Mortgage Bailout

Christian Graus

Yeah, I agree. Something to help tide people over without actually paying for their home makes sense to me

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

Lost User

Ed Gadziemski wrote:

t's my opinion that human decency requires us to not lump everyone into one category

Even mortgage brokers?

Stan Shannon

Christian Graus wrote:

Who pays your police, your army ? Who pays for your schools ? You do, via taxes. Without taxes, none of these things would exist. Do you also get robbed ?

If that is where it stopped I would be perfectly happy with it. Those are the only legitimate reasons to tax (and with schools the taxation should be purely a state/local concern)

Christian Graus wrote:

Yes, but, in THEORY, you should be able to have a say, at the ballot box, to control the problem.

That theory is predicated entirely on being able to cast a free vote. Those who are dependent upon the same state they are voting for cannot possible cast a free vote. Its impossible. They are dependents.

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

Oakman

Thats what was said by Mort Zuckerman, owner of US News & World Report to Joe Scarborough about a week ago

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

Ed Gadziemski

Statistics from Freddie Mac:

(PDF) According to a 2006 study conducted by Freddie Mac, unemployment or curtailment of income (36.3%), illness or death in the family (25%), and excessive obligation (13.6%) are at the top of the reasons homeowners get into trouble.[^]

Statistics from Countrywide Mortgage:

Countrywide Financial, the largest mortgage company in the country, also cites economic performance as a cause of foreclosures. In 2007, Countrywide released its findings on the main reasons for foreclosure, which was reported in about 80 percent of the cases. --Curtailment of income: 58.3% --Illness/Medical: 13.2% --Divorce: 8.4% --Investment Prop./Unable to sell: 6.1% --Low regard for property ownership: 5.5% --Death: 3.6% --Payment adjustment: 1.4% --Other: 3.5%[^]

Also, various studies show loss of home value is a major contributor. In the United States as a whole, 34.6% of the sales made in 2008 were done at a loss. Related to the rapid increase in housing prices are those who overextended in order to buy a home before they becamse even more expensive. Statistics on home pricing effects on foreclosures and defaults from Goverment Accounting Office:

(PDF) Zandi et al (2007) estimated that changes in home price appreciation explained about three-quarters of the nationwide increase in mortgage delinquency rates from the fourth quarter of 2005 through the first quarter of 2007.[^]

Ed Gadziemski

Josh Gray wrote:

Even mortgage brokers?

Sadly, yes. Human decency is at its best when we can forgive the worst.

leckey 0

TY! I will research tomorrow.

Back in the blog beatch! http://CraptasticNation.blogspot.com/[^]

Ed Gadziemski

Christian Graus wrote:

this lot should get bailed out because of the timing of when it happened to them ?

No. One addresses a problem by uncovering the root and treating the rot. If it is true that bad mortgages are the root of the world's current rot, then throwing trillions at the leaves and branches as we are and have been doing fails to address the problem. I'd rather spend $500 billion to solve the problem, even knowing that some people will reap undeserved benefits, than continue to spend trillions to line the pockets of so-called financial wizards while not solving the problem. It's nice to stand on priciple, Christian, and piss on people worse off than yourself, and please, continue to do so if it makes you feel superior, but a little pragmatism mixed with a little compassion is what it will take to clean up the mess we're in. We have not and will not solve the problem by throwing buckets of cash at Wall Street and the other "players" that got us here.

Christian Graus

Ed Gadziemski wrote:

It's nice to stand on priciple, Christian, and piss on people worse off than yourself

Well, those are two different things. I wasn't seeking to do the second, except to the degree that it's possible that helping people pretty much at random, some of whom deserve it only because they are stupid, may well not solve the worlds issues, it will just spend a lot of money.

Ed Gadziemski wrote:

We have not and will not solve the problem by throwing buckets of cash at Wall Street and the other "players" that got us here.

Well, that was just bloody stupid, I wasn't advocating that, either.

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

Christian Graus

Stan Shannon wrote:

Those are the only legitimate reasons to tax (and with schools the taxation should be purely a state/local concern)

What about the fire service ? Ambulances ? The forest service ? The list goes on.

Stan Shannon wrote:

. Those who are dependent upon the same state they are voting for cannot possible cast a free vote. Its impossible. They are dependents.

I tend to agree, and that's the problem with welfare, is that people will vote for whoever pays them the most. Personally, I think that those on the state's dime, should not be allowed to vote until they have a job and are paying taxes.

