Bush to Announce Homeowner Initiatives

[EV_Ares]

((sneaky move on Bush's part making it look like he is helping the homeowner when all he is doing is making sure the lenders who made the bad loans in the first place are going to get their money. Instead of doing what Hillary had suggested could be done which is having the lenders renegoiate the loans with the customers, he is getting a backdoor bailout for the lenders with taxpayor money))

Typical, another sneaky move by Bush.

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Friday intends to discuss ways to help the hundreds of thousands of borrowers hard hit by the housing slump and credit crunch that are rocking financial markets.

In a White House event, Bush will talk about several initiatives and reforms to help homeowners with risky mortgages keep their homes, a senior administration official said Thursday night. Bush also will discuss reform efforts to prevent these kinds of problems from arising in the future.

Foreclosure and late payments have spiked especially for so-called subprime borrowers with blemished credit histories or low incomes. Higher interest rates and weak home values have made it impossible for some to pay or to keep up with their monthly mortgage payments. Some overstretched homeowners can't afford to refinance or even sell their home.

Mortgage foreclosures and late payments are expected to worsen. Some 2 million adjustable rate mortgages are to reset to higher rates this year and next. Steep penalties for prepaying mortgages have added to some homeowners' headaches.

The official said Bush will direct Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Housing Secretary Alphonso Jackson to work on an initiative to help troubled mortgage holders get services and products they need to keep them from defaulting on their loans. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss details of the initiatives ahead of the presidential event.


(entire article @ link below)

http://www.forbes.com/topstories/home/feeds/ap/2007/08/30/ap4070907.html

[Subdivisions]

1. ABSOLUTELY NOT! No relief for people who KNEW

they had no business buying a fucking house! I knew better and they should have too!

Fuck THAT shit!!!!!!!

[danalytical]

2. That what I have been thinking

I don't like when Hillary or any Dem talks about bailing these people out. So it seems our parties only agree when they are both wrong.

[global1]

4. I'm Puzzled By Your Reaction......

what's wrong with helping these people out. Would you rather help out the mortgage companies and let the people be put out on the street. That would seem like the typical reaction by *Co. Afterall it was the mortgage companies that lured these people into thinking that they could afford the 'American Dream'. They were the ones that offered inticements to get people to sign on the dotted lines. I'm really shocked by this reaction to say 'absolutely not' and 'no relief for them'.

These are your fellow americans that are suffering the pangs of 'big business' and you want to throw them under the bus?

[Subdivisions]

9. Sorry, but I fight day in and day out just to get by and I'm not

the smartest person in the world and I didn't fall for the sales pitch. I did the math. I knew better than to sign the bottom line.

And, why should those that have put themselves in financial straits be helped when there are plenty of people like me and worse of than me that need it. I don't want to see anyone on the streets, but I get sick and tired of people making mistakes getting bailed out while the rest of us can go to hell.

[JuniperLea]

23. So, I'm irresponsible and I buy a house far out of my means...

So irresponsible that I knowingly took on more mortgage than I could possibly handle, and I should be bailed out?

This is typical for an idiot like Bush who had Ivy League parents bailing them out all the time, and who have kids of their own who they bail out all the time. No one learns a lesson about the reality of life and responsibility by getting their asses bailed out of the troubles they create for themselves.

What about the rest of us who bought homes within our means, and obtained ethically and morally correct loans based on what we actually earned instead of the fib we were allowed to tell? Why should we be satisfied with the homes and loans we have? Because we earned them honestly? Why should the irresponsible be rewarded while the responsible have to sit back and watch people who are irresponsible get awarded with more than they rightfully deserve and more than we did?

The only way I would accept any sort of government or tax support for these people is assistance in selling the home they cannot afford, and buying a home they can afford.

[EV_Ares]

7. Your reaction is a little extreme. First of all, it is a well known fact that

these mortgage companies came up with all kinds of new loans that sometimes even the lender did not completely understand nor could explain the details to the customer.

Yes, some people may have got caught up in owning a home and there were plenty of lenders to do what they could to sell them a loan.

After all, what is pushed in this country? Ownership, everyone must own a home. Therefore, it is a drive for everyone to be able to do that.

Secondly, what is wrong with giving these people some assistance to get them over the hump. It is not a handout but just a way for the banks, mortgage lenders and homeowner to work out something where they can stay in their home. Or would you rather they be thrown out in the street because you think they were stupid for taking a loan they did not understand.

However, what Bush is doing is nothing more than a sneaky move making people think he is helping the homeowner but all he is doing is making sure the lenders who made the bad loans in the first place are going to get their money but having the FHA get involved using our (taxpayor) money to finance all of this.

[peekaloo]

10. Ramen to your last paragraph.

I seem to remember a certain dancing Monkey proclaiming his great, robust economy was the reason so many people could now afford homes. I also remember a petulant Monkey, at a recent press conference, refusing to commit to any action to help these people facing foreclosure. After all, he didn't have a crystal ball to predict these things.

Proof positive everything he touches and/or promotes is built on a foundation of shit, leaving others to clean up after him. (his true legacy)

[Subdivisions]

11. Perhaps it is a bit extreme. For that I apologize but I just get

so sick and tired of bailing out fools while I struggle and others have it worse and we and they get nothing.

[EV_Ares]

12. I understand what you are saying and I do not believe in handouts

but am willing to give people the benefit of doubt of making a mistake. You can't help but understand the dream of a father or mother wanting to provide a owned home for themselves and family. We have pushed this dream in this country that everyone should own a home and you are less than others if you don't. Then you have the unscrupulous lenders that take advantage of this dream and they are slick and make you believe that "yes" you can do this and you are seeing the result of this dream.

