UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (25) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: AOLFoolman100 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 736296  
Subject: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Noooo......that was the first quesiton in the debate by that PBS dube. My god.

The goal of an economy is to CREATE WEALTH for everyone. Raise the standard of living for everyone. NOT to create jobs.

Jobs are the "by products" of wealth creation, not the primary goal.

Damn, you wonder why we are so screwed up....basics aren't even understood.
Print the post Back To Top
Author: AOLFoolman100 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646818 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Problem with Romney......he need to talk more slowly....connect with the people. Be more folksy. He's not.

He talks too fast...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 2828 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646819 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:25 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
All i know from watching the debate is Romney is going to spend too much ;0).

Obama is sputtering, saying the same stuff over and over. Millionaires/billionaires, 5 trillion dollar tax cut, Bill Clinton economy, investments, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: wolverine307 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646820 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I'm watching Tiger baseball. Has he blamed Bush yet?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 2828 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646821 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I'm watching Tiger baseball. Has he blamed Bush yet?
---------------------------------------------
Yes.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AOLFoolman100 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646823 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
They're talking too fast for the average person.....seriously. No average person really gets what they are talking about.

Romney says good stuff.....but he's too robotic. He has NO PERSONALTITY......no one likes him. He's a good debater and he's smart, but is he electable....no....why?? He's talks a great game, but he talks too fast...too choppy.....he's too bland.

He will not win the debate. No way.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 2828 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646827 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Romney says good stuff.....but he's too robotic. He has NO PERSONALTITY......no one likes him. He's a good debater and he's smart, but is he electable....no....why?? He's talks a great game, but he talks too fast...too choppy.....he's too bland.

He will not win the debate. No way.
---------------------------------
It could be my partisan leanings but i think Romney is doing much better than Obama.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AOLFoolman100 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646829 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It could be my partisan leanings but i think Romney is doing much better than Obama.

Again, is this because of common people reading this, or just the RECF people.

Which is it?

Real polls take time.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 2828 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646831 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It could be my partisan leanings but i think Romney is doing much better than Obama.

Again, is this because of common people reading this, or just the RECF people.

Which is it?

Real polls take time.
-------------------
I'm talking about the debate right now. Is that what you're talking about?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AOLFoolman100 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 646832 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/3/2012 9:48 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Obama is a pretty good speaker....off the cuff. Just being honest here. With all the posts about teleprompters about him I wouldn't have thought so.

But he's actually really good. So there.....I was DECEIVED by conservative blogs.

Just being honest.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: andrew61 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647306 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/5/2012 11:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Obama is a pretty good speaker....off the cuff. Just being honest here. With all the posts about teleprompters about him I wouldn't have thought so.

But he's actually really good. So there.....I was DECEIVED by conservative blogs.

Just being honest.



I thought Obama held his own pretty well in that regard, too. I'd expected much more stammering and stuttering. I was deceived by tele. <LOL>

All in all, I thought Romney did a better job, however. Although I did come away with the feeling that if Romney is elected, we're going to end up only marginally less bad off than under Obama.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: arrete Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647343 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 10:12 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I did come away with the feeling that if Romney is elected, we're going to end up only marginally less bad off than under Obama.
--------------------

If part of that less bad is the abolishment of the death board (IPAP), it's worth it to me. I'm getting too close to the age where it would affect me. Let me and my doctors make the decisions.

arrete

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647348 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 10:14 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If part of that less bad is the abolishment of the death board (IPAP), it's worth it to me. I'm getting too close to the age where it would affect me. Let me and my doctors make the decisions.

arrete
________________________________

If it makes you feel better, the death board will probably not be a problem, You won't be able to find a doctor to diagnose you or a hospital to take you unless you are paying your won way anyway.

So , if you are counting on Medicare, you are worrying about nothing.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 2828 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647352 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 10:23 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I did come away with the feeling that if Romney is elected, we're going to end up only marginally less bad off than under Obama.
--------------------

If part of that less bad is the abolishment of the death board (IPAP), it's worth it to me. I'm getting too close to the age where it would affect me. Let me and my doctors make the decisions.

arrete
--------------------
I know it's really cool to hate both sides and call them exactly the same. It's almost as cool as being a democrat, but i don't see in this instance it being the same, what with Obamacare and the fiscal cliff and the enormous debt. It's night and day what both sides claim to want to do.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jim2B Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647360 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 11:00 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I know it's really cool to hate both sides and call them exactly the same. It's almost as cool as being a democrat, but i don't see in this instance it being the same, what with Obamacare and the fiscal cliff and the enormous debt. It's night and day what both sides claim to want to do.

