Jon Stewart's interview with Joe Biden

disagreeeeeed wrote:

Most people who did what you mentioned are not more irresponsible than you. They're just less fortunate. Some were irresponsible and are struggling to pay for big houses. For them I have no sympathy either. But for most I don't think that applies. Owning a home should be possible for everyone, not just those who grew up in the middle class.

This is why we're in the situation we're in.

No one is entitled a home. Subsidizing home ownership is not a good idea, it's essentially making it easier for people to go into debt on a large scale. We, as a nation, need less debt, not easier ways to get into it.

Take your fiscal responsibility and GTFO of America, we have no place for your lack of short-sightedness here.

"Owning a home should be possible for everyone, not just those who grew up in the middle class."

That should read...

"Owning a home should be possible for everyone who can afford to pay the people who made and marketed the house a fair price for their labor."

People seem to forget that whether it's a service or a product or whatever, it has to come from somewhere. Someone spent their time and money to get a skill, which costs them more time and effort to put to use.

Home values needed to crash.

They were too high. Keeping them high doesn't help.

They were too high because lending was out of control.

The values need to be low so people can afford to buy them under reasonable credit terms.

Millions upside down is also bad.

Some how we need everyone with home equity and affordable houses.

Banks writing down mortgages and giving borrowers new mortgages with less principle owed with govt assistance would solve this.

But there would be a market adjustment bubbling out somewhere.

It's just going to hurt until it gets better over time.

true

Why did we spend 700 Billion dollars bailing out banks who knew, or should have know, that the borrowers had no chance in hell of ever paying back those loans?

Suppose some stranger walks up to me on the street, asks to borrow $100, and I lend it to him. Whose fault is it if he never pays me back?

The banks are entirely to blame for this mess. The average borrow takes out 2-3 mortgages in a lifetime. The average bank makes how many loans each day? Who is more irresponsible for failing to figure out what reasonable loans are?

It is absolutely amazing how people become inflamed at the thought of their neighbor getting a pittance from the gov't but the wholesale rape of the country by financial institutions is somehow acceptable...

Many U.S. banks don't either. The citizens have an excuse-- it is not their area of expertise. What's the banks' excuse?

asasmzcxv wrote:

I wish Biden had said something about the filibusters at the end. It's something I and most people don't understand. Why not just let them talk? 50 guys aren't going to be able to talk for 50 days. There might even be dissent among the republicans if they're actually forced to try it. Nobody wants to filibuster meaningless crap, and people understand it's a bush-league tactic. Let them do it.

As a longtime senator, Biden knows that rules were changed several decades ago such that filibustering senators are no longer required to talk as part of a filibuster. They only need to inform the Senate Majority Leader of their intention or continuing intention to filibuster, which is a big part of why the number of filibusters has gone up significantly since the last few decades of the Twentieth Century. It's not like the old days where Strom Thurmond went on and on for 24 hours.

Biden's on the Daily Show.

Palin's on Oprah and the cover of Newsweek.

What's wrong with this picture?

on the runs wrote:

As a longtime senator, Biden knows that rules were changed several decades ago such that filibustering senators are no longer required to talk as part of a filibuster. They only need to inform the Senate Majority Leader of their intention or continuing intention to filibuster, which is a big part of why the number of filibusters has gone up significantly since the last few decades of the Twentieth Century. It's not like the old days where Strom Thurmond went on and on for 24 hours.

The Majority Leader can change make a unilateral decision, apparently, to restore the old rules.

I hope he does. Let the Republicans take their stand and read poetry for 12 months. And let the voters decide if they want Senators to avoid a democratic vote at absolutely any cost.

"Why should the government offer 5% 30-year mortgages to refinance all homeowners? The people who took out ARMS, no downpayment loans, loans with balloon payments, etc. knew, or should have known, what they were signing"

You are a victim of the old divide and conquer routine. The finacial industry screwed all the consumers and you blame the victim, sitting there thinking you are too clever by half.

"it should be mandatory that all students be required to take at least basic finance/economic classes"

How about making it mandatory that all students take math, physics, chemistry, biology -- you know, real science courses. And not those propagandisitic, pseudo science economic courses

uncleB wrote:

"Why should the government offer 5% 30-year mortgages to refinance all homeowners? The people who took out ARMS, no downpayment loans, loans with balloon payments, etc. knew, or should have known, what they were signing"

You are a victim of the old divide and conquer routine. The finacial industry screwed all the consumers and you blame the victim, sitting there thinking you are too clever by half.

"it should be mandatory that all students be required to take at least basic finance/economic classes"

How about making it mandatory that all students take math, physics, chemistry, biology -- you know, real science courses. And not those propagandisitic, pseudo science economic courses

What makes you think that only banks can be to blame? Why set up a dichotomy at all? Maybe banks and homeowners should both take some blame.

I don't know what state you live in but in most states, it IS required that students take multiple years of math and science. It is virtually impossible to graduate from the school I teach in without Algebra II, Bio and Chem.

What up wrote:

Biden's on the Daily Show.

Palin's on Oprah and the cover of Newsweek.

What's wrong with this picture?

Last I checked, Palin's cuter.

If we bailed out the home owners rather than the banks, we would have just delayed the inevitable anyway. All of this would have happened down the road AFTER we spent $700 billion on the homeowners. Absolutely nothing would have changed and the banks would have had this problem down the road anyway. Better now than billions upon billions of dollars later...

By the way, I've been thinking. Who is the guy who first thought about bundling up these bad mortgages and securitizing them? I have no idea about the time table for how long they've been around, but if he's still alive, he either A) feels really bad or B) is laughing himself silly.