E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSPresident Barack Obama rolled out new proposals to help struggling home-owners and bolster the struggling housing market. Gene Sperling of the National Economic Council, joins Andrea Mitchell Reports to discuss.
President Barack Obama on Wednesday called on Congress to approve a $5 billion to $10 billion effort to help U.S. homeowners refinance as part of a wider package of proposals to shore up the depressed housing market.
Obama had sketched out the proposals in his State of the Union address last week, including a tax on banks to pay for the plan that Republicans quickly rejected.
The White House offered more details on Wednesday ahead of a speech by Obama to expand on his initiative, which some Republicans have derided as an election-year ploy.
Nearly 11 million Americans are underwater on their mortgages, meaning they owe more than their homes are worth. Millions more have lost homes to repossession in states that will be up for grabs in 2012.
"While the government cannot fix the housing market on its own, the president believes that responsible homeowners should not have to sit and wait for the market to hit bottom to get relief," the White House said in a statement.
The White House is seeking to contrast Obama's stance with that of Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney, who has said U.S. foreclosures should be allowed to run their course.
The next contest in the state-by-state battle for the Republican nomination is in Nevada, the state with the highest rate of foreclosure filings for the past five years.
Pool / Getty Images
President Barack Obama speaks during a cabinet meeting in the Cabinet Room at the White House January 31, 2012 in Washington, DC. Obama has recently been discussing his efforts at job creation as the Republican presidential candidates vie in the Florida primary today.
The White House said the refinance program would be run by the Federal Housing Administration. The FHA has already been hard hit by rising defaults on mortgages it had insured, and its cash reserves reached a record low last year.
Many Republicans are likely to resist a larger role for the agency out of concerns taxpayers could be left on the hook for losses.
Obama's proposal, which needs congressional approval, would be open to borrowers who have been current on their payments for the last six months and have no more than one missed payment in the prior six months.
The administration also wants to broaden its Home Affordable Refinance Program, which seeks to provide refinancing options to underwater borrowers who have no equity in their homes.
The White House said the housing regulator overseeing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has exhausted its efforts to make HARP more widely accessible to lenders and borrowers, and now it will ask Congress to make changes. Among those requested changes, it will seek to eliminate the costs of appraisals.
Copyright 2013 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.
Leave a Comment:
Helping homeowners that are underwater on their mortgages is necessary.
People underwater on mortgages aren't going to buy houses, which means prices on houses are going to stay down.
Just make sure the taxpayers aren't on the hook for it.
Where do you think government gets money? Government only has what it takes or borrows from another. And frankly, it isn't the government's responsibility to "help" homeowners.
Nobody can move to take a job even when they find one.
People cannot refinance so as to make their payments lower so they can take care of other bills.
The whole housing market is just insanity right now.
.
Home prices will rebound once the government stands aside and lets the market place determine fair values. I am upside on my car as I owe more than it is worth. Would you like my address so you can help me out? I don't think so.
And I could use a little help with the finance rate on my credit card 19.8% to cover the big screen TV that I bought. Oh, cell phone rates have gone up so how about a little help there?
If we had a President that actually knew how to lower the unemployment rate we would all be better off.
If this is your stance, then you have no cause to blame the government for unemployment or the economy.
Let me get this straight, you think a house is the same as a cell phone or a TV?
Did you even read what you said?
If you are underwater on your house, that means you already OWN ( or paying for ) a house. VERY VERY few of us are going to go buy a 2nd house when we already own a 1st.
BUT back on topic.
didnt Obama and Congress already pass something early last year to help people here?
You ever heard of moving? People sell their houses and buy other ones. Or at least they used to.
But they can't sell it if they owe more on the mortgage than the house is worth.
You realize the housing market is like a cornerstone in the economy, right?
Another dumb idea by a feckless president. He is painting over the economic rot in the USA and trying to tell you how pretty it looks. And to the extent you buy his "plan" you deserve to remain in the economic toilet. The ONLY thing he said in that overall dumb speech is that anyone who broke the law should be held accountable for their actions.
This plan will fail, like every other failed before it, because it doesn't deal with fundamentals. Why should a bank refinance your loan if you are still making the payments? Why should banks do anything but uphold their end of the contract you signed? Why should your neighbor help get you out of the trouble you are in, particularly when the reasons for the trouble you are in are still FULLY in place in federal housing policy?
When this president decides it's time to deal with economic fundamentals and allow for a pro-growth economic policy at the federal level then prices might rebound a bit, and fewer people will be underwater. But this president is as economically illiterate as we have ever had, and he has no idea how to allow the markets to repair themselves. He just keeps tweaking things in the hope his voters will believe he cares and knows what to do. And you know what? It will probably work.
Enjoy your bread and circus.
See that is the problem right there. Why is this industry one of the most important to our economy? Could it be that we went on a glut of speculation in housing that with the help of the Federal Government created the bubble that burst? Could it be that easy loans that were pushed for by a variety of politicians and activists are part of the problem and are still part of the problem?
I have news for you, there were several economists that were warning about this bubble in the middle 2000's but few listened. This could have been completely avoided if it wasn't for cheap and easy credit for home ownership that politicians from both sides of the aisle and activists praised and helped create.
Now here my fellow taxpayer, suck on this! We know many of you aren't underwater and didn't buy into the ARM mortgages or speculative markets. But that doesn't matter, it's time for you to pay up for those that did!
Because many people are just walking away from their payments. The bank can foreclose, but good luck selling a vacant house.
I think you need to learn economic fundamentals. If you had any grasp whatsoever, you'd know that the housing market is a huge contributor to our economy.
Not as economically illiterate as you are. And repair themselves? The hands-off policy is what got us into this recession in the first place. Is that not plain-fully obvious by now?
Because a house is the largest investment and asset consumers often have? Housing assets make up a TON of our GDP.
Underwater mortgages are a result of the housing crisis. These people underwater were not irresponsible. The only argument I am hearing from you right now, is that the only way to fix it is to avoid it altogether. Way to dodge the topic at hand.
This proves you have no grasp of what a mortgage is. When you owe more, even on a fixed rate, than the house is worth, you are underwater. Period.
My house is now worth less than when I bought it. Nevertheless, I am responsible, did not buy more house than I could afford, and am making my payments. Those who bought way over their heads don't deserve our tax dollars!
we are slightly underwater in our mortgage, means we can't sell without a huge loss, and can't refi because we don't have enough equity for hte appraisal to work out. We are current on everything and make good $$ no issues there. We happened to buy RIGHT before things tanked, thus resulting in where we are right now. Luckily we dont' want to move for a couple more years, but getting a lower interest rate would be great right now. The banks just won't let us do it. So some new rules to allow that would be VERY helpful. I also know taht we aren't the only ones in this predicament, stuck in a house that it would be nuts to get out of becuase of hte loss that would hit you.
Oh great. More handouts to the irresponsible, the deadbeats, and the nipple suckers in an effort to pander for votes. I AM SICK TO DEATH OF CARRYING THE LOW LIFES AND LOSERS OF THIS COUNTRY ON MY BACK!
For those of you against a "government bailout"--this economy won't move until the housing crisis starts to get solved. This money will allow people to afford their homes and continue to make payments.
This is much better to rev up the economy than for people to just walk away from their underwater homes.
Of course, the Repubs, against anything the President proposes, will be against this. They don't care about our dying middle class at all.
While I appreciate what you are saying, this proposal is to start getting people to buy and sell their houses again. You, being a homeowner, should know that you can't sell your house when you owe more than it's worth.
Until houses start selling, the prices will stay down.
You are clearly uneducated on mortgages, when you are able to comprehend the basics, feel free to contribute. Until then, stop spewing incorrect ignorant garbage.
Why not have frannie and freddy refinance the nation, one time deal for all citizens on new and refi's @1%.
A fair deal for all.
Haven't the banks leeched enough?
I remember when affordable home prices was a priority. I also remember when the bubble began and home prices outpaced income. Home prices have to come back in line with income. So either incomes need to go up, which is not happening, or home prices need to come down. All else is folly. The government's real policy is to inflate the nominal values to cover the morgtages. This plan covered by the article is nothing more than window dressing for partisans to bicker over.
While there are homeowners underwater on their mortgages today, how is this any different than the situation in New England and Southern California in the late 80's when they were underwater? There wasn't a government buyout of those mortgages. People just put off selling their house and moving or would decide to rent their house.
In order to recruit people to northern California, we had to provide a signing bonus large enough to cover their losses. Same case as today, just on a larger scale - Keep government out of it and it will take care of itself.
Seriously? How can anyone possibly believe this. Now he wants to give them another 5-10 billion dollars?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-57368239/freddie-mac-accused-of-betting-against-homeowners/
That is BS and you know it. We have gotten soft and don't want to do anything that is uncomfortable or varies from routine. Since the recession began in 2008, I have worked in three different states, go home occasionally on weekends and mail home the check to pay the bills. You have to do what is necessary to make it through a recession. No more excuses. Leave that to Obama.
Let's be honest here. Home prices are not going to go any higher. That's a pipedream of real estate agents, land developers and others in the housing industry. These loonies don't get it. Owning a home is tied to income. DUH. If incomes are stagnated back to 1971 levels, guess what happens to all those McMansions on sale for 1,000 times what the average stagnated salary reality is?
However, there's more to the skankoids in housing and mortgaging than just Americans who are underwater. What about those who had mortgages approved under skankola conditions? Millions of Americans who had their property taxes increased as a result of a reassessment in municipal value, got zapped with thousands in tax increases. When your bank sends that notice of a major shortage in the escrow held to pay property taxes, most Americans don't have the ability to scrounge together $5,000 or $6,000 at a pop. So they refinance. If their incomes are not in the glowing range, they get skanked by mortgaging banks who dole out those "at risk" interest rates double what the average is. Or else, they say they can't loan less than $50,000 with a 12% interest rate, effectively owning the home if a medical emergency arises or a job loss occurs at any time in the future and the homeowner falls behind.
How many mortgaging banks played this game with people just trying to pay their taxes?
Is he giving Freddie and Fannie that money? From what I read (maybe wrong?) he was giving the money to his Gov't program, not the banks.
It is an election year and anything goes even if it failed once already.
Is it only me that sees that Obama is willing to give away the house this year to get re-elected ? He is going to offer every entitlement and give-a-way program under the sun this year without regard to the deficit or the taxpayers just to try to get re-elected. He can't run on his record over the past 3 years and the extremely un-presidential blaming of the last president is getting old after 3 years, so now get ready for more and bigger government give-a-ways that will bring this country to it's knees economically. China will own us and the more debt the country has the more businesses and jobs stagnate due to an uncertain economic future. Whatever happened to the Kennedy administrations " Ask not what your Country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your Country" ? You, Your Children, Your Grand Children and their Children will be paying dearly for what this Country already owes, we need to stop the insanity and stop the spending and drop back and punt for a while.
1 in 4 homes are now underwater. Are you calling 1 in 4 Americans who find themselves in this position deadbeats, JP? How ignorant you are.
Ruken I could not agree with you more.Whether Obama uses it as a Campaign ploy or not,who gives a flying rat's behind, I'M ALL FOR IT,BRING IT ON!
To all you people saying it's the government giving out handouts BLAH BLAH BLAH! YOU ARE WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
Then you ask where are we going to get the Money? THINK!
We are sending aid and that includes fighting insane wars, to almost every FRIGGEN BUM FARK COUNTRY ON THE PLANET,we bailed out the Friggen banks and auto industry.Hell people we're even bailing out Europe through the IMF,with YOUR TAX DOLLARS!
YOU PEOPLE ARE BITCHEN,because this Guy wants to BAIL OUT YOUR OWN PEOPLE?GIVE ME ANOTHER FRIGGEN BREAK!
It's okay to bail out banks,it's okay to bail the auto industry, it's okay to send aid,and that's in TAX DOLLARS PEOPLE,to some Bum Fark Country,send money,TAX DOLLARS,to the IMF.For all you elitists and Geniuses,that stands for THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND,in order to bail out Europe,but again you can't help your own people.
You don't here a PEAP from anybody!
Makes a lot of sense doesn't it?They can get all this money billions and billions for all these excessive OTHER CRAP!BUT YOU CAN'T FIND THE MONEY TO BAIL OUT YOUR OWN PEOPLE, AND YOU PEOPLE ARE BITCHEN!
Question? Where the HELL do you people get your LOGIC FROM?
You want to Bitch?Then Bitch about all the INSANE EXCESS that I pointed out above,NOT AGAINST YOUR OWN PEOPLE BEING BAILED OUT!
You people absolutely make NO SENSE!
Ruken, I wanted to go post by post and decimate the stupidity of everything you said, but I just don't have the time and it wouldn't do you any good anyway.
I'll leave it at saying you're one of the dumbest commenters I've read in a long time. Please stop posting.
I just want to finance so that i can get out from being underwater in my mortgage more eaisly...make those payments (and extra payments) work for me more! And right now with things, i can't refi to be able to do that.
Really waht he should do is force the banks to lower interest rates for anyone that has been up on their payments and interest rates are above 5 %...THAT would help.
Ruken
You can absolutely sell you house if it is underwater. You will have to pay money in order to sell it, but that has always been the case. The decision has always been based on weighing the advantages/disadvantages of selling.
If the numbers don't add up for you, DON'T MOVE.
Same advice I heard when I started working 30 years ago.
Now there's some logic. Interesting, isn't it?
Money which people don't have, because the difference in the mortgage and current value is so steep.
I don't know if you know it, but you hit the nail on the head. For the housing market to recover, people need to be moving. And considering how big of an effect the housing market is on the economy, well...I'm hoping you can draw the conclusion I'm alluding to.
@ Ruken, Let the (private) market run its course! Many if not most of the people well underwater bought more house than they could afford in the first place! Their greedy mistake-not mine! These tax dollars that Hussein wants to use is given to the government by far more responsible citizens than irresponsible ones. Furthermore, this handout is not fair to all tax payers! Hussein needs to stay out of it!
Great, giving away more money that we don't have to spend!!!! Why doesn't he work on cutting spending instead of spending more?
Who whould know that the US government has a budget crisis. This just shows you how bad a president we have. Should be looking to save money and not spend it on such silly efforts.
You can put in place whatever policy you want, but the underlying fundamental remains. Income to price inequality is still way off kilter. Prices must go down, its the only fix. Sucks for me, I'm atleast 65 thousand underwater but I can afford my mortgage so I'm staying. Hopefully something happens but higher incomes is my only hope for house appreciation and no company wants that.
We bought in 2006, the height of the market with a VA loan. We've been through 2 job losses but have never missed a payment. Now we're better than we ever have been financially and want to buy a larger house. We can't because our home is underwater. I don't know what the answer is, but I know we won't be helping the housing market recover any time soon since we won't be able to sell & buy again until prices improve. It would be nice for a little help for fiscally responsible families like mine (with a credit score of 780 and no late/missed payments on anything, ever) to go back out into the market.
I thought about analyzing your post, but then realized it couldn't have anything intelligent in it once I saw you allude to the POTUS as a genocidal dictator.
Webster:
Deadbeat - One who persistently fails to pay personal debts.
How? When has the government ever given money to a limited number of people and it been a benefit to the masses? What government assistance program has not resulted in just another F'd up money pit?
If they are still in their homes and making payments, they are not upside down. To be upside down they must be trying to liquidate the asset. For example, when buying a new car it is worth about 10% less as soon as it is driven off the lot. So now a person that has no equity in the car is upside down. Are we supposed to help them also? How many people are buying new cars to resell?
All I have heard from Republicans is deregulate, deregulate, deregulate.
Basically, the Republicans want to do the EXACT thing that caused this entire mess in the first place. They want to deregulate everything and let banks drive us right into another recession.
So our options are to spend more to help our own people, or go back and do the exact thing that caused our economy to crash. Hmmmm... tough decision.
Ruken,
The vast majority of people are not walking away from their contracts. Even if underwater. This program, if it ever becomes law, will do nothing to positively affect the RE market. It's not about stabilizing prices (as if the government can do that anyhow) let alone turning the decreases in to incrases. The millions of homes being foreclosed on are being bought--I bought one and will buy another as soon as I can--but the influx is still high and we have a few more years before the market can clear supply.
Every program before thought up by Mr. Obama's brain trust has failed, costing lots of money and producing no tangible positive results. This will end up the same way? Why? Because it doesn't do anything regarding economic fundamentals. Three years into a recovery and we have 1.7% GDP growth? We still have over one million fewer wage earners today than when Mr. Obama became president. Poverty continues to rise. Costs continues to rise--just look at gas and food. So yes, this president is economically illiterate.
And your claim that unregulated markets caused this is just pathetic. Fannie and Freddie and FHA aren't the ultimate free market, just the opposite is true. We have a multitude of banking regulations and mortgage lending laws and these aren't the signs of a free market either. What we had was a controlled market, either directly or indirectly through various incentives, and it failed. We need to return to fundamentals and swallow the medicine that implies.
We need to eliminate business taxes. We need to reduce regulations which impede business activity which we subsidize in other nations (think about this and you might see what I mean). We need to stop this day to day uncertainty caused by the federal government's desire to impact every aspect of our economic life. So yes, this president is economically illiterate. If he wasn't you could point to one of his previous real estate plans which worked. Can you?
buzzsaw - He knows he needs to buy more votes, and people who care more about their personal gain than the future of the nation are the most easily bought. Those people are also too ignorant or uncaring to realize that their own short-term gain is only going to make the long-term situation worse for everyone.
The hole is simply being dug deeper by whiners screaming for handouts of dirt, not realizing they are also standing the hole.
Please take an economics class. You need to learn there's a difference between a consumable good like a car, and a house.
I am not looking to sell my house, but a lower interest rate will allow me to pay off the principle faster and then I can retire.
Go President Obama.
"We've been giving away money..." Only under President Obama? How snaky do these righties plan to get? Bush gave away billions in 2001 to hire and create jobs. By 2008, 8 million Americans were unemployed...Whose money was Bush giving away then?
Slimeball right wingers are about as hypocritical as a two-faced snake. It's all bad Obama according to them. Never once taking responsibility for the 6 years that led to this mess. Never once an honest word about the skankoids in the financial industry betting on homeowners defaulting on loans.
Sick pathetic Obama bashers...their negativity fest is their mechanism to hide their own guilt. Every time you see a post bashing others or the president, know that these are the same gimme gimmes who only know how to take from the system and never feel they owe in return. Which by the way, since they take advantage of our tax money, they most certainly do owe. Pay up or shut up.
Evelyn,
is paying off your house all you have to do to retire? If that is the case, I could have retired long ago. But I find it selfish and irresponsible to expect the government to pay for my retirement such as healthcare. Someone has to pay. It won't be you, but your children and their children will provide for your retirement.
Regardless of all the circumstances mentioned above, I am trying to protect my wallet and you had better do the same. If you feel a contribution to the government is appropriate, please make one. It is tax time. Send more than you owe. LOL.
LOL......WOW......hitting the campaign trail again.
More $$$ going down the rat hole....but this time Mr. Obama is going to have the "banks" pay for his initiative. Well, Mr. Obama....if that happens, what do you expect the banks to do to make up their loss ?
Hint.....pass the costs on to the consumer.
Yep, Mr. Obama's HAMP and other "help the homeowners" initiatives have proved so effective, I am so sure this one will work also.
Time to kick the Campaigner-in-Chief out of office.
I am underwater on my own house and I don't expect the taxpayers to pay for that. As with investments and Real Estate their is and was always a risk, but we all got a little too comfortable. Besides my mortgage being upside down now (I owe more than the house is now worth), I also lost almost all of my 401K plan when the market crashed a few years ago (I owned some Lehman Brothers Stock), but I was warned stocks were a risk and real estate could be a risk, so why blame others for the choices that you made. I did it, it was my mistake and I should have been more careful. Sure having others pay for your mistakes makes life easier, but we are free, living in a free country and we are free to make mistakes, and free to learn from them and fix them on our own. If we count on the government to fix and help our every need, we definitely are less free and surly will have ton pay for that as in life there is nothing that is free and if your taking from the government you are not free as they need to know who you are, where you are, what you earn, where you work and why do you need the help. I choose to be very free, less government and less taxes and I'll do the best I can to take care of myself and my family.
Ruken, You think a hands off policy caused the housing crash ??? Where have You been ? You need to google the American Reinvestment act passed by the Carter Administration, and further enforced with threats of fines to financial institutions if they didn't participate. To be short and sweet, the act forced banks ( By our wonderful government ) to give loans to people that couldn't afford to pay them back. We see how that worked out. So now You want the same entity that created the mess to fix it ? That doesn't make a lot of sense to Me Pal ! I can almost guarantee that any major problems in this country have been created by Uncle Sam. Thats why I would like to see the size and scope of the Government cut in half at least!!
@Ruken - Barack Hussein Obama is his true full name! I mentioned nothing but his name. However, he does seem to want to be a dictator! BTW - I use to be a Democrat until Hussein disgusted me with his wasteful, reckless spending. Now our children will have to deal with his ridiculous continued follies.
Ruken
Seems like a pretty good argument. They are both considered assets. It is just that one depreciates faster, I can get a lower interest rate for the home than the car and I can deduct interest paid for the house.
On the flip side, I can buy a three bedroom house in Lima, OH for less than the cost of the Buick I bought.
Ruken, You take an economics class. A car is not a consumable good.
Also, the housing mess was created by the Dems when they bullied banks into lending to people that were risky investments. It was Carter, Clinton, and Janet Reno that threatened legal action through the Community reinvestment Act. Too many people bought more house than they could afford.
Now my house is not worth what I paid for it. But yet, I can still cover my payments. I am glad I CHOSE to stay within my means.
Ruken, also if We wouldn't of bailed everything out, the bubble would of burst worse, but the markets would of corrected their selves by now. Obviously, the bailouts and stimulus have done nothing but prolong the misery.
Really? I heard you don't lose half a home's value just for buying it.
Well...scratch that, maybe in today's housing market you do :)
How about the government step-in an reduce all 1st mortgages on primary housing for anyone earning less than $250K annually by one full percentage point, which would help mortgage holders by lowering their payments and allowing some to pay their homes off faster?
Or, we could bulldoze vacant homes, like has been done in a few cities like Detroit, except that some neighborhoods would end-up with so many vacant lots that it might become unfeasible for the city to continue to provide city services there, also just like Detroit!!!
Or, we could just let vacant houses rot, and eventually get stripped, turned into the neighborhood party house, crack house, or worse, which certainly won't help neighboring property values either, also just like in Detroit and a few other major cities too!!!
Actually, I would vastly prefer having the government seek to use our tax dollars to bail-out underwater lower and middle-income homeowners over either tearing down vacant houses or just abandoning them. Doing so would obviously help the banks too, far more than it would hurt them, as it would also help keep the value of bank-held vacant real estate up too. Such a program would also help keep the property values of neighboring existing homeowners up too.
The only people who should really be able to oppose such a plan would be those homeowners earning above the income floor, the lion's share of whom live in neighborhoods with vary low vacancy rates anyway.
Ruken,
You are guaranteed to be out 6% in realtor fees, the loan origination fees and the other closing costs if you decided to sell the house one day after you bought it.
Also, if I bought a '67 Shelby when it was new, I wouldn't have lost much on the deal...
Even banks are walking away from foreclosed homes OldTimer.
Easy to answer. When you build a house you employ an architect, a worker to dig the hole, a concrete guy to pour the foundation, a carpenter, a plumber, drywall guy, painter, electrician, roofer, carpet layer, landscaper, siding and windows guys, window treatments, garage door, furnace and air conditioning guys, cabinets, counter tops, finance people, etc. etc. plus all the people that manufacture the products that these wokers are installing. It's a huge chain. When the housing crash came, all those workers, and the workers making the materials for those homes became unemployed. Those unemployed don't buy new TVs and electronics, clothes, cars, go on vacations etc. etc. So......the electronics, car, and clothing manufacturers, and Disney have to lay off people, and the whole thing continues.
Just more redistribution. It never ends with the Democrat/Socialist/Progressive/Liberals.
Just one word. One word:
Europe.
After reading many of the posts I have decided that the best approach is to do NOTHING! As we have seen for the last several years the Republicans have the answer, JUST SAY NO! That way everything will continue to spiral downward! Ain't it great to live in a country which shows so much compasion and empathy for its struggling citizens, of all political stripes? The 'law of the jungle', survival of the fitest works just fine, although there may be suffering and eventually revolution. So?
Yea, because saying "No" for the last few years has improved things dramatically hasn't it?
There is ALWAYS an equal negative consequence to government meddling.
Why isn't the question being asked by this media; "Who will REALLY be made to pay this cost"
The answer is: "Everyone who has a bank account of any kind" will see a rise in fees of all kinds.
What about those of us who bought our houses and they are paid -off? Whats in this for us?
Why should we home owners with no mortgage be made to pay higher bank fees to subsidise others who made bad real estate deals?
Obama knows it will be passed onto the customers. Remember last fall all the folks burning their bank cards in protest of a monthly fee? Thankfully Obama set up his new consumer protection joint to stop the bank from levying such a fee.
I think Obama just found a legal way to rob a bank.
touchette Mr. president.
Galt 2012
That is a lie and a myth that the right has been trying to propagate to absolve the banks of any responsibility. The American Reinvestment Act did not force anyone to loan money to unqualified applicants. It was the repeal of Glass-Steagall that lead the housing crash, because it allowed banks to begin speculating again. Banks were qualifying people for loans, they knew would not be able to pay off, because they knew that they would not even hold that mortgage when it fell through. The banks pushed people into variable interest loans, giving them a sweet introductory rate, knowing that when they reset the interest rates, that person could not make payments, thereby allowing the bank to get as much money as they could from that person, foreclose their house, and resale it. The banks did not foresee that so many foreclosures would happen and the housing market would tumble.
In the area I live in there are so many houses that have been foreclosed on, that the banks are not even putting them on the Market, they are sitting empty. The banks don't pay HOA dues, which causes a budget shortfall for my HOA that they have to raise dues and cut services. It means the vacancy rate is so high that it drops the value of occupied houses. I am under water because my house has lost $30,000 in value in the last year, and it expected to drop at least another $15,000 this year. You cannot make that guarantee because, it is NOT government that has caused any major problem in this country, it is rich people who get too greedy and to reckless with other people's money.
bdjb for common sense,
YOUR children will have to deal with it... I'm not having children, so I could care less. Tell them "thank you" for me. Because like so many Republicans have stated here, I didn't make the decision, so your kids are not my problem.
BTW - if you think there is a difference in Republican and Democrat spending policies, you are a fool. Both parties are responsible.
JPSOTW
I want to personally thank you for carrying the entire economy on your back. It is the selfless individual that you are whom I admire. You wake up every morning with a sunny disposition, smile at the wonderful life that you have, and then you toil untold hours, slaving away just so you can personally support the entire economy of the United States on your back. You are truly a wonderful human being. Because of you, I can sit around all day and play my new Playstation 3. I bought it and all the games (some are terrific, and again, thank you!) by selling my food stamps for 40% face value, cash. Thank you for the food stamps. My family doesn't need them because we all work under the table. I work at a bar, although I wouldn't call it work, my wife is a pole dancer, and my 4 kids all work cleaning toilets for Newt Gingrich.
Damn, I just got killed on Modern Warfare by a kid from Deluth while I was busy typing this.
Anyhoo, thanks again. Keep working, man. I need a new wireless controller!
Most people who are underwater on their mortgages didn't make bad real estate deals. And, think about this. Your neighborhood has a high foreclosure rate, it causes the value of your property to drop. It will not only benefit your neighbors. It will benefit you as well, because it will keep the value of your house from dropping lower.
What about Europe?
My Florida house is worth $150K. My mortgage balance is $300K. Should I refi from 5.5% to 4%, saving $3200 per year? Or should I short sell my house and start over? $3200 per year is a drop in the ocean, unfortunately.
Romney is correct. The bad paper, including mine, needs to wash through the system. Only then will the market begin to recover. More lipstick for the pig real estate market is not the answer. Obama is clueless. He wants to bribe voters with their own monry.
Europe is a nice place to visit.
Love the food!
I'm so tire of all the BS out of washington, Obama is throught around MY money like he has an unlimited supply. I do wish I know what happened to the days of the stricked FHA rules of the House payment could not exceed 28% of your net monthly income and all bills couldn't be more than 45% of that same number... That seems reasonable too me. And the Banks that profitted by letting homeowners add second mortgages to there homes that pushed the Loan-To-Value ration to 125% should lose there shirts.....
Never been there.
Been to China though, can't say I enjoyed the food (our "Chinese food" is heaving Americanized, real Chinese food is like 'fish head soup').
I had trouble breathing in Shanghai also, you wouldn't believe how trashed that place is.
raddave
The CRA most certainly forced Banks to make bad loans along with ACORN protester calling Banks RACIST because they didn't loan to POOR people.
Here you go.
CRA.
Sec. 802.
(a) The Congress finds that—
(1) regulated financial institutions are required by law to demonstrate that their deposit facilities serve the convenience and needs of the communities in which they are chartered to do business;
(2) the convenience and needs of communities include the need for credit services as well as deposit services; and
(3) regulated financial institutions have continuing and affirmative obligation to help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered.
(b) It is the purpose of this title to require each appropriate Federal financial supervisory agency to use its authority when examining financial institutions, to encourage such institutions to help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered consistent with the safe and sound operation of such institutions.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act_of_1977#Sec._802
Notice the words REQUIRE and ENCOURAGE. Now if you were a Bank President what would you do?? Make the loans or risk Fines and Closure??
How about obannana give me some money on the losses I have in my investments ,which are about half of what I paid for them so that it will help out the stock market. This was for my retirement years.
real Estrate prices function with basic economic principals, supply and demand. Lack of demand is the problem. Lack of demand is due to unstable economic conditions and lack of financing/equity/down payment and income. the economy gets better and housing demand goes up.
Obama simply wants to bribe more voters with their own children's money. If Obama really wanted to help the real estate market, he would annouince he was stepping down at the end of his term.
raddave
Then there is Section 804.
SEC. 804. (a) IN GENERAL.--In connection with its examination of a financial institution, the appropriate Federal financial supervisory agency shall--
(1) assess the institution's record of meeting the credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with the safe and sound operation of such institution; and
(2) take such record into account in its evaluation of an application for a deposit facility by such institution.
(b) MAJORITY-OWNED INSTITUTIONS.--In assessing and taking into account, under subsection (a), the record of a nonminority-owned and nonwomen-owned financial institution, the appropriate Federal financial supervisory agency may consider as a factor capital investment, loan participation, and other ventures undertaken by the institution in cooperation with minority- and women-owned financial institutions and low-income credit unions provided that these activities help meet the credit needs of local communities in which such institutions and credit unions are chartered.
Notice the words "LOW and MODERATE-INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS"
Obama the pandering Al Green cover act. So as the community organizer in chief, he continues to allow the mortgage and foreclosure crisis to linger on and on etc... pandering to voters once again with a band-aide but no real solution to the Mortgage mess perpetrated to the largest extent by Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and the whole entourage of fellow panderers simply intent on destroying prosperity and dragging out the inevitable need to clear the slate of massive mortgage defaults! So let's have another government program instead of approving the Keystone Pipeline or even coming up with a reasonable energy policy that relieves the massive burdens on American businesses and create jobs.... BUT NOOOOO.. more of the same from a guy who couldn't balance his own checkbook before he became president.
Let big mouth Romney pay for it. It's people like him with his unethical business tactics that have done serious damage to this country.
slowdon, do you not know what ENCOURAGE means? Here's a hint, it doesn't mean force. Also in your second post, you forgot to highlight this part
I wonder why you for got that part??? ACORN? you can do better than that.
Ruken-You have to be kidding me, the president has tried this three times and all three times it has failed. Yes, it is the problem of the person that bought the home, if you put no money down and you income was only $50,000 and you bought a $500,000 dollar house this is not my responsibility that you were negligent. See if you knew anything about the economy that you would know you should not buy a house with less than 20% down, if you don't have the 20% to put down than you save and do without until you have the 20% to put down. Than you buy a house that if you would happen to loss your job you could still make you mortgage payment. So if you are not responsibleenoughto have done these thing, than I should not have to bail you out. Besides this was Clinton's doing in the first place, he mad it so you could buy a house with no money down and a below avg. income. Does it mean it is a good idea to buy a house in this way just because the bank will do it, no it goes back to being a responsible person and not a negligentone. Here is the post about Clinton. It looks to me that Obama is trying to fund the Federal Housing Administration instead of helping people as this has been tried, tried and retried again. See from the article it says that the FHA cash reserves have reached an all time low, I believe this has more to do with it than anything else.
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/clintons_drive.html
This post was from Ron H #1.47 thanks Ron.
John, I think you mean there is an overabundance of supply.
Bill, you are mistaking being "underwater" with buying too much house. Being underwater means that the value of your house has fallen so low that if you sold your house, you would not be able to make up the difference in what you owe on your house. It does not mean that you bought a $500,000 house with only a $50,000 a year salary.
So, my wife and I could have qualified for a $300,000+ ARM home loan and bought a nice, big, new house up the hill. Instead, we bought a fixer-upper that we could still afford even if one of us lost his or her job. THAT is responsible home mortgage and ownership. Why, then, do our taxes, and our children's children's taxes have to pay for a bailout of foolish people who bought on speculation? Every major economic downturn has been the result of a burst "bubble" following rampant speculation. I am sick and tired of paying for other people's get-rich-quick schemes! No politician wants to say it, but the real culprit here is not big banks, but individuals (voters!) who bought well beyond their means, betting on the come, and were caught out. Until we hold people responsible for their own choices, we will continue in this downward spiral. WAKE UP!
@ Ruken
I find it funny and I believe everyone else here does as well that you do not respond when questions are directly asked of you. Questions like do you own a house, do you have a mortgage, or the comments by Joel and Bill in this thread. You avoid having to prove that you know anything and just spout off whatever you please. Joel has done the research to unravel just about anything you will post and everything you will and prove you are not knowledgable on the subject at all. Please stop posting and embarassing yourself and others like you.
@Everyone Else
Step back and realize that this money will have to come from somewhere. Banks, oh yeah thats what the article said, but wait, where will the banks get the money to recover their losses? The customers, but wait, if the customers have all gone to credit unions, how will the banks get the money? Thats right they will declare bankruptcy and require another bail-out. If they need the bail out, where will the money come from? Oh yeah, thats right, every tax payer. Then we have to pay more, as will our employers who will then need to cut costs and lower their expenses (i.e. outsource, layoff, shutdown, etc.) Then we have more people who can't make their mortgage payment, looks like we are back at square 1. Sounds like a pretty bad cycle to be on, maybe we should just stop with all the intervention?
So do other facets of the economy, but we see people b*tch all day about unemployment. Isn't it just working as intended then?
raddave
That is where Fannie and Freddie come in. The Banks make the REGUIRED Loans and then SELL the Mortgage to Freddie or Fannie. That takes the HIGH RISK LOANS off their Books so that the BANK has a 'safe and sound operation'.
See how it works??
As far as ACORN goes.
By organizing tenant unions, pushing for inclusionary zoning, and ensuring fair and increased access to low-interest home loans, ACORN has sought to extend the possibility of homeownership to all people.
In the 1980s, ACORN members fought banks to that were refusing to give home loans to people living in low income and minority neighborhoods. The practice is called redlining, and is now illegal as a result of campaigns by ACORN and other organizations.
Additionally, ACORN created a loan counseling program called ACORN Housing. ACORN Housing is distinct organization from ACORN, though the two work closely together to increase home ownership.
Notice the words fought banks that were REFUSING to give loans to low income and minority neighborhoods.
Now wouldn't those loans be considered HIGH RISK???
@Ruken if anyone needs to take an economics class, it's you. you say it's fine as long as taxpayers aren't on the hook for it. so I have to ask, did you read the article? this would be funded by a tax on the banks, so who do you think ultimately will foot the bill for this program. The taxpayers will, thru new and increased fees. One thing that you need to understand is that the government can not create jobs, the only thing they can do is make the environment friendly enough that the private sector will expand and create the jobs. But when you follow obamas plan to tax and regulate the hell out of everything, the only thing that happens is that the environment conducive to expanding and creating jobs goes in the toilet, so the economy and unemployment go up. on the bright side a furniture plant in the south that had been shuttered is now in production again. and employing about a hundred workers. it was part of an interesting program where analyst's say that companies are realizing that Chinese workers are only 25% as productive as American workers and that the costs of shipping from overseas has doubled within the last couple years, all of these things combined have people predicting a return of manufacturing jobs 2015 as long as the idiots in Washington don't regulate and tax the hell out of everything.
Ruken,
You are a funny one. "just make sure taxpeyers are not on the hook for it" Who do you think will be on the hook Wallstreet? HAHAHAHAHAHA
First of all, it's not just Obama's fault. It's every President before as well, it's Congress, it's the Federal Reserve, and the IRS.
But mainly it's all of our faults for actually believing that the federal government is supposed to do these kinds of things.
A federal government produces nothing, so to throw money at a problem (which history has shown us has NEVER worked), they need to rob Peter to pay Paul. The American taxpayer being Peter.
Yes a huge part of the US economy is the housing market, but the only way the federal government can begin to fix it is through eliminating the Federal Reserve.
Alfred Crozier, lawyer from Cleveland, Ohio testifying before the Senate Committee shortly before the passing of The Federal Reserve Act.
" It should prohibit the granting or calling in of loans for the purpose of influencing quotation prices of securities and the contracting of loans or increasing interest rates in concert by the banks to influence public opinion or the action of any legislative body. Within recent months, William McAdoo, Secretary of the Treasury of the United States was reported in the open press as charging specifically that there was a conspiracy among certain of the large banking interests to put a contraction upon the currency and to raise interest rates for the sake of making the public force Congress into passing currency legislation desired by those interests. The so-called administration currency bill grants just what Wall Street and the big banks for twenty-five years have been striving for, that is , private instead of public control of currency. It does this as completely as the Aldrich Bill. Both measures rob the government and the people of all effective control over the public's money, and vest in the banks exclusively the dangerous power to make money among the people scarce or plenty. The Aldrich Bill puts this power in one central bank. The Administration Bill puts it in twelve regional central banks, all owned exclusively by the identical private interests that would have owned and operated the Aldrich Plan. President Garfield before his assasination declared that whoever controls the supply of currency would control the businesse and activities of all the people. Thomas Jefferson warned us a hundred years ago that a private central bank issuing the public currency was a greater menace to the liberties of the people than a standing army......"
W. H. Allen, Moody's Magazine 1916
" The purpose of the Federal Reserve Act was to prevent concentration of money in the New York banks by making it profitable for country bankers to use their funds at home, but the movement of currency shows that the New York banks gained from the interior every month except December 1915, since the act went into effect. The stabilization of rates has taken place in New York alone. In other parts, high rates continue. The Act, which was to deprive Wall Street of its funds for speculation , has really given the bulls and the bears such a supply as they have never had before. The truth is that far from having clogged that channel to Wall Street, as Mr. Glass so confidently boasted, it actually has widened the old channels and opened new ones. The first of these leads directly to Washington and gives Wall Street a string on all the surplus cash in the United States treasury. Besides, in the power to issue bank note currency, it furnishes an inexhaustible supply of credit money; the second channel leads to the great central banks of Europe, whereby, through the sale of acceptances, virtually guaranteed by the United States Government, Wall Street is granted immunity from those foreign demands for gold which have precipitated every great crisis in our history."
anyone else sick of the free handouts our corrupted politicians use to buy votes?
Obama is the second worst president this country has ever had (hard to beat Bush). totally incompetent and clueless about the economy.
I heard you have to use banks James, because there are no other alternatives available.
The tax payers will pay for this, remember the banksters motto, privatize profits and socialize losses. The problem is where are the banks going to get the money. The media presstitutes aren't covering perhaps the biggest story in our financial history.
The ISDA (International Swaps and Derivative Association) is expected to make a decision as early as this week on whether five major US banks will go insolvent. The ISDA organization is more powerful than governments, they determine how world financial events are categorized. These are the people who are going to determine if Greece is a credit event that constitutes a default. If so, the 5 largest banks in America who hold 97% of the over the counter derivatives will have to pay up and will collapse because they don’t have the resources to pay off the credit default swaps they are liable for. The derivative market liability is estimated to be 1.4 quadrillion dollars.
The saving grace for the banks is that they heavily influence the ISDA and can even be called the ISDA. I know that sounds like double speak but we are coming to the end of the road when the banks are going to have a coming to meet Jesus meeting regarding their actual liquidity.
In other words the markets call taking a loss and in this case on Greek bonds a haircut (loss on expected return of bond investment). They have already taken a 50% loss on Greek bonds but the ISDA didn’t call that credit event a default. If you or I invested our life savings on Greek bonds and we were told we would have to take a 50% loss on our expected return, I think we would call that a default.
Now, the European Union is telling the Greek bond holders that they will have to take a 70% haircut. The predicament that is clearly becoming evident is at what point does the ISDA consider bond losses a default. You see where this is headed? Even if the ISDA doesn’t declare a 70% loss as a default, which they probably won’t since the banks have a big say in the default declaration, it is getting dangerously close to the 100% loss. At the 100% loss how can they not call that a default and then the USA’s 5 largest banks are forced to pay and can’t which would cause them to collapse. Greek bondholders who thought they had principal insurance are now screwed and left holding the bag. Greek bondholders (big euro banks, big Euro governments, big hedge funds) will now be insolvent.
Greece is bankrupt and the bulk of the austerity measures haven’t even been implemented yet which will seriously impede their productivity.
In order to stave off the inevitable later rather than sooner, being that it is an election year and all, the powers that be will try not to allow this to happen. We will see global QE3 (printing and devaluing currency) on steroids until Greece succumbs to their ordained default status. The Federal Reserve Currency Swaps going on right now in my estimation were the beginning of QE3.
Don’t expect the media presstitutes to cover the climax of this obscene financial abortion called the derivatives market. Once this starts to occur in earnest, listen for the beating of the one world currency drums.
To see for yourself how much power the ISDA wields, Google the International Swaps and Derivative Association.
Raddave-
I understand what underwater is, I was merrily saying if you had put 20% down on a reasonable house for your income you shouldn't be that much in the negative to warrent goverment tax dollars. So that leaves the people that were not responsible and who didn't put 20% down that have this problem. I now because I moved to WA in 2008 bought a 300,000 dollar house and put 20% down and today my house appraises at $230,000 now that is only $10,000 less than I borrowed. I don't have equity anymore but as far as needing government tax dollars to help with the loss of equity , no I don't need it. Most people that follow the 20% and buy what you can afford rules, would not need government tax dollars either.
this does NOTHING to help those that "are in trouble" - in order to "qualify" for this lovely "program" you aren't allowed to be late more than once in the last 12 month and MUST BE CURRENT on your mortgage now.
So "help" for people isn't really help, it's help for those that couldn't otherwise refinance and want to stay in their houses?? So that doesn't stimulate the economy, but helps the banking industry earn more money in INTEREST!!! - the first 7 years of a loan are where you pay the most interest!!!!
The housing bubble isn't solved by throwing money at it - you would think our "illustrious" leader would realize that after throwing TRILLIONS of dollars away and nothing is fixed, the government needs to get the hell out of everyones business, let things FAIL dangit. the market will fix itself and always has, governemnt is the big problem here, forcing banks to lend money or not get federal backing, FORCING banks to partipant in the other bail outs or be "targets" - ask US bank execs about THAT closed door meeting!....
if he wants to approve something he should have approved the danged pipeline that would have provided work for americans who can then spend their money how they choose. Stop dictating how others should be providing money to others for doing nothing.....what a moron. November can't come soon enough!
Naaah.
First of all, it's brilliant. History shows that buying votes works. How do you think Hugo Chavez keeps getting re-elected?
He's going to be able to campaign on:
It's like he's Santa Claus.
On another note, Ruken..buddy...it may be time to quit while you've only embarrassed yourself this much.
Vacant houses sell all the time.
This is just funny. When you accuse someone of being illiterate, you might want to be more careful about what you write.
You do understand what GDP is, right?
Ryan is making the point that the continual practice of the national governments borrowing large sums to give away to their poor populations has led to the current sovereign debt crisis threatening to overwhelm Greece, Italy, Portugal, Ireland and Spain.
Rich-281385..interesting...you make claims of abouse by Obama..however, Obama did not create the problems he has had to work on...your republican president Bush caused these problems..and so far...no republican politican has done a thing to try to correct the problems this country faces. No..the only thing they are concerned with is beating Obama..the country means nothing..their only idea is to beat Obama. So far..every idea the republican presidential want to be's have come up with just taxing the middle class that they have not done away with ...Yet..they are going for lowering their own taxes however...for their wealthy friends. Just how much has to be cut to make the republicans happy from our debt...that they helped to bring about ? And..who will be effected by it ? Their wealthy friends...not likely.. It would be refreshing to hear one time these want to be's telling the truth instead of lies and mis statements to make their own points.
Sure it would be great for those underwater to refi to the point where they are back above water, however if your house lost half of it's value you aren't going to shore up.
There are a few problems here:
1. $5-10 billion in taxdollars are going to go to a program that will help a limited few. It would be better to spend $5-10 billion to incentivise job creation in those areas. Let's say it's worth $10 billion, that's $200,000,000 each state could use to incentivise the creation of jobs in their states. Just take that $200,000,000 and create a business tax break for each job created as based on the annual salary being created so that the state gets the best bang for the buck and the incentives are applied in a fair way (not all barista jobs).
2. No offense, but a LOT of us didn't upgrade to huge houses that overextended us before the bubble burst. Why would those of us with 1,000 sqft want to help support someone living is 3,500+ houses? We worked with what we had and didn't attempt to keep up with our friends (until we had the capital to do so on our own).
3. No offense, but a lot of us are pretty fixed with income right now and don't need to be saddled with more taxes, nor the responsibility of more national debt.
4. Why is it that the only response has to be more federal "spending" while taxing the banks and us to pay for it? Making the banks finance the downgrade of their loans is kind of like telling Apple that the 3rd generation ipod you bought has been made obsolete by additional models, so they should refund a percentage of your money.
5. With all of the wasted money going out of the federal government- green jobs and bankrupt companies anyone?- why can't the federal government find it in their current "budget" to save the money needed to finance the program.
Just more "waaa waa waa waa" coming from DC.
And THE BUMMER wonders why the republicans say no. He has no idea about how much this program could cost and he comes up with a figure of $5-10 BILLION like it is merely pocket change ($5-10). How far would the $5BILLION difference go for other financial shortfalls.
My how easy it is to reach into somebody else's pocket and spend their money.
Joyce,
You should be spewing your rhetoric at the obstructionist pukes who have banded together and block voted "NO" at every opportunity.
Ryan?? when u can define the word socialism then u might want to add your opinion..until then please look it up....then get back ...until then stfu!!!!!
bdjb for common sense said:
And you know this how exactly?
Once again Obama’s proposal is to inject still more government into people’s lives, further expanding the bureaucracy and using money that doesn’t exist to do it, and don't be fooled by his assertion that this program would be funded by some additional tax on banks because taxing them only serves to pass the cost onto the people. He knows this but hopes the people don't.
There is virtually nothing he has ever proposed or implemented that doesn’t involve more government control and expansion.
People who can meet this criteria don't need to refinance through the govt. Yet another campaign ploy by our Campaigner-in-Chief. Stop interfering! People need to look at their home as A HOME, not an investment.
(Oh and I love the part about a tax on the banks to pay for it.......guess who will paying for that?!?!? Yes, that's right, bank customers. Home owners need to be responsible for their purchases, not the govt. and in turn the taxpayer, whose money is being wasted by the govt.)
President Barack Obama on Wednesday called on Congress to approve a $5 billion to $10 billion effort to help U.S. homeowners refinance as part of a wider package of proposals to shore up the depressed housing market.
Here is a novel idea. Save the 5-10 billion and put up regulations so banks don't have the position to rip off the new homeowners again. All I see is the 5-10 billion taxpayer $$ going straight to the bank's pockets.
$5-$10 billion is chump change to Obama. The man has already added $7 TRILLION to our debt.
Look, people. Obama pitched an idea. It could help many people. Probably not a whole lot, but maybe enough to make a dent in our housing market. And FWI, why do you have to keep blaming Obama for the debt??? I mean, what the @!$%# would YOU do if you had a $1.2 trillion deficit and hundreds of thousands of jobs being lost???? Cut your way out??? We tried that in 1937, and we started a whole new recession. Obama did what most people (even McCain) would have done; spend money to stimulate growth. The stimulus may not have kept unemployment under 8%, and it was pretty expensive, but it WORKED. Ask the economists. Many even say that it was too SMALL. And don't you think that about 50% of the blame comes from the former president??? If conservatives are tired of people blaming Bush for our problems, then maybe they should stop saying that Reagan FIXED our economy (he did, but only for the short-term). Bush had a $5.6 TRILLION surplus, and he could have fixed the recession with spending instead of huge tax cuts. Even after he pushed the tax cuts, he could have at least rescinded them to pay for Iraq and Afghanistan; but he didn't, and we have to pay for it. And Obama DID offer a plan to cut the deficit: it wasn't necessarily enough, but it was a start. But the GOP said no, not Obama. To be specific, BOEHNER and the Tea Party said no. The Tea Party freshmen told Boehner to decline the offer, even though he liked it, and he catered to their wishes. So don't call Obama unconcerned about our debt, because at least HE offered a BALANCED plan to cut the deficit.
And Joe, I know Americans are fixed with income, but this is the type of shared sacrifice that is needed. Americans NEED higher taxes; that doesn't just mean the rich, nor does it just mean the little guy. EVERYONE has to pay their share: I say let the Bush tax cuts expire and institute the Buffet rule and make our tax code more PROGRESSIVE, not REGRESSIVE. And at least Obama tried to do something about jobs. Remember the auto bailout??? People advised him to let them crash, but he bailed them out (a controversial issue) and practically SAVED the industry and thousands of jobs. And at least Obama did SOMETHING about the housing market instead of letting the market find the bottom. It is not bad for the government to try and find ways to quicken up the housing recovery, because sometimes (a lot of the time) the private sector can be very slow.
And if you still think that Obama is unconcerned about jobs, how come did he offer a jobs plan to create 2 million of 'em while repairing our infrastructure AND not adding a dime to our debt??? If the GOP were all about creating jobs, why not create 2 million of them in a BIPARTISAN effort (incorporates Republican/Democrat ideas like infrastructure bank) instead of offering petty deregulatory bills??? They could have tried to negotiate a deal to have at least SOME of those bills passed while reforming. THAT would show that they actually GIVE A DAMN about the economy and about jobs.
I am so tired of seeing the same old negative crap being spewed here like it was being spewed in 2007 when the discussion about a housing bubble and it bursting and what could be done to minimize the effect of such a disaster.
Here we have the same selfish narrowminded, ignorant folks saying the same thing about poor people buying homes they could not afford, it was their stupidity let them be forclosed upon. Well we see what has occurred since then. It was since found that it was not poor (code word for black) people who purchased these homes rather it was many people of all races and circumstances who purchased homes and have watched the value sink into oblivion.
While some folks thought that it would have been only poor ( supposedly black) people who would have been negatively impacted, many have woken up to the stark reality that everyone can take a hit and did, including those who were not 'irresponsible' (which would also include actual black people), and purchased a house they could afford at the time of purchase.
The financial institutions are primarily to blame for the mess we are in period. They pushed for deregulation, as the banks pushed for the repeal of Glass-Steigel. Their lobbiests lobbied members of congress, donations were given and voila here we are now... in the mess they created yet got bailed out from with OUR money.
