's not worth it," he (Dean Baker) said.

He said he'd be "very surprised" if the vast majority of those who take advantage of the program don't eventually lose their homes.

snip

David Abromowitz, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, said the main problem with the funding is that lenders will benefit without requiring any concessions or matching of the federal aid.

snip

Despite his reservations with the funding, he emphasized that with millions facing foreclosure, the fragile economy and a slowing economic recovery, "anything that slows or stops foreclosures is good."



One of those things that most certainly would have slowed and stopped foreclosures -- and it wouldn't have cost a dime of taxpayer money -- was to allow mortage cramdown -- giving judges the ability to cut mortgage terms. However, Obama notably http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/08/white-house-silence-may-h_n_199892.html">never lent the mortgage cramdown legislation any support, and the bill died on the vine.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
1. A decent economy fixes the problem of being underwater, of unemployment, lack of food...
We keep trying to fix all the bruises and cuts being inflicted by the bully of a bad economy but we wont solve anything til we get the bully to stop beating us up.

So again...jobs jobs jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. "concern that banks, not homeowners, will be helped by the White House's $3 billion funding"
Edited on Mon Aug-16-10 10:36 AM by ProSense
Concern is one thing, BS is another thing altogether.

From the OP:

Republicans have argued that it puts taxpayer money at risk, and the special inspector general for the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program is auditing the program.

"It’s troubling that just weeks after the SIGTARP assailed the administration for its lack of success and transparency in managing their signature mortgage-relief program, they have ignored the IG’s warnings and are committing even more money in a failed program that ultimately isn’t helping those who need it the most," Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) told The Hill.

Issa, ranking member on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said "if the administration were serious about helping the jobless keep their homes, they would be advancing policies that would create jobs and address the root causes of the housing crisis – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."


Also, why is there an effort to lump this aid, which was part of financial reform, mortgage relief much called for by advocates, with the older programs?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
3. What earthly reason would Obama have to speed up
foreclosures? That's what you're insinuating and I call bull shit. Maybe there's more to this than even you know about. :think:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. I don't see where the poster insinuates that Obama is speeding up
foreclosures. Am I reading the same post you are? Because if I am, I don't see that's what the poster is saying.

To me President Obama is more like Herbert Hoover, the Chicago School boys or Ronnie Raygun. He pumps as much help as he can into the the hands of the elite bankers and wealthy CEOs. While doing as little as possible to pump any money into the hands of the middle class and poor. He really does believe in trickle down, free trade, voodoo or laissez-faire economics.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Here...
One of those things that most certainly would have slowed and stopped foreclosures -- and it wouldn't have cost a dime of taxpayer money -- was to allow mortage cramdown -- giving judges the ability to cut mortgage terms. However, Obama notably never lent the mortgage cramdown legislation any support, and the bill died on the vine.

That sounds like the insinuation to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. me 2, more overly critical Obama bashing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yourneighborsdog Donating Member (6 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
7. Not to knit-pick, but how does one escape foreclosure?
The issue is not now, nor has it ever been, a problem of banks not having enough money to keep homeowners afloat. The issue is homeowners not having jobs. The stimulus has completely failed to create and/or save jobs in any meaningful way because government cannot take the place of business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
8. It continues to be deeply disappointing that Obama 'never lent mortgage cramdown' support
Obama needs more advice from people like Elizabeth Warren and less from the likes of Geithner and Summers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Mortgage relief was relief only to big banks. Should have let judges alter terms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. he should side with Pelosi more often instead of Reid
Pelosi wanted cramdown, Reid didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
10. This is a loan program to home borrowers who are unemployed
and need a lifeline to stay in their homes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. It is, but it is yet another insufficient effort to help those facing foreclosure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. What would be sufficient--the government paying off everyone's mortgage? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
12. I'm waiting to hear from the people critical of any relief for those
who are underwater and/or can't meet their mortgage:

"Well, ****I**** can pay my mortgage and *****I ***** didn't borrow for a trip to Bermuda & a trip to Vegas & a BMW to drive to my mansion in. ****I**** am living in a humble shack and paying my bills. Why shouldn't those spendthrifts have to suffer for their choices?"

You can't convince some people that

1. not everyone in trouble gambled with their financial future and/or borrowed wildly

2. in a lot of places, the housing market was so hot the choice was take out a large mortgage, pay an outlandish and rising monthly rent or live on the street.

3. even if those who are hurting were irresponsible, if their house goes into foreclosure, the value of your house drops as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-16-10 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
14. holy shit
He's fighting home foreclosures?! That bastard!

I haven't been so upset since Moe, Larry, and Curly (well known big oil shills) discovered a gusher on Widow Jenkins' farm, and used the money to selfishly pay the bank that owned the mortgage.

I mean, at least the Blues Brothers got what was coming to them after they paid the bank that owned the mortgage on the orphanage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC