Americans split on homeowner bailout - poll

[SameOld]

Obama or Hillary will bail out the homeowners. McCain probably won't, but the Democratic Congress will override his vetos.

[Daytimedrama]

SameOld wrote:

Obama or Hillary will bail out the homeowners. McCain probably won't, but the Democratic Congress will override his vetos.

Im starting to think your house is in trouble. Are you a one issue guy/gal? Are you waiting for the handout? Did you make a poor choice and now you need my help?

[Jim C]

Dinah wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't know WHERE you get this idea that predatory lenders should be used at ALL. They should be against the law!

I agree! No predatory lenders would be ideal. deregulating the industry and expecting upright dealings was the wrong answer.

Dinah wrote:

<quoted text>
These stupid games have got to stop. Anytime you have somebody artificially manipulating things, especially in a dishonest or shady fashion; EVERYONE suffers. Then politicians make stupid laws to deal with them and we're screwed.

With the current narrow majority for Congress the laws are pretty hard to get passed. As we know without regulation the industry does not police itself.

Dinah wrote:

<quoted text>
When you do things like this you take away the natural consequence of things not being done right. You cloud the picture.
It's a LOT easier to fix something in which the problem is glaringly straight up than it is when manipulation gets into the picture.
Am I naive' or what? What happened to the picture here of shady businesses falling naturally as a consequence of their dealings?

With all the money put toward fighting passing the proper legislation it is hard to imaging the industry is weeding out the deceptive from the lot.

Dinah wrote:

<quoted text>
If we have laws that are just and fair regarding corporate entities; then it should be easier to allow consequence to take over. Word of mouth can be a strong thing. Ask any gossip.

Everybody is complaining about the price of oil and nothing is getting accomplished. word of mouth does not always do good.
The company that built our community and many homes around central Ohio has a blemished reputation and not many new homes are being built from them, but people still have to muddle through the mess left behind. People were set in over appraised homes and cannot sell them successfully and there are many. The predatory loans add even more to the problem.

[Jim C]

Dinah wrote:

Something tells me I misunderstood "Jim C"; but I don't know how. Think it's a Venus/Mars thing.

You misunderstood me because I was just replying to the previous poster regarding some of his comments. I like your alternative better regarding just breaking the ability to market poor financial instruments that cause disastrous after effects. We have enough problems without having to calculate the MPG rating we would get for converting predators into alternative energy sources.

[Jim C]

Daytimedrama wrote:

<quoted text>
Im starting to think your house is in trouble. Are you a one issue guy/gal? Are you waiting for the handout? Did you make a poor choice and now you need my help?

Being his/her claim is that he has substantial income, the probability is not.
Regarding a bail out I do not see any legislation that is a bail out. The legislation varies from removing exclusions from lenders that allows our bankruptcy courts to modify these loans. Loans with a lot of equity would not be effected but loans with very high interest rates and for loans where the initial appraisals were false and set way too high would be adjusted.
The loans will still be at reasonable interest rates and have a risk premium. The homeowner will then be able to recover from the offset the predatory loan induced. Taxpayers do not pay anything for this plan since it only requires lender and buyer concession with a judge as the mediator.(HR 3609)
Another plan will require the lender to adjust the loan to about 85% of the appraised value so that FHA can underwrite the loans. The loans will be insured and will have equity so the underwriter has protection in the loan being insured has adequate collateral. The borrower will have to pay insurance yearly at about 1.5% of the home value so it will not be a real cheap alternative. The borrower has to concede to a profit sharing condition where if the home value increases they have to share the increased value with the financier on resale. Also the percentage varies with each year through the loan. There is an early out provision for if the homeowner tried to sell early. The home has to be a principal residence, no speculators or secondary homes would be subject to this deal. The proposal is pretty much through the legislation process so relief may soon show.(HR 3221)
There is also legislation which will specifically target predatory loans and also have provisions for making reasonably sure that the loans are affordable by the borrower. There is also provisions which make it illegal to steer borrowers in higher interest loans than they are eligible for.(HR 3915)
The senate has s.2136 and s.2636 also underway.

[SameOld]

Daytimedrama wrote:

<quoted text>
Im starting to think your house is in trouble. Are you a one issue guy/gal? Are you waiting for the handout? Did you make a poor choice and now you need my help?

I own several houses free and clear. You don't have to be poor to have sympathy for the less fortunate among us. Do you remember the Kennedys?

[Dakota]

SameOld wrote:

<quoted text> Most of them are innocent, but they will all be bailed out as soon as we have a Democrat in office in January. It's better to let a few guilty go free than to punish the vast majority of innocent homeowners.

So again I ask, do your think these "poor" homeowners that did cash-out refi's up to $200,000.00, should be bailed out now they can't make their payments?

[SameOld]

Dakota wrote:

<quoted text>
So again I ask, do your think these "poor" homeowners that did cash-out refi's up to $200,000.00, should be bailed out now they can't make their payments?

That depends. If they took the cash out to pay for medical bills or their children's college education, then definitely yes!

[No_oil_4_u]

Dinah wrote:

<quoted text>
So where'd the money go?

It was spent on the continuing escalation of entitlement/social programs that this state is becoming so well known for.

[Patriot60]

How about, legislating mandatory negotiations between the banks or mortgage companies who approved the sub-prime loans? The people still pay for their houses and the taxes that accompany them, the mortgage companies get paid either a reduced payment (back to the original interest rate on ARMs) for a longer period of time or an adjusted principle amount according to the new (lower)appraised value. The mortgage companies are taught a lesson about ripping people off and the homeowners have the responsibilty to continue paying their mortgages. The government doesn't have to bail anyone else out and MIGHT learn a little something about leaving businesses to regulate themselves.