Another group of people who were to blame for the housing mess were also the builders who kept on overbuilding new homes resulting in a glut of new homes on the market.
Another group were investors/flippers, who bought up the less expensive homes fixed them up sometimes on the cheap then put the houses back on the market at a high cost to make a big profit. These were homes that regular folks could have purchased at a reasonable price, live in the property then fix up over a period of time.
When the bottom fell out of the housing market these investors and flippers then glutted the market with these homes that they had bought but had not yet fixed up as they too went into forclosure. (Oddly enough they are it again with the purchasing of homes at a very low cost and for cash thus taking more affordable homes off the market again.)
The toxic assets..i.e. the faulty mortgage backed instruments that these financial institutions packaged, repackaged and sold to others around the world, and now was not worth the paper it was printed on and then defaulted on yet still made enormous amounts of money for some on, were taken off their books by the govt.
But the thing is that real estate does have value, because land is the only thing that is really real no matter what, because and as it has been noted ' God isn't making any more of it'... here on earth anyway lol. The house may fall down, get demolished etc but the land remains no matter what.
Well back in 2007 a plan was floated about having the banks not reset these ARMs rate higher, to sort of give the bubble a chance to slowly deflate. It was soundly trashed by many including the financial folks. The same plan was floated int 2008 after the bubble burst, in an attempt to stabilize the housing market and yet again there were many who soundly rubbished and trashed that too, warbling on about 'poor people' buying homes they could not afford blah blah blah.
We are our own worse enemy. We do not want to help each other yet we scream how Christian a nation we are etc. People seem to forget ..charity begins at home. So what if someone was irresponsible, does that mean they should not be helped. Remember the story in the Bible of the Prodigal son and other references in which we should help our neighbors?
If a person drives a car too fast and crashes into a pole, should we just leave them there by the wayside trapped and or dying, because they were so irresponsible in driving the car too fast? Well per Ron Paul perhaps we should..... hmm
There are many of us who were not irresponsible and actually put down more than 2o% plus as down payment and paid closing cost with real hard earned cash, and now our homes have also taken a hit, bigtime. That is the problem with living in this country together, your neighbors misfortune can also affect you too.
By the way with all the programs that were rolled out to help homeowners, the banks and financial institutions have hampered, stalled and done very little to carry out. Why should they do anything when they are making a profit on homes that they do not even own, as these mortgages were taken off their books in those toxic asset swaps done by the govt. Also many of these forclosed homes were covered with mortgage default insurance too. LOL
Must not forget... there is also a problem with appraisals, especially when attempting to refi for a lower interest rate. Home are being valued at the value of the last home sold which often times is a forclosure or a short sale. So even if your house was not underwater and you are living in it, kept up the property, paying your mortgage on time etc, you will find that whatever hard cash that you had put up like that 20 odd% down is now gone, and worse you may find that your house is now at the value of a forclosure and now have been pushed underwater by these questionable appraisals, thus the banks do not want to refi you home to a lower interest rate. See the problem?
It was not such a good plan to let these homes go into forclosure after all was it?
It is time for us to work together to solve the problems of our country. This divisiveness is not hurting the financial instutions, corporations or the 1-10% and those foreign entities who can come here and buy/take our land for pennies on the dollar.
When this is over, I wonder how much of this country will still be owned by Americans. If I were of the American Aboriginal tribes I would be laughing.... as we too are now being forced to move off our land. LOL
Talk about karma and all that..... LOL
I dont own a house. Does this mean I can expect a check for cash in the mail?
short and to the point Bz..good job.
We tried a progressive experiment in the US for 80 years. It failed.
Just like in Europe.
You can't redistribute your way to prosperity. You can regulate new jobs into existence.
Handouts make people lazy and dependant on handouts.
This is just one more plan to take money from the responsible people and give it to those who were less responsible.
Home prices were too high. I'm sorry you bought at the top of the market. But just like people who buy stock and then it falls, it doesn't become my responsibility just because you lost money.
We are all far better off in the long run with lower housing prices. It represents a lower share of your income now.
People simply need to be patient and keep making payments until housing prices rise again in a few years. (With all the Gov't produced inflation on the horizon, you will not have to wait too long).
Europe has tried every big Gov't regulation, handout, or socialized scheme imaginable - and it is about to collapse them. They are like lemmings in Europe.
Why on Earth would we go over the cliff like a lemming?
This is the greatest nation in the history of man. Are we going to blow it all on Gov't?
Too many people gave their lives for us to go out like spoiled, fat piggies who spent too much time at the trough.
And our children's future is in the balance.
If you want to see the numbers, and they are truely frightening, go to usdebtclock.org.
Check out the unfunded liablilities clock.
As for refinancing: Banks are under many new regulations due to Democrat Law known as Dodd-Frank.
They cannot lend as freely as we would like.
We can whine about there not being enough regulations before (although consumer and lender greed were the main cause, in that order - with Gov't regulations that forced bad loans in minority/low income areas and low interest from the Fed being large factors) but now we see the results of more regulations - less lending and refinancing.
Good luck to all those of you who are hanging on. We will get this house in order one day. We can live within our means, and so can our Gov't. I only hope we come to our senses before we end up like Europe.
.
You still haven't actually answered the question! Why is the housing industry such a major portion of our economy. I have a clue, maybe if you looked back to the early 1970's you would too! The housing industry was a creation of an easing of loan restrictions that was supported by both the GOP and the DNC. The DNC was buying the "disinfranchised" while the GOP was pandering to the the banking industry through mortgage brokers, not big banks.
I am not dodging anything! You are! There was a fundamental problem with the way mortgages were presented for many years. Anyone who would objectively look at what the market was doing since the mid 1990's understood that there was something fundamentally wrong with the housing market. How could a home worth 80K be worth several times that much a few years later without economic growth outside the housing market? Did anything else grow in apparent worth during that time frame? We went from the tech bubble to the housing bubble. What made the market grow was speculation, pure and simple. The government was culpable because they encouraged people to buy into that fantasy with cheap credit and nothing down.
Well DUH! Here's your sign my friend! I know EXACTLY what being underwater is as a homeowner. What you fail to understand is that some of us hedged our bets and didn't take out huge mortgages on homes we knew were overpriced in questionable markets that were expanding too fast. Some of us didn't let the politicians tell us what we deserved nor let a mortgage broker tell us what we could afford. Now you think that the rest of us who were responsible and middle class should pay for the rest.
Well, you can stuff it!
The moment I got to the sentence that poor was a code word for black, you lost all credibility for me and there was no reason to read further. Race is not the problem. We're all suffering from each end of the race/religion/creed spectrum. Our problem is the two party system and the fast that due to natural human tendency, two party systems become polarized beyond reason over time.
The race card is overplayed. Well overplayed and I refuse to listen to anyone that uses race as a reason to talk about disparity concerning this issue. There is certainly continues to be racial issues in this country but to use it as a blanket statement on such an issue that affects more than one race or another is disingenuous.
At least this helps everyone that is poor or middle class, not just a certain segment of society. Those that make over 250K probably don't need the help and everyone with a mortgage under that limit probably would appreciate it.
So it will never happen because it is too simple and straight forward and doesn't pander to a political base.
JTB75, you are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
Hi ivan, NC,
Both parties have a hand in this, no doubt, but you are wrong to say that Bush created the problem. This problem--the RE market bubble--has been building for about 7 decades, long before Bush 43 was born. It began as most failed ideas begin with noble intentions and modest policy ideas. All we wanted to do, they said, was to help the RE market by letting people deduct the interest they paid on their mortgage. And the snowball began to roll downhill.
When the short-term economic "benefit" of that deduction dried up then we had to find other ways to help produce economic results. These things included low interest loans (FHA), zero down loans (FHA, Fannie, Freddie), first time buyer credits, the community reinvestment act, and the list goes on and on. The worst of the abuses came when the market was stalled and so Fannie and Freddie were used to buy up paper on the secondary markets in a sort of Keynesian stimulus plan. See, if only we could buy up excess paper so that firms will continue to build homes, and other firms will continue to provide loans to buyers, well then we could create nirvana!
The one thing all of these ideas failed to take into account though are the laws of economics. At rock bottom you can't have something for nothing. So we lived well beyond our means for decades, and we did it by stealing wealth from our unborn heirs (man, we are such great people, just ask us!), but the laws of economics were still there. In the early to mid 2000s we had a president you want to blame for all of this. Fine. But that president, along with several other people, wanted to reform Fannie and Freddie so that the bubble would stop being inflated. And what do you think his reception in Congress was like?
Could it be that Maxine Waters called Mr. Bush a racist for simply wanting to reform F and F so that they could no longer subsidize risky lending? Could it be that Barney Frank said that all was well, nothing here to see at all? Could it be that democrats refused every effort at reforming the problem that Mr. Bush was trying to solve 4 years before it blew up on us all and ruined our economy? Well, yes, all those things happened. But you go ahead and blame Mr. Bush and excuse everyone else. I'm sure that wise course will prevent us from having to go through this lunacy again.
Oh, food for thought...which party do you think Fannie and Freddie OVERWHELMINGLY gave cash money to, including contributions to campaigns? So please, ivan, NC, before you try to lecture any of us as to who is to blame, find a mirror and blame yourself.
Technically, Ryan, the progressive experiment in America DID work. Check out the economic and social data from the end of World War II to the 1970s. We prospered A LOT. Sure, a lot of that was because of our industrial dominance after the war, but programs like Social Security and Medicare helped decrease poverty while unions helped improve worker standards. Plus income inequality was down, tax rates were reasonable (high for us now, but reasonable back then), and debt was relatively stable. We then tried a conservative, neoliberal economic experiment ever since the 1980s that included deregulation and tax cuts, and THAT failed. Hopefully, we can get back on the right track. Progressiveness HAS worked; conservatism, not so much.
He's only allotting $10billion.
This is one of those things where he asked his staff, "what can I do about housing?" His staff replied, "Do you mean do or appear to do?" "Well appear to do, obviously."
Ryan we also tried the reagan plan and it failed..all the WORKING PEOPLE are suffering from prune face's support of the wealthy
Hi Freshieee,
Well, not really, and not technically either. Poverty is little different today than when the war on it began. Income inequality today is as bad as normal, if you believe the rhetoric of the people you support. And we've done all of this nothingness on money borrowed from our unborn heirs too, which makes it even more irresponsible. If we were paying for this nirvana you imagine existed by taxing ourselves directly then at least we could dispense with the most immediate problem we now face--massive accumulated debt--but we would have still far exceeded the confines of the constitution to do what you favor.
Your idea about deregulation is perhaps most funny. Partly because of who you blame, and partly because you think we've actually achieved lots of deregulations to help create a rebirth of free markets. Airlines were deregulated in the 70s, so was the first major bank deregulation law (DIDMCA was from 1980). These were laws passed by liberals, signed into law by liberals. But then we went and did lots of dumb things.
It was a great idea to deregulate banks, but it was a stupid idea to then increase the insurance on accounts, and then after that to eliminate passive loss tax provisions on owned assets. Had we actually deregulated banks and allowed the market to work we'd have seen a different outcome, but we didn't do that, and we didn't see that. Time and again the left blames deregulation for all our ills, but I challenge you to find an industry that has fewer regulations on it today than in what you think was the heyday of liberal regulatory heaven.
Our problems have lots more to do with too many regulations in which you are promised free stuff, like with environmental or labor rules. It isn't that we should have no laws, but the idea that we can have all the laws you can possibly dream up and there will be no cost attached to them is, well, fantasy. So here's the deal I'd ask for you to consider...you come up with some regulations you think do no good and should be eliminated, and I will come up with an equal number that make sense. But this idea that all regulations are simply wonderful is simply stupid.
Joel - I've seen Ruken argue with an extremely well educated scientist on Global warming. In frustration the guy stopped trying to write in simple terms and started replying with more technical terms.
Spend your time replying to someone else - I could see you getting frustrated too.
Hey Jack,
Did you watch the Man U v Arsenal match? Our team won, but dang, to only net one goal in that first half with what looked like complete domination? We have got to get more creative on the attack. And in the FA match with Liverpool I again thought Man U were having the best of the coordinated attack, and once they levelled I figured they could win, but the shots just weren't there. The Pudlians late goal was excellent too, and that was the game. I'd rather be out of the FA than out of Europe, but I thought that game was within their ability. Playing at Liverpool made it a bit harder, but if you want to be champion you have to win away.
Well John, by your statement it is therefore obvious that you do not get your news or other info from a variety of sources. This statement regarding poor being code word for black people was noted by a respected reporter a few years ago who was reporting on the housing bubble issue and who it affected etc.
The housing issue was not being reported on or investigated just in the past year or couple of years. It has been ongoing since the 2007 if I remember correctly. Even if poor is not a code word for black folks then why is it that there is always a refusal to do anything to stem the tide of loss of homes? Is it because it is assumed that the people who are being affected are simply poor people?
Who were the ones stating that nothing should be done because 'poor' people bought homes they could not afford? That has been out in the media for the longest time. It is nothing new.
So perhaps you should wonder why there were those mouthpieces who decided to plaster these message boards and in the media with all sort of vitriol against poor people for supposedly purchasing homes they could or should not be able to afford, instead of plastering the lenders who approved the loans to these poor people who should not have qualified for these expensive homes in the first place, don't you think?
The truth of the matter it was not only poor people that were so poorly treated and their suffering ignored, it was all socio-economic spectrum of this country but especially and predominantly in the middleclasses. But who want to hear that? It is far more effective to blame poor or black people for the cause of the housing crisis because then nothing needs be done to help 'those' people who had gotten themselves into trouble again wanting a handout/ help / government assistance etc or on the other hand had the audacity to want to improve their lot when they should not even have dreamed of doing so.
Considering all the vitriol, racially charged statements e.g. that President Obama is the food stamp president blah blah blah, black kids do not have good role models and black kids do not see others going to work, or black kids at school should be assisting the janitors in cleaning toilets etc by Gingrich and other of the T'publicons whether in these T'publicon primaries or at the grass roots level, including supposedly 'jokes' made about the President and the First Lady with for example the White House lawns turned into a mellon patch,.... or them being drawn as monkeys etc, or Bachman stating that black kids were better off during slavery because they had 2 parent in the home and all the rest of the crap that has been stated, negate your assertions regarding race and how some segment of our society is looked upon and treated in this country.
Why would any one want to help these devalued people when they are already looked upon as leeches upon our society and economy? These statements placing the blame on poor people as the cause of the housing bubble was well thought out by the financial folks to deflect the blame from themselves , where it should have been. It also set in motion a means of doing nothing to help these po people and in turn not have to think of helping anyone anyway. That is why we are still in this housing mess with no end in sight, because too many bought into those divisive racially charged statements.
Here we are again with folks cutting off their noses to spite their face with the nonsense that folks should not be helped to prevent the forclosures etc, not realizing that for as long as nothing is done to stem the tide of forclosures more homes will go underwater resulting in more forclosures, which will result in lowering of the values of more homes which will in turn see them go underwater, resulting in more forclosures........ the vicious cycle unending.... and then we all fall down, unless something is done to break the cycle.
The President and many of the democrats in Congress have been trying to break the cycle, yet they are being stymied by these selfish, selfcentered, me and my donors only, do nothing but fillibuster, winge and whine, namecall and criticize the President trying to make him a 1 term President T'publicans in Congress and in the country.
Many T'publicondinos are losing their homes and jobs too. But what is soo amazing is that it seems that T'publicondinos seem to still believe in that failed policy of trickle down economics that has been proved over the past 20 odd plus years not to work, even while some still seem to believe that the rich 1-10%ers and corporations pay too much in taxes even when this has been proved to not be true.
It also seem that these t'pubcondinos believe they are not worthy of higher salaries, a better standard of living, healthcare, education, clean water, air, seas, or a safe work environment, food, drugs etc, or that citizens should have the right to privacy and the right to chose, right to chose who they marry, right to keep the governments hands from up a womans private parts and off a couples reproductive choices including birthcontrol etc. Rather and instead they seem to believe that they deserve to lose everything, including their home, their savings, their pension, their social security, unemployment insurance payments that they contributed to, the public safety nets, and to lose the ability and right to be able to collectively bargain/unionize, or to due process etc, and seem to want to take the rest of the people in the USA into serfdomination perdition with them.
Like stated before, it is time that people in this country start thinking for themselves and to realize that we are all - from super rich to pitifully poor- in the same leaky boat at sea together. We had better start to paddle together to get to the shore or sink together out at sea.
Because if the forclosures continue and nothing is done about it, it will continue to have a negative impact on the economy, pulling everyone down, and so will be the effect of not doing anything to stem the tide of outsorcing of jobs abroad. No job= no money to buy anything including pay rent or mortgage..... Thus the jobs bills in Congress needs to be addressed instead of the usual fillibuster thing that these T'publicons keep doing, holding back progress in this country.
'nuff said....
Peace
I want to understand the big picture. I want to understand how this fits in. The President promised, without conditions, that the 2012 federal deficit will not exceed 229.27 billion dollars. To do that the federal government will have to spend more than 1 trillion dollars less in 2012 than it did in 2011 and currently that does not seem to be happening. In his state of the union address the President talked about more spending but also mentioned starting to pay down the National Debt. To do that the federal government will first have to balance the budget. Of course currently they do not even have a budget. The President needs to explain how all of this is going to happen. The President needs to explain how we are going to pay back our already massive debt.
