Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

There is a bright side, less conversions of marinas to condos.
Basically, the subprime mortgages were intended to get poor people who
otherwise couldnt get a mortgage buy a house with low or no collateral
(a really bad idea). What happed was that everybody realized "What,
no collateral, I can now finance any bizarre thing I want as long as
its real estate". So, a lot of it went into what people expected to
appreciate, coastal property bought with almost nothing and often
actually nothing down. They couldnt lose. In Florida the state
forces everybody else to subsidize insurance on homes built in bad
locations. Not only could they afford a loan with nothing down, they
could afford the insurance. Older Marinas that are always of marginal
business worth saw their property values and hence their taxes
skyrocket, they HAD to sell out.

Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

wrote in message
...
There is a bright side, less conversions of marinas to condos.
Basically, the subprime mortgages were intended to get poor people who
otherwise couldnt get a mortgage buy a house with low or no collateral
(a really bad idea). What happed was that everybody realized "What,
no collateral, I can now finance any bizarre thing I want as long as
its real estate". So, a lot of it went into what people expected to
appreciate, coastal property bought with almost nothing and often
actually nothing down. They couldnt lose. In Florida the state
forces everybody else to subsidize insurance on homes built in bad
locations. Not only could they afford a loan with nothing down, they
could afford the insurance. Older Marinas that are always of marginal
business worth saw their property values and hence their taxes
skyrocket, they HAD to sell out.


You still crying about the insurance?
If you don't like it...move elsewhere.

Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...
There is a bright side, less conversions of marinas to condos.
Basically, the subprime mortgages were intended to get poor people who
otherwise couldnt get a mortgage buy a house with low or no collateral
(a really bad idea). What happed was that everybody realized "What,
no collateral, I can now finance any bizarre thing I want as long as
its real estate". So, a lot of it went into what people expected to
appreciate, coastal property bought with almost nothing and often
actually nothing down. They couldnt lose. In Florida the state
forces everybody else to subsidize insurance on homes built in bad
locations. Not only could they afford a loan with nothing down, they
could afford the insurance. Older Marinas that are always of marginal
business worth saw their property values and hence their taxes
skyrocket, they HAD to sell out.


You still crying about the insurance?
If you don't like it...move elsewhere.



I don't believe he understands how insurance works. One of the
"fundamental" concepts of insurance is the mechanism insurance companies
provide for sharing the risks. The rates we pay for homeowners'
insurance here are partially determined by the losses our insurance
company incurs on the real properties of others, no matter where those
properties are. Same with boat insurance, of course.

When we lived in Florida, I was appalled at the rates insurance
companies charged for all sorts of coverage. At that time, it was
revealed in many news articles how the GOP-dominated state insurance
commission basically bent over for the insurance companies and allowed
them to charge whatever they wanted, sans any serious regulation by the
state.

That's the GOP dream world: no government regulation. It's behind the
mess we have on Wall Street and until he flip-flopped earlier this week,
it was part of the McCain Doctrine.

Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

"Harry the K" wrote in message
...


That's the GOP dream world: no government regulation. It's behind the mess
we have on Wall Street and until he flip-flopped earlier this week, it was
part of the McCain Doctrine.


Also behind Bill Clinton in 1999.

There's enough blame to spread around to virtually everybody.

Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Harry the K" wrote in message
...

That's the GOP dream world: no government regulation. It's behind the mess
we have on Wall Street and until he flip-flopped earlier this week, it was
part of the McCain Doctrine.


Also behind Bill Clinton in 1999.

There's enough blame to spread around to virtually everybody.




While there is plenty of blame, most of it should be layed off against
the Republicans, and a lot of that blame should be heaped upon Phil
Gramm and his economic acolyte John McCain. It is the Republicans who
abhor government regulation, although it has been interesting this week
to watch the gang that works so hard to privatize profit work at least
as hard to socialize loss.

It's kind of funny to be blaming Bill Clinton. Bush has been president
for almost eight years, and for six of those years his party controlled
congress. During Bush's presidency, there have been plenty of signs the
deregulated financial sector was in deep doo-doo and heading for a hard
fall. Bush is the head of state. He did nothing.

I suspect as the thinking part of the electorate realizes this, the
tight polls that at the moment favor McCain will shift. As an aside, I
find it fascinating that neither McCain nor Palin will "meet the press"
at an open press conference. I suspect it is because McCain doesn't know
enough about the economy and how it works to say anything unprompted
that won't bite him in the ass. As for Palin, she really is turning out
to be a cipher.

Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

"Harry the K" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Harry the K" wrote in message
...

That's the GOP dream world: no government regulation. It's behind the
mess we have on Wall Street and until he flip-flopped earlier this week,
it was part of the McCain Doctrine.


Also behind Bill Clinton in 1999.

There's enough blame to spread around to virtually everybody.


