Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

White House closes in on housing plan

Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:56 PM EST
obama, white-house, personal-finance, congress, only-on-msnbc-com, loans, mortgage, foreclosures, mortgages, homeowners, jp-morgan
msnbc.com News — By John W. Schoen, Senior Producer

— The White House said Friday a much-anticipated plan to help struggling homeowners will be announced by President Obama in a speech Wednesday in Arizona. In the interim, banking giants Citibank and J.P Morgan said they would halt new foreclosures on owner-occupied home loans through March 6.

The administration is working on a comprehensive plan to try to halt the ongoing wave of home foreclosures as part of its efforts to stabilize the financial system. The $50 billion package may include a program to buy up distressed mortgages at discount prices, subsidies to help struggling homeowners make their monthly payments and national standards for modifying home loans to more affordable terms.

The foreclosure prevention plan is part of a broader package of measures the administration is putting in place to help the staggering economy. Congress is moving toward final passage of the economic stimulus legislation. The Treasury Department has outlined in broad terms a plan to help stabilize the nation's financial sector.

Government-controlled mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac suspended foreclosure sales during the winter holidays and have halted evictions from foreclosed properties until next month. Earlier this week, the Office of Thrift Supervision urged the more than 800 thrift institutions nationwide — which hold roughly a half-trillion dollars in mortgages — to do the same.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and other Obama administration officials held a series of meetings this week Wednesday with top bankers, community groups and financial industry representatives to discuss the plan.

So far, government efforts to prevent foreclosures have focused on pressing the lending industry to work with at-risk homeowners voluntarily and provide them with more affordable payment terms. But the new proposal signals a shift to a more direct government approach.

The foreclosure prevention package is expected to contain a number of measures designed to work in concert. One proposal would draw on $50 billion in funds already approved for the financial bailout to buy up millions of mortgages at a discount.

A $300,000 mortgage on a house now worth $200,000, for example, might be bought at a 30 percent discount. The homeowner then would be able to refinance the smaller mortgage with lower monthly payments. The government could then sell the loan back to investors, freeing money to buy more loans.

Of the roughly 10 million to 12 million households facing foreclosure over the next four years, the buyback plan could help between 4 million to 5 million to keep their homes, according to John Taylor, president of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, who met this week with White House officials to discuss the plan.

White House officials have stressed the urgency of acting to shore up the nation’s banking system to avert a potential “catastrophe.”  But slowing the pace of foreclosures is essential to reducing the glut of homes on the market and resolving the crisis, according to Columbia University economics professor Christopher Mayer.

“We've got to deal with housing,” he said, ”because, look, if housing drops another 20 to 25 percent, I can promise you a lot more of these mortgages are going bad, and we're going to have a much bigger problem.”

Some 275,000 foreclosure filings were reported in January — or about one in 466 households — an 18 percent increase over January 2008, according to data released by RealtyTrac Thursday.

To date, industry efforts to halt the pace of foreclosures have proved inadequate. According to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, more than half of the 287,755 mortgage workouts in the third quarter of 2008 involved repayment plans that, in many cases, increased the monthly cost of the loan to make up for missed payments. That’s one reason more than half of borrowers who had worked out new mortgage terms redefault within six months, according to the OCC, which regulates nationally charted banks.

For the past two years, Congress has considered a number of proposals to try to keep struggling homeowners in their homes. Much of the debate has centered on how much taxpayer money — if any — should be applied to the problem. That debate continues to slow progress on adopting these proposals. 

Some longstanding proposals have advancing slowly through Congress. One of those would overhaul the Hope for Homeowners program Congress set up last year with the goal of helping more than 400,000 homeowners swap unaffordable adjustable mortgages for 30-year loans with fixed rates. Tight restrictions and high fees left that program out of reach for all but 25 homeowners who have been approved to date.

The White House foreclosure package is also expected to try to break the logjam at the heart of the problem homeowners face trying to modify their mortgage to more affordable terms: the enormous legal complexity created when trillions of dollars worth of mortgages were bundled into pools and sold off to investors. Loan servicing companies — originally hired to collect payments from homeowners and distribute them to investors — have been slow to respond to modification requests, in part because they fear being sued by investors.

Under a program overseen by Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairwoman Sheila Bair, standard guidelines were developed to speed the modification of mortgages held by the failed IndyMac Bank, which the government seized last year. The program also provides financial incentives to servicers to modify loans and gives them legal protection if they follow certain standard guidelines.

Both the Treasury and the Federal Reserve also have been exploring ways to make mortgages more affordable to help stimulate demand for housing.

By far the most controversial proposal to break the loan modification logjam would change bankruptcy law to allow judges to modify loans from the bench — as they’re able to do for all other forms of consumer debt. This so-called “cramdown” idea has been floated several times since the crisis began but has been vigorously opposed by the financial services industry.

Lenders argue they would have to charge higher rates to offset the increased risk that a judge would forgive part of a loan in bankruptcy court. Proponents counter that the risk is no higher than for any other form of secured credit subject to modification, and that any increased borrowing cost would be relatively small. 

But the proposal is getting another look. On Tuesday, Geithner told Congress changes in the bankruptcy law “will be an important part of the president's plan."

“At that same time, we want to do it very, very carefully,” Geithner testified, “because this is a delicate situation, complicated balance. And we want to make sure we're not making the process worse as we go forward.”

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • John W. Schoen's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (272)
Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3 ... 5
martvol

If they modify loans to people who are behind in payments, they need to do the same for those of us who are not. One group should not be treated different then another. My mortgage still needs paid. Why should I continue to take care of my affairs if I would be rewarded for defaulting?

  • 19 votes
#1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:29 PM EST
oldcavscoutDeleted
ytfel

This plan is a complete joke. Why should I continue to pay my mortgage if the government will reduce the principal if I stop paying? Why should I have to pay the full amount of my mortgage, if others are not required to do so?

If they want to help people, just lengthen the loan period. Take it from 30 years to 40 years and make sure they have a fixed reasonable rate, but don't discount the principal. People need a place to live. Reducing their payment will allow them to stay, but don't reduce the loan amount unless you are willing to do so for everyone.

We are rewarding the people who make bad decisions and punishing the responsible people.

  • 10 votes
#1.2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:53 PM EST
MNmoney

It is sad, many people who are in these situations because they were offered the only loans they could afford at the time. They could not qualify for a standard 30 yr fixed, so some shady loan outfit gave them an interest only loan and these suckers took it. Now look at them, I chose not to take one of those loans as that was basically my only option. Instead I chose to rent because the loans made avilable just did not make sense. I made the responsible choice. Looks like I should have thrown caution to the wind and had faith that it would be viewed as not my fault when everything hit the fan and the principal balance had to begin to be paid off. Am I going to get an automatic 30% down when I choose to buy a house?

  • 4 votes
#1.3 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:59 PM EST
X- KKK

martvol: Sorry to inform you but if you are able to pay your mortgage there is no help for you if you want you can get $15 thousand dollars to purchase a new house. That's where our money went to help the rich purchase a new home. Remember we must think about the rich first. (I am not by the way).

Ytfel: The trick is you must not have a JOB... if you have a job you are not homeless and hungry.

Let get real people the rich have been getting tax breaks, tax shelters, loopholes for years for having money. We Have not cried about that, there TAX BREAK WELFARE PROGRAM, we even pay the farmers to not farm. This came out doing the election which I did not know myself until they started talking about the MILLIONS of dollars that we give them not to farm. So why is it a problem to help a homeless family that has loss there job. I would rather for my money to assist a family keep there home than to assist OUR FAILING BANKING SYSTEM AND CORPORATE AMERICAN for shipping our jobs to other countries. As long as we as AMERICAN keep fighting about the little things we don't have our eye on the picture. The laws that have changed for the benefit of Corporate American....

Wake-up AMERICANS PLEASE WAKE UP

  • 6 votes
#1.4 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:07 PM EST
Bill-541803

I agree with you martvol, fedupwithliberals and foggyeyeball. If the government is going to provide financial aid to the whiners, cry babies and the totally " me first" financial irresponsible then I say No Bama and his cronies might as well pay off all Americans home mortgage loans. To do anything else borders on discrimination. Yep they will deliberately be discriminating against the financial responsibility as opposed to the financial irresponsible. A large portion of the people, from what I have witnessed on the news, who took out those loans knew dang well they would never be able to pay them back and to me that constitutes financial irresponsibility. Those folks need to pay back the money they borrowed – PERIOD. If the mortgage companies work with the people who bit off more than they could chew that would help a lot. The mortgage company could do two things that would help alleviate the situation; provide all their clients with a reasonable yearly interest rate and extend the length of the loan. Those two measures would provide the ability for the people to stay in their homes while at the same time forcing them to pay back the money they borrowed. Those folks borrowed the money and they damn well need to pay it back. If the idiots borrowed 300 thousand dollars then that is what they need to pay back. I don’t care if the house is only worth 150 thousand now because of a down turn in the housing market – that is not the tax payers fault – that is the idiots who borrowed the moneys fault for thinking they were going to buy a house and then flip it for a huge profit – sometimes that works and sometimes it doesn’t. No – short of the mortgage companies willing to lend a helping hand to those folks the government – especially No Bama and his cronies – need to keep their noses out of it – financial lenders are in the business to provide charity assistance – they re in business to make money. Period.