122 comments and the same old b.s. about the cause of the housing dump and recession. Freaking amazing!
We surely deserve the next round of imbecile rulers.
Americans used to be smart........and then they anointed Reagan as God, Its been downhill for the middle class ever since. Trickle down became a urine shower, Corporations became people, speech became money.
Ad naseum.
More BS from the Great Pretender.
What we need is a cram down or a moratorium on all foreclosures.
Most people don't know it but the people who own and run the U.S. changed our economy in the mid to late 1970's. It was capitalism before and it was capitalism after but from 1933 to the mid 1970's it was "Demand" side, Keynesian capitalism (dominated by the economic ideology of John Maynard Keynes). The economic Ideology of the New Deal and the FDR administration.
Keyesian economists wouldn't like me saying this but basically it was a hybrid between Capitalism and Socialism.
Economic policies associated with this ideology: Social programs like Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Medicare, Pro-union, a large public sector, high taxes on the rich and corporations, low interest rates. etc.
Policies that put money in many peoples hands and stimulate "demand".
After the 1970's our economy was increasingly dominated by "Supply Side" "Free-market" capitalist ideology or as economists call it: "Neo-liberal" economics.
Don't be confused, this is not because it has anything to do with "liberals" (although "liberals" like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have now embraced it) or cultural liberalism but because it involves the liberalization of capital. Indeed the first political leaders to embrace "Free-market"/ Neo Liberal economics were conservatives like Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater etc. (Milton Friedman is the economist most associated with this economic ideology).
Economic polices associated with "Free-market"/ Neo-liberal ideology: Deregulation, privatization, anti-union,
low taxes on business and the wealthy, etc.
This policy is similar to Laissez Faire the economic ideology which dominated the 1920's. You know, right before the stock market crashed and we had the Great Depression.
Even though 30 years of Free-Market/Neo-liberal economics crashed the economy in 2008 and brought about another profound economic crises like it's ancestor did at the end of the 1920's (when it was called Laissez Faire) this ideology still rules in the minds of U.S. politicians, policy makers and for the most part in corporate media.
That's why both Barack Obama and the Democratic leadership and all Republicans push many of the same "free-market"/"Neo-liberal", ideas about "fixing the economy" and "creating jobs": Slashing government spending, lowering taxes on business and the wealthy, (Obama calls them "tax incentives" and his proposals for raise taxes in the rich by token amounts are election year gimmicks)
Here's some graphs and text that shows the difference in effects the two opposing ideologies have produced"
U.S. unemployment rate during the 1930s with New Deal programs. Notice in the graph below it is generally going down at a pretty rapid rate during: Federal jobs programs (WPA, etc), creation of Social Security and Unemployment Insurance, etc. etc).
By the way that jog upwards in the unemployment rate around 1937 was when the FDR administration briefly REVERSED it's New Deal policies and started CUTTING the federal deficit. They realized their mistake and resumed spending at the previous levels and unemployment started going down again.
Even so conservative critics who say that New Deal programs did not end the depression are right.
It ended after we entered WWII and spent EVEN more than we had been during the New Deal Period. After WWII we had the Cold War and space race which kept federal spending high and the unemployment rate low.
http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/depression(6).JPG
Wages adjusted for inflation (also includes inflation rate). Wages, adjusted for inflation were much higher on average than now.
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/images/2008/us-wages-june08.gif
It's popular for politicians of both parties to say we have the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world but they are blowing smoke and they know it. They are talking about the NOMINAL tax rate, the tax rate that is on the books but which few corporations pay.
60% of U.S. corporations pay NO TAXES some years and the tax rate for corporations has generally been going down since the end of the 1940's. This gives the lie to claims that further lowering taxes for businesses will "stimulate the economy" and produce "jobs". If you look at the graphs above you will see that unemployment was lower and wages higher even when corporate taxes were much higher in the 1960s for example.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/key-elements/business/images/corptaxrates_graph_2.jpg
http://cdn.investinganswers.net:81/images/09-02-11-taxes3.jpg
There is also a lot of BS about the share of taxes the richest americans pay. They pay a large percentage of federal taxes not because they have a high rate of taxation but because so much of the national wealth is going to them. In fact the rich are paying historically low rates of taxation.
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/hildebrand/WG%201.png
Here's the history of the tax rate. Notice it was 90% during the 1950's which was mostly a Republican Administration (Eisenhower).
http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/4e1c5b08ccd1d50779000000/us-income-tax-top-bracket.jpg
The result of all of this? From roughly 1950's to the mid 1970's we had what economist Paul Krugman calls the "Great Compression". The period of time when wealth inequality was the lowest it's ever been since they have been taking records (and probably in U.S. history)
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/introducing-this-blog/
As Krugman points out the period of the Great Compression is also when the large prosperous middle class that the U.S. used to be famous for was created and was at it's greatest.
Today, from both political parties and constantly in the corporate media we have calls for more of the same "Free-market"/Neo-liberal" policies that, for the last 30 years, have been eroding the middle class, assaulting the poor and that pushed us off a cliff in 2008: "austerity" (drastically cutting federal spending), lowering taxes on billionaires and reliance on "the free-market" to produce jobs instead of a huge federal jobs program like the WPA in the 1930's that would really work.
In spite of all the happy talk in the corporate media (TV and online) and from politicians things really won't get better (and could get a lot worse, again) if we don't make radical change in the economy and learn some lessons from history.
Even if it can't be done in exactly the same way it can still be done.
Just why would Obama want to pass this bill now in election year? Anyone refinancing under this proposed bill, this is as bad as voter fraud. Obama is attempting to buy your vote.
So Rich in 1.7 let me see if I understand your position on this. You are stating that anyone who at one time had a job that paid wages that allowed them to afford paying their mortgages on time but lost it during the 2008 collapse or got pay cuts as a result deserve to have their house taken for them because that was the end-game of their contracts with their banks?
You agree then that those that are now underpaid that cannot afford anything but paying the bills, their mortgages, and little else are on their own and should get no help whatsoever?
What if, god forbid, it happened to you? If your employer fired you or lessened your hours and even after finding a second job you could not keep up with mortgage payments, even after refinancing you were unable to keep up on it, that your house should be taken, would you still say that you sohuld receive no help?
A lot of these people are in this position because of their bank's reckless actions. So why do they end up holding the bill when it is their banks fault that their jobs were lost or are now underpaying? Why should they be kicked out onto the street when bank CEO's got bonuses?
I understand that a contract is a contract, however the circumstances of these events warrant leniency and understand from the very institutions that created it and that is what most people are seeing is not happening. The very people that caused the direct action that lead to a homeowner now unable to keep up on their mortgage are now saying get out of our house, we own it now because you could not pay your mortgage.
It smacks of at the very least arrogance and audacity. At the very least you could draw a connection through all of the events that took place leading up to and after the 2008 collapse to claim it to be fraud committed by the banks; actually that is exactly what it was, the banks knew the loans they had were not viable but they were allowed to be used in the derivatives market anyway and boom. That is not the fault of the people who took out the loans that was a calculated decision made by the banks to use those loans on the markets and the S&P for rating them AAA.
The tax payer money that was given to the banks was supposed to go directly toward allowing anyone who had a mortgage to refinance it to a lower rate and was to help cover the costs of those refinances long term. That did not happen, the money given to them to help the tax payers was given to their CEO's and boards instead. Here we are again, after TARP, suggesting to give them another round of money, per say.
So tell me again why you think, even though the contract is legally binding, that the peopel who used to have a good paying job, or one at all, must now bend over backwards, with no help, after the banks, who killed the economy which directly resulted in their unemployment/under employment either at their new or old job and who have refused to allow refinancing and short selling on many occasions, and give up their homes.
I fail to see why a bank that did not honor the commitment of tax payer dollars to help homeowners out should expect those same homeowners to now honor the contract with them, regardless of them being lawfully binding; the vents that have transpired, I would dare to say, are beyond the grasp of the law surrounding contractual obligations such as to nullify them. That most of TARP has been paid back is no defense to this, their actions with the money show their true motives and proclivities.
I have seen the argument so many times that homeowners should not have taken out loans they could not afford. This is in fact true, there are many that have done this and to the detriment of the system but there is one powerful argument that you cannot ignore about this situation:
The banks, knowingly because you must turn over tax returns, job and salary information and credit reports, knew that these loans were not going to be paid back. They knew these loans were total crap in a can. But what did they do with them? They sent then to S&P who gave these loans a gold star and put them into the market knowing that they would cause a sh!tstorm. They could have held them back, left them out of the bundles they were gambling with but instead they bet it all and lost.
Why should I have sympathy for an industry that knowingly cut off a leg just to try to make a few extra million? Why should I care more about their legal rights more then the homeowners who lost their job or salary bracket because of the actions of this industry and now cannot pay their mortgages and are now going to lose their homes because their bank will not let them refinance or a lower rate or sell their home?
The banks are sitting on huge cash reserves. Todays report says banks are only lending 7.1% of their cash. If the 5 biggest banks would increase their lending percentage to 9% to 10.5% of total cash on hand, no new tax dollars would be needed for an infusion of $5 to $10 Billion.
Why does this administration continue to insist on giving more and more tax money to big banks with which to do business? Banks have it great, don't they? They lend tax payer money to homeowners and then collect monthly mortgage payments to put in their pockets and call it earnings. Plus, they charge a fee up front for the pleasure of their company.
Hey REPBULB,
Tell your Congressman,to GUARANTEES ALL CAPITALIST VENTURES like what they did before,Under US TREASURY GUARANTEES ,INVESTMENT BANK GUARANTEES,INSURANCE GUARANTEES on US Real Estates to foreign Bank.Now they can include Casino,stock share whatever..etc in GUARANTEES, KNOWING the end Loser will be the American Public.
STICK WITH,More TAX CUT GUARANTEES,MORE TAX REBATES......Just love. I'll GUARANTEES YOU MANY FOREIGN INVESTORS with GUARNTEES investment will BUY,NOT JUST 10,20 houses. the whole American's House.......
WOW this definately PUSH the Price Of US HOME sky rocket.
We dont need rocket science to figure this out.
Hey REPBULB,
Tell your Congressman,to GUARANTEES ALL CAPITALIST VENTURES like what they did before,Under US TREASURY GUARANTEES ,INVESTMENT BANK GUARANTEES,INSURANCE GUARANTEES on US Real Estates to foreign Bank.Now they can include Casino,stock share whatever..etc in GUARANTEES, KNOWING the end Loser will be the American Public.
STICK WITH,More TAX CUT GUARANTEES,MORE TAX REBATES......Just love. I'll GUARANTEES YOU MANY FOREIGN INVESTORS with GUARNTEES investment will BUY,NOT JUST 10,20 houses. the whole American's House.......
WOW this definately PUSH the Price Of US HOME sky rocket.
We dont need rocket science to figure this out.
Our home burned to the ground in January 2005. My insurance agent had screwed up (or screwed me) and I didn't have the policy that I thought I was paying for. The banker who had written my mortgage missed it too when he issued a mortgage higher than the insured amount - so after the fire I was left homeless, and owed the banker 10s of thousdands of dollars, due immediately to avoid foreclosure on my land and improvements. I have a good job and an excellent credit record, and was able to bootstrap my way out of the mess using credit cards, and eventually rebuilt and secured a new mortgage at 6%. My home appraised for $235,000 at that time. I then refinanced to 5.5%, and I tell you, it was so difficult to say no to the new lender who wanted me to take an extra $60,000 out of the equity on my home - but I refused.
Because of the destructice antics of the wall street speculators and the banking industry, my home is now worth less than I owe, and I cannot refinance because I don't have enough cash to buy-down the mortgage. So I'm left paying 5.5% when todays rates are less than 4%.
Now if those who are responsible for the meltdown were feeling the same pain as I am I would feel different about this, but since they hijacked the system and actually increased profits through this mess I feel screwed - their antics are to blame for my current predicament.
I say they should cover the fee's for those who can swing a re-finance - they sure took their share of the tax dollars, it's only fair that they now contribute some of it back.
Hi Geowil,
If I believed your premise that the banks caused all the problems then I might reach the same conclusion you have, namely, that the banks should pay the bill for the problems they created. But there are two problems with your analysis. The first is original sin. We live in a self-governing republic, and so we elect people to put into law those things we demand. And the government has been very eager over time to accomodate our wishes. So we wanted all sorts of laws about disclosure forms, risk requirements, interest deduction, buyer credits, and on and on. In short, we decided as a people to ignore market signals that we either had too much demand or too much supply, in essence, we decided we were smarter than markets at determining what to make, and how much to make of it.
To blame banks for doing what the government demanded or encouraged through law and regulation is a very bad idea. You are excusing yourself in order to condemn an entity that simply did what it should have done. Was it wise to behave this way, to make these kinds of loans? No, but it was rational given the legal and economic incentives in place at the time. And which, oddly, remain in place today. Anyhow, this is your fault, and every other voter's fault, for supporting with your vote those people who pushed the very policies that banks followed. If you voted AGAINST politicians that voted for all of these laws then I apologize, but your post to me indicates you are a full-throated supported of this mentality.
The second reason your analysis is flawed is far more simple. Banks get the money you think they should give you from you. Or from other customers. To the extent ANY bank broke the law they should be prosecuted and any money that can be recovered should be disbursed to the victims of that crime, but so far no one and no bank has been prosecuted. And you know why? There isn't a good case to bring forward. If there was do you think this president would stop at anything to get in front of a camera to show us all how determined he is to right a wrong? Spare me.
So you can demand money from banks, and the banks will get the money from you, and you can pretend you got ahead in the deal, and we can continue this economic circle-jerk until you on the left are satisfied, but in the end nothing will be achieved except that we will be less wealthy and less powerful as a nation. Or, maybe you and people like you could respect contracts, accept risk and reward, and allow economic darwinism to take place. But, in the meantime, please, quit trying to presume what you think my life is like, how much money I have or make, whether I am employed or not. You aren't good at it anyhow, and it wasted a lotof the space of your post.
The only home stimulus that has worked has been the homebuyers credits. The credits cost the country 12.6 billion dollars, but reduced the number of existing and new homes from the inventory. I think that many homeowners with an underwater mortgage would be better off if the market began moving again, slowly bringing values of current homes up again. Many markets are coming up slightly and there are a lot of homeowners that are not quite underwater but treading water who wouldn't qualify for the program. Some of the posters on this site seem to feel like they are entitled to the refinance option although most say they can't afford to currently refinance which sounds like another case of throwing good money after bad.
Keep the money.
Just eliminate the red tape and exhorbidant fees.
Pass a law that FORCES mortgage companies to offer lower rates to anyone paying double what the market rate is now.
With due respect for those who have homes with underwater mortgages I still have to say that this proposal is trash. It doesn't help those who need it. People who are current on their mortgage even if it is underwater are not the ones that are in need of the help! People who have seen significant drops in their income and those who suddenly find themselves choosing between a mortgage payment or heating fuel are those that need the help. Before I get a long list of detractors saying there are already programs to help these people, think again. To qualify for a mortgage modification your monthly mortgage expenses,(i.e. mortgage, insurance, property taxes) must be 31% of your GROSS income or higher! People who have well paying jobs, looking for a home, don't want a burden that size let alone a person who has no choice in the matter.
Real estate has always been considered a long term investment. Those who can afford to pay their mortgage, even if it is underwater right now, should do so. They have options that others don't and the help that the government gives should go to those who need it most.
I partially agree with Arch. I like Obama, and I'll vote for him in 2012. Yet I think that we need to drift away from the "government is the problem" concept toward the more neutral "government can be both the problem AND the answer." How is government the problem??? Was it the government's fault that a volcano in Scandinavia blocked out much of Europe's commercial air routes??? Was it the government's fault that people are greedy and take huge risks??? Was the government responsible for my neighbor's cat dying??? I am tired of this anti-government BS and anti-European welfare state crap. I know Europe isn't doing much better than the US (except Germany), but even they have things that we can use. Like focusing more on education instead of wasting billions on foreign adventures, or having the government PARTNER with the private sector in finding new economic techniques. Those were the things that helped us win the Cold War, and they will power us through the 21st Century. America doesn't need a smaller government. We need a SMART government. Sure, we need to trim and reform the fat and bloated segments (mostly defense and entitlements), but cutting spending in crucial areas (R&D, education) like how the GOP is proposing is as responsible as telling your doctor that you don't need your left kidney. It does nothing but hurt the economy. Obama may not be the liberal America needs, but at least he's the guy that is gonna take us out of the mess that we're in. Maybe after he helps America recover and leaves office in 2016 a more liberal person can come to office. But to be realistic, Obama is pretty liberal at heart. He had liberal plans like increasing spending for education and larger stimulus packages and a more progressive tax code and the public option for healthcare, but he had to do away with some of those more left-wing proposals to placate his "comrades" on the right. And yet they STILL call him a spending liberal. Obama may not be much of the FDR we need him to be, but that is in large part because the right-wing has experience about dealing with progressive policies and is fiercely fighting. But unless we return to the principles of the New Deal; of regulated economies, strong social institutions, large manufacturing bases, and a progressive tax code, America will be left to rot in the wreck that is supply-side economics.