While there is plenty of blame, most of it should be layed off against the
Republicans, and a lot of that blame should be heaped upon Phil Gramm and
his economic acolyte John McCain. It is the Republicans who abhor
government regulation, although it has been interesting this week to watch
the gang that works so hard to privatize profit work at least as hard to
socialize loss.

It's kind of funny to be blaming Bill Clinton. Bush has been president for
almost eight years, and for six of those years his party controlled
congress. During Bush's presidency, there have been plenty of signs the
deregulated financial sector was in deep doo-doo and heading for a hard
fall. Bush is the head of state. He did nothing.

I suspect as the thinking part of the electorate realizes this, the tight
polls that at the moment favor McCain will shift. As an aside, I find it
fascinating that neither McCain nor Palin will "meet the press" at an open
press conference. I suspect it is because McCain doesn't know enough about
the economy and how it works to say anything unprompted that won't bite
him in the ass. As for Palin, she really is turning out to be a cipher.


Holy crap. You sure run a long time on a nickel.

Eisboch

Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Harry the K" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Harry the K" wrote in message
...

That's the GOP dream world: no government regulation. It's behind the
mess we have on Wall Street and until he flip-flopped earlier this week,
it was part of the McCain Doctrine.

Also behind Bill Clinton in 1999.

There's enough blame to spread around to virtually everybody.

While there is plenty of blame, most of it should be layed off against the
Republicans, and a lot of that blame should be heaped upon Phil Gramm and
his economic acolyte John McCain. It is the Republicans who abhor
government regulation, although it has been interesting this week to watch
the gang that works so hard to privatize profit work at least as hard to
socialize loss.

It's kind of funny to be blaming Bill Clinton. Bush has been president for
almost eight years, and for six of those years his party controlled
congress. During Bush's presidency, there have been plenty of signs the
deregulated financial sector was in deep doo-doo and heading for a hard
fall. Bush is the head of state. He did nothing.

I suspect as the thinking part of the electorate realizes this, the tight
polls that at the moment favor McCain will shift. As an aside, I find it
fascinating that neither McCain nor Palin will "meet the press" at an open
press conference. I suspect it is because McCain doesn't know enough about
the economy and how it works to say anything unprompted that won't bite
him in the ass. As for Palin, she really is turning out to be a cipher.


Holy crap. You sure run a long time on a nickel.

Eisboch




You're a funny guy. You bitch and moan if you think I am getting
personal, and you bitch and moan if I give you a non-personal, reasoned
response to one of your posts or responses.

Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

"Harry the K" wrote in message
. ..



Holy crap. You sure run a long time on a nickel.

Eisboch


You're a funny guy. You bitch and moan if you think I am getting personal,
and you bitch and moan if I give you a non-personal, reasoned response to
one of your posts or responses.


Harry, I hate to burst your bubble but I rarely read more than the first
sentence or two of your political posts.
For the most part, they are all the same, regurgitating the same political
spin over and over and over. What makes it worse is it's almost word for
word what one hears daily in the media as the political pundits recite the
party lines.

You need to include a flag or keyword or something to indicate you are
posting a new, original thought. I might take the time to read that.

Eisboch

Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Harry the K" wrote in message
. ..


Holy crap. You sure run a long time on a nickel.

Eisboch

You're a funny guy. You bitch and moan if you think I am getting personal,
and you bitch and moan if I give you a non-personal, reasoned response to
one of your posts or responses.


Harry, I hate to burst your bubble but I rarely read more than the first
sentence or two of your political posts.
For the most part, they are all the same, regurgitating the same political
spin over and over and over. What makes it worse is it's almost word for
word what one hears daily in the media as the political pundits recite the
party lines.

You need to include a flag or keyword or something to indicate you are
posting a new, original thought. I might take the time to read that.

Eisboch




Perhaps you ought to stick with Justwaitaloogy and the rest of the heavy
thinkers.

Boater benefit from the subprime mess
 

"Harry the K" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"Harry the K" wrote in message
. ..


Holy crap. You sure run a long time on a nickel.

Eisboch

You're a funny guy. You bitch and moan if you think I am getting
personal, and you bitch and moan if I give you a non-personal, reasoned
response to one of your posts or responses.


Harry, I hate to burst your bubble but I rarely read more than the first
sentence or two of your political posts.
For the most part, they are all the same, regurgitating the same
political spin over and over and over. What makes it worse is it's
almost word for word what one hears daily in the media as the political
pundits recite the party lines.

You need to include a flag or keyword or something to indicate you are
posting a new, original thought. I might take the time to read that.

Eisboch


Perhaps you ought to stick with Justwaitaloogy and the rest of the heavy
thinkers.


At least they have new material. A typical post from you reads almost
exactly as one you posted an hour ago which is the same as one posted a day
ago, which is the same as one posted a week ago. Or a month. Or a year.
They are all the same. All that changes is the date and time.

Eisboch