  • 5 votes
#1.5 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:08 PM EST
jd-475053

You are right. My daughter and her husband put 20% down on a house. That equity is gone now but they continue to always make their payments on time. Their rate is 6 5/8% but they can't refinance with no equity. They should just be able to streamline without an appraisal to get the rate down.

  • 5 votes
#1.6 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:23 PM EST
Arthur-379160

Who cares. I just want the guilty banks and wall street firms to go Chapter 7 - bye, bye, a-holes and take your greedy executives with you.

  • 2 votes
#1.7 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:37 PM EST
Eve -887490

This whole thing makes me furious! Why should I have to pay for others? I know I cannot afford a house or the loan that comes with it, so guess what? I did not buy a house! Why does everyone seem to have that entitlement air about them, regarding a house? BUt, now I am expected to help pay for other's mistakes? Is someone going to help me pay me rent, too? That has been quite a struggle for me these many months!

    #1.8 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:49 PM EST
    J Andras

    see my post and let me know what you think

      #1.9 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:15 PM EST
      Texas Tea-717266

      X KKK

      martvol: Sorry to inform you but if you are able to pay your mortgage there is no help for you if you want you can get $15 thousand dollars to purchase a new house. That's where our money went to help the rich purchase a new home. Remember we must think about the rich first. (I am not by the way).

      For those of you who were planning on the 15k it was pulled from the package. It is only 8k.

        #1.10 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:39 PM EST
        HRDawg

        Another piece of the puzzle that Obama keeps reminding us on - that there's many parts to the recovery, and that it will take time.

        But at the rate that he has this House and Senate moving, he's slam dunking at the moment, and that could translate into a phenomenal quick recovery, before the next General Election rolls around.

        Obama has maintained an approval rating between the mid-to-high 60s, second only to JFK, since he took the oath. Let's see what his rating is next Tuesday.

          #1.11 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 PM EST
          joe-295829

          This plan offered by obama and the Democrats is Un Constitutional and should not be allowed.. You cannot do for one group and not do for another.. I think that if your home is in foreclosure and it is because you made bad loan on a home you could not afford then you are out of luck.. Ohh and those of you who think the 1 .7 TRILLION is going to job creation.. LOL sorry you are screwed.. And most of the money is not released till 2010..

          • 5 votes
          #1.12 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:41 AM EST
          joey-520070

          I have a mortgage with Flagstar Bank, in Nov. 08 we had huge job delayed,i am self emp. so i checked their website and called to see if they could delay our payment,we have never been late on our note so I thought that being proactive would help.Nope!!! The bank told me they could not help me until i was at least 32 days late on my mortgage, i replied that I valued my credit and was looking to keep a negative off of it. Sorry, they cannot help me. The banks act like they want you to fail and trying to be responsible carries no weight with them. luckily,work came through but the money these banks recieved from us the taxpayers is not being used to help but a few, mostly the banks themselves.

          • 1 vote
          #1.13 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:58 PM EST
          natilda12

          This would have been a great plan had this happened last year... don't think they will be rewarded. Your credit score now controls your life and theirs will not be good.

          However, on the other hand, we could continue to hand money to banks directly... These "troubles assets" will be removed one way or another....

          We too have a loan that is not in jeopardy and was handled the old fashioned way- 30yr fixed 20% down- we too have equity about 30%- say what you want... rant.... I hope they fix this by helping the citizens and getting these "troubles assets" off the banks balance sheets at the same time as compared to continuing to hand money out to banks directly. Let these folks who get the loans pay back the govt and reduce my proposed tax burden I would have had if they continued to just hand money to the banks.

          BY THE WAY..... funding was provided for the homeowners assistance program (HOPE???) The one where the MORTGAGE BANK gets to choose whether to participate or not... yeah- there have been 393 applicants allowed by them and only 100 or so helped. Let's take that money back and use it too......

          The sick thing here is that so many will rant and rant about taxpayers getting dollars that they at least will have some responsiblity to payback but no one seems to have demanded the govt prosecute the reverse pyramid scheme the banks came up with to get up in this mess.... If you think there is anyone else to blame, you are seriously missed informed.

            #1.14 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:55 PM EST
            BigRick

            Exactly! The whole stimuLESS plan has left a crucial area untouched. Current home owners who are not behind in payments but are distressed in loss of home value.

            My retirement is history due to stocks, my home value upside down so bad I will never recouperate, not in my lifetime. Everything wrong with my financials is due to the so called professionals who insisted we take this route when all they were doing was filling there pockets with no regards to our futures.

            The stimulus plan helps current distressed properties and leaves a gap in the near future for more distressed properties.

            • 1 vote
            #1.15 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:58 PM EST
            ROY WILSON-336103

            The new Obama plan - Buy up the mortgages of the people who bought homes they couldn't afford and let them stay in them nearly free. That way they'll be sure to vote Democratic in the future. Just print off some more money to finance it.

            • 1 vote
            #1.16 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 10:43 PM EST
            piglizard420

            Joe, things are done for one group while not for others all the time. The strengthening of the economy is of utmost importance right now and stopping the mortgage bloodletting is imperative.

              #1.17 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:22 PM EST
              Bill Carson

              With so many working families in America facing bankruptcy due to the economic crisis the tightening of the Bankruptcy laws a few years ago seems particularly cruel and stupid. Mr. Obama's vice president Joe Biden was a big supporter of the legislation that tightened the screws on average americans while preserving the lenient treatment for big corporations. Here's two very short articles and commentary about the BAPCA legislation from several years ago:

              August 25, 2008

              Bankruptcy Law Changes Less Likely With Joe Biden on the Ticket Ever since the passage of the BAPCPA changes to the bankruptcy laws in 2005, consumer advocates have held out hope that a new presidential administration might roll back some of the more hard line changes to the Bankruptcy Code. Although support for the BAPCPA laws was bi-partisan, some Democrats have attempted to tie the nation's housing crisis in with the changes to the Code. You may remember that earlier this year Democratic leadership attempted to push through legislation that would permit bankruptcy judges to change the terms of mortgages. Senator Obama's selection of Senator Joe Biden of Delaware would seem to dim the hopes of consumer advocates hoping for consumer friendly changes to the bankruptcy laws. Delaware, as you may know, is the home to corporate headquarters of many large and small corporations. According to StreetDirectory.com, businesses choose Delaware simply because of their flexible corporate laws, highly respected Court of Chancery, a business-friendly State Government, and a customer service oriented Staff of the Delaware Division of Corporations. Given that most of the large credit card banks are incorporated in Delaware, it should be no surprise that Senator Biden was one of only three Democrats who voted for the BAPCPA changes to the bankruptcy law and that he supported it enthusiastically. My colleague Carmen Dellutri, writing in the Bankruptcy Law Network blog, comments that when reflecting on the Senate debate about the BAPCPA laws, "the first thing that comes to mind is the passion that Senator MBNA (Biden) put into getting the bill passed. He was a staunch supporter of the bill. He was also very instrumental in getting many of the amendments stricken [that would have benefited consumers over lenders]. " The Associated Press reports that during the time the BAPCPA laws were being debated in the Senate, credit card lender MBNA paid a consulting fee to Hunter Biden, Senator Biden's son. Further, the AP reports that "MBNA employees have poured more than $200,000 into Biden's Senate campaigns over the past two decades, making donors working for the credit card company the senator's largest source of campaign money." It is, of course, unclear how much influence a vice president Biden would have on Barack Obama or his policies. However, it would certainly not be surprising if bankruptcy reform is not at the top of the list should Mr. Obama find himself in the White House.

              JOE BIDEN'S BANKRUPT VOTE

              When researching the Democrat Senators that voted for the Bankruptcy bill, I found that the Senators from Delaware were the top recipients of campaign cash from the Finance/Credit Card industries. And I found that neither of them had any press releases explaining their votes for this bill. Today, Senator Joe Biden finally gave a reason for the vote he took as he responded to the charge that Jonathan Chait had made in his column, When Democrats Join the Dark Side. (via Dkos' dday) Biden's letter to the editor castigates Chait for not realizing that this was a well-balanced bipartisan bill. In his zeal to attack the bankruptcy reform bill, Jonathan Chait's March 4 commentary, "When Democrats Join the Dark Side," mischaracterizes the legislation. In 2001, a similar bill passed the Senate 82 to 16. The provisions affecting consumer bankruptcy were identical to those Chait criticizes. At the outset, I refused to support bankruptcy reform until fundamental changes were made. I fought to establish a "safe harbor" for those below their state's median income. I also insisted on a provision requiring lenders to post a clear warning about the dangers of making minimum monthly payments, one of the worst debt traps for consumers. This bill establishes unprecedented protections for child support and alimony, making bankruptcy part of the enforcement system for women and children, who now will be at the head of the line, in front of every other creditor. Is this bill perfect? No. But over several congresses it has earned the kind of bipartisan consensus only balanced legislation can achieve. Oh, gee, isn't that nice? The bill is a peach of a bill with all kinds of protections for consumers who find themselves in trouble. All those little gems stuffed in this bill like the fact that credit card companies can charge rates that would make the mafia loan sharks look like pikers. Some Democrats found that little credit card company giveaway .

              • 1 vote
              #1.18 - Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:31 AM EST
              truthseeker-

              This administration is as lost as last year's Easter Egg; they would have us believe the Easter Bunny will fix everything.

              The stimulus package is nothing but a PORK package with nothing to help the economy. Why was there nothing for the housing industry and the auto industry in the Obama Pork Package of Feb 2009? Too busy stuffing in mouse habitats for Pelosi and a myriad other pork earmarks.

              • 1 vote
              #1.19 - Sun Feb 15, 2009 11:30 PM EST
              joy57111

              they shouldn't pay down the mortgages, period. Let the foreclosure happen and then buy up the mortgage. Then turn around and list the property at a much reduced price. Yeah it is a loss for both the foreclosed and the general public but it allows a correction in the market and it would serve to keep a non-favoritism like treatment of those who were greedy (buying a home they knew was too expensive for them to begin with) or who are currently not in a position financially pay a mortgage. Treat it like a government insured loan that went bad, foreclose, readjust and get over it!!!

              Let's face it, over the past decade prices became so inflated that no one in the middle class was able to comfortably afford what was on the market. And that is why those idiots offered the teaser rate bad mortgages in the first place.

              Moral of the story is - Stop being Greedy!

                #1.20 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:43 AM EST
                loan modifier

                I agree. It is unfair to reward those who got into loans they knew and understood and are now crying re the adjustments because they banks on the market continuing to go upward. In many cases these same borrowers borrowed for other reasons, so we are paying for their financial risks. Everyne should get the same treatment. I would revolt if I were a homeowner who piad on time and sacrificed while ther other deadbeat is getting the Obama welfare treatment.

                  #1.21 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:26 PM EST
                  Greg-281912

                  Joe, I agree, this plan is unconstitutional. Buying a house is a choice, just like buying a car or buying a TV or gambling in Vegas. There is no constitutional right to owning a house.

                  No one held a gun to anyone's head and made them buy a house. It was a personal decision. The government should NOT be in the business of rectifying individual decisions which turn out to be bad.

                  And, if the government does decide that it is responsible for fixing all bad decisions, then boy do I have a list of bad decisions that I have made that have cost me money!

                  My tax money should not be used to pay someone else's mortgage. I can't even afford a house myself! I rent a small apartment!

                  It's not right that I should have to bear the burden of someone else's financial choice, which turned out to be bad. Period.

                    #1.22 - Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:43 AM EST
                    Reply
                    fedupwithliberals

                    I bought a house I could afford, I understood the terms (8.5% interest in 2000 - I've since refinanced to 5.5%), and I've never missed a payment. Property values have dropped in my neighborhood, but I still have about $50K in equity.

                    Are they going to lower the principle on my loan by 30% too?

                    If not, I'm really wishing I had bough that bigger house we looked at a few years ago, and decided we couldn't afford!

                    • 5 votes
                    Reply#2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:30 PM EST
                    restraint

                    I suppose there are some unfortunate souls out there, who unknowingly bought a home and had the value decrease on them, based on no doing of thier own; my problem with this whole situation is that I also chose to buy within my means, and don't think we should be rewarding so amny people for the poor choices they have made in buying too much home with a loan they either did not understand or gambled on. Likewise, the same institutions that made the loans and the profits when they were overvalued will once again reap the rewards of the refinancing that is likely to take place with this plan. Essentially, builders, lenders, mortgage brokers and high risk home buyers are being taken care of, when the responsible people of the US are footing the bill for their neglect and exuberance. Does not seem right.

                    What happened to personal responsibility? Or letting dying businesses fail, for that matter.

                    • 4 votes
                    #2.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:37 PM EST
                    MNmoney

                    Exactly, most of these people facing foreclosure should have their homes foreclosed on, and they should become forced to be renters as they should have been from the start. Property management companies can buy their homes and provide them with a fixed payment they can live with and they get to live in their homes. They just don't get to own it.

                    Do liberals really think they are doing good here? They are acting as enablers. Make a mistake and it is okay to screw up because Uncle Sam will just bail us out again.

                    • 2 votes
                    #2.2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:09 PM EST
                    oi812

                    X-KKK after reading your post I think you should get some help' Your hatred of people that are rich is not healthy. Did you know that the top 1% of wage earners pay more income tax than the bottom 50%. That's the problem with class warfare and a person envy. Please when you have all these wonderful things/programs that the government provides please remember who pays for them- The rich. I am glad we have people who are able to provide jobs and pay taxes,if you do not like rich people please get a job from a poor person and don't work for the government cause the rich are paying for that too.

                      #2.3 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:54 PM EST
                      X- KKK

                      martvol: loose your JOB and you just may need a little help also... You all are showing a lot of LOVE for the American children that will have no where to live.. I have saw more compassion for the DOGS THAT VIC (football star) was involve in hurting than I am hearing for the JOBLESS, HOMELESS, HUNGRY Americans and there children...

                      When the AMERICAN PEOPLE fight it works great for the system, have you all not notice that is how we got were we are now while we FIGHT each other our LAWS & RULES get changed for the benefit of Corporations. This is the same trick that we REPUBLICAN have used for generations and it worked. Where is the proof you say (you all still think that the color of your skin matters when the only thing that matters is your bank book.)

                      wake-up America and see what we have done to you while you were thinking that your skin color matters. (not meant to insult just the facts I know since I was one of the people that use to this trick).

                        #2.4 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:02 PM EST
                        EllieP

                        Hey, fedup. Long time, no see.

                        I thought Obama might have bought out mortgages instead of the porkulus. Silly me...should have known it would be in addition to...

                        Anyone for some bacon bits on that luau pig?

                        • 4 votes
                        #2.5 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:39 PM EST
                        Big Tee

                        Don't you understand that if there is no help for those who can't pay their mortgages now for whatever reason, those houses will foreclose making the property values for those of us who are doing OK decline even more which translates to we lose more and more equity in our homes. We have to look at the big picture - not just how do we get ours too.

                        • 2 votes
                        #2.6 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:22 AM EST
                        FmntGirl

                        Us too!! I feel like quite the chump for cramming my family in 900sq.ft of living space because that is all we could afford. (That's 5 generations of family by the way.) We could have gotten a house that gave us each a bedroom and maybe even a second bathroom but instead we choose the fixed-rate mortgage and payments we could actually pay for the life of the loan. These people think that they are ENTITLED to a better life than my family... at taxpayer expense?!

                        Who cares what the house is worth on the open market! They chose that structure as their HOME! Live in it and continue to pay for it!

                        They KNEW that they were agreeing to an interest rate that would go up and that the monthly payments would be higher; so step-up and get a second job, collect cans, sell plasma, volunteer to be a guinea pig for the drug companies who pay people to do drug studies, sell your jewelry and electronics, get rid of cable and satellite services as well as internet, one no-frills phone line only not mulitple cells for everyone, forget about eating out, going to a spa and golf club memberships need to stop...this is no-frills living people and unless you are doing all these things don't ask for my families money to pay your bills!!

                        • 3 votes
                        #2.7 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:41 AM EST
                        natilda12

                        yes, we have rolled that thought around too- we should have bought a home that was 5 times the price we did or at least that is what we were being told.... I have looked at the numbers of those who had the ARMs- sorry, but the number of foreclosures is MUCH higher than those numbers.... So who else is in the numbers?

                          #2.8 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:02 PM EST
                          sumthin fishy

                          Folks:

                          Chances are that the homes that are bailed out that were originally purchased by strange or fraudulant means will still end up in trouble and possibly foreclosed in the future because the buyers were unqualified to begin with, and are probably not any smarter now than they were when they bought a home they could never afford to own to begin with.

                          There are many financial pressures that are brought to bear on home owners such as maintenance; high energy costs; replacements of roofs, applicances, etc.; taxes, (which will probably be raised I would guess since almost all of the states, counties and cities have economic problems, too!); utility loans; etc.

                          There is a good chance that a home buyer that was either bold or foolish enough to buy a home they knew was unaffordable will also be irresponsible with money, especially with credit, and will find themselves in trouble again.

                          The underlying problem in all of what is unfolding now is that many in this country have little meaningful exposure to the use of credit and lending, and have no business being given money on demand, when they are likely to get into an unsustainable financial position.

                          This country needs its people to examine their priorities, no matter what big government and big business is trying to cram down our throats. Turn away from being a debtor. Own your existance. Teach your children not to spend money they do not have, and do the same.

                          Good Luck.

                          • 1 vote
                          #2.9 - Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:39 AM EST
                          truthseeker-

                          This administrtion doesn't have any plans to reward those who were frugal and planned to take care of themselves; they will reward the lazy, inept and the corrupt with your hard earned money.

                          We have an administration of tax cheats, lobbyists and reruns, exasctly what BarackO said he would NOT do. Lies? You judge.

                          • 1 vote
                          #2.10 - Sun Feb 15, 2009 11:32 PM EST
                          skipster56

                          I have a plan. Let the banks take the homes, then rent to the homeowners they take it from until they get back on their feet financially. Once they do that, the bank can offer them a 30 year fixed rate mortgage at the current market value. That way, if they pay their rent on time and can afford the mortgage, it's a win-win situation. If the owner fails to keep the rent up, they don't belong in a mortgage in the first place. Then the mortgage company can go through with the foreclosure and re-sell the home. It's time to weed out the wanna-be buyers problems from the real buyers problems.

                          • 1 vote
                          #2.11 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:32 PM EST
                          EllieP

                          Good post, skipster56. I've seen another version of that in this thread. You might also like the link to Guttentag's proposal.

                          I think your idea is a sort of stay-lease approach. There only a couple of potential problems I see -- the coming inflation which could still make the home unaffordable for a buyer. Also, with the economic contraction and associated job losses, some people probably couldn't afford the rent either.

                          For ARMs, though. Great idea.

                          • 1 vote
                          #2.12 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:50 PM EST
                          Reply
                          foggyeyeball

                          Bend over , Bend over let -wealth redistribution- come over

                          • 1 vote
                          Reply#3 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:35 PM EST
                          piglizard420

                          Wealth redistribution has and will continue ever since man began to trade. That is part of economy.

                            #3.1 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:25 PM EST
                            Ravenous

                            What ever happened to reaping what you sew? I am not rich, I rent a very small house because I could never afford what the going price for even the biggest dumps in my area were going for and now that the market is starting to "correct" itself the government is going to let those who were the least responsible reap the biggest benefit with my hard earned tax dollars. Screw you guys and your entitlement. I just want to raise a family in a normal home... you deserve what you get

                            • 1 vote
                            #3.2 - Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:46 PM EST
                            Reply
                            MikeThompson

                            As a teacher in Elkhart, IN, and a homeowner, I ask Mr. Obama, what do you plan to do for me and my family? We are debt free and own a home. We have never lived beyond our means. We have a fixed rate mortgage. We always pay our bills on time (ahead of time) and have never been dilinquent. We never will. We were too intelligent to be duped by predatory lenders, unlike the masses that have screwed up the housing industry. The message Washington is sending is in effect "screw you people that live honestly while we rescue those that live excessive lifestyles". It's not fair to me that the value of my home disappears into the ether, and I continue to pay more than the property is currently valued. I would gladly accept an offer of no federal taxes being deducted from my paycheck for the next five years as rightful and just compensation.

                            Next time you visit Elkhart, Mr. Obama, look me up. We have lots to discuss.

                            • 4 votes
                            Reply#4 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:35 PM EST
                            CARL THE PLUMBER

                            Mike, he didn't forget you, there is 40b for the NEA in the stimuls bill so you can keep your job.

                            • 3 votes
                            #4.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:44 PM EST
                            Capt Tripps

                            you really think they're saying screw you by helping the peopl who actually need it? What do you think of food stamps and welfare then, should you also get the same amount of those benefits as anyone else in the programs in the name of fairness? What about student loands which are based on need? Just about every government social program is based on who needs it most. Why all of a sudden do you feel slighted?

                            Why not rejoice that you DON'T need a handout, and be happy in your lifes stability, and the fact that you live in a country that's willing to help those less fortunate than yourself?

                            Jeez.

                            • 1 vote
                            #4.2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:04 PM EST
                            oi812

                            Mike I think its funny that the party that is trying to shut down gas guzzlers and keep the price of gas high by not using U.S. oil/gas is trying to get support from a town that depends on the R.V. business. You poor people were used for a photo opt. There is nothing a highway interchange will help restore your industry. This stimulus bill only gets 10% of the money into economy the first year and less than 50% by the end of the 2nd.

                              #4.3 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:04 PM EST
                              X- KKK

                              Mike Thompson: I am sorry to say but PRESIDENT OBAMA (I assume this is who you ment) was dealt this hand he has not played yet or so far. President Obama first day at work and he finds out that we have a $10-$15 trillion dollar dealt. He has no choice but to do something or the lovely home that you have will be worth about $100 dollars in a couple of years. You will not be to happy about that alone with the crime rate. Which is going to rise with all of this homelessness. You all cry about what am I going to get well well I would like some help also. But I would happily give my money to help any family KEEP A HOME FOR THERE CHILDREN they deserve at least that. Think about it our Government has spend MILLIONS FOR THE BANK BAILOUT. Show a little compassion being a school teacher I know you can't be that cold hearted. Besides PRESIDENT OBAMA has been pushing for better pay for you better working condition better schools. You are being very inconsiderate since you have a job and will be getting better PAY, BENEFIT, WORKING CONDITION not even considering the people that NO job at all and there companies have outsourced there jobs. What are they to do O YEA LIVE OUT SIDE ON THE DIRT WITH THERE CHILDREN. I guess you are the new breed of teachers.

                              Again I remind you all this was not caused by the unemployed Americans this was caused by the Corporation GREED. I personally have not worked for a year now and guess what I am running out of money what am I to do.... does that make me lazy or did I overspend.... PLEASE PEOPLE as an AMERICAN I know we can not all believe what the media and Rush Limbaugh say and take it for facts. PLEASE CHECK OUT OTHER SOURCES.

                              You all complain about helping family keep there homes well I guess I will hear a lot of noise once you check out this link below. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/12/nyregion/12repubs.html?th&emc=th...

                                #4.4 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:27 PM EST
                                David5000

                                Capt Tripps, "need" and "want" are two different things. People may need food stamps so they do not go hungry, but they do not need taxpayers to pay the bill for a groumet dinner at Ruth's Chriss Steak House when they could not afford to eat there. By the same token, people need shelter, but they do not need a house. There are plenty of people renting who are getting by each day just fine. Help the people loosing homes find such places, but to give them a luxary that is not available to me because of my income and job circumstances is just plane wrong!

                                • 2 votes
                                #4.5 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:45 PM EST
                                joe-295829

                                MIKE HE IS NOT Going to do a damn thing for you.. You are not on welfare or drawing food stamps..

                                • 1 vote
                                #4.6 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:45 AM EST
                                piglizard420

                                You are debt free and therefore not struggling. You don't sound as if you need any help. What exactly are you asking for?

                                  #4.7 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:27 PM EST
                                  skipster56

                                  Mike. I live in MD where my wife and I both work and own our home and not struggling to stay ahead, I do not want anything from president Obama's plan, but I am going to benefit from it greatly. I am selling approximately 7 homes and the $8k for the new homeowners is a win for me whether I want it or not.What's sad is the homeowners are going to get the $8K and will be real happy thinking the President helped them. what they don't understand is the tax rate on that $8K. I am not sure if they are going to treat it as earned income, but if anything, I know they will tax it. That's what the government is banking on. People get money and they get more back. As far as the government forgiving any loans, it's no different than a credit card com forgiving a loan. the government will tax the amount forgiven. What money is loaned out, must be paid back. Throughout the years, I have watched how the governments have sneaked money out of taxpayer's pockets and this is going to be one of the biggest "sneak" of any administration. After all, they took years to perfect it.

                                    #4.8 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:44 PM EST
                                    Reply
                                    Marheart

                                    My hopes are in the hands of Pres. Obama and his staff. WAMU will raise my mortgage by $900 on April 1st. They are only working with people who are in foreclosure. That leaves me, a 68 yr old female, up the creek without a paddle! My little 960 sq. ft. townhouse takes my whole social security check, then I work full time for my other expenses.

                                    It's not like I have a place to turn. I've asked everyone for help--the City, the County, the State, WAMU, HOPE foundation, attorneys, social services, aging assoc., ETC! WAMU doesn't have the staff or time to work with me.

                                    As a former teacher/public servant and Senior Citizen, I resent this treatment. I can afford to stay in the house if they work with me. They won't even take the time to read my HOPE submitted paperwork.

                                    Foreclosures must stop! Not just to hold off on the inevitable, but to work with us. My situation is not greed. My loan is now so out of whack that it's impossible. Just work with those of us who are in trouble.

                                    I made the interest only payments and was told to just keep it up and I'd be fine. The extra money not paid for the minimum payment would disolve when the loan recasts. I hope the Employees of WAMU didn't know they were lying.