DEMAND-SIDE ECONOMICS 2012
OBAMA BIDEN 2012
PROGRESSIVENESS 2012
Freshieee
I guess you're more in favor of the evil corporations and villianous rich paying their fair share? And you mentioned we need a smarter government. That starts with reform of our education system. We have to get a much better output on education for what we are paying. Throwing more money at a broken education system will not yield any better results. Good luck getting the private sector to assist this regime with anything considering the saber rattling this administration has done to them. Companies are sitting on trillions of dollars and the primary reason is because they don't know what's coming next from these guys.
Hey Arch??? speaking of BS, im wondering is bushy proud of his accomplishments??? you know throwing our economy in the abyss......two wars that weren't necessary ..et al
Sorry, you lose! It had nothing to do with Progressive policies. The reason the US boomed from the end of WWII to the 70's was because we were the only industrialized nation left in the world with an intact industrial infrastructure. Europe, Japan and Russia were in ashes. It took the rest of the world a couple decades to get back on their feet and once they did, jobs started leaving our shores.
That is a fact!
John, I didn't like Bush and I don't like the Republicans they are every bit as bad as many people say and then some. I'm just saying both parties have bought into (or been bought off by) the same ideology (pushed by Think Tanks funded by the wealthy and corporations) so things won't change just because the president is black and a Democrat.
Amazing - a great deal of this nonsense can be directly attributed to some form of government intervention along the way, trying to 'level the playing field' or make things 'fair'. Spoiler Alert: Life is not fair... and further to that, it's not the government's job to make it so.
Years upon years of government trying to 'even the score' ...and years upon years of this continued downward spiral and yet... very few seem to be able to make the connection.
,,,people are still at the Altar of Government, with their hands raised high... in worship and praise.. "MORE Government... MORE.. Give us MORE.. Make us Totally and Completely dependent upon Government" I just don't get it.
(And here's a bonus thought for ya.. as if you hadn't tuned out yet - lol
The EPA.... is the unofficial smokescreen for our 'friends', the Saudis.
"Nooo.. can't drill for oil there! Might interfere with the mating of the swamp rat!!" 40 bajillion acres for the swamp rat to mate.. hell, two teenagers can 'mate' in the back seat of a Ford Mustang on Any given Friday night... but nope... can't drill there!"
Translation: We can't drill ANYwhere, because the Saudis have bought off our elected officials.. seen any job creating oil pipeline bills get crushed lately?? hmmm?? "
We will NEVER be energy independent as long as we have the good ole "EPA" to answer to ;)
Ok... I can stop obsessing about it now- thank you all for coming.
When I had my house built ~20 years ago I put 20% plus down but was under water for 5 years as my house was worth about $5,000 less than what I paid, had it built, and could sell it for. Most everyone I knew was in a similar boat as house values in my area were pretty flat at the time.
If I paid just what the monthly mortgage required it would have taken 10 years plus before I would have broken even. The reason is that interest does not pay off at the same rate as the principle for your mortgage. You pay most of the interest up front THEN pay off the principle amount you borrow! It takes ~15yrs on a std 30yr mortgage before principle really starts dropping significantly.
If they want to fix the housing mess set the interest payments to a simple interest plan or a max of ~25% of the loan payment for the next 5-10 years. Then set a fixed maximum interest rate on all mortgages to say 5% for the next 5-10 years. That would shift a majority of payments being made to principle. It would reduce bank profits for 5 years but most people who are underwater would at that time be even and able to sell their homes. This wouldn't require any government $$$.
The banks would never go for something like this as they would take a hit on profits and don't really want the mess fixed. They expect to ride it out with government help in loaning them money for free and then make a killing by foreclosing when the economy improves.
Unless this bill includes an effective way to reduce the principle of these upsidedown loans, Obama's plan is merely election year bs
A loan modification which merely lowers the interest rate yet doesn't touch the principle... solves nothing and will only extend the problem.... This is nothing more than what obama does each time he borrows a $trillion or so every few months to avoid default on the debt! The guy is in denial!
I think I understand this...I have been paying on my mortgage for 8 years, even though my house's value is below what I paid for it. The guy down the street who hasn't been paying is going to get a cut on his mortgage principle, tax free and I'll get nothing other than the opportunity to pay more in taxes in the future to reduce the increase of the federal deficit this program costs... What county do I live in again?
The money is coming from the Goverment. Who do you think will be paying for it. It's us. Get a clue.
This is one of my biggest gripes, Eric. People who say "Oh, the government will pay for that!" Um, where do you think the government gets their money?
I do think there should be more pressure on banks to at least WORK with people who are underwater to refinance. These forclosures on folks who actively seek help are wrong. Such a mess!
This is an election year. We are seeing a new announcement from the White House every day. It will be interesting to see if ANY actually become part of our society, let alone something that helps us without creating more debt.
Obama is proposing a tax on banks to pay for this. We bailed out the banks when they were in trouble. Shouldn't they help Americans out when we are in trouble?
Bart, lets say the tax on the banks goes through. WHO do you think is going to pay those taxes? WE ARE. With higher fees and lower interest rates on our investments? Which defeats the whole purpose in that we will have even less to spend on anymore than the bare essentials.
"Obama is proposing a tax on banks to pay for this"
And where do you think banks get their money... from American consumers. You will simply be paying more bank fees in addition to bailing out irresponsible home buyers.
The money for Big Oil tax subsidies comes from taxpayers too....so do the subsidies for Big Pharma and many other industries that don't need a dime of taxpayer help. Shouldn't there be major grousing about that to?
It all comes down to affordability. We can no longer afford to be part of the grand scheme of supporting Big Business if it means these businesses are going to crash the economy and devastate the lives of millions of Americans for no reason other than sheer, unmitigated greed.
We could afford to return much of the taxes we already pay if Big Business paid their own debts and didn't make us an obligatory scheme to help them remain profitable. This is also true of a handful of states getting a far rosier return for the taxes they pay into the federal government.
When these states take more, other states get less. It's time to stop the biased attitudes of what's affordable and what isn't.
Because people can't go to say, credit unions, and then the banks have to drop their fees to remain competitive?
Say it ain't so.
They can, but most won't.
Can't people find a way to pay their own debts or else face the fact that they made a bad investment?
Say it ain't so. You're breaking my heart.
Ruken...hate to be a bearer of bad news but...Americans can and are going to credit unions in droves. Doing so just makes economic sense. Big banks are feeing customers to death and only to insure they have enough reserves to continue their reckless addiction to high risk investing.
Now, credit unions are no longer the sole advantage for union members. It's mindboggling that some posters don't know this.
That's good news :)
I am a member of one.
Why should the taxpayers pay for this? Why don't the too big to fail bandits on Wall Street who caused this mess pay for it?
4 years after the start of the depression and they STILL have not been prosecuted or asked to bear any responsibility for the disaster they created.
If you actually read the article, you'd see he's trying to get the banks to.
Reverend...I cannot agree with you more. When the Robber Barons crashed the market in 1929, they knew they would face prison for their over speculating with decent, honest Americans life savings. So they jumped out of skyscrapers. Now, the spawn of their greed has yet to exact punishment for their recklessness and unless that happens, their actions will be seen as white collar getting away with crime.
As we saw with Madoff, these criminals can tell even their most educated, savvy victims anything, make it sound totally reasonable and rational and still be nothing more than a bunch of t|hieves.
Sometimes the only way to force responsibility and legality on individuals is to punish them with the harshest penalties. That way, a copycat criminal thinks twice about pulling the same stunt.
Not one word about "Cram Down" legislation that would allow homeowners upside down in their mortgages to use the U.S. Bankruptcy Code to force banks to to come to the table and re-negotiate their loans.
Hello folks, where is going to get the money? The media presstitutes aren't covering what could be the biggest financial news in our history. The banks are overleveraged big time.
The ISDA (International Swaps and Derivative Association) is expected to make a decision as early as this week on whether five major US banks will go insolvent. The ISDA organization is more powerful than governments, they determine how world financial events are categorized. These are the people who are going to determine if Greece is a credit event that constitutes a default. If so, the 5 largest banks in America who hold 97% of the over the counter derivatives will have to pay up and will collapse because they don’t have the resources to pay off the credit default swaps they are liable for. The derivative market liability is estimated to be 1.4 quadrillion dollars.
The saving grace for the banks is that they heavily influence the ISDA and can even be called the ISDA. I know that sounds like double speak but we are coming to the end of the road when the banks are going to have a coming to meet Jesus meeting regarding their actual liquidity.
In other words the markets call taking a loss and in this case on Greek bonds a haircut (loss on expected return of bond investment). They have already taken a 50% loss on Greek bonds but the ISDA didn’t call that credit event a default. If you or I invested our life savings on Greek bonds and we were told we would have to take a 50% loss on our expected return, I think we would call that a default.
Now, the European Union is telling the Greek bond holders that they will have to take a 70% haircut. The predicament that is clearly becoming evident is at what point does the ISDA consider bond losses a default. You see where this is headed? Even if the ISDA doesn’t declare a 70% loss as a default, which they probably won’t since the banks have a big say in the default declaration, it is getting dangerously close to the 100% loss. At the 100% loss how can they not call that a default and then the USA’s 5 largest banks are forced to pay and can’t which would cause them to collapse. Greek bondholders who thought they had principal insurance are now screwed and left holding the bag. Greek bondholders (big euro banks, big Euro governments, big hedge funds) will now be insolvent.
Greece is bankrupt and the bulk of the austerity measures haven’t even been implemented yet which will seriously impede their productivity.
In order to stave off the inevitable later rather than sooner, being that it is an election year and all, the powers that be will try not to allow this to happen. We will see global QE3 (printing and devaluing currency) on steroids until Greece succumbs to their ordained default status. The Federal Reserve Currency Swaps going on right now in my estimation were the beginning of QE3.
Don’t expect the media presstitutes to cover the climax of this obscene financial abortion called the derivatives market. Once this starts to occur in earnest, listen for the beating of the one world currency drums.
To see for yourself how much power the ISDA wields, Google the International Swaps and Derivative Association.
America would not have this problem if everyone had work.
Import tariffs on China bringing goods into the U.S.A. is 2.5%..
Import tariffs on the U.S.A. bringing goods into China is 25%..
China is supplying the steel to restore the San Francisco to Oakland bay bridge.
U.S.A. cannot pay down it's debt, go figure!!
This guy is on a campaign trail..
We need to nationalize the banks.....then we could refi everyone under water...and refinance for what its worth....i hate these fricken banks who received bailout money.....and they thumb their noses at the same people who bailed them out
ewent
Big banks are feeing customers to death and only to insure they have enough reserves to continue their reckless addiction to high risk investing
First, clearly you don't comprehend the scope of economies.
First, The fees are getting raised because the fed stepped in and limited the charges for credit cards. Figure it out every time you regulate one place, they pay people to find a way to recoup that loss in another and to pay for that person(s) to figure it out. Apparently the teams of lawyers and accountants business hire are better than the ones we send to Washington to write the laws and regulations. Think about it - if the lawyers running for office were really good, they would be in private business.
Second. The reason the banks are holding on to so much money is because of the regulations Obama put on them. The regulations are excessive so the banks have more cash and assets on hand. You apparently are not aware that in a state of default the Fed can confiscate the assets of the federal reserve. The underlying reason for the increase requirements is to build bank value so if China stops buying our debt, the government can fund itself by claiming the assets of the bank.
You are so lost in the shuck, you don't see the jive.
How about we have GOP take back $700 billion dollars that borrow from China to pay for super rich tax cut like Mitt Romney, and use this $700 billion to invest in jobs creation, home foreclose, education, etc. Don't you think this would be a better use than give $700 billion to super rich like Mitt?
Can you imagine Mitt Romney said that he wants foreclose home to fall to the ground, and let his wall street or big banks come in and buy it at low price and flip it like Mitt flip with Bain Capital where he brought companies, then fired workers, reduce people wages, shipped jobs oversea, etc. to make quick profit for himself and his elites friends?
Technically, that $700 billion occurs for only about 10 years. But if we spent an extra $70 billion in America every year for things like education, the housing market, and infrastructure, etc., we'd pay off that $70 billion gradually through economic growth and revenues. Plus economic output would grow. Debt is not a bad thing; its how you use it. If you want to grow a new nation or upgrade it, you need a lot of capital, and that often requires borrowing. Loans aren't bad as long as you put them to good use. Had Bush not borrowed the money for the Bush tax cut and put about $300 billion of it's cost over ten years, we could have reformed education to make free trade FAIR. Unfortunately, we wasted just about every penny we had on stupid tax cuts, wars of choice, and an unfunded Medicare plan. Had we used that money for more constructive things, like education, MAYBE our economy would be a lot better.
But your right, brian. If we stopped borrowing billions from China by simply letting the Bush tax cuts expire, reforming the tax code, using the Buffet Rule, cutting the defense budget and trimming entitlement and discretionary spending costs, we would have a surplus in a matter of years and we could start paying off the debt. Tell that to the anti-tax GOP who are willing to rip apart safety nets if it means keeping their rich overlords safe.
I do NOT want to pay more taxes to bail out a person who is underwater on their home. 95% of us make their payments on time and acted responsibly.
It is irresponsible for the government to let Fannie and Freddie to continue to operate as they did in the past. Have we not learned anything from this crisis?
People aren't underwater on their home by choice. They're underwater because they bought say...a 300K house, which is now worth 200K. But they're still paying the mortgage on a 300K mortgage.
They can't move, because they can only sell the house (assuming it sells) for 200K. The government is trying to fix this by "encouraging" banks to let people refinance to mortgages that reflect the real value of their homes.
You can be underwater, and still make every payment on time in full.
Joyce,
Reread the article. It says it will be paid for with a tax on banks. You were not specifically listed unless you own a bank.
So you want the bank or mortgage lender or credit union to take the loss.......doesn't seem fair.
But the ones who should never have qualified to begin with are the ones that helped drive the market to artificial highs. When they have no equity in the home because they never put any in or they refinanced to take it out, they only have themselves to blame. If they are still living in the home and current on payments then they are not ""upside down".
That is like saying that if you buy stocks as a long term investment and the stocks go down one day then you are upside down in the stock market. If you were intending to "flip" stocks to gain a quick buck - too bad. Same for the house, if you speculated and lost or if you never could afford the house to begin with - too bad.
Rod, And where do you think the banks will get that money? By raising rates on customers, it's a no win situation.
Ruken,
I'm not sure your understanding of mortgage refinancing is accurate. The amount the homeowner owes on the mortgage will stay the same and the market price of the home will stay the same (in the near-term) so if they're underwater before refinancing they will still be underwater after they refinance. All refinancing will do is lower their interest rate and subsequently their interest payment - that's where the relief comes from.
The government is trying to fix this by "encouraging" banks to let people refinance to mortgages that reflect the real value of their homes
In actuality the government is asking the lenders to ignore the real value of the home in relation to the loan amount.
Rod_Father, who do you think the banks will pass that charge on to? It's customers. Ans even if it's only on commercial banks the tax will eventually be funneled down to US.
@Rod_Father: If you impose a tax on the banks to pay for this, they will in turn charge you some kind of fee to get thier money back, so indirectly everyone will pay for it, and I'm not ready to pay everyone elses mortage, I already paid for mine.
We bailed banks out. They need to step up and help the middle class.
They helped cause this crisis by giving loans to people who were unqualified.
Banks will actually benefit in the long run. No one is buying abandoned foreclosed homes. It's better to keep an owner in the house, paying the mortgage, than having to deal with an abandoned property.
Ruken,
If someone owes $300k on a $200k home then simply refinancing it will not help reduce the mortgage. You are confusing a lower interest rate on a mortgage with principle reduction. It would make the payments slightly easier to make, that is all. And it will harm EVERYONE else who doesn't refinance in order to do this. Which means this is a net nothing for the housing market. Some visible beneficiaries, many invisible victims.
Rod_Father,
Any "tax" on banks is a tax on you. The only way this isn't the result is if you think banks get money from any source other than consumers. You could argue they get investment income, true, but to the extent that is decreased they will have to make it up elsewhere. Guess where? YOU! So yes, this is exactly what you say it isn't.
Ruken,
So when I buy a car and it drops in value after driving off the lot...I can ask the bank to renegotiate my loan because my car dropped in value?!?!? When these home owners (I use the term loosely) BORROWED the 300k... they OWE 300k! Why is it SO difficult for people to understand this concept! There is no personal responsibility anymore.
My house is worth less now too and I bought it 13 years ago. Fortunately I bought below my means and it is now paid off. But I am not complaining to the bank that I should have paid less back because my house is worth less.
I agree that banks should not have been bailed out. But neither should these home owners. What should be done to help these people out is to postpone the payment or reduce the payment at a better rate. But don't forgive a large chunk of the principle.
When the banks (private companies) were in trouble, we loaned them money at minimal interest. When people need help because of the greedy fiscal policies of the banks, everyone is whining about the costs. I think we should help people, not corporations.
I would say that you already are paying for underwater mortgages, as the value of all the homes in the country have declined because of the many foreclosures. If the rate of foreclosures continues to grow, the value of homes will continue to fall. I for one was counting on using the profit for the sale of my home to help finance my retirement.
Bart Conner,
Lots of people are buying abandoned homes and short sale homes. The market is working to the extent it is allowed to work. Which isn't a whole lot right now btw. And yes, banks were bailed out--wrongly too imo--but they owe nothing to the middle class. Because we made a mistake in bailing them out doesn't mean we should compound that mistake by making them make more bad decisions.
