Mortage Bail out

[The Dog]

I think this is bullshit - so b/c people got greedy, took on more than they could chew, or were to stupid to investigate all the pros and cons of buying a home, the government has to bail them out?

Your thoughts everyone?

[SLCPUNK]

Did you read the fine print on the deal? It's kinda sketchy.

Myself? I don't think government should be involved, let free market sort itself out.

Now, on a personal note, I will admit it is appealing because I want the foreclosure rate to slow down. But that does not mean I support it, it simply means it is appealing to me. Selfishness is always appealing, but it's not what is best for you or others.

[Bandita]

Did you read the fine print on the deal? It's kinda sketchy.

It's by the Bush administration what did you expect?

For anyone clueless, here are the details, layman style:

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/dec2007/db2007126_633122.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5

[The Dog]

I'm with this guy:

"President Bush's plan may make good politics, but it is terrible economics," said Edward Ketz, an accounting professor at Penn State University. "It punishes those who have acted prudently and rewards bad decisions by homeowners who bought what they could not afford. It gives incentives for future homebuyers to act rashly, because they may believe Washington will rescue them from error and greed."

Hilary thinks the gov should be doing MORE to help people - I have to disagree here.

GO HUCKABEE hehee kidding.

[sandman]

this is bullshit. how dare Bush help struggling families from having to lose their homes!!

[SLCPUNK]

this is bullshit. how dare Bush help struggling families from having to lose their homes!!

A mortgage is a contract between a bank and a private citizen. There is no need for government interference.

[The Dog]

this is bullshit. how dare Bush help struggling families from having to lose their homes!!

don't buy what you can't afford.  don't lend what you don't have.  simple as that.

sandman, what if i was a retard and i bought a new 60 inch TV, a new car, had a swimming pool built in and spent tons on a vegas vacation.  now i'm broke and in over my head. 

should the gov't bail me out b/c i'm a greedy douche?  should we bail out people who are deep in debt on their credit cards?

and what does this bailout say to responsible Americans, those who know to save their money and not blow it all on one thing, those who buy the less expensive car b/c they know they can't afford the really expensive one.

does it suck people might lose their homes - sure.  could it have been prevented.  um, absolutely. 

[crazycheryl]

I think it is bullshit because most people will take out a 30 year fixed because they never want the rate to go up and if those people would have known that this was going to happen, I'm sure they would have taken out the more risky loan with the increasing interest rate because now these people get the advantage of getting that lower rate for a longer and guaranteed period of time. I am not a 30 year yet. I did have a loan like this but my hub works in the financial district and we knew the interest rates were going to go up so we refinanced to get out of the escalating interest rate loan. Why can't people just refinance to get at least the same rate? Or a tad more but at least they get to keep their house.

[GeorgeSteele]

I feel that there should be some assistance in this case. ?There are exceptions to the sentiment that people should be forced to live with their mistakes. ?

For example, there's government assistance to low-income single mothers raising a child from an unplanned pregnancy. ?Simply because most people are not so cold-hearted to think that a child should starve because of its parents mistakes. ?While obviously not on the same scale, the loss of one's home is still enormously catastrophic. ?And few would suggest that the kids from these families be thrown out on the street because their parents took out a bad loan.

[The Dog]

I feel that there should be some assistance in this case.  There are exceptions to the sentiment that people should be forced to live with their mistakes. 

For example, there's government assistance to low-income single mothers raising a child from an unplanned pregnancy.  Simply because most people are not so cold-hearted to think that a child should starve because of its parents mistakes.  While obviously not on the same scale, the loss of one's home is still enormously catastrophic.  And few would suggest that the kids from these families be thrown out on the street because their parents took out a bad loan.

in the example you gave though, the extra cash is for the kid, the kid is a new expense.  and since it was unplanned, then yeah, they 100% probably need assistance just to put food in the childs mouth.

the housing situation is different.  these are people who got houses not through govt assisted programs, but on their own initiatives.  they bit off more than they could chew in the interest of greed or simply wanting more than they could afford.  do i feel bad if people lose their homes, of course.  is it their fault? well, yeah. 

this sets a dangerous precedent for people who are careless/reckless with their money.

[The Dog]

Would any of you bail out these assholes?

A family on the Upper West Side of New York has placed an ad in New York magazine pleading for $1 million to buy an apartment so they can stay in their wealthy neighborhood. Gawker spotted the ad and posted it here; it reads:

"WE NEED HELP BUYING AN APARTMENT on the UWS, 3bd 2 bath. YOU are a philanthropic, wealthy person who would not miss a million bucks and would be interested in donating (or even investing) in a highly targeted manner: to my family. WE are a wonderful, hard working middle class family who contributes to our UWS community, is entrenched, happy and desperately wants to remain on the UWS (lest the city lose yet another wonderful family to the burbs). We can afford 600-700K, so you see the predicament. Can you help us??"

[sandman]

should there be welfare? should we help the homeless?

[SLCPUNK]

Life sucks and then you get an apartment.

[sandman]

i don't necessarily disagree. but when their problems have a trickle down effect on the economy, and ultimately, the financial situations of other americans, i can understand the government stepping in.

this isn't so much the government bailing out a bunch of morons, it's more the government taking action to help the economy.

[JMack]

     The proposal supposedly was made after meeting with 25 top economists for 90 minutes and then top aides.  No not everyone agreed or had a better plan so this is the one that stuck along with all current economic indicators and employment rates etc..
     We're not privy nor know all that goes on to make these decisions nor would I want to be.


I'm in the agreement that people do get greedy and bite off more than they can chew.  That's including the lenders.??  It's sad but it is what it is.

[The Dog]

so why shouldn't anyone do something just as risky in the future?  if it doesn't work out, the government will just bail em' out. 

it sets a dangerous precedent.

the chips should fall where they may. 

[Dr. Blutarsky]

I feel no sympathy for the banks on this one.

[SLCPUNK]

this isn't so much the government bailing out a bunch of morons, it's more the government taking action to help the economy.

Well gee golly, I thought you said the economy was great? 

[The Dog]

this isn't so much the government bailing out a bunch of morons, it's more the government taking action to help the economy.

Well gee golly, I thought you said the economy was great? 

hehe, thats pretty funny.  he got you there dude.

[sandman]

this isn't so much the government bailing out a bunch of morons, it's more the government taking action to help the economy.

Well gee golly, I thought you said the economy was great??

hehe, thats pretty funny.? he got you there dude.

i said the economy is a healthy one overall, and it is hitting major turbulence right now. most notably the subprime issue. some are saying we may hit a recession, some are saying we may be able to avoid it. recent news and studies by the most respected analysts (andersen) have backed what i said.

i thought it would be stating the obvious to say that managing the economy is an ongoing process, but i guess i shouldn't assume anything in these threads.

and i don't think this measure creates a HUGE incentive to fail. the large majority of people will not even qualify for help. and those that do, will still struggle. they still have to make their payments and those payments will still increase at some point.

so the incentive is far less than say welfare or universal health insurance where the government bails you out and creates a guarantee with no doubts that you will be covered if you "fail."