What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Smart Guys Keep Their Faces Looking Young view!
howlifeworks.com - Why men have finally started to use certain anti-aging skin care products...
41 Comments
- badfrog, on 05/27/2009, -0/+42Wish I got a reward for actually paying my bills.
- Hillsfar, on 05/27/2009, -1/+39Sure these modified mortgages will fail again...
...but not before costing the taxpayers billions of dollars and making tidy profits for banks and servicing companies!
Stupid financial gimmicks and bailouts by government. - atomheartmother, on 05/27/2009, -0/+24Loans to irresponsible borrowers and poor credit risks aren't going to be made better by restructuring. Rather than bilking taxpayers to prop them up, let the borrowers who won't or can't pay default, and let the market work it out over time. Anything else is bound to fail.
- Y0tsuya, on 05/27/2009, -1/+18When you prop up deadbeat borrowers, they walk a few steps then fall down again. Were they expecting anything different?
- Bloodwine, on 05/27/2009, -1/+16Some people just aren't cut out to own property. Trying to prop those people up are just hurting the rest of us.
- sndream, on 05/27/2009, -0/+13"Deceptive practices on the part of the borrowers themselves"
What? But we have been told by the administration that all the fault belongs to the lenders of the Ninja loan, not borrow who lied.
Oh and don't forget that "Affordable Housing" mean that keeping housing price artificially high by popping up loser mortgage with tax payer money while building more social housing by using more tax payer money. - ladydiquickwit, on 05/27/2009, -1/+12I hope everyone commenting is considering a change in their elected official??????
Term Limits if you please. Terms in Congress should not be 20/40 years. I am from Massachusetts. - inactive, on 05/27/2009, -0/+9Ain't nothing that another couple trillion dollar bailout won't fix.
- Y0tsuya, on 05/27/2009, -1/+9The "Making Home Affordable" program is just your regular bureaucratic doublespeak. If homes are truly affordable we would not be having these wholesale defaults and foreclosures. A decade ago 7% was very good interest rate on a mortgage, now people still can't afford to pay even after artificially lowering it to 4.5%. This tells me housing still has a long way to fall.
- scoottie, on 05/27/2009, -1/+8You do get a reward, your reward is paying extra so you can help those that are too stupid to do whats right pay their bills. Its exactly what Obama said he wanted when he was campaigning.
- scoottie, on 05/27/2009, -1/+8Did any intelligent person think this wasn't going to happen?
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats for life. - BottledViolence, on 05/27/2009, -2/+8Is it so hard to understand that people are the problem here? Don't expect a restructured loan to make a person financially responsible. There is a reason for credit scores... to keep people who cannot or will not pay from being loaned money. Its not hard to understand.
- BottledViolence, on 05/27/2009, -2/+7Housing is affordable. People just didn't buy affordable homes. They bought homes that were out of their price range, and are now shocked that they can't pay for homes way outside of their price range. Sorry, but not everyone can afford to live in any area they want.
- ancalagon73, on 05/27/2009, -0/+5Well I pay my bills, have a great credit score, get low interest rates, was smart enough not to get a house a few years ago even though all these lenders told me I could afford it, but now that I worked hard, saved my money and can afford a house I can't get a mortgage without putting 40-50% down on a house. Wish I was as stupid and/or greedy as everyone else back then rather than working hard and saving like I was taught to do. Live and learn.
- markgl, on 05/27/2009, -0/+5I am from Indiana.
But yea term limits. Some of the government is seated there and just crushing forward progress. - AlterLite, on 05/27/2009, -0/+4Really? You mean people who were irresponsible in the first place will continue to be irresponsible when given a break? That is a shocker. /sarcasm
- portnoy, on 05/27/2009, -1/+5If you light a man a fire,
you warm him for the night.
If you light a man on fire,
you warm him for the rest of his life. - Tenareth, on 05/27/2009, -0/+3Worst part is, nobody has learned anything yet. Builders have a new trick going... they don't reduce the price, but they give you a big chunk of cash back you can use on the Down payment.
At first I was curious why... but it makes sense, they get to publish the sell price as still outrageously high, which means valuations still show prices as higher than they really are.
Still haven't figured out that housing prices are NOT coming back, they are going to go back down to the normal level of inflation, not 50% increase in value every year. There is still a group of people that made a lot of money that are trying to figure out how to recreate the bubble. - Tenareth, on 05/27/2009, -0/+3Problem is there are people out there that believe irresponsible people are just people that have had "bad luck" and everyone would be responsible if they had the opportunities of those people that are responsible only because "they had connections" or whatever excuse of the day.
- Hillsfar, on 05/27/2009, -0/+3No, the bank makes a tidy profit from being incentivized by the government to refinance on a loan they know is already in default - that's why they're willing to modify.