The one major player in the entire mess you don't mention, EVER, is the federal government. You want every private firm to pay a price, to change their behavior, whatever, but you are apparently happy with the government and the policies it imposes that is the root cause of the bubble that made our economy tank. It's this "free stuff" mentality that will continue to cause our ruin.
The fact that you compared housing values to a car, shows that you need to take an economics class, and provided me with the reason to not read any further.
Ruken,
Just curious, are you a homeowner? and if so, do you have a mortgage?
Ruken - "They can't move, because they can only sell the house (assuming it sells) for 200K."
So you can only move when you make money on your home?
Anyone can move anytime, all it requires it owning up to your responsibilities. Rent it out or take a loss, nobody owes you a dime for your own personal choices.
Cliff, the strangest part about this is that he knows it will be passes onto the customers. Remember last fall all the folks burning their bank cards in protest of a monthly fee? Thankfully Obama set up his new consumer protection joint to stop the bank from levying such a fee.
I think Obama just found a legal way to rob a bank.
touchette Mr. president.
Galt 2012
Ruken, buying a home is an Investment. Like an investment you make in the stock market you HOPE the value will go up. But there is no guarantee that this will happen. Real estate has ups and downs just like the market does.
Will your broker give you a bailout when your stock drops? Of course not. So why should investors in Realestate get a bailout? They can refinance for a lower rate, so that they can ride out the storm. I'm all for that.
You can pay the difference, but the difference is so steep people can't afford it.
With people not being able to sell, the housing market is crap, the housing market is a huge effect on our economy. See the point I'm making?
Joyce: So it would be "irresponsible" for the govt. to "let" Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac operate as they did in the past? Well, who was in charge in the past and let it happen? Oh, I see. Now you're calling for more government regulation of Fannie and Freddie? Sounds too liberal for me.
Ruken - " the housing market is crap, the housing market is a huge effect on our economy"
The housing market "is crap" only compared to the bubble days. Housing prices are still obscene compared to their historical average in comparison to wages.
Of course the housing market has a huge effect, that is what lead to our current recession. Wages did not and couldn't possibly keep up with the imaginary "value" gains in housing and that is why everyone is now broke and underwater. Robbing the taxpayers to continue attempting to manipulate the market above what the REAL economy can actually sustain is only going to accomplish the same thing it has over the last 3 years... more debt and a longer time before prices reach their true level and a real recovery can begin.
Do you wonder why the current generation is worse off than the one before? Imagine how kids today are ever going to purchase a house when the economy is crap yet home prices are being inflated by short-sighted bafoons. Hope you enjoy having 3 generations in your current house.
Then Pjam, using that argument, the economy must be fine too.
Just because it's not those boom 90s early 2000s, doesn't mean it's bad.
Right?
Ruken, Yes the housing market is a huge part of our economy. The government making banks give loans to people that couldn't afford them made the market boom. Everyone was able to get a house, therefore all properties were falsely inflated, that is supply and demand. ( I learned that in economics ) Now We are paying for that, eventhough it was caused by the government. ) Now You want the government to make the banks give up more money to fix things. Where do You think the money comes from ?
Ruken, I'm not going to say You need a eco. class, but You do need to catch up on some current event articles, so You have a clue how We arrived here. Good Day !
Already provided a solution to this.
Banks raise fees. People get pissed off and leave banks for credit unions. Banks sees profits fall. Banks scrap fees to entice people to return.
Banks fail, Obama bails them out, home values reach all time low......
Correction: George W Bush bails them out.
Tarp was passed under Bush with a Democratic house, yes that is true. Obama sent lots of stimulus money to the banks as well. Most of the money Bush allotted has been paid back, google it. I'm not trying to argue Republican, Democrat here, I'm trying to tell You the government caused this crisis, and You want them to go correct it now. Thats like letting the fox in the Hen house. Do You get that ? Look how great the government manages everything Ruken, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Freddie, Fannie, U.S. Poastal service. You know what they all have in common ? They are all broke. These are the people You want to fix things ? I can't make a formidable argument if You don't get it!
you can have a free stimulus if the banks would allow homeowners who have made their last 12 months payments on time be able to refi into a lower rate if they do not have to get a new appraisal. Require no cash out, just lower rates. Think of all the extra money people would have if they can get into the lower rates today. This is not rocket science....
@Ruken
Are you saying the Banks lose that 100,000 that was loaned out? Not a chance in heck. There has been enough bailing out the banks.
Ruken
You definitely take the cake for dumbest posting. Yes GW signed the bank bailout bill written by DEMOCRATS and defeated the first time by REPUBLICANS. Repubs didn't have enough votes to stop it the second time around check your facts. Also you blame the free market system for the economic collapse when in fact it was the DEMOCRATS IN OUR GOVERNMENT under the CLINTON ADMINISTRATION that brought us zero down, interest only, 125%LTV mortgages, etc. with the intention of getting the poor into home ownership and government run Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac took the mortgagaes and spread them around to private banks.
You're a complete idiot
Joyce...not sure you get it. The people that would qualify for this program (myself included) HAVE been making their payments and ARE acting responsibly (myself included). There are people out there making timely payments on a house they are 100k+ upside down on. I bought a small fixer that was a wreck when I got it. It's much better now, but I'm 30k upside down. I would like to refinance and get a better rate to make my home more affordable and possibly pay the principle down faster so I won't be upside down, but I can't refinance because of the negative equity. I'm not asking the government or anyone to reduce my principle (what I owe)...I would just like refinance options. I don't even want to move...just wanna get my house situated on a better financial path.
Aw, Matt is mad.
So far the banks haven't taken any losses. Who got the money when they bought bad loans? Who got the bail out? Who is not lending any money to help small businesses or you?
The banks seem to be the only ones so far who have not taken any losses. Time for them to share some of our loss don't you think?
We should have not given the banks and corporations money in the first place. We should have shut down Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.
Free Market forces would have eventually evened things out.
I understand that Shawnie, that is the cost of doing business with a bank. Dont like it? Put your money somewheres else.
Me, my house is paid for. I trade in commodities.
I also agree that Ruken doesn't have a clue about how this works. Just another one of those salivating as they wait for the next attempt by Obama to buy votes off the backs of those of us that pay federal income taxes with policies that end up being paid for from the pockets of businesses and tax paying citizens. Once more than 50% of this country's citizens have bought into the liberal mantra that bigger government is the answer to our problems, this country is doomed. Our government will run out of other peoples' money to support their operations and then they will be the ones saying who loses their house, who gets what job, and how much they will get paid for it. Like in that old movie, our government will be able to solve two problems at once. Over population and food shortages. They'll just make food out of those that cannot work so they can feed those that can. Anybody care for some Soylent Green?
Umm joel??? you must suffer from long term memory loss......When in fact it was the bushy the clown's admin who gave the banks easy financing.......they made no concessions..unlike the auto workers had too....so joel , please work on your memory!!!!!!!!!!
John, for your info, Congress, which was controlled by the Democrats in 2008 joined Bush in bailing out the banks. Bush could not have done it without them. Then Obama was joined once again with the Democrat controlled Congress in bailing out corporations. Obama could not have done that without them. I voted for Obama, but now think it was the worst vote of my 64-years on this earth. I would never call him Obamie though because no matter how terrible a job I feel he has done, he is the freely elected President of this country, just like Bush was.
Ruken - anyone who bought home in the last 5 years even at a legitimate price, on a standard 30 year mortgage rate, or refianced their home to take advantage of the low rates and bloated value of their homes is under water. I believe the number is over 40% of all homes are under water. That number is still increasing because the values of homes are still as a whole decreasing.
BTW My wife and I were rejected by the first program. From experience I can tell you that for the far majority of those who get on the temporary payment will get rejected again, and most of those will be just as bad off or worse than if they just skipped the program.
It's a repeat of hope and change that is nothing more than smoke and mirrors
I'm not. I bought mine in 2008.
Ruken
Don't forget the irresponsible congress (Barney Frank) who defended Fannie and Freddie and their policies.
Like most of the proposed programs of the government, there is always a twist so you don't qualify for it. With the hiring of people (we hired 3 people unemployed) we couldn't get the tax credit because of the "rules". With the HARP program if you pay PMI insurance you can not qualify. And they wonder why no one applies.
momlags, that's not true about PMI under HARP 2.0. PMI has to stay the same, so if you have it now, you have to keep it. If you don't have it, you don't need it, and if your PMI is lender-paid, like mine is, then you have to refinance with the lender that paid it, because they have to pay it again.
Also, the article says that Fannie Mae, etc. is working to get rid of appraisals . . . that's already part of HARP 2.0 - no appraisals, and it doesn't matter how underwater a mortgage is - so I don't understand what that means.
The fact that you compared housing values to a car, shows that you need to take an economics class, and provided me with the reason to not read any further.
This statement that you made Ruken,"you compared housing values to a car shows that you need an economics class," really shows what your values are. The person was trying to tell you that you made a commitment when you signed the home mortgage loan and you are responsible for it. I have made some not so good investments throughout my life, such as a boat and motor home, but I sucked it up and took the loss.
Motor homes are full time homes for some people and they really drop in value. I wonder if these will qualify under the president's plan?
I don't know, maybe you should ask.
You have paid in for 10yrs on a 30yr mortgage and now you refinance it for a lower rate and even tho your payments are lower you are now paying for 30yrs instead of 20yrs so the banks don't lose but gain in the LONG RUN because of the interest payments now last another 10yrs.
So? Do you expect to use money for free? If your payments are lower, then you "win" as well.
garryk - Your math is faulty. I don't think there are a lot of banks stepping up to the plate and wanting to make a 30 year commitment at today's ridiculous low mortgage rates.
Banks need to make a profit contrary to some liberals thinking.
Garryk..
Then do not take out another 30 year refiance. Take out a 20, or a 15 year loan. NOBODY says you have to take out a 30 year everytime.
Contrary to what you might believe, many banks are posting record profits.
@GO USA...
But thats not Obama whats to do he want the bank to refinance the mortgage with the LOWER HOUSING VALUE. He's say if you finianced a 3000k home and the value is 200k and you owe 250k the refinance would be 200k. Bank loses large volumes of cash...
Are they going to make Freddie Mac quit betting against homeowners? Freddie Mac says they want to help homeowners, then they make it more difficult so that enough homeowners are locked into their loans to cover the bets placed by traders. The gamblers in Freddie Mac are making it tough for homeowners to re-fi.
I have to call BS on this. My wife and I have worked all our lives to afford a small home that we knew we could afford. We didn't run out and buy new cars and a house on an ARM and then cry when the note came due and want someone to bail us out. People live within your means and Government should be forced to do the same. I am so sick of these people wanting others to pay for them. No one made you take that loan out
The President is creating a "gimme" society with the government being the number one giver. And as you know, you and I support the government with our taxes. I am sick and tired of the whiners.
And yet Joyce, you were whining about the economy and the President in an earlier post.
Hypocritical much?
No Joyce. The "gimme" society was created by the GOP 30 years ago. And all the numbers prove that the gap between the 1% and the rest of us has become HUGE. We're tired of all this CORPORATE WELFARE. It's time to level the playing field so that the average American middle-class citizen gets a share in the wealth that is being created by their labors.
What most of us want is for the President to do what he is suppose to do "Defend this country" period. He and the rest up there need to stay out of business that's not what their job is It is to Defend us that's all
So it is OK for the government to give money to the banks that caused the problem and bail them out and bail out Wall Street but all you people are quick to say no to help people who bought a house in good faith and had no hand in the downturn in the economy. Well, why don't you idiots vote Republican then and see what happens to you when there is no middle class. The US has gone from a nation of home owners to a nation of home renters. And some of the landlords aren't even citizens. Shame on some of you posters for being so stupid, selfish and short-sighted!
Joyce,
If the president did nothing you'd fault him for that too.
United States1776, The gimme society was started by the Democrats in 1960's, WAKE UP!
How much "good faith" is there when people who could barely make payments on some rat-trap flea-infested dive suddenly qualify for a $200K home? They "qualified" for a loan that they knew they could never afford.
Kathy, the country has gone from home owners to home renters because people don't stay in their homes like they used to. Houses aren't passed down from generation to generation. Far too many people view a home as an investment that they expect to collect on in the short term and they don't deserve a bail out. They can hold onto their homes and eventually they won't be underwater. Finally, who are YOU to call people stupid, selfish and short sighted? Just because people have counter views to yours doesn't give you the right to denigrate them. I like how you liberals are so open to new ideas as long as they are in line with your beliefs.
@UnitedStates1776 "American middle-class citizen gets a share in the wealth" Do you believe in a socialist system of goverment because that is what you seem to promote. Respectfully
Ruken,
Joyce is not hypocritical at all.
Comprehend much?
United 1776, save Your money and start Your own business! If don't want to labor for labor wages, do something different. We still have that choice, We aren't slaves. I did it, and am very happy I did. I was making millions till Obama got in office, that is the truth.
Literate much?
Ruken,
Wow, got me there!?
He is pretty sharp !
I think that this is a great idea. Helping people to refinance who can't and those underwater will help greatly. The only problem i see with this is that it will go no where with the party of no. And the reason it want pass the house is because it's the Presidents idea and they will not pass it because they will do anything and all things to make Obama a one term president. It's a shame that the GOP will not do anything for the low and middle class. The reason being is that they want or can't pocket any funds from it, and it want benifit their 1%.
Ricky - As I understand it the President wants to impose a fee on the banks. That means you and me will pay for this folly as the banks can't operate without a profit.
Has zero to do with any party of no.
You could always go to a credit union Joyce.
I'm upside down on my house as well, but I'm sure I won't be eligible for this re-election ploy because I make too much money. Of course, I won't be voting for Obama so he really doesn't care about me anyway.
Thank God for those in government who have the balls and enough common sense to say NO to more government handouts and payoffs.
It's a great idea if you think doubling down on stupid is great. More subsidies for loans that were already federally guarenteed and subsidized? Are you kidding me? More transfers from those who have to those who don't have for "fairness? Get this clown out of town.
It's a stupid idea because the details will mean few if any can take advantage of it. Just like all of Obama's other housing stimulus, it will fail. My guess is the senate won't pass it either.
It is Obama and democrats that are destroying the middle class, democrats, including senator Obama, inherited 4.6% unemployment and a booming economy. It is they that destroyed it.
So you can only refi if you really dont need to refi to keep your house?
He's just waves his magic wand and appraisers will work for free?
I'm wondering how they'll make sure this goes toward homeowners that actually need help. The way it sounds I would be able to take advantage this program and I don't really need the help (and I am fortunate enough to say that). I was planning to refinance anyway.
Why would you need an appraisal for 100%+ loant to value deals? No appraisal needed.
Mr. President:
Why do the American people have to cough up another 5-10 billion dollars we do not have to buys houses for people that should never have bought them. Why can't the Federal Government, who doesn't seem to have a problem telling people and business what to do, TELL the bank to get this mess bailed out. They caused the recession/depression with their greed, they paid mortgage underwriters to give loans to anything that breathed, they packaged bulls---t as 'securities' and lied thru their teeth about the quality.
The TSA can stripsearch anyone at any time; why can't the President of the United States get banks to do the right thing?
If you actually read the article, you'd see he was trying to get a tax on banks to pay for it.
The GOP instantly rejected said tax.
Where do you think the banks are going to get the money to pay the tax. From the people who have accounts there or make up some new crazy fee for getting the mortgage.
I heard there was this marvelous invention called a credit union.
And how do you think that the banks will pay for this tax Ruken?
And you too, can always go to a credit union.
Credit Unions are just as regulated as banks. Check it out.
And yet have almost none of the fees.
I am a member brah.
"Almost" none. True, but they do have them and there is not a fee in the world that cannot be increased.
Credit Unions are non-profit. Therefore they aren't going to increase fees anywhere close to the rates banks do.
Could be. But, my point is they COULD do it if they wanted to. As to non-profit, I deal with non-profits that are going down the tubes. Be careful.
Ah, but if the cost of doing business for a credit union increases, they will not just lose that money. Non-profit does not necessarily mean that they don't need to cover operating costs. If their cost increases, so does yours.
Exactly Danno. This is why they do enough to cover said costs, but they don't have to post any profits to shareholders.
It's why they will always have less fees than a bank.
I will :)
There is no free lunch, we pay for EVERYTHING, either through tax on business, tax from states or local governments, federal tax. etc.
Liberals are living in a fantasy world, thinking the government can borrow 40% of what they spend to keep the party going indefinitely. We are a decade behind Greece at our current trajectory but when we get there nobody can bail us out.
When ANY politician offers you something for nothing, dump him mercilessly. Obama, democrat, or republican, let them know that you aren't that stupid.
There is no way the republicans will go along with this. The plan has a very high degree of success which in turn will give President Obama the election. The republicans refuse to do anything that will make President Obama look good so we all know this plan will never be passed. Republicans say they want the housing market to hit bottom to allow the market to correct itself without government interference so we all know this plan is DOA. Hopefully, the American people will vote these short-sighted jerks out of office so we can finally do something constructive ( no pun intended) for our country as well as it's hard working people who deserve more than getting taken advantage of at every turn.
