Can someone explain to me why Foreclosures

Knownothing

Well-Known Member
Nov 22, 2006
16,649
8,718
113
51
are getting bailed out. Why is it that lately everyone in America who has done the right thing like pay there bills does not get crap. If you don't pay your bills you get bailed out. It's like America now has an incentive program to not pay for your crap.

Obama Announces $75 Billion Foreclosure Prevention Plan - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com


I feel bad for people losing there homes. At the same time they should start giving incentives for people who do the right thing. It might make people want to try harder.
 

bos

Legend
Staff member
Apr 10, 2006
30,639
6,423
113
When they foreclose, dont we all suffer? If the lending industry tanks from those losses, all of us will feel something Im sure. I really dont know much about this stuff, but it seems like it would screw us all. Its crap, I agree. But this is a country of handouts.
 

usedcarguy

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2008
5,556
1,581
113
Ames
This country is rapidly becoming known for rewarding bad decisions/behavior.

No one wants to be responsible for their own actions anymore, and this step by Obama is only encouraging more of that type of behavior.
 

laytonz

Member
Feb 16, 2009
114
6
18
Ames
When they foreclose, dont we all suffer? If the lending industry tanks from those losses, all of us will feel something Im sure. I really dont know much about this stuff, but it seems like it would screw us all. Its crap, I agree. But this is a country of handouts.

It sucks to be someone who is working your a** off just to get by and watch people get bailed out for making bad decisions, but your right we need the banks/lending to come back with a vengeance and soon. So as much as I disagree with the principles behind it; it is probably the right thing to do for the economy as a whole
 
  • Like
Reactions: kingcy

kingcy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 16, 2006
22,806
3,698
113
Menlo, Iowa
When they foreclose, dont we all suffer? If the lending industry tanks from those losses, all of us will feel something Im sure. I really dont know much about this stuff, but it seems like it would screw us all. Its crap, I agree. But this is a country of handouts.

Many were stupid loans on both ends and both should have to suffer. Why do I have to pay for others wanting to live outside their means? Why do I have to pay for others that blew all their money in the good times while I saved and payed my debt down and lived within my means?
 

kingcy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 16, 2006
22,806
3,698
113
Menlo, Iowa
This country is rapidly becoming known for rewarding bad decisions/behavior.

No one wants to be responsible for their own actions anymore, and this step by Obama is only encouraging more of that type of behavior.

Yes that is backwords of the way it should be. It is becoming sad. You take chances and do the right things and have to pay for others that do it all wrong.
 

superman_101680

Active Member
Oct 30, 2006
973
161
43
SW Michigan
This country is rapidly becoming known for rewarding bad decisions/behavior.

No one wants to be responsible for their own actions anymore, and this step by Obama is only encouraging more of that type of behavior.

Can you propose an alternative? Do you allow major parts of our country to go belly-up?

I don't know the answer but I keep seeing tons of negative press on all available steps in attempt to correct the economy.
 

GeronimusClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 23, 2008
8,261
616
113
Des Moines, IA
Has there ever been anything on the table about giving people money to pay for their student loans? I mean, this would seem like a good economic stimulus package. Money to people with educations, but then, they'd probably do the smart thing and hold on to their money and save - lord knows we don't want that.
 

delt4cy

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2006
1,181
253
83
Atlanta, GA
We should all be given a 4% refi across the board. Considering the fed funds rate is practically 0%. The gov't propped banks should be forced to offer this, and the consumer can choose to accept.

If you can't remain in your home with a rate like that you shouldn't be in your home. That's why we're in this mess in the first place.

For those of us that can remain in at 4%, all the better, and extra cash to spend too. Thus bulking up the economy.

My two cents....
 

bos

Legend
Staff member
Apr 10, 2006
30,639
6,423
113
It sucks to be someone who is working your a** off just to get by and watch people get bailed out for making bad decisions, but your right we need the banks/lending to come back with a vengeance and soon. So as much as I disagree with the principles behind it; it is probably the right thing to do for the economy as a whole


Oh for sure. This whole economy thing isnt effecting me at all..at least to where I am worried about it. But I plan ahead. Ive learned over the years to prepare. Life, when going great, is awesome, but you have to be ready for the unexpected. I feel bad for the folks who are trying to retired on their investments who are hitting bottom. I dont however feel sorry for the jackasses who bite of more than they can chew and live lifestyles they cant afford to maintain.
 

kingcy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 16, 2006
22,806
3,698
113
Menlo, Iowa
Can you propose an alternative? Do you allow major parts of our country to go belly-up?

I don't know the answer but I keep seeing tons of negative press on all available steps in attempt to correct the economy.


Why are they going belly up? Lets start there and figue out how to fix the problem instead of just throwing money at it.
 

bos

Legend
Staff member
Apr 10, 2006
30,639
6,423
113
Many were stupid loans on both ends and both should have to suffer. Why do I have to pay for others wanting to live outside their means? Why do I have to pay for others that blew all their money in the good times while I saved and payed my debt down and lived within my means?


