Fannie/Freddie to be discontinued?

• Manhattan Buckeye

  http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/25/usa-housing-finance-idUSL1N0BP89120130225?type=companyNews&feedType=RSS&feedName=companyNews&rpc=43
  
  No word yet from Barney Frank.
• O-Trap

  

  Somehow, I don't see this getting through.
  
  Something about relinquishing power to the private sector seems to fly in the face of normative behavior of those who have the power to do it.
• gut

  Not to mention all the cries over the "unfairness" when people with bad credit and/or no jobs can't get a mortgage
  
  Ehhhh, who am I kidding? They'll replace it with a program where Uncle Sam just gives the 47% their downpayment.
• stlouiedipalma

  Who cares? I've got mine, the rest can go to hell. Isn't that the mantra you folks all support?
• O-Trap

  

  stlouiedipalma;1396815 wrote:Who cares? I've got mine, the rest can go to hell. Isn't that the mantra you folks all support?

  Truth is, I don't "have mine" with a lot of things, as is the case with a lot of people. What does "having mine" (whatever that even means) have to do with this?
• stlouiedipalma

  It just seems as though compassion has become a dirty word these days. The very folks who argue for elimination of many government programs for the poor somehow feel that the poor don't need the help, that they are lazy "takers". Perhaps they feel that someone is "getting something for nothing" and it bothers them. It's like the seniors who refuse to vote in favor of a school levy because their children are adults now and they have no one in the school system. They forget that a lot of folks paid taxes which made their public education possible. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I just don't see much in the way of compassion these days.
• O-Trap

  

  stlouiedipalma;1396842 wrote:It just seems as though compassion has become a dirty word these days. The very folks who argue for elimination of many government programs for the poor somehow feel that the poor don't need the help, that they are lazy "takers". Perhaps they feel that someone is "getting something for nothing" and it bothers them. It's like the seniors who refuse to vote in favor of a school levy because their children are adults now and they have no one in the school system. They forget that a lot of folks paid taxes which made their public education possible. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I just don't see much in the way of compassion these days.

  I don't disagree, but to be honest, I don't see any real compassion in such programs, either.
  
  If I were asked to define compassion at its most base form, I would suggest it to be a willingness to give of oneself in order to help someone else who needs it. I can't say I would include forcibly coercing others to do the same. I would argue that the latter does enable what few "takers" exist (the ones most often publicized) to continue in the same vein. In essence, I think it only solidifies the cycle.
  
  My heart goes out to the kids in my neighborhood whose parents exhibit an attitude of entitlement. Like it or not, that attitude DOES exist. Certainly, not all people going through hard times have it. Same with the more affluent people in the nation. There are some who have an entitlement about what they own. The attitude exists across all socioeconomic plateaus.
  
  But my heart goes out to these kids because they usually end up adopting their parents' worldview, including this. They're not stupid kids. They're not lazy kids. However, some will be "taught" to be lazy, such that they will believe their worldview justified.
  
  Compassion MUST exist, and I would suggest that any community which wishes for a thriving society will have elements of compassion as they are necessary. However, I simply believe this ought to be (a) volitional, and (b) up to the communities and individuals to decide what the specific needs are within the community.
  
  When I see nationwide programs that are put into place in a well-intentioned effort to help or solve problems that change from area to area, to me it is as if a doctor is trying to make thousands of small, precise incisions into a body using a chainsaw.
  
  Each community, though small, has (as Liam Neeson would put it) a particular set of skills. I am more than convinced that these skills would be far more effective in solving their community's problems than the blunt instrument that is Federal legislation. I believe far more in the power and talent of a community to solve its own problems and adapt to suit its circumstances than a large entity which doesn't know or care about the uniqueness of each community and tries to address each one with the same "solution cookie cutter."
  
  So when I see programs that cost everyone money and that provide something to only some of the population without ANY context or frame of reference, I don't see compassion.
  
  It's when I see someone giving of their time, effort, and money to people in need within their communities ... people who have a back-story and a context to their needs ... THAT's when I see compassion.
• gut

  Compassion is not about giving handouts with money we don't have. That's punitive, even for the people it supposedly is helping (the long-run damage to the economy hurts everyone, especially the poor and middle class).
  
  I don't see anyone here (well, maybe Sleeper) calling for anything more than a balanced budget. That opposing trillion dollar deficits somehow means people lack compassion is nothing more than an ignorant liberal talking point.
• queencitybuckeye

  stlouiedipalma;1396842 wrote:It just seems as though compassion has become a dirty word these days. The very folks who argue for elimination of many government programs for the poor somehow feel that the poor don't need the help, that they are lazy "takers". Perhaps they feel that someone is "getting something for nothing" and it bothers them. It's like the seniors who refuse to vote in favor of a school levy because their children are adults now and they have no one in the school system. They forget that a lot of folks paid taxes which made their public education possible. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I just don't see much in the way of compassion these days.

  Lending people money for a house they can't afford is the very antithesis of compassion.
• believer

  

  As long as we keep printing money out of thin air, we can redistribute compassion at will. No harm, no foul, right?