Jazz for aficionados

"Not only off subject, but dead wrong. The interest rate on
fixed rated" mortgages never changes. Your monthly mortgage payment will remain constant for the life of the loan. Some people pay their property tax monthly with their mortgage as one payment. An increase in property tax can result in an increase in your monthly payment, but that's due to tax increases not interest rates."


    THE SKY IS BLUE, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT.

Those people were encouraged to take out those loans by their political representatives, who they trusted and believed in. Those loans were presented as the thing to do. If what you are saying is don't believe your government, you got that right.

I sold real estate, and I would not have gotten one of those loans for my worst enemy. I worked for my clients, some of who were not the swiftest, that's why they came to me; I was suppose to lead them.

It's not the house, but the house payment; you're using the same exact language "They Used". What language was everybody using before those people signed the papers?

Why did Ben Bernanke raise the interest rate? He said inflation. Was that a period of inflation when we had high unemployment?

I had a dummy over to my house, whose house is paid for, he was telling me the kind of loan he got and how smart he was. The dummy forgot I negotiated the special low rate loan he got, and I had to bring loans to that company in order to get his loan.

"They bought houses they could not afford". They agreed to payments they could make when they signed the papers. I'm not talking about one individual, but a mass of individuals who were encouraged to take out these loans, and shady fast talking real estate agents who encouraged them.

Can you answer the question as to why Ben Bernanke raised the interest rate? If it was the right thing to do, why did he say it was a mistake? can you answer those two questions; if not, the case is closed.

Rok you were "property" of the US government, you could have gotten court-martial for getting frost bite in Alaska. You were not paid to think; but that's the way all military's have functioned since time began.

It's good to get off subject occasionally. If you notice, none of the wire worshipers but in.



Enjoy the music.

See type number Two.  :)   Fits your clients to a T.

Cheers

***** Rok you were "property" of the US government, you could have gotten court-martial for getting frost bite in Alaska. You were not paid to think; but that's the way all military's have functioned since time began.*****

Wrong, wrong and wrong. 

I was not 'property'
MY career would have been if jeopardy if one of my soldiers had suffered from frost bite.
I was paid to think.

BTW, if you were a real estate agent, you guys were the problem.  Not the Fed.

Cheers

Hi O-10 - your post today about subjectivity and objectivity was interesting.  Most of it is fine as far as it goes.  However, as Frogman has pointed out several times, there is much more about music that is indeed objective than you think.  It requires knowledge of music to be able to determine which is which.  And since you state that you have no knowledge of music and do not want any, doesn't this mean that your point of view is neither objective or subjective, but simply un-informed?  Even subjectivity assumes knowledge of the subject.  You seem to imply that your un-informed point of view has equal value to an informed one.  While this may be true for you, I don't see how it could possibly be true for anyone else, and that is the problem.  You also imply that this situation is unchangeable, which it is clearly not.  Again, that is up to you.  Please do not take this personally - I am genuinely interested in trying to bridge the disconnect here.  I am not at all implying that you are not capable of understanding - I know you are if you wanted to.  But if you really don't want to, then it seems to me that you really shouldn't complain about your "detractors" who insist on correcting false statements/perceptions.