To heal from the great damage done by the financial crisis with foreclosure rates and delinquencies continuing to fall. There are also growing signs of pinup demand among first im home buyers which could be a key point. This has been a slow segment of the market for several years. So a core purpose of the rule was to help restore reliability to the Mortgage Market. When people take out a loan to buy a home, they deserve confidence that theyre not being set up to fail. They can be more activity engaged in the process of seeking an outcome. They could choose the lender in the product with the ferms best suited to their project. And the vision they want for their families. Making the choices effectively will depend on people in weighing their options and understanding how to shop around. But we know it can be difficult to shop for a mortgage. Its hard to understand how to shop and the process can be intimidating to say the least, especially with all of the paperwork. Thats why were relosi
To invest, borrow at negative yield, negative Interest Rates, that is very different i understand your argument but i understand the fear after government that doesnt want to have debttogdp ratio that exceeds 6 . In our government there is no fiscal room for deficit spending program. However, and this is a big however, europe as a whole eurozone as a whole is typified not only by a mountain of great private and public debt, which we do have, but there is another mountain hiding behind this, huge mountain of idle savings with nowhere go and it should be our joint project to energize motivate those idle savings to overcome the great fear that keeps them idle and channel them into protective investments. Not investments into assets but in real productive capacity. How do we do this . We have European Investment bank that could do this. And we have European Central bank embarking on quantitative easing. Why cant they fund a new major deal for europe that channels investment to the private
Questions. Most are not aware of this and have not received training dollars to be aware of it. We met the enemy, and it is us. So yes, and we invest in professional development. We would like to invest more. And i also argue publicly in many places that the money we put behind current teacher professional development, not future teachers is often well sorry. Is often poorly spent and not spent on things teachers are looking for. It seems reasonable that congress would give some direction, if we see a need to address 20 of the population, that we could give specific direction it shouldnt be like here some money. Spends it as you wish. But we have a specific national need. Please address. Much like concord and hiv are going to the moon. There are many children with special needs, many children facing real challenges, and for me its not about picking out this population, that population. Its about how to get every single one of those children i accept that. In times of limited resources,
That is not department of education, its other departments and the government. This is a widely recognized problem that we have, that weve all contributed to including us in congress, those of us who have been in government. So heres my question, would you be willing an example, let me give an example for example when students withdraw from college a portion of their title 4 funds has to be returned to the federal government. Regulatory techs are figuring out what that is, over 200 pages in a handbook. Thats one of the number one objections they have. That could be easily fixed with financial responsibility standards, theres a requirement for audited Financial Statements for private nonprove it and for profit colleges that causes them to get expensive letters of credit according to this report. These requirements by the department dont cause dont follow accepted accounting principles, another one is that when the fapsa, the application for federal grant or loan which is 108 questions i
That is not department of education, its other departments and the government. This is a widely recognized problem that we have, that weve all contributed to including us in congress, those of us who have been in government. So heres my question, would you be willing an example, let me give an example for example when students withdraw from college a portion of their title 4 funds has to be returned to the federal government. Regulatory techs are figuring out what that is, over 200 pages in a handbook. Thats one of the number one objections they have. That could be easily fixed with financial responsibility standards, theres a requirement for audited Financial Statements for private nonprove it and for profit colleges that causes them to get expensive letters of credit according to this report. These requirements by the department dont cause dont follow accepted accounting principles, another one is that when the fapsa, the application for federal grant or loan which is 108 questions i