mortgage rates

[taters]

mortgage rates have dropped inn this area to 4.5% and it looks like 4% is a real possibility...might have to look to buy..any one here take advantage of the lower rates?

[smiller]

If you happen to be moving I guess it's good news, or maybe if you're looking to refinance, but otherwise I don't think that there's too many people looking to make a killing in real estate investments these days. The decline might have started to level off in some localized areas of the country but the regions that saw the highest rate of appreciation almost certainly still have a ways to go before prices stabilize, and it doesn't take much of a decline to offset a slightly lower interest rate.

[keithb]

I have been watching the rates and have thought about it. 5 years ago I refied down to 5.4%, cut 7 yrs. off the loan, and knocked $30 off the monthly payment. Got all of this for a total of $200 from my lender. If I can something close to this again it is a total no brainer.

[Joel]

I'm thinking about a refi, even though I'm only 6 months into a new mortgage. But, based on my experience of being a buyer this year, I'd be very wary of buying or financing anything other than a principal residence. Two takeaways from that experience: (1) Underwriting can still be tense even a high credit score. I think my colonoscopy was less invasive than the U/W process for my mortgage, even with a 800 credit score. (2) Lots of appraisers are now afraid of their own shadows and have gone WAY beyond conservative. With the spike in foreclosures, and people making desperate deals, valuations can be on thin ice. In these market conditions, the appraisal contingency might be the most important clause in a purchase contract.

[mrduck]

mortgage rates have dropped inn this area to 4.5% and it looks like 4% is a real possibility...might have to look to buy..any one here take advantage of the lower rates?

 

Cheap Advice Alert!

 

You betcha we did! Just bought another house around the corner from us for our son and his soon to be wife. Only been in less than 6 months and gonna do a streamline re-fi, down about a point an a half. Should drop the payment down even more!

I was in the house building biz for a lotta years, and this is the third time I've seen this happen,gotta believe things will come back after awhile.

If ya have a somewhat steady sorce of income, Now's the time IMHO.

[11101110]

The week before last Clark Howard was predicting mortage rates in th low four and might even start with a three.

[OoPEZoO]

I have a running spreadsheet comparing a whole bunch of things right now, and I'm about to pull the trigger on refinancing. I'm 4 years into a 30 year mortgage set at 5.5%. Not bad, but I started looking at the 15 year rates. With my current remaining principal and the new 15yr rates, I can drop from a 30yr mortgage to a 15yr mortgage and my monthly payment will only go up by about $30. If rates drop any more I will be able to keep my payment the same or even lower.

 

Its a great time to buy/refinance if you've been smart (or lucky) with your money

[lawnchairboy]

I am in the market also, also great credit. Lenders seem to be VERY tight fisted... for no apparent reason attributable to me....

[John Ranalletta]

If there's not a significant rate advantage, why would you opt for a 15 year over a 30? Take the 30 and double up the principal payment each month. If you get in jam, you can always drop back to the 30 year payment.

[Nice n Easy Rider]

If there's not a significant rate advantage, why would you opt for a 15 year over a 30? Take the 30 and double up the principal payment each month. If you get in jam, you can always drop back to the 30 year payment.

 

+1 Given the current economic turmoil, and the total unpredictability of where things are going, I'd stay as flexible as possible.

[steve.foote]

If there's not a significant rate advantage, why would you opt for a 15 year over a 30? Take the 30 and double up the principal payment each month. If you get in jam, you can always drop back to the 30 year payment.

 

To expand on your comments, John, why even double down on the principal? If you are able to lock in below 5%, that is really cheap money allowing one to move free capital into other instruments which will rise as interest rates rebound in the coming years. I think it's entirely possible that passbook savings rates could eclipse 5% in the not too distant future.

[John Ranalletta]

If there's not a significant rate advantage, why would you opt for a 15 year over a 30? Take the 30 and double up the principal payment each month. If you get in jam, you can always drop back to the 30 year payment.