- charbabe1980, on 05/27/2009, -0/+3While homes values continue to plummet the borrowers are becoming more discouraged. There's not much of an incentive to protect negative equity. While the credit markets are still virtually frozen, the average borrower wants to conserve what capital they do have, rent a house and pay half of what their monthly mortage payment was. Why throw good money after bad? The only thing at stake is their credit scores, most lenders aren't even chasing a deficiency judgement.
- ninjaturtles1, on 05/28/2009, -0/+2The real story? Huh? You have not mentioned the Federal Reserve or Alan Greenspan once!
- Y0tsuya, on 05/27/2009, -0/+2Here in the SF Bay Area, run-down hovels were bid up to 10x median household income in 2006. And pretty much everybody had to take out option-ARMs to buy them. That's the ticking time bomb set to explode soon. They're now down to 5-6x median income. But crap shacks need to come down below 3x. Even then that will still leave decent houses at 4-5x. Not truly affordable, but will be closest to normal I've seen.
- ashcnshsad, on 05/27/2009, -0/+1"And pretty much everybody had to take out option-ARMs to buy them."
No, they didn't. They could have sat tight and NOT bought a house they couldn't afford. They could have NOT gotten into a loan that would blow up on them if they didn't flip the house in time. But they were greedy and stupid and now everyone who was responsible is taking it up the ass for these bastards.
It's no different than people who get up to their eyeballs in credit card debt because they HAD to have $1000 handbags. Don't buy what you can't afford and you'll do ok. - BottledViolence, on 05/27/2009, -1/+2But there is the option to buy a house in another area or rent. You pay for convenience. If you work there, you might need to have a long commute or find work where you can afford to live. No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy a house in the Bay Area. At those prices it doesn't take a CPA to see you can't afford to live there! Hopefully housing prices will fall to a point where people have the flexibility to live where they want, but keeping people in homes they can't afford will prevent that.
- vinod1978, on 05/27/2009, -0/+1Tenareth - if people actually got those things it would nice. You only have a good credit score if you have credit cards and use them. If you have enough cash, and have very few credit cards, but pay off your mortgage and regular utilities your credit score would not be as high as someone that pays their bills on time but has more debt. It's the system that F'ed up.
- vinod1978, on 05/27/2009, -0/+1BottledViolence - Mass media would have you believe that the economic crisis started with the housing market. That's false. It started with financial companies. These financial companies made up 42% of the profit for the entire country under W. Bush. All the sudden there was an influx in cash, so they put it into real estate. Builders were building left & right, and all of the sudden there were too many homes and not enough people to get mortgages for them. The builders wanted to fill the homes, and the bankers wanted to make more $. So the bankers & builders lobbied congress to deregulate the financial industry. When the banks saw that the APR was going to rise they knew it would lead to foreclosures - so, they sold pieces of those mortgages to other companies to soften the blow if a large % of people started to foreclose. Other companies started selling "insurance" to investors, but they didn't want to call it "insurance" because that would regulated - so they started a 'credit default swap' program that would pay any investor the $ they invested if mortgages were unpaid. Insurance is regulated by the federal gov't to ensure that the necessary $ is physically available in case the insurance contracts needed to be paid. By avoiding the regulation the the "insurance programs" didn't keep the cash the needed, and when they housing market was flooded with foreclosures the investors expected their insurance to kick in. Companies like AIG, Lehman Brothers, and Citibank didn't have the necessary cash on hand to pay their investors - so they needed federal $ or file for bankruptcy - and that's the real story.
- PBRbeer, on 05/29/2009, -0/+1The blame is more directly related to the Moral Hazard created by ultra low interest rates and rapidly rising home prices. What happens is that as home prices continued to soar many people that were considering buying a home, and maybe some that weren't, were pretty well convinced that if they didn't act immediately they would NEVER be able to afford a home, while they could act now and just barely afford it if they really pinched. With the interest rates set so incredibly low it made buying a home more attractive than ever. Very few people have the knowledge of economics to understand the bubble would burst, hell 95% of our government kept telling us to buy buy buy, and that everyone would be fine, because the country is too big to fail.....
It's very easy for people like you and me that didn't jump on the band wagon to point fingers at these people and call them irresponsible, but all they were trying to do is act quickly to secure their futures... the irresponsibility lies with our monetary policy, the federal reserve artificially lowering interest rates, and federal legislation easing lending qualifications so that 'less fortunate' individuals could afford to own a home.....
Keynesian economics for the fail - inactive, on 05/27/2009, -1/+2HI MY NAME IS PATTY AND I'M YOUR AGENT!
I'm going to speak really loudly and excited about whatever over-priced piece of cr@p house I try to shove down your throat! Did you notice my makeup and perfume? I put WAY too much on. It's my way of trying to cover up the 45 pounds I gained after I have birth to my kid. My husband then lost interest in me and now has sex with Thai hookers when he goes on business trips for his WIlly Lomanesque sales trips! Can I interest you in this split-level Colonial which has gone 500% in the past six months? The markets fueled by low interest, interest only loans which will entrap you like an 18th century negro south of the Mason Dixon Line- hi, I'm Patty! - arplayer2k, on 05/27/2009, -0/+1FTA: "Fitch based its projection partly on "shrinking disposable income, escalating job losses and possibly some deceptive practices on the part of the borrowers themselves," the New York company said."
