Forum Post: Should We Demand Write-Downs?
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 29, 2011, 12:04 p.m. EST by AlternativeSynergy
(224)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Wall Street, the Federal Reserve, and misguided government policies created the housing bubble, inflating the prices of housing far beyond its real value in many areas. Now 11 million Americans are underwater on their mortgages, stuck making payments that don’t make economic sense; the extra money going to these inflated payments that could otherwise be used for consumer spending has become a severe drag on the economy.
Should we demand write-downs of the principle on these inflated mortgages? Or is that a can of worms we don't want to open.
Raise the common stock for fannie and freddie mac! the people bailed them out and the people should be rewarded. My retirement fund is in those stocks and I am watching the preferred stocks that I cannot buy grow five times their original value, whereas I lose everything! They took my money in taxes and then gave people who are rich the ability to get richer!!!! I have lost everything and this is my only hope... I need help
one of the the demands is debt forgiveness,holding a debt ceiling of 50 trillion is bogus..the money is not real,the debt is just made up
I just think that due to the fraudulent nature of the creation of the housing bubble, some sort of relief is in order.
Actually, that applies generally when all things are considered.
if you forgive all debt that exists in the country that means the debt owed by the government to the public - pensions, medical insurance, social security, etc must be written off.
No. That kind of demand just reinforces the "asking for handouts" stereotype. We need to focus on real democracy and placing sensible regulations on businesses.
But isn't the way housing prices were artificially inflated a sort of a con-job. If prices were driven up fraudulently aren't we within our ethical rights to demand a write-down? (I'm not underwater on my mortgage, so I'm not speaking out of self-interest)
You buy something. The value of it goes down, so you can't sell it. But you still pay a loan on the original amount. That sucks for you financially, but it isn't a violation of law. True the banks were playing it fast and loose from a moral stand point, but no laws were broken (in most cases mind you) so we have no legal right to enforce that demand. The banks might do it voluntarily, but I don't think we can bring that much pressure to bear.
What really needs to be addressed is the banks trying to take homes from people who don't even have a mortgage, or who haven't missed any payments. This is a serious, systemic problem, that is absolutely illegal but judges sign off on the documents by the hundreds without reading them.
Anything can be demanded, and nothing provided UNLESS the authority is present to compel action. Since government is supposed to operate under law, it is the authority over them that is needed, the law. When demands are made that do NOT invoke law, you can be dismissed with no action whatsoever.
http://algoxy.com/ows/strategyofamerica.html
IF these demands are on the level of federal reserve finance, THEN the maximum authority is needed.
An Article 5 of the US constitution is the appropriate law to use. Invoke the law by demanding your state legislation apply to congress for an article 5 convention. Use the misguided policies that are unconstitutional to justify your demand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to_propose_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution "Congress acted preemptively to propose the amendments instead. At least four amendments (the Seventeenth, Twenty-First, Twenty-Second, and Twenty-Fifth Amendments) have been identified as being proposed by Congress at least partly in response to the threat of an Article V convention."
Our first right in our contract is Article V, the right to have congress convene delgates when 2/3 of the states have applied for an amendatory convention.
Article. V.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.-------