I agree. But those who have loans that are in good standing or those who are applying for loans, will probably suffer for this crap as well. This is where its a tough decision.

Its kind of like the theory behind stores raising their rates to make up for theft losses and insurance increases.
 
Last edited:

cybsball20

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2006
12,735
438
83
Des Moines, IA
We should all be given a 4% refi across the board. Considering the fed funds rate is practically 0%. The gov't propped banks should be forced to offer this, and the consumer can choose to accept.

If you can't remain in your home with a rate like that you shouldn't be in your home. That's why we're in this mess in the first place.

For those of us that can remain in at 4%, all the better, and extra cash to spend too. Thus bulking up the economy.

My two cents....

I was thinking something similar, but when the first bailout came, divide all that money to pay down the balance of everyone's mortgage then refinance them all at 4%. That would give everyone a much lower payment > giving them more money to spend > creating more jobs > allowing people to keep jobs > allowing people to keep their homes... The banks would get their money, it would just be dictated as to where it goes...

Regardless, the forclosures need to be halted, it's killing everyone's home values, even the responsible ones that are making their payments will still be upside down on their mortgage...
 

CloneIce

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2006
37,772
21,151
113
The problem is, many of the banks are basically insolvent.... and none of the possible solutions are palatable to most of us, so you just have to hold your nose and pick the lesser of the evils.

Seriously. The banks owe way more than they originally indicated, and the 1st bailout won't even come close to covering what they need. So we have 3 crappy options left:

1. More bailouts.

2. Let the banks collapse, which most (so-called) economic experts believe will lead to our economy collapsing.

3. Nationalize the insolvent banks.

Since most (especially politicians) will do anything to avoid #2 or #3, we will end up doing more bailouts..... I assume the idea behind bailing out the homeowners is you may as well help out the homeowners rather than just end up giving even more money to the banks in the end. What a mess.

There is a part of me that would love to just let the banks fail, and let the chips fall where they may. I am in a good position with my job and I didn't get a mortgage I can't afford, so it would probably be better off for me personally in the end. But, unfortunately I have a conscience so I worry about other people and nobody wants to see massive, massive unemployment and a real depression.
 
Last edited:

Wallruss64

Member
Feb 5, 2009
392
23
18
39
Monticello, IA
I don't know why anyone would ever want a sub prime loan or why anyone would ever loan them out in the first place. Countrywide was the biggest player in this and they already went bankrupt. I don't see why the banks that are having all of these houses get foreclosed on don't meet with the borrower and restructure the loan. Getting some money is way better than getting nothing and having pretty much worthless assets on the books from reposessing the property. But, I'm buying a house right now and I do like the fact that I'm going to get a $7,500 tax credit for it so I can do the repairs that are needed on it and get the necessities for the place(big screen):smile:. I don't think I will save any of that money I get it will most likely go right back into the economy so I will feel better about myself sitting there watching my new TV.
 

Cyclone90

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jan 29, 2007
1,850
434
83
We should all be given a 4% refi across the board. Considering the fed funds rate is practically 0%. The gov't propped banks should be forced to offer this, and the consumer can choose to accept.

If you can't remain in your home with a rate like that you shouldn't be in your home. That's why we're in this mess in the first place.

For those of us that can remain in at 4%, all the better, and extra cash to spend too. Thus bulking up the economy.

My two cents....

That might help but people would still walk away if the mortgage they're paying on is worth 125% of their house value. You're right, if you can't afford it, leave, but nobody's buying houses so people are just saying screw it and walking away.
 

kingcy

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 16, 2006
22,806
3,698
113
Menlo, Iowa
The problem is, many of the banks are basically insolvent.... and none of the possible solutions are palatable to most of us, so you just have to hold your nose and pick the lesser of the evils.

Seriously. The banks owe way more than they originally indicated, and the 1st bailout won't even come close to covering what they need. So we have 3 crappy options left:

1. More bailouts.

2. Let the banks collapse, which most (so-called) economic experts believe will lead to our economy collapsing.

3. Nationalize the insolvent banks.

Since most (especially politicians) will do anything to avoid #2 or #3, we will end up doing more bailouts..... I assume the idea behind bailing out the homeowners is you may as well help out the homeowners rather than just end up giving even more money to the banks in the end. What a mess.

Not all banks will collapse. The ones that made loans that shouldnt have will. We are already nationalizing the banks. The government is telling them what to do.
 

cybsball20

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2006
12,735
438
83
Des Moines, IA
I don't see why the banks that are having all of these houses get foreclosed on don't meet with the borrower and restructure the loan. Getting some money is way better than getting nothing and having pretty much worthless assets on the books from reposessing the property.

You can't squeeze blood out of a turnip... I used to work on rewriting these loans and I would say most of the people either lost thier job, became disabled, or were on fixed income...