VTLewis
Obama's plan has three main parts:
1. Better regulation. He has called for the Federal Reserve to take
<snip>
MJ
Somehow with the "right" rules this failure will not fail.
VTLewis
2. Help for homeowners. Obama's plan includes support for Sen.
Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) to create a program in which lenders buy or
refinance existing mortgages. Those mortgages would be converted into
30-year, fixed-rate loans with a federal guarantee. The Illinois
<snip>
MJ
Those HomeOwners who should NOT have received a loan
in the first place EXCEPT for Government intervention will
be "saved" by further Government intervention.
VTLewis
3. Federal funds. Much like that of his Democratic rival, the third
part of Obama's plan calls for a $30 billion stimulus package. What
<snip>
MJ
The Taxpayers will have money TAKEN from them ... and then
returned to them. Stimulus.
VTLewis
1. Mortgage transparency. McCain would require mortgages to be written
so they are more easily understood by borrowers. In return, borrowers
<snip>
MJ
Irrelevant to the problem and largely MEANINGLESS.
Fraud is already criminal.
VTLewis
2. Lender accountability. Responsibility for the quality and
performance of loans would be in the hands of lenders, and strict
<snip>
MJ
Another RED HERRING ... lenders loaned because they were GUARANTEED
that the Government supported entities would BUY the loans the Government
FORCED the lenders to provide in the first place.
VTLewis
3. Down-payment realism. For loans to be insured by the Federal
Housing Administration, larger down payments would be required.
MJ
As opposed to the PREVIOUS Government Mandates that minimized
or eliminated payments.
VTLewis
4. Stronger safety nets. In McCain's plan, financial institutions
would be encouraged to increase capital reserves to serve as
protection from losses.
MJ
MORE ... somehow with the "right" rules this failure will not fail.
The problem, of course, is the Government's intervention ... but hey,
few Americans have even a cursory grasp of economics.
Regard$,
--MJ
"Mises demonstrated that, in any economy more complex
than the Crusoe or primitive family level, the socialist
planning board would simply not know what to do, or how
to answer any of these vital questions. Developing the
momentous concept of calculation, Mises pointed out
that the planning board could not answer these questions
because socialism would lack the indispensable tool that
private entrepreneurs use to appraise and calculate: the
existence of a market in the means of production, a
market that brings about money prices based on genuine
profit-seeking exchanges by private owners of these means
of production. Since the very essence of socialism is
collective ownership of the means of production, the
planning board would not be able to plan, or to make
any sort of rational economic decisions. Its decisions
would necessarily be completely arbitrary and chaotic,
and therefore the existence of a socialist planned
economy is literally 'impossible' (to use a term long
ridiculed by Mises's critics)."
-- Murray N. Rothbard,
"The End of Socialism and the Calculation Debate Revisited",
Rev. Austrian Econ. 5 (1991): 52-53.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