I agree with this.

Four major areas of concern I have with government:

1. Economy
2. Fiscal policy
3. Personal freedoms and Constitutional protections
4. Foreign policy and international relationships

In 3/4 of these Mitt is clearly better than Obama. On the fourth (personal freedoms and Constitutional protections), I suspect Mitt will be better but don't have hard evidence to support that belief.

On the Foreign policy side, I find it hard to believe that anyone could unintentionally do as bad as Obama.

There are a variety of others areas that we could compare in which Mitt comes out as the clear winner too:
A. Race relations
B. Divisiveness
C. Leadership
D. Bipartisanship
E. Etc.

I fail to conceive of a single presidential topic in which Obama beats Romney but am willing to concede that Obama beats Romney in things like fund raising, basketball skills, golf skills, etc.

I can think of areas in which they rank equal though.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jim2B Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647361 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 11:04 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Also say what you like about Bush II's foreign policy, but

he got things done
our enemies feared us
our friends may not have liked us as much as they did under Clinton but they respected us and were willing to work with us


Obama got nothing done
Our enemies laugh at us
Our friends don't like us and they also laugh at us


Even liberals shouldn't be able to look at the results of Obama foreign policy and claim this as a win for Obama.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647362 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 11:07 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I fail to conceive of a single presidential topic in which Obama beats Romney but am willing to concede that Obama beats Romney in things like fund raising, basketball skills, golf skills, etc.
______________________________

I do not know if Mitt golfs, but if he does, I would bet on Mitt

I do not know if Mitt plays basketball, but I expect if he does, it would be an interesting game.

I would like to see a fund raising battle on terms where Obama is not the incumbent.

I would not concede any of these, but I do agree that there are many where they are likely equal. There are also areas where I am sure Obama would beat Romney, unless Romney were allowed to prepare like a test on Alinsky tactics or Cloward and Piven or how to roll a tight joint

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647364 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 11:09 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Even liberals shouldn't be able to look at the results of Obama foreign policy and claim this as a win for Obama.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Depends on the game you are actually playing, have you ever played low hand poker?

I am not conspiracy theory minded, but even with that I can't rule it out.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CCinOC Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647372 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 11:56 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Jobs have a hard time being created in this environment. From a mortgage industry newsletter.

Over the past four years, it seems that everyone has been demanding that something be done to "fix Wall Street," and Dodd-Frank and Occupy Wall Street, it would appear, have not been sufficient. The Justice Department hasn't actually convicted any of the high-profile bankers who played a large part in the financial crisis, and data from the IMF suggests that the capital markets are no less vulnerable to crash and fraud than they were in 2008. Despite aggressive rhetoric from the White House, the Obama Administration has opted to go after institutions rather than individuals. This method has prompted criticism due to the fact that such settlements don't involve any actual admission of wrongdoing and the dollar amounts they cost banks are really not all that significant. Take, for instance the $25 billion foreclosure abuses settlement with Wells, Ally Financial, Citibank, BofA, and Chase. There's also the issue of time, money, and expertise. It's much more expensive and logistically difficult to go after a plethora of individuals. In the post-9/11 era, the FBI and Justice Department have been focused mainly on counter-terrorism, a whole other can of worms. In addition, insiders cite pure and simple fear of financial institutions failing if they were indicted and the resulting effects on the already-precarious global markets.

Wall Street often points to lenders offering lax guidelines, or not underwriting loans to published criteria. There is some argument there. But in the halcyon days of pre-2007, it was possible to be given a mortgage loan with little more than a credit score--no verification of income or assets required. To make a gross understatement, things have changed since then, and many borrowers are having difficulty qualifying for loans due to "hyper-strict" lender underwriting standards. With 30-year mortgage rates at historic lows, some are hopeful that banks might be relaxing those standards, but industry data actually points in the other direction. The average credit score on new loans closed in August 2012 was 750, nine points higher than August 2011. When analyzing a sample from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which dominate the conventional loan market, the average score is 763, a point higher than it was a year ago. For reference, less than 22% of consumers have credit scores over 749. A sizeable chunk of the population are therefore unlikely to qualify for a mortgage should they want to purchase a home, long touted as part of the American Dream.