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

Ed Gadziemski

Christian Graus wrote:

helping people pretty much at random, some of whom deserve it only because they are stupid, may well not solve the worlds issues

Helping a targeted group of people -- those who are in default but will be able to pay their mortgage with a simple adjustment in terms, the forgiveness of penalties, and perhaps a principal only/no interest moratorium of 2 years -- won't solve the world's issues but it will go a long way toward correcting the foundational issues of the current financial crisis. In addition, it will stabliize the real estate market, create a floor for property values, stop the death-spiral that lower property values have on municipal property tax recipts, and save mortgage companies and banks a goodly sum of cash, since foreclosures typically result in a 40% or more loss to the lender. I see nothing wrong with those results.

BoneSoft

Yeah! Cuz two wrongs don't make a right! Unless... One was bigger? Then the smaller horendous abamanation is a great idea? When WRONG = wrong, wrong = :thumbsup: :confused: Ouch, liberal math gives me a headache. :sigh: [edit] Please disregard this post, you said it much better later in the thread. :) :rose: [/edit]

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

modified on Wednesday, February 18, 2009 12:04 AM

BoneSoft

Personally, I don't think of any of them as the scum of the Earth, the lenders were in a lot of cases (and the clowns that made other lenders do it). And I feel for them. But their loan is their responsibility, and it has to be that way, it should be that way. It sucks, but sticking everybody else with the bill is adding an unfair solution to an unfair problem. I say we sieze Jimmy Carter and ACORN's assets (and the dough ACORN is getting from porkulus), shut down and liquidate the assets of Freddy, Fannie, Country Wide, and any other lender that did hugely blantant preditory lending and divy that up amongst the worst of these mortgages. :thumbsup:

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

Christian Graus

Ed Gadziemski wrote:

elping a targeted group of people

My original statement was that I don't agree with just helping everyone who bought a house they cannot afford. I meant to imply that the sort of targetting you're talking about would be needed, instead of a payday for every person who bought a house and is close to defaulting.

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista.

BoneSoft

Ed Gadziemski wrote:

human decency requires us to not lump everyone into one category and I believe we should not be the first to cast stones.

I agree completely. I also believe we should not be the first to cast wads of cash at them either.

Ed Gadziemski wrote:

Some people bought houses they could perfectly well afford and then were laid off. Others developed health or family problems such as divorce that ate up their cash reserves and income. Quite a few took adjustable rate mortgages in anticipation of increased equity and got slammed when the interest rate readjusted. About 10% bought houses they could never afford and should not have been granted mortgages.

All true, all sad stories, all deserving of sympathy. But life sucks, and you have to be responsible for yourself and your actions. Live and learn. However, there was some good old fashioned government supplied injustice dealt to these people, for which they should not be held accountable for. Jimmy Carter, Billy Clinton, ACORN, Frank Reins, Jimmy Johnson, Maxine Waters, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank should be held accountable for that portion. How to determine what that portion is will be difficult though. The tax payer is the one and only group in this country that isn't to blame and shouldn't be held responsible.

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

Ed Gadziemski

Christian Graus wrote:

My original statement was that I don't agree with just helping everyone who bought a house they cannot afford

My bad then. I thought you were criticizing the Obama plan specifically like the OP was. The new plan is targeted and has a means test to make sure the homeowner can afford the mortgage after rate and/or monthly payment adjustments are applied.

Ed Gadziemski · modified on Wednesday, February 18, 2009 12:04 AM

BoneSoft wrote:

Ouch, liberal math gives me a headache.

As it should.

BoneSoft wrote:

Cuz two wrongs don't make a right!

However, one right can help correct a wrong.

BoneSoft

Ed Gadziemski wrote:

I'd rather spend $500 billion to solve the problem, even knowing that some people will reap undeserved benefits, than continue to spend trillions to line the pockets of so-called financial wizards while not solving the problem.

Now that makes sense. I can get behind that. IF we could know for sure that that would fix the problem.

Ed Gadziemski wrote:

It's nice to stand on priciple, Christian, and piss on people worse off than yourself, and please, continue to do so if it makes you feel superior

I followed you right up to "piss on people worse off than yourself...". There's nothing wrong with standing on principal, and in fact principal is something this country is seriously lacking these days. I understand the depth of your concern here, but please don't vilify those who choice to stand on principal. You have enough good arguments to justify not taking that road.

Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

Ed Gadziemski

BoneSoft wrote:

The tax payer is the one and only group in this country that isn't to blame and shouldn't be held responsible.

Are you saying that none of the homeowners going into foreclosure ever held jobs and paid taxes? They never worked, never paid income tax, never contributed in any way? Golly, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.

Ed Gadziemski

Thanks. Point taken.