Does no one accept responsibility any more?

I suggest that MOW at least express that some are struggling in a system that legitimately needs retooled.

[DividedThigh]

you know you wont be able to be better till you let someone help you grasshopper, dt

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

So you don't care that people are going to providers and forcing you to pay their bills, along with fees, and processing costs? Don't you realize your medical bills will be significantly smaller if they had to pay into the system for their care too?

Way to completly avoid dealing with your ridiculous claim. I care, the solution is....wait for it....STOP GIVING THEM FREE HEALTH CARE.

[rgcraig]

The saying "teach a man to fish" comes to my mind when I read threads like this.

As long as the fish are provided free there's no need to learn how to fish.

[DividedThigh]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

The saying "teach a man to fish" comes to my mind when I read threads like this.

As long as the fish are provided free there's no need to learn how to fish.

very true renda, no doubt, i guess that is why it wasnt so bad that those people at the childrens home made us learn to work huh, dt

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

What's abusive is to steal from those who have so the government can keep people in Ghetto's through housing subsidies, welfare, food stamps etc. If people really didn't eat unless they worked they would find a way out of those situations. Hunger is a powerful motivator. I am not suggesting that Christians don't have an obligation to help the poor, those truly in need, I am adamant that this is NEVER the responsibility of government. Forced charity is no charity at all.

Baron, this all sounds good, but when the jobs in any given area don't pay much more than $7-$8 per hour, and someone has a family to feed in the midst of $3 a gallon milk, eggs that cost $2 a dozen, gasoline that costs $3-$4 a gallon, rising utility and rent costs, etc., then government assistance is more of a "have to" type of thing. It's real easy to just say "find a way out of that situation", but talk is cheap, Bro. Getting a degree to find a better paying job is always an option, but even in those situations government assistance is the only thing that makes it possible (grants, government backed student loans). There are no easy answers to solving the issue of poverty in this country.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

That’s the talking point. The reality is that lobbyists from the banking industry pushed for deregulation that allows them to sell high risk mortgages to investment firms to then sell on the international market. It’s very complicated but essentially they were making money on giving high risk loans. It’s been revealed recently that a particular lender set a standard to approve no less than so many loans, regardless of the applicant’s likelihood to be able to pay on the loan. Prior to this deregulation what they did would have been highly questionable and maybe even illegal. And now my property values are suffering because of this corruption and the government’s lack of initiative to insure equitable lending practices. Government should work to put swindlers out of businesses. It’s in the best interests of the people that government serves.



True. Every consumer should look into it deeply. But we’re talking about some folks who have gone to school and been licensed in the lending industry…no one will know all the details like they do. Nor should they be expected to. When a lender shows presents a lending scheme because it’s technically legal (now) all they have to do is put in some fancy salesmanship and young family’s who think their dreams are about to materialize can be taken advantage of. There should be strong laws against it. They need to re-regulate the industry because this shouldn’t have happened to begin with.

Honestly, I believe it was Bush that pushed for the deregulation so that "everyone could realize the American Dream of owning their own home." There may have been lobbyist, too. I am not studied in all this, and just have a vague knowledge of it.

BUT, I didn't need schooling to know that a adjustable loan has the potential of going up. In the end, the true fault (unless specific predatory lending practices are found) has to be laid upon the consumer. Its not the car salemans job to police my spending habits, and if I buy a car with an adjustable loan, and then later can't afford it, it is my fault for my spending habits.


I also have to wonder about those that are crying wolf, and still have cable tv, internet, and are not already on a very ridged budget. Also, most leaning companies will bend over backwards if you will just talk with them. My point is, the consumer has to take the majority of the responsibility on their spending. After all, they did not have to sign on the dotted line, and could have walked away at any time.

[DividedThigh]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Honestly, I believe it was Bush that pushed for the deregulation so that "everyone could realize the American Dream of owning their own home." There may have been lobbyist, too. I am not studied in all this, and just have a vague knowledge of it.

BUT, I didn't need schooling to know that a adjustable loan has the potential of going up. In the end, the true fault (unless specific predatory lending practices are found) has to be laid upon the consumer. Its not the car salemans job to police my spending habits, and if I buy a car with an adjustable loan, and then later can't afford it, it is my fault for my spending habits.


I also have to wonder about those that are crying wolf, and still have cable tv, internet, and are not already on a very ridged budget. Also, most leaning companies will bend over backwards if you will just talk with them. My point is, the consumer has to take the majority of the responsibility on their spending. After all, they did not have to sign on the dotted line, and could have walked away at any time.

st matt, the process for these policies to change and the mortgage industry to be less regulated, started in the mid 90s, and continued under gwb, dt

[Rico]

Originally Posted by Grasshopper

Don’t be ignorant. I’ve told nearly everyone I’m posting with about this new handle. Ask Baron about it…he was there when I created it. You see Ferd, you, and others were calling me such names and slandering my character I decided to take on a different name so I could express my feelings without being openly slandered. Here’s what happened on another forum. I was on Apostolic Man forum and posted some things about President Bush. I was called a liberal, a commie, and all this garbage. Well a few brothers from the church I used to attend read some of what I wrote. One day after men’s prayer they approached me with political questions and said they read what I wrote about President Bush. They told me how they felt, “a communist”, shouldn’t go to church there. It turned into a shoving match as I tried to get into my car to get away from them. When you guys began slandering me under my real name I realized I better take on another alias just to give myself some anonymity. I don’t know who you are DT…and I wouldn’t want to put you in any kind of danger. So stop making fun of me and slandering me. It’s a darn shame when you can’t disagree with conservative Apostolic brothers on politics without being harassed and risking some degree of danger but that’s the world we live in. Well, when I decided it best to go by a different handle Baron had called me, “young grasshopper”, so I adopted the title in his honor. So please DT….get a life and stop trying to brow beat people you don’t agree with. And if you continue to try to connect my real name with my posts I’ll take it as an effort to expose me to personal slander and/or harm. I’m not playing with you. Please respect my wishes.

DT, he's got a point here Bro. Exposing the identity of posters is generally not a good thing to do.

[DividedThigh]

he did that himself rico, dt