Re: OT Health Care was Re: More Government Interference

On Aug 18, 11:51 am, Rich Piehl
<rpiehl5REMOVET...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Larry G wrote:
On Aug 17, 8:32 pm, Rich Piehl
<rpiehl5REMOVET...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Larry G wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:21 pm, Rich Piehl
<rpiehl5REMOVETHIS...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Larry G wrote:
On Aug 17, 11:13 am, Rich Piehl
<rpiehl5REMOVETHIS...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Larry G wrote:
On Aug 17, 6:40 am, Rich Piehl
<rpiehl5REMOVETHIS...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
" I know!  We'll have the government force banks to make loans to
those
poor needy people even though they don't make enough money so as to be
a
good credit risk and be able to pay them back."
this is an example of the total distortions that are making the
rounds.
You mean total distortions like unless we adopt HR 3200 poor people will
be dying in the streets if they get sick?
The Law said that banks could not refuse loans to QUALIFIED people in
sections of towns and cities that the banks decided that they would
not loan money to anyone - regardless of their fitness to pay off the
loan.
The law explicitly said not to loan to unqualified people.
The law ALSO did NOT REQUIRE banks to make liar loans for McMansions
in the suburbs to people who did not have documented employment nor
documented financial assets....
the govt did not require companies to make these loans at all - this
is something the mortgage industry did..
and the reason a lot of unqualified people signed up was because they
were told that the obscene ARM interest rates could be written off on
their income tax and that if it turned out that they still could not
afford the house then they could sell it at a profit.
It was a giant ponzi scheme and had nothing what-so-ever with the law
against redlinning in poor districts and everything to do with the
govt - subsidizing - mortgage interests by allowing it to be written
off - for any/all homes.. including upscale and 2nd and 3rd homes and
condos - instead of limiting mortgage interest write-offs to a
principle residence capped at median values and means tested.
so the govt did not FORCE anything at all but the mortgage companies
found a way to exploit the portion of the income tax that allowed
people to write off the interest - the same exact way companies and
people are exploiting the flood insurance program.
I don't accept your premise.  There was more to it than that.  But for
the sake of discussion you didn't say what you do for housing those poor
people that have no houses because they couldn't move back to their
flooded house.  To say nothing of the jobs lost and the small businesses
closed leaving more people poor, unemployed and destitute.  What do you
do with them.
my premise is the truth. Why do we allow people to deduct mortgage
interest on 2nd and 3rd homes and RV's who make way better than
average salaries while at the same time not allow people with much
more modest incomes - deduct their medical expenses?
it's a double-standard, two-tiered system where the folks who are well
off get perks.n
It's the same deal with flood insurance. If these folks who are fairly
well off had to pay unsubsidized rates for flood insurance for their
2nd homes at the beach what would be the result?
they'd have to build a more modest home ... so really what the subsidy
is doing is allowing people to build fancier homes than they can
really afford.
on the theory that such things are "good for business".
Would you care to cite a source for that information.
What about the poor people who can't afford to rebuild, and can't get
any money out of their property in the flood plain?  What about the
businesses and the jobs lost.
so the govt should take tax dollars from other folks and give them to
these folks - right?
do I really need to cite a source? Can you drive to a place like the
Outer Banks and take a look at all of those homes that are NOT primary
residences for the most part - but instead rental properties owned as
second homes whose insurance is subsidized by the govt?
are you in favor of subsidies anytime jobs and business are involved?
I'm trying to understand your basic criteria for govt subsidies.
Since you keep throwing it out as fact YES I want you to cite a source!!
  Especially since homes on the Outer Banks would be covered by
hurricane insurance NOT flood insurance.  And hurricane insurance is NOT
Federally backed.  Florida was considering making it state backed, but
that makes it a whole different issue

http://www.env-econ.net/2005/08/should_we_have_.htmlhttp://www.proper.......

Congratulations, Larry, you have JUST shown you don't know what you are
talking about!!!

Now, since you insist on talking about flood insurance I invite you to
come to the Mississippi River Valley.  I'll gladly give you a tour of
the areas affected by floods in 1993 and 2008.  You won't see 2nd and
3rd vacation homes.  You'll see homes of blue collar hard workers.
You'll  see the businesses and industry of average America.

And if you remember at the start of this whole flood insurance tangent I
said major commercial development in flood plains that have flooded in
in the recent past should not be sold Federal flood insurance. NOR
should they receive Federal funds to rebuild.  But you conveniently
forgot about that in your desire to demonize and insult anyone who
disagrees with your perspective.

I have some direct experience with the flood insurance on the outer
banks with two personal friends who have properties there so I do have
knowledge that such insurance IS offered to non-primary residences and
it is not means-tested.

what I favor IS Govt support in both flood, hurricane and health
insurance - all 3 as long as it is restricted to primary residences
and it is means tested so that it is limited to people who have a
legitimate need and few other options.

In other words, I have a consistent view towards the govt being
involved.

Ah, so you have personal friends who have second and third houses? Wow,
they must be wealthy republicans who are milking the system. And even if
flood insurance is available on the outer banks if FEMA and the COE deem
the area to be flood prone the flood insurance will pay once to rebuild
or relocate and that's that.  They won't pay to do it again and again
and again.

You didn't respond to my comment about the people that live in the flood
plain here. They are usually NOT wealthy.

Many are well off enough to be able to afford a 2nd home. I favor the
insurance for folks primary homes - on the condition that once they
are flooded and get paid off that they cannot rebuilt in a flood zone
and still get insurance.

I am opposed to a govt program that subsidizes 2nd homes and condos
for people who make salaries about the median.

I'm in favor of means-testing the insurance so that insurance is
provided ONLY to people who are trying to insure their primary
residence and cannot afford to.

and stop the program right there.

I favor the same approach for health care.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT Health Care was Re: More Government Interference
    ... sections of towns and cities that the banks decided that they would ... The law ALSO did NOT REQUIRE banks to make liar loans for McMansions ... interest on 2nd and 3rd homes and RV's who make way better than ... It's the same deal with flood insurance. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: OT Health Care was Re: More Government Interference
    ... We'll have the government force banks to make loans to ... the govt did not require companies to make these loans at all - this ... interest on 2nd and 3rd homes and RV's who make way better than ... It's the same deal with flood insurance. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: OT Health Care was Re: More Government Interference
    ... sections of towns and cities that the banks decided that they would ... the govt did not require companies to make these loans at all - this ... interest on 2nd and 3rd homes and RV's who make way better than ... It's the same deal with flood insurance. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: OT Health Care was Re: More Government Interference
    ... We'll have the government force banks to make loans to ... The law ALSO did NOT REQUIRE banks to make liar loans for McMansions ... interest on 2nd and 3rd homes and RV's who make way better than ... It's the same deal with flood insurance. ...
    (misc.transport.road)
  • Re: Financial crisis for who?
    ... asleep at the switch financial regulators are, after all, Wall Street ... inventory not of mortgages but of Credit Default Swaps and other derivative ... They are securitized INSURANCE POLICIES and they insure the losses on ... As traded securities, the worlds banks, investment banks and hedge funds ...
    (misc.survivalism)