Where's my share?

I guess I am fortunate.  I just get by, paying my bills.  I'm not delinquent on any of them.

I suffer from a serious illness, which is my business and I don't use as an excuse.  My bills include my meds.

My question is:  because I am responsible, I don't see how I can partake of any of the stimulus package that Alabama, I mean Obama has made available.  My income is not great, just enough to get me by, but it is higher than most of those needed to qualify for LIHEAP, etc.

Am I put behind the 8-ball due to other's irresponsibilities?  Is this fair?  I know I am not the only one in this boat, but something is wrong.

Bossman Mike

bossman:

I guess I am fortunate.  I just get by, paying my bills.  I'm not delinquent on any of them.

I suffer from a serious illness, which is my business and I don't use as an excuse.  My bills include my meds.

My question is:  because I am responsible, I don't see how I can partake of any of the stimulus package that Alabama, I mean Obama has made available.  My income is not great, just enough to get me by, but it is higher than most of those needed to qualify for LIHEAP, etc.

Am I put behind the 8-ball due to other's irresponsibilities?  Is this fair?  I know I am not the only one in this boat, but something is wrong.

Bossman Mike

It's not a question of fairness; it's a question of the financial markets and our economy now in free fall.

The financial markets (free markets) were allowed to recklessly get involved in the mortgage business and funded mortgage brokers nationwide.  These brokers were encouraged to offer mortgages to virtually anyone and passed them onto Wall Street firms who bundled them as securities and sold them.

Once the housing bubble burst and housing values declined millions of the securities became worthless and homeowners found themselves in houses not worth what they paid for them.

Then due to a slowing economy, people are losing jobs and then their homes.

Restructuring mortgages can help stem the tide of foreclosures and help stabilize values and neighborhoods.

 I'm not disputing what you're saying, Burghman, BUT, there were many, many people who purchased homes knowing full well that by doing so, they were living way beyond their own means...and the lenders were allowing it to happen. And now, they are going to be rescued and allowed to keep what they still can't afford!  I really do hope the restructuring you referred to helps, but I don't think it's fair either to those who live within their means, work hard for what they make, and pay their bills (especially their mortgage) on time.

jbps1329:

 I'm not disputing what you're saying, Burghman, BUT, there were many, many people who purchased homes knowing full well that by doing so, they were living way beyond their own means...and the lenders were allowing it to happen. And now, they are going to be rescued and allowed to keep what they still can't afford!  I really do hope the restructuring you referred to helps, but I don't think it's fair either to those who live within their means, work hard for what they make, and pay their bills (especially their mortgage) on time.

 Care to put a number on those that "knew" they couldn't afford their houses ?

 WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama knows Americans are unhappy that their taxes will be used to rescue people who bought mansions beyond their means.

Why don't you ask the President to get you your numbers you're looking for?

 Mansions......that's funny.

It is necessary to help out those that were sold mortgages that put them in jeopardy.

Predatory lending was at work and what has been prosposed it to help homeowners that bascially qualify but need the mortgage restructured.

Until housing is stablized, the economy will struggle.

jbps1329:

 WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama knows Americans are unhappy that their taxes will be used to rescue people who bought mansions beyond their means.

Why don't you ask the President to get you your numbers you're looking for?

 I join you in condeming this :

So Mr. Bush had to, in his words, “use the mighty muscle of the federal government” to meet his goal.

He proposed affordable housing tax incentives. He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Mr. Bush persuaded Congress to spend up to $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for federally insured mortgages with no money down

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

 I do believe this to be just another "shot" at President Obama and liberals. The statement "I am responsible" is code for conservative ideology which encourages individuals to take personal responsibility for themselves.   To a conservative, taking personal responsibility would preclude the need for social programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid all funded through some form of taxation.  The conservative views taxes as income sharing....not acceptable to conservatives.  Conservatives believe taxes should fund only basic services such as the courts and limited public services.  Is it any wonder why conservatism appeals to a minority of Americans.

allablaze:

 I do believe this to be just another "shot" at President Obama and liberals. The statement "I am responsible" is code for conservative ideology which encourages individuals to take personal responsibility for themselves.   To a conservative, taking personal responsibility would preclude the need for social programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid all funded through some form of taxation.  The conservative views taxes as income sharing....not acceptable to conservatives.  Conservatives believe taxes should fund only basic services such as the courts and limited public services.  Is it any wonder why conservatism appeals to a minority of Americans.

Conservatives mean you and I should be responsible but not them.

Conservatism doesn't stand for anything.

 Somehow it’s always reasonable to hurt the poor as a way to make them shape up. Tougher bankruptcy laws, welfare reform, it’s all good social engineering.

But if you talk about hurting the rich to make them reform, it’s terrible. Taking money away from a guy with plenty more to spare is worse then taking money away from a person with none left.