For the portion that are deceptive, it is a drain on the system. The rest of these people just are being hit by the recession, which their loans caused. What a ***** storm. - inactive, on 05/28/2009, -0/+0It's the secondary loan market that makes a tidy profit from refinancing while the banks LOSE money.
How about educating yourself first? - vinod1978, on 05/27/2009, -1/+1BottledViolence - although what you say seems like common sense - it's just not true. Many states do not require a lawyer to complete the sale of a house. How many people would read a 150+ mortgage contract. I'm sure we all have credit cards - have any of you read your credit card contract? I hired a lawyer when I closed on my property - NJ mandates it - but I would have gotten one anyway, so I knew exactly what I was getting into.
The problem is that many people (esp. in CA), told what they earned honestly, yet the mortgage brokers lied on the application (without the applicant even knowing), and convinced them that their monthly payment would stay low or go even lower depending on the economy. These mortgage brokers advertised in lower-income areas on purpose with TV ads, and direct mailers non-stop so people were inundated with these offers. If you lived in a violent neighborhood and you kept getting offers to move to a big house in a better neighborhood - the idea would seem very attractive - esp if you were told that you could do it for no money down. They shouldn't be allowed to keep their houses - they should rent - but if they file for bankruptcy it goes on their credit report - and no one will rent to them. It's a bigger issue then you make it out to be. - ninjaturtles1, on 05/28/2009, -1/+1No, it's just crazy.
- vinod1978, on 05/27/2009, -1/+1Y0tsuya - No, but the reality of the situation is if everyone defaulted at the same time it would kill the economy even worse. By delaying these people from foreclosing all the same time, and to have it more spread out over the next couple years we are at least averting an even bigger disaster. Take AIG for example - most of their divisions will be sold to other companies. This is the strategy - not what experts say what will "eventually" happen, but the actual goal. If AIG did it now it would be an even bigger disaster - but by delaying it, and spreading it out over the course of the next 5 years it allows the economy to be a "bit better off"...I know it sounds crazy, but it's actually just common sense.
- olsateam, on 05/29/2009, -0/+0Time has shown, as it always does, that loan modifications are NOT the best options for distressed homeowners. Like many other things this was an industry that got and currently still is getting a lot of media coverage. Because of this a lot of predatory lenders started getting into the business at the same time they were putting people in loans that would NOT help them. Sound familiar? Well...whats left now? The only other Foreclosure alternative that I see being a good option is a short sale. With the Presidents new short sale plan I'm sure we will start seeing a big shift in the market towards short sales. For FREE Short Sale help visit http://www.ShortSalePros.com
- vinod1978, on 05/27/2009, -2/+1Mass media would have you believe that the economic crisis started with the housing market. That's false. It started with financial companies. These financial companies made up 42% of the profit for the entire country under W. Bush. All the sudden there was an influx in cash, so they put it into real estate. Builders were building left & right, and all of the sudden there were too many homes and not enough people to get mortgages for them. The builders wanted to fill the homes, and the bankers wanted to make more $. So the bankers & builders lobbied congress to deregulate the financial industry. When the banks saw that the APR was going to rise they knew it would lead to foreclosures - so, they sold pieces of those mortgages to other companies to soften the blow if a large % of people started to foreclose. Other companies started selling "insurance" to investors, but they didn't want to call it "insurance" because that would regulated - so they started a 'credit default swap' program that would pay any investor the $ they invested if mortgages were unpaid. Insurance is regulated by the federal gov't to ensure that the necessary $ is physically available in case the insurance contracts needed to be paid. By avoiding the regulation the the "insurance programs" didn't keep the cash the needed, and when they housing market was flooded with foreclosures the investors expected their insurance to kick in. Companies like AIG, Lehman Brothers, and Citibank didn't have the necessary cash on hand to pay their investors - so they needed federal $ or they would have had to file for bankruptcy which would have put us in a depression (and not a recession) - and that's the real story.
- duewydo, on 05/27/2009, -4/+2tell you what, I am going to give you a reward. Im not going to repo your car.
- Tenareth, on 05/27/2009, -4/+1"...but not before costing the taxpayers billions of dollars and not losing quite as much money for banks and servicing companies!"
Fixed it for you. - Tenareth, on 05/27/2009, -6/+1Good credit score, low rates, not having to be afraid every time the phone rings or the doorbell rings...
Seem like pretty good rewards. - qiaohua, on 05/27/2009, -7/+1Whuuu boy
- inactive, on 05/27/2009, -11/+2...right the banks will make a tidy profit from having people default on their loans...
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is