Yourish.com

Charles Gasparino writes about the mortgage bailout in today’s NY Post. I’m so glad I’m bailing out deadbeats who tried to play the housing market and failed.

By borrowing far more heavily than what they could afford, they were also gambling that housing would keep rising in value, defying basic rules of economics.

Now they’re being rewarded for their mistakes. Ironically, even the government officials who were part of the deal have privately conceded that, with few exceptions, more than 95 percent of the so-called victims weren’t victims at all; they faced imminent foreclosure because they were delinquent on their mortgage payments — often for a year or more.

Or as banking analyst Dick Bove put it: “What this settlement did was to help 1 million people who were deadbeats.”

And why is there a settlement? A technicality being used to demonize evil bankers.

Why are these deadbeats getting bailouts? Aside from election-year politics, at issue is the foreclosure practice known as “robo signing” — a procedure in which low-level bank employees, without direct authorization, approve perfectly legal foreclosures on a bank’s behalf.

The foreclosures themselves were legal; the only apparent illegality is that the banks streamlined the foreclosure process, with clerks signing the bank officer’s name on legal documents.

Just as “Cash for Clunkers” destroyed the used car market, this bailing out of the undeserving–I’ll bet you only a tiny fraction who get the bailouts will be people who actually have problems due to the economy screwing with their job–is going to continue to depress the housing market. So good to know that I’ve played by the rules, worked hard, saved until I could buy my own home–and then get to pay the government to pay for the houses of others who have done the complete opposite.

Nichole Olson explains why American companies aren’t hiring veterans, and the American education system refuses to honor military education when vets go to college to get a degree (that will make them more employable) and try to transfer credits from the education they’ve had in the military.

In each of my interviews, my military experience obviously came up and it was evident that it was an issue. Not that my experience meant little but the fear of my being called up again and my availability came into question several times. I found this odd but even more so, discouraging. After the last interview, I really started thinking as to why I would not be considered for one of the open positions. I was told that I had the qualifications, experience, and that they were sure I could handle the job but my availability was in question due to my commitment to the Navy Reserves. They weren’t sure they wanted to hire me because I may have to leave unexpectedly. From a business standpoint, I understand their concern; who wants to hire someone who may have to leave due to a national crisis? They do have a business to run after all. However, the more I thought about it, the angrier I became. I am but 1 reservist in a sea of thousands of others who, especially since 9/11, have found themselves in this exact situation at least once in the last 11 years. My experience cannot be that uncommon to that of my fellow reserve/guardsmen and of those who have recently separated from active duty; I can’t be the only one who has experienced this opaque form of discrimination.

[…] In speaking with a fellow Veteran recently, maybe the onus isn’t on the 1 percent but the other 99 percent. Why is it that military members receive extensive training in the fields of electronics, medicine, mechanics, aviation, and administration yet we can barely get a nationally accredited university to grant us little more than three credit hours towards physical education (because we were smart enough to complete boot camp). While we are able to apply for and received certifications in some career fields, they are either not enough, or are not recognized, by many employers. We can continue to write resumes and attempt to translate our skills into civilian terms yet without education that is nationally recognized, we’re back at square one. The GI Bill is an outstanding benefit and most service members take advantage of it in some capacity but many Veterans should be at least 50 percent completed with their degrees simply by the amount of education and experience they’ve received through the military. At the very least, they should be allowed to test their competency without having to re-take formal classes. How can we not grant the required qualifications necessary to obtain employment in the civilian sector to deserving Veterans? How do we tell a military police officer that while he is qualified to carry a weapon and serve in a combat zone that he is not qualified for employment with his hometown police force because he has not gone through their training academy? How is he good enough to go to war but not good enough to respond to 911 calls?

That’s interesting, because my nephew is currently learning communications in the Marines. From my understanding, he’ll learn about the most modern networking systems, 3G, 4G, etc., and will be setting up communications at FOBs in Afghanistan if necessary. To know now that his education will be meaningless if he chooses to go to college is unbelievable.

Read it all.