                                      Reply#5 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:42 PM EST
                                      willie-749103

                                      A teacher eh, I assume then you know how to read? Did you read the terms before signing?

                                      Mobile homes are pretty resonable, you might want to check one out.

                                      • 1 vote
                                      #5.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:46 PM EST
                                      martvol

                                      960 sq.ft. and the note goes up $900?!?!? WTF. The note should never hit $900 yet alone go up that much. I hope you taught kids better then you were taught.

                                      • 3 votes
                                      #5.2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:59 PM EST
                                      methodman

                                      Even if obama happened to qualify you for money. Looks like at your age, his healthcare plan is going to bite you.

                                      • 1 vote
                                      #5.3 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:35 PM EST
                                      X- KKK

                                      marheart: You have my prays, I hope that you find some help at 68 years of age homelessness would not be good. Not sure if there is any help for use in this plan I am no as senior as you but close. I get no unemployment or food stamps and for all of you that feel we are a burden I GET NO MEDICARE OR MEDICADE the only thing that matters to AMERICANS now is that it does not cost them a dime. I amazes me that I never heard this while X PRESIDENT GW BUSH was spending our tax dollars like it was his personal account. Now they exspect for PRESIDENT OBAMA to pull money out of his dry well with no incress in TAXES while helping the BANKING SYSTEM OUT. Personally maybe it would be a good idea if the Banks go down and I would love to see what you all would say when your MONEY is gone.

                                      It amaze me that everyone complaint about women having children you want to tell a women how many children she is allowed the Single women really get a raw deal. But heaven forbid these women want Birth Control you all don't feel they are need either. Now you all feel like it is OK for a family to be put on the street for loosing there job and unable to pay there Mortgage. And I though the dogs involve in the Michael Vick case had a bad deal. At least they died quick, not like these families... WHERE IS THE AMERICANS COMPASSION...

                                      • 1 vote
                                      #5.4 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:46 PM EST
                                      vol fan in chatt, tn

                                      Marhart, get out of there. It's a sinking ship, let them have it! Rent or move in with someone, it'll be a lot cheaper and save you the headaches

                                        #5.5 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 10:06 PM EST
                                        Ian Blokesworth

                                        "My hopes are in the hands of Pres. Obama and his staff. WAMU will raise my mortgage by $900 on April 1st. They are only working with people who are in foreclosure. That leaves me, a 68 yr old female, up the creek without a paddle! My little 960 sq. ft. townhouse takes my whole social security check, then I work full time for my other expenses."

                                        While I do feel sorry for you, a major boost indicates that you bought this house recently, right? Who would give a 30 yr (my guess) mortgage to a senior citizen? A fraudulent broker, although you should be able to figure out this for yourself. The average 65 year old woman has about 15 years left, and the last ten are probably laden with heavy health care expenditures such as hired helpers and nursing homes. Seriously, you shouldn't be owning the house unless you have a fifteen year mortgage and a 50% downpayment. Take in a roommate or get out and share a place with a few housemates.

                                          #5.6 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:47 AM EST
                                          joy57111

                                          my thoughts exactly, What price did you pay for your home? And how did you expect to do the upkeep and repairs? At your age you should have been advised to look at a retirement community. Home ownership is more than just the mortgage, and although this must sound like age discrimination, you were too old to have been given a mortgage. Just one more case of bad banking. If you had been my family member I would have told you to reconsider and to look into the retirement communities available for retired persons. I am sorry for your situation but you didn't show much prudence in your decision of purchasing a home.

                                          • 1 vote
                                          #5.7 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:03 PM EST
                                          skipster56

                                          Ian. It sounds as if you were duped. I am surprised as you say you are an educated person who served the community. You entered into a mortgage of the worst kind. Can you please explain to everyone in here why? You should have also known that you were going to retire soon and still have a mortgage payment. What kind of thinking is that for an intelligent person? You post opens many questions on why you did what you did. You basically set yourself up for your demise. good luck, but I think you are going to need more than luck to help.

                                            #5.8 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:50 PM EST
                                            Reply
                                            willie-749103

                                            So, is Obama sending me a check for the difference between what my house was worth say 4 years ago and what it is worth today? I realize I screwed up and actually paid it off so I don't qualify for any kind of bank deal....I did the right thing and will be punished for it I am sure.

                                            Nice though, we already subsidze apartemnts via title 8, now it is mortgages.

                                            • 3 votes
                                            Reply#6 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:43 PM EST
                                            X- KKK

                                            willie-749103:We have been subsidizing the Banks for years over and over again and it is always the same banks BofA, Citi, Well Fargo.... Maybe you can get it from some of the money the Banks got. THEY GOT PAID... at least you don't have to worry about loosing your job and not being able to afford your Mortgage since your home is paid for. Next it will be the insurance companies that need to be subsidizing and it will not matter that they don't pay 1/2 of the claims.

                                              #6.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:52 PM EST
                                              verno

                                              Willie, if you don't get any help, why are you being punished? You own your house and don't need the help. Why should you care if someone else who really needs it gets help?? I sure don't understand the thinking of some of you people. I own my house also and it is depreciating but I am not complaining about it. I did not buy it as an investment I bought it as a place to live. People in this country are really hurting and you complain because they are helping them and not you or me. I just don't get it. If we help them get back on their feet they will be paying taxes just like the rest of us and helping the economy.

                                                #6.2 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:44 PM EST
                                                skipster56

                                                Verno. I see your point, but I also am a homeowner that is debt free and not struggling. My problem is when the government hands out money, there are always those that abuse the system to get the money. There are many people living in homes, trying to live the American Dream, that have not earned that right. The percentage of people that would actually benefit for President Obama's stimulus package is very small. It will help the rich, because the rich people that purchased homes over $3M on an ARM will get the benefit of going to a fixed. The question is, if someone chose an ARM as their option, they were looking for one of 2 things. 1, a lower payment, and 2 they were looking to have the home as an equity builder, and sell for a profit a few years down the road. These options and the poor people that signed there name to a 30 year fix are all part of the large percentage of people this stimulus will NOT help. The small percentage it will help, is people that CAN afford going from an ARM to a fixed rate. If you made the decision to purchase a home, go into mortgage, what guarantee did anyone have that they would be able to afford it? My wife and I both work. We purchased a home on a 30 year fixed, 28 years ago. If I or her were to leave one another, for whatever reason, the one left in the home, would not be able to afford it. I lost a $78K+ salary when the company I worked for, closed the division. I took a job in a restaurant to make sure we had ample money coming in to pay the mortgage. We also had put 6 mortgage payments into our savings account. I got back into the same profession, only to get Lymes disease and lose that job after being out 2 years. We still survived because we "planned." All this hoopla about the mortgage mess is the banks, not the homeowners. after all, the homeowner is the one that said they could afford the mortgage. It's no different than buying a vehicle. You go into the dealership and you like the new sUV that cost $56K. You put $1,000 down and your payment is $1200 per month. You going to be able to make that if you lose your job? The problem isn't the government. It's the people. The biggest roar you hear now is those that live off off the government and want more. I really don't care. They are incapable of making good decisions in life and will go through it always complain of wanting more money. Don't hold your breath.

                                                • 1 vote
                                                #6.3 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:10 PM EST
                                                Reply
                                                CARL THE PLUMBER

                                                This is the problem the congress should have worked on first not the stimulus package.

                                                • 2 votes
                                                Reply#7 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:45 PM EST
                                                oi812

                                                I agree--I own a concrete construction company and in the last 2 years we have gone from 250 workers to 75 part time workers. My suppliers tell me I am doing better than my competitors. If things do not change by Aug we will be forced to shut down. We need to get the problem fixed that started this problem mortgages/housing. The stimulus bill will not provide jobs for all the workers in the housing industry.

                                                • 1 vote
                                                #7.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:23 PM EST
                                                X- KKK

                                                o1812:Sorry to hear your business is having trouble I understand your pain. I also have a business that is suffering I have not had a contract for a year I only have 4 employee, I pay them when we do not work in order to have my staff when work comes in I don't know how much more I can take. Since we are the small business I don't think that we qualified for any of the thousands of dollars involve in the Bailout....I wish you luck I hope it gets better for you soon we can't afford to loose anymore American jobs with products made by American hands.... I have a feeling that when this is over Americans are going to be very concern about American made products by Americans hand...

                                                  #7.2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:11 PM EST
                                                  Jimmiesgirl

                                                  This stimulus bill will do nothing to help the working people . It is all pork and wasteful government spending. I know for me and alot of others , my company does not have two or three years to wait to see if things get better. And there is nothing on the horizon to help things get better. Government needs to cut spending and taxes big time if we are to get out of this. Then people will have more cash to help get the economy going again. Bigger government is NOT the answer, it will as usual only make things worse. Maybe that is what they want so that we are all weakened.

