DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Biden to hike payments for good-credit homebuyers to subsidize high-risk mortgages

Yes I know. Leveling the playing field is not an agenda around here on DT. And resorting to name calling is the typical thing. Got it.

That's the way it's supposed to work to be sure. But what happens on the other end is horrible. I went through a divorce over 40 years ago. That ordeal ruined my credit... (back to normal now of course and have been for years) But during that time, my interest on a car note when nutty. In the teens if memory serves. I was considered a higher risk borrower than I was prior to the divorce so it made sense. But what they did in terms of the rate was crazy. Damn near doubled as a result.

Having said that, I don't agree with Biden on this one., It's a mistake to burden those responsible folks with the costs of those that are not responsible.

Here is another article from a source that doesn't lie about the Left.

https://www.newsweek.com/biden-raises-costs-homebuyers-good-credit-help-risky-borrowers-1795700

Same thing...either way, I don't like it.

I don’t like it either. But that didn’t stop them from calling me foolish for wanting to level the playing field for all. I mean, is it a whatabout when the rich can come through multiple bankruptcies with no sustaining damage to their wealth and borrowing power, while the middle class and poor are usually devastated?

Just shut-up rick. Nobody is talking about trump.

Answer me this: Do you agree with this rule or not?

Yes or No is all that is needed.

He plainly stated that only simpletons would think this is a good idea. Just curious, how much more plain could he have made that?

That's a simple as it can be stated. So why does it follow with "Trump supporters are stupid too!"

Oh wait, never mind.

Skipping over the part I was addressing by ignoring that and focusing on something I didn't address is rather funny. But just to help you out here.....


As I said, he plainly addressed that.

Skipping over the entire intent of his post to start an argument is funnier.

Not funny "ha-ha"... funny "peculiar". Especially when it's done 20-30 times per day. Crazy, crazy form of self-centered narcissism.

So it is your contention that in order to reply to any post people should break down every part and opinion in that post or not reply at all?

And of course this is what your flimsy accusation of "starting an argument" must mean....


To you that constitutes staring an argument?

In case you missed it and I don't think you did, there was only one question in the post I addressed......


And that question is what i addressed. I think it's rather obvious who it is trying to start an argument here.

I stopped at "contention", so I have no idea what that ^ salad tastes like.

I'm already three posts past having any contention. It was just sheer entertainment at that point. Entertainment value has now waned and died. Have a nice evening.

There's no accounting for taste and what people find entertaining.

Contention; an assertion, especially one maintained in argument.

For future reference. You're welcome.