|
cinphi
|
 |
« on: February 22, 2009, 02:25:29 AM » |
|
Michelle Fry is a suburban Atlanta homeowner who has seen the value of her modest one-family home drop by more than half in the past year. She now sees a national mortgage bailout plan that appears to reward people who bought more house than they could afford and can't pay their bills. And she has a simple question for President Obama:
"Why am I paying for them?"
"We are very frustrated and scared," said Fry, 32, a newly expectant mother who works as a creative director for a public relations firm. Her husband Sam, 38, is a truck driver for a local printing company. Their combined household income is less than $100,000.
"My husband and I always discuss, 'Why do we try to better ourselves, when it seems if you do nothing, you get all the help in the world?'” she said.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,497707,00.htmlI have to say I agree with this question. We have worked hard to get and keep our home and we had saved for years to to put a down payment to buy this home. I am very unhappy with the way this government is trying to be in control of everything. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tharedhead
|
|
« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2009, 05:20:03 AM » |
|
Another solution... "Illegal Activism: Moving Homeless People Into Foreclosed Houses in Miami" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/06/AR2008120601968.htmlRameau is an activist who has been executing a bailout plan of his own around Miami's empty streets: He is helping homeless people illegally move into foreclosed homes.
"We're matching homeless people with people-less homes," he said with a grin.
Rameau and a group of like-minded advocates formed Take Back the Land, which also helps the new "tenants" with secondhand furniture, cleaning supplies and yard upkeep. So far, he has moved six families into foreclosed homes and has nine on a waiting list.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
gosweepwin
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2009, 09:40:31 AM » |
|
So wouldn't it make sense then for the original owners to stay and become squatters in their own house?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cinphi
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2009, 09:45:31 AM » |
|
Here's my solution to the problem. Work two jobs if you have to. How about three if it takes to keep your home. It's called the American way. You want to eat work. You want a roof over your head work. We did. DH worked two jobs and I worked one to keep paying our bills.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2009, 09:47:32 AM » |
|
Maybe, we can all get Section 8 Housing for our own homes!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cinphi
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2009, 09:50:44 AM » |
|
And there are jobs out there it's just that they don't pay enough for some people. I used to clean houses and babysit at one point. There is work if you want to find it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2009, 09:51:36 AM » |
|
Here's my solution to the problem. Work two jobs if you have to. How about three if it takes to keep your home. It's called the American way. You want to eat work. You want a roof over your head work. We did. DH worked two jobs and I worked one to keep paying our bills.
Then that would mean that all the stay-at-home moms/dads, homeschoolers, etc., will be forced to go to work and put all their children in government-subsidized day care facilities and government schools--taking all influence and schooling out of the parents hands and into the government's! Hmm, sounds like another plan to me. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cinphi
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2009, 10:31:57 AM » |
|
If someone is fortunate enough to be able to stay home and raise their family great but if others have made the choice to buy a home and they want to keep it then work. Don't expect the government to bail them out at the expense of all tax payers.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #8 on: February 22, 2009, 10:38:21 AM » |
|
If someone is fortunate enough to be able to stay home and raise their family great but if others have made the choice to buy a home and they want to keep it then work. Don't expect the government to bail them out at the expense of all tax payers.
Who do you think created the economy that forced both parents to go out and work? It's a part of their plan. This way, children were less likely to be influenced by their parents; and those children would be more susceptible to the influence they are subjected to in the government schools. There was a time, if you recall, that both parents didn't have to work to afford such luxuries. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tharedhead
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2009, 11:22:00 AM » |
|
Just pack the kids off to the Mossad Hinuchi?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2009, 11:25:07 AM » |
|
Just pack the kids off to the Mossad Hinuchi? I probably earn more swag bucks thanks to you!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2009, 11:33:23 AM » |
|
These communes they refer to in this article is what our government has been referring to as "Sustainable Development". However, I don't think many people here really understand what that term implies. In a nutshell, it refers to self-sufficient towns/communities that they want to create whereas you have everything you need there and have little reason to wander outside the community. Kind of like the rancher keeping his cows in many corrals so he can keep better track of them. Celebration, FL is a sustainable community. When we drove through it, I kept thinking "THE STEPFORD WIVES"! "In the 1920s kibbutzim began a practice of raising children communally away from their parents in special communities called "Children's "Societies" (Mossad Hinuchi). The theory was that trained nurses and teachers would be better care-providers than amateur (and busy) parents. Children and parents would have better relationships due to the Children's Societies, since parents would not have to be disciplinarians. Also, it was hoped that raising children away from parents would liberate mothers from their "biological tragedy." Instead of spending hours a day raising children, women could thus be free to work or enjoy leisure." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 22, 2009, 11:36:21 AM by LIDARKSIDE »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tharedhead
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 22, 2009, 12:35:49 PM » |
|
Sings (to the tune of Green Acres) "kibbutz living is the life for me/ who needs individuality..." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lidarkside
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 22, 2009, 12:54:31 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
pmeek
Beautiful Oregon Coast
SA Mods
SA Gold Member
 Online
Posts: 35598
Mood:Happy 
Ever stop to think, and forget to start again?
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 22, 2009, 04:52:01 PM » |
|
So wouldn't it make sense then for the original owners to stay and become squatters in their own house?
No, that would make too much sense! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