                                                  • 2 votes
                                                  #7.3 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:32 AM EST
                                                  joy57111

                                                  I don't see it improving in the immediate future. And there is certainly not enough of it being spent on what is truly the problem. The government is blind to the politics that they are using to get it passed. They are working deals to get what they want and not truly addressing the heart of the problem.

                                                  First - Tax more on all export and imports. Tax all companies that send jobs overseas more than domestic products.

                                                  Second - use the stimulus to reduce taxes for everyone, on a ramp up type style, say for the next 4 years.

                                                  Third - although i hate to suggest it, Buy up all the foreclosures then put them back on the market at a reduced price that is market correct. A loss for us but we all know that we will be the one's to pay anyway so let's suck it up.

                                                  fourth - Do not interfere with the current foreclosures, but, creat a bill that will excuse those that were suckered in with the bad mortgage loans that created this problem. Let them start from square one credit wise.

                                                  Fifth - Invest the rest of the stimulus money on mid to small businesses and then public works projects. Therefore creating jobs.

                                                  Sixth - create a national healthcare program that most other countries have and enjoy. Eliminating medicare, medicaid, co-pays, premiums, and pharmacy costs.

                                                    #7.4 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:25 PM EST
                                                    skipster56

                                                    oi812 Good luck in staying afloat. How many other concrete businesses are in your area? That could come down to the nitty gritty of who's the best in town. Although concrete is a very hard business, what guarantee is there, that made you go into it? I know my brother-in-law is the VP of a window manufacturing co. He had to let over 35 of his work staff go, but he is out working in the field till the late hours of night. Are you having to consider closing because of you overhead? A lot of people go into business and have too high of an overhead to weather a storm such as this. I know when my father was a farmer in Wisconsin, we worked the fields my hand and 1 tractor, and one truck. Years ago farmers were complaining about having to lose their farm and sell everything. Pictures showed them with every machine possible that could be used on a farm and there were 3 to 4 of some of the field equipment. It's always nice to be able to mass produce, but as I said, can you weather the storm as this one. Good luck in your business.

                                                      #7.5 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:22 PM EST
                                                      Reply
                                                      MNmoney

                                                      What about people who elected not to purchase a mortgage and remain renters because the teaser rate they dangled in front of me just did not seem right? Is this country going to help us out? I doubt it. Just like a bunch of democrats to offer help to people that put themselves in their crappy situations.

                                                      • 2 votes
                                                      Reply#8 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:52 PM EST
                                                      X- KKK

                                                      MINmoney: O' so X PRESIDENT GW BUSH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS HE LEFT USE A DEALT OF $10-$15 TRILLION DOLLARS... WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE I can't hear you... Be real PRESIDENT OBAMA got this gift on his first day at work a $10-$15 TRILLION DOLLAR DEALT but of course this is his fault the man has had the job less than month and it is now his fault. The Democrats get blamed for everything I know I use to blame them also but I realize that every time this has happen in our country we the REPUBLICAN was in charge think about when X PRESIDENT BUSH (father) was the President (we as a country was in bad dealt) this was our gift to X PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON. IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME CHECK THE FACTS.... I lost big on this one...

                                                      • 1 vote
                                                      #8.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:21 PM EST
                                                      leemac

                                                      This problem got a real start when Nixon had to find a way to pay what had become a monstrous debt..(Viet Nam war)...we began the "borrow dear and pay back cheap" philosophy for government who needed inflation to make it happen....Carter got a bad rap for it.( He made mistakes, but the economy tends to bite several years after a bad decision)

                                                      Reagan fired up the economy by launching star wars projects which catapulted teh national debt..and he began the serious deregulation that had guarded against this kind of debacle...Bush1 lost to Clinton because things were going south (It's the economy stupid" campaign slogan..Clinton signed NAFTA as it had been negotiated by Bush1 and then sold our economy to the Chinese...Every POTUS has built on this situation...and greed has been right there to get fed...by Dems, Repubs...bankers and speculators alike.....And the American taxpayer has been bilked...

                                                      • 2 votes
                                                      #8.2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 10:22 PM EST
                                                      verno

                                                      Mn: Do you need help?? Or are you just complaining? You rent do you have a job? If so you are in a hell of a lot better shape than a lot of people. This program is not for everyone to have their hands out, it is to help the people that need help. And to get the country back on it;s feet.

                                                        #8.3 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:48 PM EST
                                                        skipster56

                                                        X- KKK You make false claims from not being an educated person. Your title shows you of one capabilty. Hate. If you did see the light, as your nick appears, X, please try to get your facts correct. I get tired having to explain this problem over and over to mindless Democrats so I won't do it now. Just go back to the presidential archieves and read up on your great president Clinton. Open you mind, not your eyes. It's like how many more people are not going to be able to read between the lines when they sign a new document. They just accept that what the banker or government tells them is gospel.

                                                          #8.4 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:37 PM EST
                                                          Reply
                                                          willie-749103

                                                          If they actually follow though with this they need to insert a clause for anyone accepting it. When you sell that 200K house that used to be a 300k house if you get more than 200k the "profit" goes to help pay off the 50 billion allocated to bail your butt out. Seems fair, folks say they just want a roof over their heads..fine by me, just don't expect to make money off OUR money.

                                                          • 3 votes
                                                          Reply#9 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:53 PM EST
                                                          whatstheuse

                                                          As usual, the government will take what could be a simple solution and turn it into a complicated mess. Homeowners will mostly end up being screwed by the mortgage companies and a few people will be saved from foreclosure. The house flippers that got caught when the last "musical chair" was pulled out from under them will probably benefit the most. I hope there is a payback clause so when these houses regain their value (and they will, the Chinese are in the buy American home market) the taxpayers will get repaid.

                                                          The simple solution would be to offer a 4% refi to any homeowner that wants it. The mortgage companies and banks would get an immediate cash flow of taxpayer dollars and the people would pay back the government/taxpayers with monthly mortgage payments. Fannie and Freddie could handle the paperwork and lots of new jobs would be created.

                                                          There would be some adjustments if a mortgage had a prepayment penalty but that could be worked out.

                                                            Reply#10 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:56 PM EST
                                                            gideb114

                                                            I believe that was one of the

                                                             Republician ideas in the Senate for the stimulus plan that the Dems veto.  I guess giving homeowners an extra $200 - $400 a month back just wouldn't getting the economy back on track like that $13 dollar a week we are going to get from no payroll taxes.

                                                             

                                                            • 1 vote
                                                            #10.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:33 PM EST
                                                            whatstheuse

                                                            We can use our $13 a week to fill the gas tank as the price of gas is going up, up, up.

                                                              #10.2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 10:44 PM EST
                                                              Reply
                                                              Dawn Allison

                                                              Democrats, again buying votes with tax dollars. So, I live in a home worth 135000 and pay 2800 a year in real estate taxes (I live in democratic Illinois-high taxes), and those who live in 300000 homes will get cheap monthly payments. They live in an expensive home and the gov. pays for it. I bet many of these folks are people who whine about welfare for the poor. NOw they will become welfare recipients and vote Obama in 2012. Staying on the bright side, maybe preventing massive foreclosure will free up the credit crunch.

                                                              • 2 votes
                                                              Reply#11 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:58 PM EST
                                                              Dawn Allison

                                                              Thing that scares me is the fact that many of these folks will still be fall into foreclosure again, thinking Uncle Sam will keep bailing them out. ON our way to socialism.

                                                              • 3 votes
                                                              Reply#12 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:59 PM EST
                                                              michael-301083

                                                              Obama is going to allow Hamas terrorists to migrate to the USA

                                                              By executive order, president Barack Obama has ordered the expenditure
                                                              of $20.3 million in migration assistance to the Palestinian refugees and
                                                              conflict victims in Gaza.
                                                              The "presidential determination" which allows tens of thousands of
                                                              Palestinians with ties to Hamas to resettle in the United States was
                                                              signed on January 27 and appeared in the Federal Register on February 4.
                                                              Yes folks, avowed suicide bombers being paid to come to the USA.
                                                              Here are Barack Obama's most recent actions.
                                                              1. His first call to any head of state as president was to Mahmoud
                                                              Abbas, leader of Fatah party in the Palestinian territory.

                                                              2. His first one on one interview with any news organization was with Al
                                                              Arabia television.
                                                              3. He ordered Guantanamo Bay closed and all military trials of detainees
                                                              halted.
                                                              4. He ordered all overseas CIA interrogation centers closed.
                                                              5. He withdrew all charges against the masterminds behind the USS Cole
                                                              and 9/11.
                                                              6. And now we learn that he is allowing hundreds of thousands of
                                                              Palestinian refuges to move to and live in the US at American taxpayer
                                                              expense.
                                                              DOES SOMETHING SMELL HERE???

