The Obama Administration wants to have a "cram down" on home mortgages which are "underwater." They want the people who loaned the money on homes to reduce the principle on the loan. I'm wondering how that works in a fair manner. (To Democrats the only thing that is "fair" is something that re-distributes wealth.) How much write down would be required on the $500,000 home loan in Los Angeles for an illegal alien with an income of $15,000 per year. The loan would have to be reduced to $40,000 or so for the person to be able to make payments. Suppose the next door neighbor bought a few years earlier, and owes $200,000. It seems that the only fair thing would be to reduce his principle to $40,000 also. But, is that fair to the investors who loaned the money? Maybe not, but they are rich guys, so they should expect to lose some money. Of course, the actual investors are not the ones who loaned the money: that was workers at a financial institution that in effect misled the investors. The government was involved in this, since they actually coerced the financial institution workers into loaning to people who were credit risks as part of the governments "social engineering." So far this plan has worked well for the Democrats. It is achieving their desired result of re-distributing wealth. Poor guys are getting houses they couldn't afford paid for by rich folks. And, as a side benefit, Democrats can say free market capitalism has failed, so the government must take over financial institutions. And, as soon as Carol Browner can announce that CO2 is a pollutant, the government can use the need to control emission of CO2 to take control of all production in the US. Thus the liberal fascists will have achieved their goals of central control of the economy, and re-distribution of wealth. The poor people who failed to take out a loan they couldn't afford are the losers I suppose.