On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:00:52 -0400, shag <shag at cleandraws.com> wrote:
>>And this is a good thing you support?
>
> i'm objecting to your rhetoric. you type as if there are home buyer in
> debt peonage for the rest of your life vs. everyone else who aren't.
I made my point clearly, the "home owners" have been subsidized enough, subsdizing them more is neither realistic, sustainable, nor beneficial, for the reasons I gave.
> what planet do you live on. even if we were socialized, we'd still work
> all our lives to support ourselves and our communities.
Paying your mortgage is "supporing you community?"
Clearly, we do live on different planets.
> i'm a person who's never bought a house in my life. i will probably never
> buy one because the prices are inflated, and the bailout will keep them
> inflated.
Exactly.
> my step grandfather does not have a sob story. he purchased a home with a
> debt-income ratio that was reasonable. he did so with a government backed
> mortgage while taking advantage of the GI bill. Same thing with my
father.
> all when housing was reasonably affordable -- a contrast to today. So no,
> I obviously don't think this is OK, you jackass. I'm just pointing out
that
> your characterization of greed is wrong.
You have only pointed out that you are more interested in calling me names and making fallacious arguments then discussion the point that further subsidizing home owners is not a good idea.
There is a lot of profit-motive speculation in the housing market among "home owners," regardless of your step-grandfathers moral standing, this is just as much money-for-nothing greed that that wich drives the money lenders.
Just like the way that the farm subsidy lobby uses the myth of the independent rustic farmer to justify subsidies of massive corporate conglomerates, no doubt the hard working single family will be used as the poster child for "bail out" lobby.
>>This whole discussions is of course moot, because in reality neither you
>>step-grandfather nor sustainable housing projects will get the cash, this
>>crisis, like all economic crisis, will simply lead to a greater
>>concentration of wealth. You can take that to the bank.
>
> it is interesting that you failed to include yourself among the impotent.
What is "interesting" is that there is no list of "the impotent" in the message you are responding to.
Get over yourself and pay attention to what it is you are allegedly responding too. Neither I, nor I suspect anybody else, is in the slightest bit interested in whether you think a person who you have never met is a jackass or not.
>>btw, speaking of sustainable housing, i was talking about housing within
>> a 1 mile radius of my workplace, where it's mostly tightly built condos,
>>high rises, housing in downtown above business storefront, or single
>>families which are as densely built as allowed by law.
Yet this is not the entire housing market. How selective do you imagine a "bailout" of "home owners" would be?
-- Dmytri Kleiner editing text files since 1981
http://www.telekommunisten.net