                                                              [Federal Register: February 4, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 22)]
                                                              [Presidential Documents]
                                                              [Page 6115]
                                                              From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access []
                                                              [DOCID:fr04fe09-106]
                                                              Presidential Documents
                                                              [[Page 6115]]
                                                              Presidential Determination No. 2009-15 of January 27, 2009
                                                              Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration Needs
                                                              Related To Gaza
                                                              Memorandum for the Secretary of State
                                                              By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and
                                                              the laws of the United States, including section
                                                              2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of
                                                              1962 (the ``Act''), as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601), I
                                                              hereby determine, pursuant to section 2(c)(1) of the
                                                              Act, that it is important to the national interest to
                                                              furnish assistance under the Act in an amount not to
                                                              exceed $20.3 million from the United States Emergency
                                                              Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund for the purpose
                                                              of meeting unexpected and urgent refugee and migration
                                                              needs, including by contributions to international,
                                                              governmental, and nongovernmental organizations and
                                                              payment of administrative expenses of Bureau of
                                                              Population, Refugees, and Migration of the Department
                                                              of State, related to humanitarian needs of Palestinian
                                                              refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.
                                                              You are authorized and directed to publish this
                                                              memorandum in the Federal Register.

                                                              (Presidential Sig.)
                                                              THE WHITE HOUSE,
                                                              Washington, January 27, 2009

                                                              • 2 votes
                                                              Reply#13 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:01 PM EST
                                                              Sichuan

                                                              You're posting this on every discussion you can find.

                                                              Idiot!

                                                                #13.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:18 PM EST
                                                                Arthur-379160

                                                                Michael is an idiot who needs an enema.

                                                                  #13.2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:37 PM EST
                                                                  Sichuan

                                                                  He needs to have his account deleted by Newsvine.

                                                                    #13.3 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:49 PM EST
                                                                    Juno Hera

                                                                    Arthur and CD, please acquaint yourselves with the Code of Honor, a link can be found at the bottom of the page.

                                                                    Calling people "idiot" is a violation.

                                                                    • 2 votes
                                                                    #13.4 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:53 PM EST
                                                                    John-385319Deleted
                                                                    leemac

                                                                    Hey we have a lot of people being evicted...a lot of unemployed folks...citizens who have fallen on hard times...So we bring in more people when we are struggling to take care of folks living here already???????????? yeah it makes as much sense to me as the explanations given about how the stimulus parts all fit together...

                                                                    • 2 votes
                                                                    #13.6 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:44 PM EST
                                                                    whatstheuse

                                                                    Will the Palestinians get their $8000 as new home buyers?

                                                                    • 1 vote
                                                                    #13.7 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 10:39 PM EST
                                                                    IMMIGRATIONFORYOUDeleted
                                                                    John-385319Deleted
                                                                    Reply
                                                                    Ray-815321

                                                                    As someone in the mortgage industry, the plan will not work. Just lowering the balance will not help. They still need to meet the guidelines of FHA to qet the loan. NO lates, low DTI, etc., that is why the other plans have not helped (Hope for Home, FHA Secure, etc...). They would basically need to have the same low standards to get folks the loan.

                                                                    • 2 votes
                                                                    Reply#14 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:08 PM EST
                                                                    Ray-815321

                                                                    For the senior out there, you need to get a reverse mortgage. Backed up by HUD/FHA.

                                                                    • 1 vote
                                                                    Reply#15 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:13 PM EST
                                                                    David5000

                                                                    Sorry, the reverse mortgage industry is going to die out very soon. Banks cannot keep acquiring housing inventory.

                                                                    • 2 votes
                                                                    #15.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:59 PM EST
                                                                    skipster56

                                                                    A reverse mortgage is great if you don't have children. My daughter has the option of getting everything. She's going to college and works hard every day. She may not want to live in it, but she can sell it for a healthy profit. I know she handles money very well. She was taught by her mother and I. I guess in her future years people will be bashing her for being rich. Too bad. that's something you have to earn.

                                                                      #15.2 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:52 PM EST
                                                                      Reply
                                                                      Griphen02

                                                                      part of the problem with this is that the INFLATED housing prices are not being addressed. Even at current market rates the houses that are forclosed on or about to be forclosed on are still not worth even the deflated price.

                                                                      so when they re-value these homes that were bought by people who couldn't afford them in the first place i.e. if you make $50k a year you shouldn't be buying a $300K house or even $200 or $150K house. Decent folks who could afford the house at the price loos big time thru no fauld of their own here is an example.

                                                                      I bought a house for $145K and have paid the mortgages and taxes as i should. My neighbor bought their house for a little more and could not afford it when the ARM matured it forclosed and the bank sold it for $90K.

                                                                      Now my property is worth about $90k, but my mortgage is $115K. So do I just have to eat the 25K while some idiot who did not understand what they were doing gets rewarded for it?

                                                                      • 2 votes
                                                                      Reply#16 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:24 PM EST
                                                                      Ian Blokesworth

                                                                      "Now my property is worth about $90k, but my mortgage is $115K. So do I just have to eat the 25K while some idiot who did not understand what they were doing gets rewarded for it?"

                                                                      You bought a house at an inflated price. If you can't handle the risk of a highly leveraged investment, you shouldn't be buying. Though, I agree with you that the idiots that bought a house they knew they were unable to afford shouldn't be bailed out. That's completely unfair to those house owners such as you that didn't overextend themselves.

                                                                        #16.1 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:52 AM EST
                                                                        martvol

                                                                        Grip,

                                                                        You are not going to "eat" the $25,000 if you are planning to live in the house the rest of your life. If you bought a house as an "INVESTMENT" then you should eat it. You gambled, you lost. If you plan on living in your house for at least 15 years, the price might come back to you by then.

                                                                        That's what chaps my hide about this plan. People will get to save the principle and interest payment from the offset now. The in 15 years be rewarded again when the house is back up to the original price.

                                                                        • 2 votes
                                                                        #16.2 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:51 AM EST
                                                                        Reply
                                                                        jd-475053

                                                                        I thought all or most of the people on this site voted for Obama?

                                                                          Reply#17 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:26 PM EST
                                                                          Griphen02

                                                                          not me

                                                                          • 2 votes
                                                                          #17.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:27 PM EST
                                                                          David5000

                                                                          I did, but I am regretting it more and more every day.

                                                                          • 3 votes
                                                                          #17.2 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:01 PM EST
                                                                          Biggdogggg

                                                                          I sure as heck didn't..

                                                                          • 2 votes
                                                                          #17.3 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:44 PM EST
                                                                          Church and State

                                                                          After I heard the Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers news and Obama's deplorable voting record in the Senate, there was no way that I would vote for him. He has a toothy smile, is a great speaker, and had his "change" slogan which sucked a whole lot of people in. Too bad they couldn't see through it all. Now, we have to put up with the Dems nonsense for 4 years. Hope we can survive.........

                                                                          • 3 votes
                                                                          #17.4 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:38 AM EST
                                                                          IMMIGRATIONFORYOUDeleted
                                                                          skipster56

                                                                          Want to see something real interesting, go to Wikepedia and look up Adolph Hitler. Not referencing him to Obama, but referencing it to the party. Very very interesting.

                                                                            #17.6 - Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:56 PM EST
                                                                            Greg-281912

                                                                            I vote libertarian. I never voted for a Bush or a Clinton, I have often bragged.

                                                                            Now, I can brag (and only 3 weeks in) that I never voted for an Obama either.

                                                                              #17.7 - Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:48 AM EST
                                                                              Reply
                                                                              disgusted-550171

                                                                              On the surplus 800+ billion bill - the congress has not been given the package in writing at all - they don't have before them exactly what they are voting on - what are they thinking of - where in the hell is common sense - you guys voted the democrats in power and where is THEIR common sense - I cannot believe we Americans are allowing this to happen - vote on this kind of funding - soooooooooo carelessly ---- I want to make ALL responsible accountable for their actions !! and by that I mean if they send us down the black hole they can rot in prison.

                                                                              • 2 votes
                                                                              Reply#18 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:28 PM EST
                                                                              rob-861604

                                                                              The Treasury Department should work with the banks and buy out the currently delinquent and non performing mortgage loans from the banks. These notes should be bought on a discount with the banks suffering a loss of principle. The banks should have already appropriately reserved for these losses, so the discounted sale price should not negatively affect the banks’ earnings.

                                                                              The institutions will then re-underwrite the loans at the market value for the home. After the loans have been re-underwritten, the banks’ will then payoff the loans the government bought out. So virtually what the government is doing is providing liquidity to the banks to be able to correct the over extended borrowers.

                                                                              The new loans will need to be underwritten at pricing and a tenor that allows the borrower to be able to meet the debt service requirements. While these loans will be below market terms the banks will once again see interest income from these loans and will also see principal reductions. In order to make up some of the revenue loss due to lower pricing, the banks could charge a small annual insurance premium, which could also be used for reserves on these new loans. Additionally, the loans could be guaranteed by a Federal Gov’t agency.

                                                                              The loans may be held by the issuing bank, or possibly Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or the FHLB’s could buy the loans from the banks. However, under the current capital position of these entities this may be somewhat difficult.