[Greven]

SameOld wrote:

Obama or Hillary will bail out the homeowners. McCain probably won't, but the Democratic Congress will override his vetos.

Do you remember that Obama was in on residential fraud and the only people the Clinton's did was help themselves or can you little liberal mind not grasp the concept. you are right about one thing though unfortunately we will have a liberal in office with Obama,Hillary or McCain. remember he votes with your side more than the right side

[eternal cynic]

SameOld wrote:

<quoted text> I own several houses free and clear. You don't have to be poor to have sympathy for the less fortunate among us. Do you remember the Kennedys?

Which Kennedy?

The one who brought us to the brink of nuclear war with the Soviet Union?

The one who killed his girlfriend? Driving drunk running his car off a bridge.

The rapist?

The other one who crashed his car drunk?

Or the drunk? Wait, that’s most of them.

[Jim C]

Patriot60 wrote:

How about, legislating mandatory negotiations between the banks or mortgage companies who approved the sub-prime loans? The people still pay for their houses and the taxes that accompany them, the mortgage companies get paid either a reduced payment (back to the original interest rate on ARMs) for a longer period of time or an adjusted principle amount according to the new (lower)appraised value. The mortgage companies are taught a lesson about ripping people off and the homeowners have the responsibilty to continue paying their mortgages. The government doesn't have to bail anyone else out and MIGHT learn a little something about leaving businesses to regulate themselves.

I'm all for your ideas since voluntary negotiations were pretty scarce. Your other rationalizations are right in the mark in my view.

[SameOld]

eternal cynic wrote:

<quoted text>
Which Kennedy?
The one who brought us to the brink of nuclear war with the Soviet Union?
The one who killed his girlfriend? Driving drunk running his car off a bridge.
The rapist?
The other one who crashed his car drunk?
Or the drunk? Wait, that’s most of them.

The great President John F. Kennedy saved us for nuclear war and got those Soviet nuclear missles out of Cuba! Ted Kennedy had one unfortunate accident, but has served honorably as a Senator for half of a century! That "rape" episode was pure nonsense. None of them are drunks! You spaced out Bush loving Republicans need to wake up to reality already.

[SameOld]

Greven wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you remember that Obama was in on residential fraud and the only people the Clinton's did was help themselves or can you little liberal mind not grasp the concept. you are right about one thing though unfortunately we will have a liberal in office with Obama,Hillary or McCain. remember he votes with your side more than the right side

The Liberal Democrat side IS the right side! The Republicans are just greedy corporate butt kissers.

[eternal cynic]

SameOld wrote:

<quoted text> The great President John F. Kennedy saved us for nuclear war and got those Soviet nuclear missles out of Cuba! Ted Kennedy had one unfortunate accident, but has served honorably as a Senator for half of a century! That "rape" episode was pure nonsense. None of them are drunks! You spaced out Bush loving Republicans need to wake up to reality already.

I’m not a spaced out Bush loving Republican, I’m an Obama supporting Democrat.

If it weren’t for the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion we wouldn’t have had the missile crisis. If it weren’t for that Kennedy decision Cuba may not have turned to the Soviet Union for formal diplomatic ties. You give Kennedy credit for something which he himself is at fault for.

[SameOld]

eternal cynic wrote:

<quoted text>
I’m not a spaced out Bush loving Republican, I’m an Obama supporting Democrat.
If it weren’t for the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion we wouldn’t have had the missile crisis. If it weren’t for that Kennedy decision Cuba may not have turned to the Soviet Union for formal diplomatic ties. You give Kennedy credit for something which he himself is at fault for.

Kennedy could have easily taken Castro out, but then all of you whining Conservative Republicans would have been complaining about Cuba becoming a US territory and all the Cubans going on welfare and coming over here!

[eternal cynic]

SameOld wrote:

<quoted text> Kennedy could have easily taken Castro out, but then all of you whining Conservative Republicans would have been complaining about Cuba becoming a US territory and all the Cubans going on welfare and coming over here!

First of all I am not a Republican as you once again missed what I posted. I am a Democrat.

You really should read up on history a bit. It was the intention of the government to “take Castro out” as you put it. They failed. Their attempt was the Bay of Pigs. Please do read up on it before spouting more crap. Read here http://library.thinkquest.org/11046/days/bay_... go on to this http://www.historyofcuba.com/history/baypigs/...

There is a lot of information on the subject.

That failure led directly to the Cuban Missile Crises. Castro was convinced the US would invade and turned to the Soviet Union for diplomatic ties.

You can not give Kennedy credit for solving a problem he created. JFK wasn’t a great president. He was mediocre at best.

[No_oil_4_u]

SameOld wrote:

<quoted text> Kennedy could have easily taken Castro out, but then all of you whining Conservative Republicans would have been complaining about Cuba becoming a US territory and all the Cubans going on welfare and coming over here!

I remeber Kruschev, when asked about the accuracy of the Solviet missles, "If we aimed at home plate in Yankee Stadium we probably wouldn't be on target...but we would be in the infield." Kennedy was a disgrace to this country. The best thing Kennedy could have done is instead of running for office stayed in bed with Maryln Monroe for the duration.

[No_oil_4_u]

I hope I hope I hope there is a bailout. The Government is already in deficit spending mode and this will make it increase faster. That will trash the dollar faster and make my oil investments soar faster than ever. Social engineering by the USA types is always a great thing to invest in.