goo0h
Well-known
Best answer so far! 😀sitemistic said:Sam Adams Boston Lager. Go USA!
(Though, lately I've been enjoying some Murphy's stout. So I guess I'm contributing to the trade imbalance. Oh well, need to get some more HP5+ soon anyway.)
Best answer so far! 😀sitemistic said:Sam Adams Boston Lager. Go USA!
grizzz said:I'll be gettting nothing. I am not rich. No one on my salary in the Washington DC area would ever consider that $75k is rich. What really irks me is my boss makes well into six figures and his wife works at a day care place a few times a week. I am sure they come in just under the $150k and will get a nice check from the gov't no doubt to buy little accent peices for their pool. I could use the dough towards repairing my basement wall that is caving in casue I can't afford to live in his neighborhood.
Thardy said:Why does the boss get the rebate and you don't?
Thardy said:Yeah, I took another look at it. Not really fair. 🙁
rover said:That depends on how much she eats.
uhligfd said:I thought Leica users earned too much to qualify for the hand-out.
Was I ever wrong! High value camera apparently does not equal a high income.
How cute! On RFForum we thus all "suffer" for our artsy desires. Great!
As I understand it, it became crisis when these loans to suspect borrowers were selected out, repackaged as bonds and sold to financial institutions (hedge and pension funds) in non-transparent packages. So now if all of the loans quickly devalue, there is a risk of huge chain reaction throughout the financial system. It is in best interest of everyone to at least smooth out devaluation.digitalintrigue said:Can someone explain this 'housing crisis?' We have lenders who lent money to relatively suspect borrowers, and borrowers who are faced with adjustable rate mortgage increases. No guns were put to either the lender's or the borrower's heads. Both parties were betting the real estate value would continue to increase.
So, some of the irrational exhuberance calms down and there is a correction in the real estate market. These borrowers now have no equity or negative equity in their homes. OK, so this is a problem only if they have to sell (or decide to sell) their home. And the lenders should learn from their risky ways, should they not? If someone makes a poor business decision, should the government be there to bail them out?