                                                                              The homeowners that are having their loans re-underwritten and principle forgiven will have this unforgiven principle counted as earned income. They will have a new tax liability on this income, however, the IRS should term this liability out over several years with no interest or penalties.

                                                                              The banks will benefit from this program in that they have cleaned up their balance sheets, asset quality will improve (re-underwritten loans should not be included in restructured loans) and loan loss provisioning can return to more normal levels. The banks will receive increased interest revenue and principle payments should increase.

                                                                              With the new loans needing to be underwritten, jobs for underwriters, documentation specialists and appraisers will be required. This should help the economy.

                                                                              Unfortunately, to date, it would appear that all the "offending" parties have received the benefits of any plan and that the taxpayers that have continued to make their loan payments are not receiving the same level of benefits. The individuals that have continued to make all their payments should receive a payment from the government that is both federal and state tax free that would be equal to the average of the tax liability that is being assessed on the borrowers having their loan principle reduced. For those taxpayers that do not own a home, they should receive a lower payment amount.

                                                                              This payment will result in increased consumer spending that should also help the economy.

                                                                              Real estate should theoretically stop declining in value as the number of homes in foreclosure should decline dramatically. So this would basically create a real estate valuation floor.

                                                                              This plan would not cost the taxpayers the full level of loan buyout or other restructuring plans. The only increase would be from the payments made to all the families/homeowners and other individuals that have remained current or do not own a home but did file a tax return. The increased deficit would not be the entire amount of these payments as they would be offset by the increased tax revenue of the reduced principle homeowners and increased tax revenues from businesses from the increased spending.

                                                                                Reply#19 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:38 PM EST
                                                                                TomK-Columbus, OH

                                                                                Well it looks like almost all come to agreement that this federal bailout is a crock. If one person I know recieves a discounted interest rate or a loan recasted for a devalued property and is allowed to stay, I am filing a lawsuit. As a group we have power. As individuals, we will loose. Its about time we the taxpayers stand up and be heard. Is there anyone else that agrees or not?

                                                                                STAND UP AND BE HEARD!!!!!!

                                                                                • 4 votes
                                                                                Reply#20 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:41 PM EST
                                                                                Cant wait to be poor

                                                                                AMEN!

                                                                                • 2 votes
                                                                                #20.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:56 PM EST
                                                                                Jimmiesgirl

                                                                                I second that motion!!!

                                                                                • 1 vote
                                                                                #20.2 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:38 AM EST
                                                                                Loyd-764704

                                                                                I have the proof you need. I still want to sign up with you. I want more of the golden egg! Get in touch. Just want to get back at the stupid government for getting into the real estate business. There are enough crooks there already.

                                                                                • 1 vote
                                                                                #20.3 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:07 AM EST
                                                                                Greg-281912

                                                                                TomK, AMEN! I'm right behind you.

                                                                                I am a renter who can't afford a house, so the use of my tax money to pay for someone else's mortgage is absolutely unfair, immoral, sickening, and as I see it, completely unconstitutional. Buying a house is a financial choice, like buying a car or gambling in Vegas. No one held a gun to anyone's head and made them sign a mortgage loan!

                                                                                I simply don't think that I should be accountable for someone else's financial decisions!

                                                                                  #20.4 - Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:52 AM EST
                                                                                  Reply
                                                                                  FedUp-349435

                                                                                  I am going to apply to the gov for a house. Yes since I pay my damn taxes and live like Im supposed to then why should my hard earned tax money go to bailout the ones who shouldnt have had a house to begin with.

                                                                                  This is total bull@!$%# flat out. What the @!$%# is our gov thinking. Rewarding those who @!$%#ed up and yet we the good ones have to bail them out. i want my damn house and I want my bailout now.

                                                                                  @!$%# paying taxes, @!$%# paying for the things I have. Why the @!$%# should I if I can get a bailout. Bailout time now...........

                                                                                  Sorry for my rant but seriously. I do apologize for the bad words I posted but seriously now.

                                                                                  • 4 votes
                                                                                  Reply#21 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:43 PM EST
                                                                                  vol fan in chatt, tn

                                                                                  I sincerely understand your frustration...sometimes it's hard...

                                                                                  • 1 vote
                                                                                  #21.1 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 10:12 PM EST
                                                                                  Greg-281912

                                                                                  Fedup, oh, I agree with you completely.

                                                                                  The government has no idea what they are about to do. It's going to get absolutely crazy here on Main Street. Let's just try to stay non-violent.

                                                                                    #21.2 - Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:54 AM EST
                                                                                    Reply
                                                                                    Cant wait to be poor

                                                                                    I would like to see Obama and the government come up with a mortgage that has a pay what you can when you can payment plan. And how about no limit on the size of the mortgage. That would be good too. Then we can all live where we would like no matter how much money we have and the world will be a utopia. Anybody have any problems with that? I don't know why we are beating around the bush with these other plans.

                                                                                    • 1 vote
                                                                                    Reply#22 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:55 PM EST
                                                                                    Just wondering Y

                                                                                    Since I'm not a home owner, and have no intentions of becoming one, I'd like to have the 8K credit the government wants to give to first time homeowners given to me in my hand and I'll be sure to put it back into the economy as soon as they give it to me. That will be my contribution to sparking the economy. I'd like my piece of the pie, too.

                                                                                      #22.1 - Tue Feb 17, 2009 12:16 AM EST
                                                                                      Reply
                                                                                      Billy-400615

                                                                                      When all is said and done...The question is: Who's gonna help prevent foreclosure of the White House?

                                                                                      • 1 vote
                                                                                      Reply#23 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:59 PM EST
                                                                                      Greg-281912

                                                                                      I'd like to bid $25,000 CASH for the White House right now.

                                                                                      Offer good through midnight only today!

                                                                                        #23.1 - Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:43 AM EST
                                                                                        Reply
                                                                                        J Andras

                                                                                        OK--here is the deal

                                                                                        If banks want in they have to show cut overhead, then be required to cut ALL home loans to 0% for 3 to 5 years. Bail out money would then go to the banks to cover documented interest lost at 80% (as they cut overhead) on a monthly basis and based on actual financials.

                                                                                        Then, all payments to all home owners are cut in half from the current amount. That half would go 100% to principle. Homeowners would then take the half of their payment they are saving and buy stuff and pay off other consumer debt. WIN-WIN.

                                                                                        Over the 3-5 year period with so much going to principal the difference between value and debt on the homes would be greatly narrowed, the economy would be stimulated, a huge percentage of tax payers would benefit from the deal, and the government would only put out the money on a monthly basis to replace the actual interest income lost by the banks.

                                                                                        Done deal.

                                                                                          Reply#24 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:06 PM EST
                                                                                          Loyd-764704

                                                                                          I like your idea. I still want to fix a few more things in my house. I bought a house at the top price. I can afford it but as long as the Messiah is handing out money, I want mine. I have beenpaying into this ponzi scheme the goverment has going for years. All of the income tax paid in only goes to cover the interest on their debt.

                                                                                          • 1 vote
                                                                                          #24.1 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 2:16 AM EST
                                                                                          Reply
                                                                                          FedUp-349435

                                                                                          Why should the banksters get a break. Do you know on how much money those crooks and fraudsters has gotten already. here let me remind you all

                                                                                          9.7 TRILLION

                                                                                          Thats right that is with a big T. So why in the @!$%#ing hell should we bailout those damn crooks on wallstreet. Why.....

                                                                                          When is people going to wake the hell up finaly and say enough and do something. Seriously enough is enough.................

                                                                                          • 2 votes
                                                                                          Reply#25 - Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:25 PM EST
                                                                                          Ian Blokesworth

                                                                                          You're right. Don't bail out anyone. Let the foreclosures roll and get it all overwith. The banks will be punished on their fraudulent or reckless loans. House owners that overleveraged themselves will pay as well. The house prices will return to normal in a few years. Then, everyone can go back to the usual model and purchase the house at realistic prices.

                                                                                          • 1 vote
                                                                                          #25.1 - Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:55 AM EST
                                                                                          Reply
                                                                                          Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3 ... 5
                                                                                          Leave a Comment:
                                                                                          You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                                                                          You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                                                                                          (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                                                                                          Newsvine Privacy Statement
                                                                                          As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                                                                                          FUN STUFF:
                                                                                          • Leaderboard |
                                                                                          • E-Mail Alerts |
                                                                                          • Top of the Vine |
                                                                                          • Newsvine Live |
                                                                                          • Newsvine Archives |
                                                                                          • The Greenhouse
                                                                                          COMPANY STUFF:
                                                                                          • Code of Honor |
                                                                                          • Company Info |
                                                                                          • Contact Us |
                                                                                          • Jobs |
                                                                                          • User Agreement |
                                                                                          • Privacy Policy |
                                                                                          • About our ads
                                                                                          LEGAL STUFF:
                                                                                          • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                                                                                          • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                                                                                          • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com