Carly - I am a "hardworking people" and I do NOT want to pay increased bank fees to bail out irresponsible home buyers. I make my payments on time and only live in a house that I can afford and now you want me to pay for the jerk down the street that bought a house he can't afford?
The fact you think people underwater are irresponsible shows you have no grasp on what "underwater mortgages" are.
Ruken,
Read my and Rich-281385 responses to you above. Seems you don't have a grasp on what a mortgage refinance does.
Well Joyce, I too am a responsible homeowner who did pass on all the free money out there, who has NEVER been late on a single mortgage payment but I am also a person who can see the difference between being selfish and being responsible. It is good for everyone when a neighborhood does not have a bunch of foreclosure signs in it. It is good for everyone to take pride in ownership and to make sure the banksters can NEVER take advantage of one single American ever again. It is selfish to think everyone else is lazy or irresponsible. It would be wonderful if we could just say well everyone but me were irresponsible when the truth is a lot of these Americans were taken advantage of by the banks. The banksters saw an opportunity to make a quick buck and guess what, they jumped at the chance. It is amazing so Americans can not see what actually happened, this whole mess is a result of greed and certainly was not the fault of our people. Those who were irresponsible should suffer the consequences but those who no fault of their own lost the equity in their homes DUE TO greed deserve a chance at recovery just like when the taxpayers bailed the ungrateful banks out. Try to think bigger than yourself and your wants and your needs, think more about other Americans who work just as hard as you do and who also deserve a chance at this wonderful American dream. Direct your contempt toward the people who have earned it by cheating YOUR fellow Americans for their own selfish greed.
It's funny how all those that want the government to pay for and take care of all their troubles love to talk about Big Business schemes, Bank schemes and the Wealthy People Schemes, like all have a conspiracy going to cheat them. When in reality the only scheme I see is people wanting others to pay for their mistakes and misfortunes. Remember you did not have to sign the mortgage, you didn't have to buy the house you couldn't afford to pay. Bottom line, we wanted the house, we knew what we signed for when we signed, you wanted the money to get the house and the Banks, Lenders, Investors. etc., gave you the money to get what you wanted at the agreed to cost when you signed to buy the house. They did nothing wrong in most cases except to lend more than they should have to people and those people should have known better before they signed.
Now this I agree with, I think entitlements are out of control.
However, it isn't applicable. This proposal wouldn't take those it helps off any proverbial hook whatsoever.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, etc. Heard this before, what a bunch of baloney. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha same ol' crap, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha , oh, ha ha ha ha ha etc! It was a lie before and it is a lie now.
Carly I agree that some homeowners could previously afford houses they cann no longer afford. the median family income has dropped significantly due to the Obamanizing of America. This program will be just as huge a failure as Obama's HAMP program. Obama couldn't make change from a $20 bill.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/07/issa-house-should-investigate-hamp-failure_n_805820.html
Hopefully, the American people will vote Obama out of office so we can finally do something constructive (no pun intended) for our country as well as it's hard working people who deserve more than getting taken advantage of by the Food Stamp President at every turn.
And vote in who, exactly? Because the GOP field has netted great candidates once again?
At least Romney and Gingrich both had successful business careers. Obama doesn't have a clue, he is completely incompetent. These last five years of democrat majority have been a complete disaster.
GOP/TP leaders don't worry about mortgages. GOP/TP voters do not have mortgages(you get payday loans for trailers). That is why it will not get support from the right...
You make the Democrats sound just as stupid as we all know they are.
books are your friends....do not be scared, you might learn something. Democrats started fannie and freddie.....you can't be that dumb!
gpotts-1106111> I have a mortgage that would choke an elephant (I have a real big trailer). But, if I call the lender saying I can't afford it anymore and ask them to take off $50,000.00 from the principal amount (If you know what that means) and ask them to lower the interest and they do that under a government program for me, are you, your children and grand children Ok with having to pay that for me for years to come ? Otherwise I'll struggle to pay for my own mess as many Americans have since the start of this nation and save you , your children and your grand children a little money. The whole solution to this mess, wasn't bailouts, government mortgage buy outs and propping up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with more and more tax payer money, the solution was to let it all crash and burn, let the banks, investors and companies take the hit when it was crashing and by now the successful banks, investors and companies would have picked up the pieces and we would all be better off by now. Instead by doing what we have done with bailouts, government spending and more regulations is just prolong our agony, bury the government in debt and cause financial hardship that will last for years to come, not to mention that we'll all have to pay for this at some point.
potts don't you have something to Occupy?
Ron - I'll echo your sentiment about letting the market correct by saying those banks who were not irresponsible with their underwriting guidelines would have been in a position to pick up the assets through fire sales. The market correction would have been to rid the market of lenders who couldn't see the forest for the trees and kept the strong lenders alive. But, we had government interference and everyone suffers because of prolonged market corrections.
Lenders were forced to make bad loans under threat of red lining charges, etc. This is the kind of craziness that happens when Frank and Dodd say home ownership is a right and enact policies to make it happen, economy be damned.
This always happens with liberal wet dreams, to them intentions trump results so unintended consequences are totally ignored.
Just lower the interst rates to what the government is allowing all the international community to borrow from (thats less than.25 %) to everyone.
Its called VOLUME. With that many people borrowing, it will create a ton of jobs, taxes collected and affordable to everyone for at least a time. NO additional costs.
I could fix what is wrong in this country in less than 3 years. Everything from the drug war to SS. Things are not hard to fix. People make it hard. But an average Joe like me wont ever have a chance at fixing this country.
The federal government should probably stay out of the housing market, their track record isn't so hot in that arena. Let's focus on getting the economy growing again; the housing market will take care of itself.
Nothing like trying to mess with a system that is already in place ....
It is what it is. If you cant afford, walk away, declare bankruptcy and move on.
If you're under water ... whatever works.
Quit f'ing with the system and let it bottom out so it can recover. ENOUGH BIG BROTHER HELP on my tax dollars.
if you want the economy to heal, quit pickin' at it.
"The White House is seeking to contrast Obama's stance with that of Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney, who has said U.S. foreclosures should be allowed to run their course. "
Newty Fruity should jump on this, since Nevada has the highest rate of foreclosure filings in the U.S. over the last five years.
Not that I think Newton should win the nomination. I just like to see them blast away at each other.
What liberals refuse to acknowledge is that Obama has no experience and has surrounded himself with others that have no experience. Any competent economist will tell you that trying to block a recovery only delays it and makes it worse.
As said above, the government needs to get the hell out and let the market bottom out. Obama is just delaying the inevitable to buy votes with other peoples money, it's the liberal way.
It's not just the liberal way. GWB did it also. You didn't think that 47% no income tax thing happened because of Obama, did you?
BO trying to do what he does best, buy votes with other people's money. I think it's time to cut the spending a lot.
I appreciate that President Obama and his staff are working hard to fix this housing crisis. Mr. Romney wants to let the market continue to take care of the problem so he and his vulture capitalists can buy these foreclosed properties for pennies on the dollar and rent them out to make even more money. If all goes well with the Task Force co-chaired by NY AG Schneiderman, much of this will be paid by the greedy banks and mortgage brokers who made millions on questionable business transactions. We need to look at the big picture which progressives can see but the conservatives without consciences cannot since their only goal is to defeat President Obama in the next election. Hopefully justice for all will triumph.
Agree with MSNBC. this is nothing more than the election year trick trying to buy votes with the voters money. Been there done that. It's so over Obammy.
They have tried other programs over the last 3 years that didn't work and this is just an election year promo to get votes. Bottom line is, if you can't pay your mortgage, you can't keep the house, plain and simple and yet this administration continues to lie to the people to get the votes. They did it in the last election with hope and change, now we all hope we change the president in this next election. Remember, if you don't pay the mortgage and let the government pay it down for you or even take over the bad mortgage loan, all of us working taxpayers, our children, your children and grand children will be paying for it. The government has no money that it doesn't take from the tax payers and they already spent more than they'll take in for years to come. This will just add more to the trillions we owe already. Since China is the main holder of our debt (Reagan would be turning over in his grave), they now can pretty much dictate whatever they want to do in the world as we owe them big time. Maybe China can send a collector here to break our arms and get some of that debt back. But I do know that all that want the government to take care of their every need don't even care who pays for it, they think it's all for free.
Most of the people who need help used their houses as ATM Machines. They have second and third mortgages on them and that is why their homes are underwater. I do feel sorry for people who only have their original mortgage and are underwater because they paid way too much for their homes, but if they are making the payments what's the beef???? The government is just throwing money around. The programs they have currently help very few people. Again, all O'Bama can do is spend more money that America does not have and let the taxpayers foot the bill.
I am underwater on that big car that I just bought. Any help for me?
Joyce, you have no idea what underwater means, and how a home is different than consumable products on the market.
Just letting you know, you look like a colossal fool at the moment.
Ruken, I have been reading all of your comments and you sure got a grip on it don't you? *sarcasm* Explain to me how Joyce looks like a colossal fool unless you assume that the value of a house must always go up and that it is an investment. Fact of the matter is, if you buy a house only to live in, can still make the payments, and aren't planning on moving, the value of it is really insignificant. So why do you think Joyce is so far off the mark?
Ruken, havn't you noticed no one agrees with you. Shut the hell up!
Because I'm sure you speak for everyone.
You know, having a name 'for common sense', you seem to lack it.
My common sense is stating that this is my last post because you are a waste of time. I'm sure you will respond, since you spout off more than anyone on here. BTW - Get a job, I'm tired of giving you handouts!
Swing and a miss. Common sense remains a myth.
First off it is the government that caused this problem by forcing banks to give mortgages to those that did not deserve them. Don't blame the banks for getting rid of toxic loans that they would not have done based on their business practices.
Secondly - BO has already tried two previous programs like this and they both failed.
There is nothing in this to get a homeowner out from underwater on their mortgage. Just lower the payments.
Any "responsible" homeowner has already refinanced at lower rates. BO thinks we are waiting for him?
Banks will pass on any new fees to the consumer - they will not just eat it. Thanks BO for another price increase or fee!
Oh and Rudeken - before you even start, I am a real estate investor and have done more to assist under water home owners than BO will ever dream about.
That pretty much sums it up.
Haven't see a reply from Ruken yet.
If he only wants 5-10 Billion why doesn't he get Warren Buffett to fund it?
Because that would get through the GOP Congress, right?
Hell if he wants a personal loan I am sure Warren would help him and then he can truly be the saviour and bail them out himself
Buffet doesn't need republican support, no one is stopping the hypocrite from writing a check.
my car isn't worth what I have remaining on my loan. My running shoes are worth less now than when I paid with my credit card. I'm not sure the hamburger I had for lunch yesterday is now worth the $3 I paid for it. Any chance the President can float a few billion to "fix" all this so I can tap into it?
You confuse the degradation of value on other products with a home's value?
You're clearly a renter, and have never taken even a basic economics course in your life.
I need help with the 19.8% finance rate on my credit card for that big HD TV I just bought.
John 2276171 didnt mention a house and I need some new shoes to as long as hes giving he ought to help ever one..but Im not gonna vote for him anyway.
Yo Obama, please include another $ 50 billion for renovation assistance. I am redoing my bath and sure can use some help there as well as with my mortgage.
It appears that a lot of you don't even know what a refinance is. It is not a handout. You are still on the hook to repay the entire loan principle. You are just getting a replacement loan, for the same amount, at current interest rates.
This is a practice that was readily available to homeowners in most circumstances before the housing slump. Someone who is already obligated to pay back a $100,000 mortgage principle is now unable to get a refinance for the exact same $100,000 because their home value has fallen, even though they are *already* on the hook for that money.
This makes no sense and is not the fault of the homeowner. Someone who is obligated to pay back a loan, and is doing so, should be able to take advantage of current interest rates just like they have always been able to in the past.
Ruken you seem to think that houses both last forever, and never decrease in value.
James, it's not the refinancing, it's who is going to pay for it. The banks, like any other corporation will not pay, their customers will. All you are doing is screwing one set of customers to buy votes with another.
Liberals, please take a basic economics course! No company has some magic bag of money stashed away. Excepting patent royalties, and such the only source of funds any company has is it's customers. It's the same as any government, they get ALL their money from YOU! Borrowing from China sticks YOU with the debt they are still getting it from you. Printing it like mad causes inflation that devalues what you have, again that still comes from you.
So companies are sitting on $3 trillion? No that is not a magic bag, it is a war chest built up to protect them from the current rogue regime, and even it came from YOU!
The problem with all government activity is you not only pay for what they do, you also pay for the bureaucracy to oversee it as well. You would get much more bang for the buck if you "cut out the middle man", (leach bureaucrats), and spent the money yourself.
Even those who don't pay federal tax STILL PAY! They pay via a feeble economy that won't let them improve their situation.
Then why is it only for people who are "underwater" and why is it going to cost $10 billion? Where is the money going? Don't kid yourself. It's gonna be a handout.
Voting time soon.
Yes, lets throw more money away. I am 'slightly' underwater on my mortgage and while I would love to refinance, I would only do it if it made sense. I DID NOT buy a home I could not afford and was not stupid enough to get an ARM or some other joker mortgage.
Whether I do or don't qualify for HARP, is yet to be determined, but if I don't...so be it...I continue to make my payments, my house is where I live and was never meant to be some investment other than the fact I bought a 2-family and at the point it IS paid off, that is my investment...not flipping it or thinking it is going to be worth a million dollars at some point.
Please! When government "offers to help"...in reality they should just say..."The taxpayer gets put on the hook again!" Do some of you people think Obama is the reincarnate of Santa Claus?
And, what reward, break, even a thank you do all those who struggle but find a way to stay current on their mortgage, or sold everything just to have a roof over their head paid for, or lived within their means in a smaller/less luxurious home?
Yes, I realize there are many in dire straits...(just saw where American Airlines will cut 15,000 jobs and here in Atlanta, AT&T is fixin to whack hundreds...) well, that's your wonderful, make-believe, improving economy for ya. Just like a bogus unemployment report or the REAL inflation index.
So, for a middle-income average Joe who's played by the rules, done what was asked, paid his taxes, went without to stay out of debt, lived within his means....where's the pay off? How can he qualify for all these Federal assistance programs? Hand outs, bail outs, food stamps, unending unemployment checks?
The double standards are getting beyond old.
Obama is creating a generation of "gimme" with the government (taxpayers) the source for help with anything you may need.
Yeah. Don't you wish you had more bank stock? I think I remember George and Hank Paulson bailing out Wall St. with your (taxpayer) money. This is just an argument over who gets the bailout. Bear Stearns or Lehmen Bros. stock anyone? Oh, I forgot, not even W and Hank could bail them out.
This responsible citizen doesn't want government assistance. I am proud that I don't qualify and wouldn't apply even if I did.
Go- USA this has nothing to do with citizenship this is being a responsible consumer there is a difference.
I know plenty of irresponsible citizens (Lie, cheat & steal) who are great with money.
The Gimme generation is here for sure. they are nothing like generations of Americans in the past that took care of themselves and their families and didn't want government help. Whatever happened to the real democrats like Kennedy tht said" Ask not what your Country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your Country" ? Life is tough and you get out there and take your knocks and make your own way in a free society. We are a good people that helps others whenever we can and we all should, but we want to do it on our own without a government mandate, government regulations and higher taxes, that diminish success and freedom. This generation seems to want the nurturing of mommy and daddy in the form of wanting the government to take care of their every need no matter who pays for it for the rest of their life.
get used to it Ronnie. Doesn't matter if it is an upper middle class or low income. A slew of younger generation (and I am talking about 20 something year olds - I am a thirty something year old) have a great sense of entitlement. Gimmee Gimmee Gimmee Mine Mine Mine.
Ron, Obama's solution is always forcibly take from responsible people and give to irresponsible democrat voters. Obama's proposal does nothing for the real problem, irresponsibility.
You maybe right about whos to blame ,but it all boils down
to the 2012 elections not whats best for the country.
please tell me how lowering the interest rate is connected to the home being underwater? there is no connection. just the jackass in the WH campaigning on our dime again !
The truth is he is trying to shore up his own election chances at our expense with more goobermint fixes that will go the way of the other failed attempts since the mortgage debacle started. Nice try at leading from behind but no sale here. Try getting Congress to balance the budget and reduce the debt and stop your spending proposals. Sheesh, election time with more drama and acting.
I'm ok with this on one condition: Let me refinance at 0% interest because my mortgage is NOT underwater and I HAVE been responsible at making my payments on time. Deal?
Yeah, I made a big mistake. I paid off the mortgage so my home is completely paid for.
One problem I can't sell my home for as much as I could have sold it for a few years ago. Mr President can you help me by making up the difference? I hope so if you want my vote. NOT
To JPSOTW - You might want to watch the name calling. I am none of the things you mentioned. I have been a home owner for 12 years, bought at a very good price, make my mortgage payments on time. But, my hours have been cut and it is now a struggle to make the payment. The home is worth less now than when I bought it. With interest rates being at an all time low, there are programs being offered now that can lower your interest rate thus lowering your payment and allowing me to spend a little bit more on the necessities in life - putting money into the economy. I have been been in real estate for 26 years - and believe me, it does drive the economy....
Oh great. More handouts to the irresponsible, the deadbeats, and the nipple suckers in an effort to pander for votes. I AM SICK TO DEATH OF CARRYING THE LOW LIFES AND LOSERS OF THIS COUNTRY ON MY BACK!