 

To expand on your comments, John, why even double down on the principal? If you are able to lock in below 5%, that is really cheap money allowing one to move free capital into other instruments which will rise as interest rates rebound in the coming years. I think it's entirely possible that passbook savings rates could eclipse 5% in the not too distant future.

In an efficient market, one would have to accept some risk to better the mortgage rate. I'm with DCB on this one in that I'd never advise a person to borrow on home equity to invest elsewhere. Yep, I realize that the house is just another asset, but living in a mortgage-free house has its psychological advantages-at least for me.

 

The numbers are fairly compelling for accelerating principal payments. On a $100k, 30-year loan at 5%, the monthly payment is $536.82 and the total interest paid would be $93,256 over the life of the loan.

 

If a person made a $816 monthly payment on the same loan, it would be retired in 14 years, 3 months for a savings in interest of $52,983. The payment on the same loan amortized over 15 years is $791. I'd get the 30, make the $816 payment (or more as cash is available). It's only $25 more per month, and it gives the borrower the flexibility to throttle back to the $536 payment if cash is tight; and, it saves another $2k in interest over the 15 year, amortized normally.

[motoguy128]

I am in the market also, also great credit. Lenders seem to be VERY tight fisted... for no apparent reason attributable to me....

 

The current rate of foreclosures might have something to do with it. It's not so much that lenders are being tight, rather than they were very... very loose with their lending during "the bubble" over the last decade. As mentioned earlier, appraisers are also under a lot of pressure to be more realistic.

 

We mgith try to refinance this year ourselves, but we're not sure how the appraisal will come out so we're holding off for a while. THe comparables aren't real good because most homes our size are owned by people that haven't updated them since Carter or Reagan were in office.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

We locked in a 30-year fixed-rate 4.5% refi last week. Have to pay 1.75 points plus closing costs, but comparing to our current mortage, we will recover those costs in 30 months.

 

Excel is a great tool for comparing mortgage options, allowing you to run the payments out for a few years and see how different mortgages compare to each other and to one's existing mortgage. I highly recommend getting familiar with Excel's finance functions; much more informative than the simple "payment calculator" you find on a lot of bank websites.

[OoPEZoO]

If there's not a significant rate advantage, why would you opt for a 15 year over a 30? Take the 30 and double up the principal payment each month. If you get in jam, you can always drop back to the 30 year payment.

 

There is a pretty significant rate difference. I'm looking at dropping from 5.5% to under 4.5%. I've run the numbers, if it didn't make sense for me I wouldn't be considering it.

 

As to your other point. Instead of making that double payment every month, I would end up doing less and throwing that money somewhere else. Retarded, I know.......but I know thats what would happen. I'm also in a bit of a unique situation. We are currently, and have been for 4 years, living on one income (mine). My fiance Danielle graduates from nursing school as a RN in May and is already guaranteed a job with the hospital she works at. Once that happens, our income doubles and cutting my mortgage from 26yrs to 15yrs makes sense, even if our payment goes up a couple of bucks. Doing that will have my house payed off by the time I'm in my mid forty's, and before any of my kids (which we don't have yet) are in high school. To me it sounds like a pretty good plan.

[John Ranalletta]

I remember when you got that first mortgage and I speculated that we'd not see lower rates for a generation. Who knew the entire banking/financial structure would grenade? Good on you.

[John Ranalletta]

Cool. Sounds as you've got a good handle on the numbers and your own strengths and challenges.

 

Bona fortuna.

[Paul_Burkett]

but living in a mortgage-free house has its psychological advantages-at least for me.

 

John is spot on with this thought, you can invest your money and watch it grow, and then see it disappear like we have seen in the recent days. But to know that no matter how bad things get, you still have a place to live, and when you have grown children, they have a place to fall back to, that is piece of mind.

 

If you can re-finance to a lower rate and not fall back on where you are now, go for it. The less you pay/month is more that you will have for other things...like gas and food, not toys. This is a time to get your financial house in order, paying off the things that eat away at the family budget, like credit cards and car/bike loans and anything else that keeps you from having that old fashioned thing once called "savings account".

You need to have three months or more in reserve that is ready and on hand to get you through an emergency, and cash is king. That is all I can say on that.

 

Another thing, don't sell your bike to pay off debt, you would regret it later. Start working now to get out of debt and stay there, except for the basics.

 

I have a brother-in law who retired from Oldsmobile at 52 years of age and with the exception of one time, he never owned a new car. His theory was to let someone else take thousands of dollars loss and buy it then. I remember one time he bought a really nice car from a doctor who had put 186,000 miles on it, he then drove it for another 100,000 miles and sold it.

 

The important thing is to know what your priorities need to be for financial security, find out what it takes to achieve them, realize what you may have to give up to obtain them, and then do it. Plan your work and then work your plan. Without a plan you are a ship at sea without a rudder.

 

[steve.foote]

In an efficient market, one would have to accept some risk to better the mortgage rate. I'm with DCB on this one in that I'd never advise a person to borrow on home equity to invest elsewhere. Yep, I realize that the house is just another asset, but living in a mortgage-free house has its psychological advantages-at least for me.

 

The numbers are fairly compelling for accelerating principal payments. On a $100k, 30-year loan at 5%, the monthly payment is $536.82 and the total interest paid would be $93,256 over the life of the loan.

 

If a person made a $816 monthly payment on the same loan, it would be retired in 14 years, 3 months for a savings in interest of $52,983. The payment on the same loan amortized over 15 years is $791. I'd get the 30, make the $816 payment (or more as cash is available). It's only $25 more per month, and it gives the borrower the flexibility to throttle back to the $536 payment if cash is tight; and, it saves another $2k in interest over the 15 year, amortized normally.

 

Six month ago, I'd be in complete agreement with you on this. But, as this current drama plays out, I'm very conflicted about what to tie up in debt vs. equity. There is no question as to higher interest debt (ccards, auto loans, etc.) but a mortgage at such a low fixed rate is really an opportunity to put money to work. I realize that the risk is somewhat higher, but not significantly. We currently have money in a moneymarket drawing 3.35%. Once interest rates begin to climb, the money earned with higher interest rates should easily offset the 4.5% fixed rate being paid to the mortgage co. To me, that seems like putting money in your pocket. Keep the 30yr fixed on autopilot, save the balance at a higher rate and keep the difference.

 

In this market you can never say never, but once interest rates start moving upward, I doubt we'll ever see these low rates again in our lifetime.

[rocks]

Doing that will have my house payed off by the time I'm in my mid forty's, and before any of my kids (which we don't have yet) are in high school. To me it sounds like a pretty good plan/quote]

 

Great plan... but I gotta tell you kids have a unique way of screwing up even the most well thought out plans

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

If you can re-finance to a lower rate and not fall back on where you are now, go for it.

 

Lenders are all very happy to roll closing costs into the new mortgage when you refi, but we're in your camp: we'll arrive at closing with check in hand, and our new mortage will exactly equal what is owed on our current mortgage.

 

Moreover, we're only able to refinance because we put a lot down when we bought the place two years ago. Even with the precipitous drop in the Michigan real estate market, we fully expect we'll be able to escape PMI.

[John Ranalletta]

we fully expect we'll be able to escape PMI

I hope you know this before closing. Does it still take a LTV of 80% or less to escape PMI?

[John Ranalletta]

We currently have money in a moneymarket drawing 3.35%

That's an exceedingly favorable rate. Bankrate.com lists only a handful of banks offering more and they're not multi-star rated.

 

I think interest rates will go to the moon eventually, but not in the short term (12-18 months).

[steve.foote]

Man, what I'd pay for a fully-functional crystal ball.

[John Ranalletta]

Man, what I'd pay for a fully-functional crystal ball.

..or have a friend who has one. I hate to buy tools I can borrow.

[tallman]

Man, what I'd pay for a fully-functional crystal ball.

 

Time to bring out the statistics, if you dare.

 

When

 

Site has a Crystal Ball too.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

we fully expect we'll be able to escape PMI

I hope you know this before closing. Does it still take a LTV of 80% or less to escape PMI?

 

Yes, I think he said 80%. If we can't appraise high enough, we'll borrow less and bring a bigger check to closing.

[steve.foote]

Man, what I'd pay for a fully-functional crystal ball.

 

Time to bring out the statistics, if you dare.

 

When

 

Site has a Crystal Ball too.

 

I ain't touching that one, sorry.

[tallman]

I did.

Wish I hadn't.

I only need 43 more sets of tires...

[lawnchairboy]

"but a mortgage at such a low fixed rate is really an opportunity to put money to work..."

 

yes sir brother... get $$$$ while they are cheap. I wish I had a crystal ball but I am in agreement that rates may not be this favorable again in my lifetime.

 

It is looking like Chesapeake will be my new home in Virginia in early 2009...

 

chris

 

 

[Deadboy]

Where are you guys seeing these rates? I checked www.bankrate.com and see nothing at 4.5% listed anywhere...

 

 

[bakerzdosen]

They have gone up a bit in the past two weeks. The site I frequent listed 4.25% for a 30 year fixed and it's now up to 5.00%.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

Where are you guys seeing these rates? I checked www.bankrate.com and see nothing at 4.5% listed anywhere...

 

My deal (4.5%) was as of Saturday, 12/20, from Fifth Third National Bank.

 

Some of these places don't have their best rates listed on their web paqe, which doesn't make sense to me. I called a bunch of places to see what rates I could get with no points, one point, or two points; they don't typically list the various combinations on their web page, either.

 

No doubt rates have changed in the past week. Whichever direction they've gone, you'll want to make some phone calls to get accurate, up-to-date info on what's available.

[John Ranalletta]

Some of these places don't have their best rates listed on their web paqe, which doesn't make sense to me.

So, nothing's changed since the late '80s. Back then, I developed a 12-line BBS (pre web) running a dBase database aimed at mortgage brokers, banks, etc. The system would allow them to upload their offerings and let borrowers search by rate, mortgage type, etc. For its day, it was pretty nifty.

 

When I presented it to lenders and brokers, there were no takers because they all said they'd never advertise their actual rates because the industry was full of liars and none of the other brokers/lenders could be trusted to post actual data.

[Joe Frickin' Friday]

...they all said they'd never advertise their actual rates because the industry was full of liars and none of the other brokers/lenders could be trusted to post actual data.

 

In concordance with what you've said, I would have expected lenders to list unobtainably low rates on their websites to encourage homeowners to call; it doesn't make sense to discourage further inquiry by listing unattractive rates.

[EffBee]

Man, what I'd pay for a fully-functional crystal ball.

We have one, Steve. When we stop being a part of the "consumer credit society" and step back long enough and often enough, the picture becomes very clear.

 

We stopped buying in 2005. We cleared all debt except mortgages and one car. We'd been doubling and tripling up on the mortgage on our main residence for years and have cut about 9 years off our debt.

 

We saw a crisis coming. I'm not smart enough to have been able to predict when, or the exact form. But it was clear that the government-induced mortgage crisis and the cronyism supporting the heads of Mae and Mac that had taken over these past two years, was a facade and a cover-up. Many an expert, as well as politicians both you and I know, had been warning of this.

 

Our cash is secure and about as inflation-protected as I can make it. We are refinancing our main residence at 4.5% which can be adjusted downward during the escrow if it drops by .25% or more. Our investment properties in Colorado and California are getting new mortgages at 4.75%, a touch higher than our main residence being that they are not owner-occupied. We will save close to $950/month all tolled.

 

If the government and the voting populace are foolish enough to try and buy their way out of this overspending/entitlement hole they've dug us into (and saddled me with some of that load), I'm going to take every advantage I can since I'm getting saddled with it anyway. I no longer have any qualms about sticking anyone else with supporting my mortgage-rate debt if I'm getting stuck with some of the things others voted for and allowed to happen.

 

I've seen this before in Argentina. It's why we emigrated. It's the kind of needle-in-the-arm socialism that brought Juan Peron into power, and his policies (and his attempts to continuously "buy" his way back into power by printing and printing and printing money to support unsustainable unionism and give-away government programs) led to the destruction of what was then the 6th largest economy in the world. It took 40 years for it to recover, but not before martial law, years and years of rampant civil violence, and the raping of the government coffers by the very politicians who were telling the public that they were there to help them. And remember, the Argentine constitution and its form of government, while established by the British, is fashioned after America's.

 

We have been duped. We are getting screwed. We are going to be bled dry and left for dead. And nothing short of a revolution will bring about the re-awakening necessary to return us to the principles this country was founded on and which helped make it great before "intent" became more important than "result," before manufacturerd crises and whipped hysterias took control of peoples' senses, and before being "popular" became a substitue for being right.

[steve.foote]

WOW, spot on!

 

We saw it coming too and liquidated all of our non-mortgage debt. Even our business is debt free now. It's such a shame, but whatever rises from this chaos, I'd like to be able to make the best of. The best play I see right now is picking up more property and financing it with low interest for as long as possible.

 

What opportunities lie beyond that is anyone's guess.

[Matts_12GS]

WOW, spot on!

 

We saw it coming too and liquidated all of our non-mortgage debt. Even our business is debt free now. It's such a shame, but whatever rises from this chaos, I'd like to be able to make the best of. The best play I see right now is picking up more property and financing it with low interest for as long as possible.

 

What opportunities lie beyond that is anyone's guess.

 

+1

 

The hard part will be training yourself to look for those opportunities.

[Lawman]

Man, what I'd pay for a fully-functional crystal ball.

We have one, Steve. When we stop being a part of the "consumer credit society" and step back long enough and often enough, the picture becomes very clear.

 

We stopped buying in 2005. We cleared all debt except mortgages and one car. We'd been doubling and tripling up on the mortgage on our main residence for years and have cut about 9 years off our debt.

 

We saw a crisis coming. I'm not smart enough to have been able to predict when, or the exact form. But it was clear that the government-induced mortgage crisis and the cronyism supporting the heads of Mae and Mac that had taken over these past two years, was a facade and a cover-up. Many an expert, as well as politicians both you and I know, had been warning of this.

 

Our cash is secure and about as inflation-protected as I can make it. We are refinancing our main residence at 4.5% which can be adjusted downward during the escrow if it drops by .25% or more. Our investment properties in Colorado and California are getting new mortgages at 4.75%, a touch higher than our main residence being that they are not owner-occupied. We will save close to $950/month all tolled.

 

If the government and the voting populace are foolish enough to try and buy their way out of this overspending/entitlement hole they've dug us into (and saddled me with some of that load), I'm going to take every advantage I can since I'm getting saddled with it anyway. I no longer have any qualms about sticking anyone else with supporting my mortgage-rate debt if I'm getting stuck with some of the things others voted for and allowed to happen.

 

I've seen this before in Argentina. It's why we emigrated. It's the kind of needle-in-the-arm socialism that brought Juan Peron into power, and his policies (and his attempts to continuously "buy" his way back into power by printing and printing and printing money to support unsustainable unionism and give-away government programs) led to the destruction of what was then the 6th largest economy in the world. It took 40 years for it to recover, but not before martial law, years and years of rampant civil violence, and the raping of the government coffers by the very politicians who were telling the public that they were there to help them. And remember, the Argentine constitution and its form of government, while established by the British, is fashioned after America's.

 

We have been duped. We are getting screwed. We are going to be bled dry and left for dead. And nothing short of a revolution will bring about the re-awakening necessary to return us to the principles this country was founded on and which helped make it great before "intent" became more important than "result," before manufacturerd crises and whipped hysterias took control of peoples' senses, and before being "popular" became a substitue for being right.

 

I read an article yesterday that was about a respected Russian economist that has been predicting the collapse of the U.S.A. in the year 2010 for ten years now..According to the article those who have been scoffing at him for the last ten years are now beginning to take notice..I can't remember where I read it but if I can find it I'll post it..It's chilling..

[Lawman]

Found it..

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

[Lets_Play_Two]

I read an article yesterday that was about a respected Russian economist that has been predicting the collapse of the U.S.A. in the year 2010 for ten years now..According to the article those who have been scoffing at him for the last ten years are now beginning to take notice..I can't remember where I read it but if I can find it I'll post it..It's chilling..

 

Sure makes sense to me that the southern US would eventually come under the influence of Mexico, that shining star of economic, social and financial development. (I wonder who has greater fire power...Mexico or Texans) I want to go with Canada.

 

Interesting----"Mr. Panarin's résumé includes many years in the Soviet KGB, an experience shared by other top Russian officials. His office, in downtown Moscow, shows his national pride, with pennants on the wall bearing the emblem of the FSB, the KGB's successor agency. It is also full of statuettes of eagles; a double-headed eagle was the symbol of czarist Russia."

[Matts_12GS]

Wow, very interesting...

 

I'll take Atlantic America for 1000 Alex

[steve.foote]

Wow, very interesting...

 

I'll take Atlantic America for 1000 Alex

 

I'll take Underestimation of the Redneck Factor for 1000, Alex.

[Boone60]

I think Canada already snuck up and got us. We've had over 42 inches of snow in December and it just started falling again.

[Ken H.]

We have been duped. We are getting screwed. We are going to be bled dry and left for dead. And nothing short of a revolution will bring about the re-awakening necessary

I don’t know that I agree with your reasons, but I do with your prediction. We may disagree how the system is flawed, but I agree a total social/economic collapse and some form of a revolution, is the most likely scenario.

[Ken H.]

Found it..

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

I think 2010 may be a bit optimistic, it’s going to take longer than that for a full fledged civil war to fester and break out. And I’m not so sure it (a collapse) will take the form of a actual war at all. But certainly the “United States of America” is going (IMHO) to become much less, uh, “united” at some point. A splintering of some form is almost unavoidable as the US federal government and it’s currency becomes totally non-functional.

 

ISFA Canada grabbing some of the northern states, some of them are also some of the most conservative ones, which doesn’t necessarily dovetail well with Canada. Can you see the citizens of Montana accepting Canada’s gun control laws!?!

 

[Lawman]

Found it..

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

I think 2010 may be a bit optimistic, it’s going to take longer than that for a full fledged civil war to fester and break out. And I’m not so sure it (a collapse) will take the form of a actual war at all. But certainly the “United States of America” is going (IMHO) to become much less, uh, “united” at some point. A splintering of some form is almost unavoidable as the US federal government and it’s currency becomes totally non-functional.

 

ISFA Canada grabbing some of the northern states, some of them are also some of the most conservative ones, which doesn’t necessarily dovetail well with Canada. Can you see the citizens of Montana accepting Canada’s gun control laws!?!

 

Ken,

I don't know..Change may not be limited to the U.S.

 

http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=yTq2NEUlhDE

[EffBee]

We have been duped. We are getting screwed. We are going to be bled dry and left for dead. And nothing short of a revolution will bring about the re-awakening necessary

I don’t know that I agree with your reasons, but I do with your prediction. We may disagree how the system is flawed, but I agree a total social/economic collapse and some form of a revolution, is the most likely scenario.

(ALSO)

. . .I’m not so sure it (a collapse) will take the form of a actual war at all. But certainly the “United States of America” is going (IMHO) to become much less, uh, “united” at some point. A splintering of some form is almost unavoidable as the US federal government and it’s currency becomes totally non-functional.

 

Ken, I agree that we certainly see the cause differently, though the outcomes may be similar. As for the U.S. being less "united" at some point, I say that point is now.

 

There used to be "Americans." I'm from Argentina, but we didn't come here to be "Argentine-Americans." We came here to be Americans. My parents insisted that we learn and speak English, and that our culture would always be with us, that we didn't have to "live it." We understood the poison that multiculturalism had been in Argentina, where Italians were pitted against Scots who were pitted against Jews who were pitted against Catholics, etc. The principle of Divide and Conquer worked exceedingly well. "They" had more than you did and that wasn't fair. Whether they had more land, or more money, or more access to city services, a greater abundance of food (and Argentina is an ABUNDANT country), whatever could be used to drive a wedge between the population's unity and convert us into smaller, more controllable and manipulable groups, they did. And they drove that class-warfare fever, always explaining to each group how they were getting the short end of the stick, when in reality everyone had everything they needed, they just didn't have what everyone else had. An unequal equality if you will.

 

Then the politicians stepped in and started promising to make things equal. I almost hesitate to use the words because someone could argue I'm being political, but one of Peron's main campaign slogans was, "Lo cambiaremos." "We will change it." Whatever YOUR group wanted, they were promised it. And "the government" would pay for it if you only elected the proper people. The media pounded at it, on the radio and in print. If you weren't on board with this new direction, you were marked as backwards, a non-progressive thinker who wanted the status quo. The term hadn't been coined yet, but there was a lot of pressure to be "politically correct" and want to force equality in all things upon all people by (among other things) redistributing wealth (even though there was very little poverty) into the creation of the unspoken and undefined Utopian Ideal. Keeping it undefined was crucial as the target could then be moved at will to redirect the public and keep it off-balance. Nobody knew when they'd get to the promised land, which direction it was, what it looked like, or what it felt like. But they were sure they'd know it when they saw it. And so they believed. And so they paid. And paid. And paid. Until they had nothing to pay and the government had no more tax money coming in and thus no way to provide the services (including food) that it had been giving to a population which had surrendered drive, motivation, goals and self-sustenance, in exchange for suckling at the federal teat.

 

Eventually the people, broke and hungry, rebelled. A society built upon American-like qualities of respect for law and each other, broke down into street survival. Martial law was imposed, and it was brutal. In a country of what was then 40 million people, there were more than 120,000 "desaparacidos." "The disappeared ones." Cross the government, cross the military, and your remains were never found. Even after order had been restored in the 80's, every Sunday mothers and fathers of disappeared spouses and older children would march in mourning through the downtown districts of cities. In Buenos Aires, the lines were more than 8 miles long. This lasted for years.

 

No, Ken, we're not going to start becoming less "united" sometime in the future. We're less united right now. And if anyone puts aside their political perspective and just looks objectively at what has been done to us, you can see it. Political correctness does not unite. Diversity is by its own definition and verbiage, divisive. Multiculturalism is not an embracing of our differences, it is an isolating of them for the purpose of keeping us apart. It's not that the intent wasn't good. But intent is something we can't afford to fund any more. We need results. We need cohesiveness. We need unity. Hunger is a great motivator in providing all of these. We just need to beat it to the punch and get back to the unity, with all its disparities, that made this country great, that made us above all other differences, One people with One purpose.

 

I wasn't born here. I never got the chance to take it for granted. My family had to ask for permission to come here, to wait our turn, to follow the rules, and then to LEARN how we could contribute to the greater whole, not how we could take from it. It was in the process of contributing, that we received the opportunity America was famous for.

[Lawman]

We have been duped. We are getting screwed. We are going to be bled dry and left for dead. And nothing short of a revolution will bring about the re-awakening necessary

I don’t know that I agree with your reasons, but I do with your prediction. We may disagree how the system is flawed, but I agree a total social/economic collapse and some form of a revolution, is the most likely scenario.

(ALSO)

. . .I’m not so sure it (a collapse) will take the form of a actual war at all. But certainly the “United States of America” is going (IMHO) to become much less, uh, “united” at some point. A splintering of some form is almost unavoidable as the US federal government and it’s currency becomes totally non-functional.

 

Ken, I agree that we certainly see the cause differently, though the outcomes may be similar. As for the U.S. being less "united" at some point, I say that point is now.

 

There used to be "Americans." I'm from Argentina, but we didn't come here to be "Argentine-Americans." We came here to be Americans. My parents insisted that we learn and speak English, and that our culture would always be with us, that we didn't have to "live it." We understood the poison that multiculturalism had been in Argentina, where Italians were pitted against Scots who were pitted against Jews who were pitted against Catholics, etc. The principle of Divide and Conquer worked exceedingly well. "They" had more than you did and that wasn't fair. Whether they had more land, or more money, or more access to city services, a greater abundance of food (and Argentina is an ABUNDANT country), whatever could be used to drive a wedge between the population's unity and convert us into smaller, more controllable and manipulable groups, they did. And they drove that class-warfare fever, always explaining to each group how they were getting the short end of the stick, when in reality everyone had everything they needed, they just didn't have what everyone else had. An unequal equality if you will.

 

Then the politicians stepped in and started promising to make things equal. I almost hesitate to use the words because someone could argue I'm being political, but one of Peron's main campaign slogans was, "Lo cambiaremos." "We will change it." Whatever YOUR group wanted, they were promised it. And "the government" would pay for it if you only elected the proper people. The media pounded at it, on the radio and in print. If you weren't on board with this new direction, you were marked as backwards, a non-progressive thinker who wanted the status quo. The term hadn't been coined yet, but there was a lot of pressure to be "politically correct" and want to force equality in all things upon all people by (among other things) redistributing wealth (even though there was very little poverty) into the creation of the unspoken and undefined Utopian Ideal. Keeping it undefined was crucial as the target could then be moved at will to redirect the public and keep it off-balance. Nobody knew when they'd get to the promised land, which direction it was, what it looked like, or what it felt like. But they were sure they'd know it when they saw it. And so they believed. And so they paid. And paid. And paid. Until they had nothing to pay and the government had no more tax money coming in and thus no way to provide the services (including food) that it had been giving to a population which had surrendered drive, motivation, goals and self-sustenance, in exchange for suckling at the federal teat.

 

Eventually the people, broke and hungry, rebelled. A society built upon American-like qualities of respect for law and each other, broke down into street survival. Martial law was imposed, and it was brutal. In a country of what was then 40 million people, there were more than 120,000 "deseparacidos." "The disappeared ones." Cross the government, cross the military, and your remains were never found. Even after order had been restored in the 80's, every Sunday mothers and fathers of disappeared spouses and older children would march in mourning through the downtown districts of cities. In Buenos Aires, the lines were more than 8 miles long. This lasted for years.

 

No, Ken, we're not going to start becoming less "united" sometime in the future. We're less united right now. And if anyone puts aside their political perspective and just looks objectively at what has been done to us, you can see it. Political correctness does not unite. Diversity is by its own definition and verbiage, divisive. Multiculturalism is not an embracing of our differences, it is an isolating of them for the purpose of keeping us apart. It's not that the intent wasn't good. But intent is something we can't afford to fund any more. We need results. We need cohesiveness. We need unity. Hunger is a great motivator in providing all of these. We just need to beat it to the punch and get back to the unity, with all its disparities, that made this country great, that made us above all other differences, One people with One purpose.

 

I wasn't born here. I never got the chance to take it for granted. My family had to ask for permission to come here, to wait our turn, to follow the rules, and then to LEARN how we could contribute to the greater whole, not how we could take from it. It was in the process of contributing, that we received the opportunity America was famous for.

 

The only post I've ever copied and saved...Thank you..

[David]

Found it..

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

I think 2010 may be a bit optimistic, it’s going to take longer than that for a full fledged civil war to fester and break out.

 

Did you mean to say pessimistic, or did you honestly mean to say optimistic?