Data on down payments reflects a trend towards tighter requirements as well. Back in 2005, the median down payment percentage for American borrowers was a mere 2%, and 43% of borrowers put down nothing at all. Compare this to the most recent numbers from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac borrowers, who on average put down 21% and had clean debt-to-income ratios. The actual time it takes to process a mortgage loan has also increased. The more checks in place, after all, the more time it takes to review them. Underwriters doing 6-8 loans per day have turned into auditors doing 2-3 files per day. From August 2011 to August 2012, the average time it took a loan to close from its application date increased from 40 to 49 days. The time it took to process a refinance increased from 37 to 51 days. Indeed, frustrated would-be buyers are saying, "but when will lenders start to loosen their standards?" Eventually, lenders will probably relax a bit about potential regulatory requirements*, have fewer fears about expensive "buyback" demands from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and remove some of the fees associated with extra credit risk. For the time being, however, don't count on anything.

* As of the second quarter of 2012, only one third of the regulations contained in the Dodd-Frank Act have actually been implemented. Mitt Romney alluded to the business-strangling nature of Dodd-Frank during the recent presidential debate.

http://www.ibtimes.com/dodd-frank-rules-nearly-9000-pages-it...

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: CCinOC Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647374 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 11:57 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
AOLF wrote: Noooo......that was the first quesiton in the debate by that PBS dube.

And Obama didn't even come close to answering the question. Our foolish president hasn't a clue.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CCinOC Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647380 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 12:11 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
lowstudent wrote: I do not know if Mitt golfs, but if he does, I would bet on Mitt. I do not know if Mitt plays basketball, but I expect if he does, it would be an interesting game.

If Romney is elected, I expect four years of head-down, no Hawaii vacations, no long weekends, pure get 'er done massive action.

Obama is a golfing, basketball shootin' slouch.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647384 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 12:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
If Romney is elected, I expect four years of head-down, no Hawaii vacations, no long weekends, pure get 'er done massive action.
_____________________________

Without a doubt.

But he will take a vacation, or spend some down time at home.

He will do both of these things in a professional manner while fully in touch and without shutting down entire communities to do it.

Yet we will hear caterwauling all over the place.

He will also actually do things like meet with his Cabinet, and attend daily briefings meet with Senators and Congressmen from both parties, heck he even will likely have press conferences without only a staged question from a source no one ever heard of before.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: warrl Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647388 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 12:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
With 30-year mortgage rates at historic lows, some are hopeful that banks might be relaxing those standards, but industry data actually points in the other direction.

OF COURSE it's going in the opposite direction.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that between costs of issuing a loan that are not covered by fees, costs of foreclosing on and disposing of a property, and the cost of funds tied up in non-performing mortgages, lenders collectively lose about 25% of the purchase price (or outstanding balance if higher) when a two-year-old mortgage is foreclosed on. (I am not claiming that this number is accurate; I have no idea. Like I said, let's assume.)

On a nothing-down loan at 8% interest, that's a touch over 3 years interest on a single performing loan of the same size. If the buyer paid as agreed for the first year, there are only 2 years left.

On a nothing-down loan at 3% interest, that's about 8 years interest on the performing loan, and there are 7 years left. More than 3 times as long.

And even that isn't the final story, because lenders have ongoing costs that aren't tied to interest rates. If those amount to 1%, then the lenders net 7% on the first loan and it takes about 3.6 years for a performing loan to cover the loss; the second loan nets 2% and it takes 12.5 years - a large fraction of the term of a mortgage, which means that the mortgage is paid down to a more significant degree so the interest stream is slowing and it's actually longer than that.

At lower interest rates lending standards are stricter - because lenders aren't complete idiots. (The ones who are, go broke - or get government-backed guarantees and the government goes broke.)

You CANNOT get sane but easy lending with low interest rates. Period. It's a contradiction in terms.

And we cannot afford more insane lending. We should be thanking lenders for not loaning money to bad credit risks - not criticizing or prosecuting them.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: CCinOC Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647395 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 1:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
warrl wrote: And we cannot afford more insane lending. We should be thanking lenders for not loaning money to bad credit risks - not criticizing or prosecuting them.

The article isn't blaming bankers. It's explaining how difficult lending is these days, how that difficulty is suppressing the housing market, and why lenders are loathe to relax underwriting standards even a little bit.

Also, the article isn't talking about prosecuting CURRENT bank executives, but about prior bank executives have ESCAPED prosecution.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: warrl Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 647417 of 736296
Subject: Re: Creating Jobs?? Date: 10/6/2012 4:21 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
warrl wrote: And we cannot afford more insane lending. We should be thanking lenders for not loaning money to bad credit risks - not criticizing or prosecuting them.

The article isn't blaming bankers. It's explaining how difficult lending is these days, how that difficulty is suppressing the housing market, and why lenders are loathe to relax underwriting standards even a little bit.


That article isn't blaming bankers, but the fact is that our beloved benevolent national government is still threatening penalties and sanctions against banks that don't make enough loans to people who can't reasonably be expected to pay them back.

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (25) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement