17 Cruise ships visited Aruba this year in October, which is 44. 4 percent less. The number of passengers was 25. 858, 45. 2 percent less. Up till November in 2007, 316 cruise ships visited Aruba and the number of passengers was approximately 474. 000,…

Once you have obtained a co- signer and you have been approved for a private or alternative student loan you need to be wise about the amount of money you are going to borrow. Make sure you talk to your financial aid advisor and find out exactly what w…

TechCrunch observes that Prosper and other peer- to- peer lenders like Zopa and Lending Club may turn out to be collateral damage from the credit crisis….

One man’s greed is another man’s living wage.

Instead, understand that no person is victim to another when both are complicit in their personal choices which lead to such financial crisis.

You cannot absolve someone of the choice

You cannot absolve someone of his accountability (owning his choice)

You cannot absolve someone of his responsibility (ability to respond to the choice)

Don’t EVER make a choice for which are cannot or are incapable of responding to

In EVERY choice – live your life and make your choices at no cost to others without their consent

Home ownership is not an American right, as some government officials seem to think it is. If economics by coercion were not used, people would be forced to *gasp* save money to buy their houses. In the short run this would not stimulate home sales (which were over-stimulated to begin with), but in the long run more Americans would own homes and we would all be better off. You can count on the fact that with falling price, supply and demand will once again meet.

Home ownership is not an American right, as some government officials seem to think it is. If economics by coercion were not used, people would be forced to *gasp* save money to buy their houses. In the short run this would not stimulate home sales (which were over-stimulated to begin with), but in the long run more Americans would own homes and we would all be better off. You can count on the fact that with falling price, supply and demand will once again meet.

Until a method of absolutely reliable and correct analysis is found [if ever], it is simply more efficient to let the market signals do their work. Intervention in necessary ignorance is doomed to unknowable adverse consequences [bubbles then house price collapse]. Consequences that are knowable are frequently ignored by the interventionists who expect that market participants will respond in the way the interventionists want them to respond, which is most often not the case. The credit crisis of 2008 / 2009 is the best example in the whole of history of government intervention creating unintended consequences. Encouraging and allowing private profit and yes human greed to respond to excess created dire consequences for the very people whom the government should be protecting. Bankers and mortgage brokers merely responded to signals in the market which included intervention effects. Encouraging mortgage brokers and bankers to lend to sub-primes is economic lunacy of the wealth destruction kind as we have all recently discovered. Government should limit itself to its protection function. Ignorant government interventionists caused the credit crisis and they should acknowledge it and take responsibility. Congress wants to deflect criticism that it caused the credit crisis.

[By contrast, intervention by spending on needed infrastructure is not intervention. It is business as usual albeit perhaps brought forward. Standard cost-benefit analysis is still required to validate that it is needed. ]

If the answer to that question is yes, then it seems to me your argument isn\’t holding a lot of water. I reject anything coercive or compulsory from the gov\’t, but it seems to me this failure is happening because of excess, not because the CRA said home ownership was a good thing and encouraged (\"coerced\") banks to be a little less risk averse (\"prejudiced\") when it came to making loans to minorities and lower-income families.

I don\’t see how banks hoarding taxpayer cash is acceptable, and the government is not in the business of underwriting home and auto loans. The credit market is still icy, so what\’s a government to do? No one said *who* they had to lend it to, just that the money needs to be lent. What\’s wrong with that?

(Hello socialism!)