Maybe you and I are a little more sophisticated in understanding these legalese mortages and how they work but you can't expect everyone to be able to understand them. I think it is the lenders responsibility and the mortgage industry's responsibility to get these things written up the best they can where people know what they are getting into. Yes, there will still be some that will dive in over their head but you have that in every scenario in life.

[JuniperLea]

24. That doesn't mean that people should be able to keep

properties they cannot afford.

Those properties should be sold and those people should be assisted in getting loans for homes they can afford.

[EV_Ares]

26. I agree with you. That is what I am saying. There is no reason for

instance if their interest rate has jumped to where they cannot make their payments. Is there any reason the lending company who made a bad loan has to hike the interest rate? Perhaps a moratorium of a certain time, something that can be worked out between the lender and the homeowner where they can manage to get back on their feet instead of the lender foreclosing on them. These sub-prime lenders got in over their heads as well, in some cases convincing these people they could afford the homes, yes, some people bit off more than they could chew but they all had plenty of help with loans that weren't even understood by the ones making them.

[Skip Intro]

14. I don't have distain for poor people who thought they might have a slice of the pie

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

3. Bush says "initiatives and reforms to help homeowners with risky mortgages keep their homes"

You can bet he's doing the opposite.

MKJ

[SammyWinstonJack]

20. Yes Indeed! nt

[onyourleft]

5. I heard on CNBC this morning...

...that the major problem resides with the investor class (speculators) who bought homes to flip, not in which to live.

[rox63]

6. It's about time Mr "Ownership Society" did something useful

Not that I think he'll actually do anything to help any poor people keep their homes. I won't hold my breath...

[EV_Ares]

8. U are right Rox, read this & it is the lenders he actually helping who stand

to lose money on the bad loans they made. A taxpayor funded bailout for the lenders while he is trying to make it look like he is helping the home owner.

[Atman]

13. He gonna say "Come on, homeowners! Show some initiative! Get another...

...job at the Quicky Mart or somethin."

.

[davsand]

15. There is potential for investors to get burned unless they help out the homeowners.

The banks do not want to be landlords. They do not want to be holding on to those houses they take back in foreclosures because then there is no interest paid to the investors. They will have to unload those houses to even pay back the investors, and flooding the market really is gonna drive the sale prices (and as a result values) down. There really IS a vested interest on their part NOT to foreclose on this stuff that is covered with bad loans.

Realizing all that, I expect that the Asswipe in the Oval office probably thinks mandated credit counseling AFTER foreclosure is the answer--because "personal responsibility" is EVERYTHING. Isn't that how they solved the problem with people defaulting on credit cards?


:puke:



Laura

[BlackVelvet04]

16. For a couple of years

it was a damn feeding frenzy in this country with people buying homes at inflated prices with very questionable mortgage terms. Many people got caught up in the frenzy. We were house hunting at the time and were very fortunate to be the first people to see on the internet the house we ended up buying. Fortunately we were at the tail end of the frenzy and the owner was in jail and needed a quick sale. We got a good deal but the mortgage lenders DID try to talk us into an adjustable rate mortgage which we refused. The first three years of our loan cost us more in interest than other's were paying because we did a 100% financing but at the end of 3 years we were able to refinance at a good rate with another fixed loan.

I feel for the people who were convinced to go with an A.R.M.

I think it's important that the mortgage problem be addressed and people are helped - otherwise there is going to be a real estate depression that will effect the whole country.

[JHB]

17. Krugman ran a column touching on this two weeks ago...

...suggesting "workouts, not bailouts":


Consider a borrower who can’t meet his or her mortgage payments and is facing foreclosure. In the past, ... the bank that made the loan would often have been willing to offer a workout, modifying the loan’s terms to make it affordable, because what the borrower was able to pay would be worth more to the bank than its incurring the costs of foreclosure and trying to resell the home. That would have been especially likely in the face of a depressed housing market.

Today, however, the ... mortgage was bundled with others and sold to investment banks, who in turn sliced and diced the claims to produce artificial assets that Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s were willing to classify as AAA. And the result is that there’s nobody to deal with.

This looks to me like a clear case for government intervention: there’s a serious market failure, and fixing that failure could greatly help thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of Americans. The federal government shouldn’t be providing bailouts, but it should be helping to arrange workouts. ...

The mechanics ... would need a lot of work, from lawyers as well as financial experts. My guess is that it would involve federal agencies buying mortgages — not the securities conjured up from these mortgages, but the original loans — at a steep discount, then renegotiating the terms. But I’m happy to listen to better ideas. The point, however, is that doing nothing isn’t the only alternative to letting the parties who got us into this mess off the hook. Say no to bailouts — but let’s help borrowers work things out.
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/08/paul-krugman-wo.html

Not everybody -- particularly not those who are just out of their league -- will be able to work something out, but this is an idea which doesn't dump people into the street, nor does it de facto reward the swindlers.

[flashl]

18. In my mind, there is a distinction between homeowner and mortgage holder

"The official said Bush will direct Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Housing Secretary Alphonso Jackson to work on an initiative to help troubled mortgage holders get services and products they need to keep them from defaulting on their loans ... Bush also planned to: _ Urge Congress to pass Federal Housing Administration reform legislation that will give the FHA more flexibility in assisting mortgage holders with subprime mortgages."

"Mortgage holders" suggests to me "investors".

[BlooInBloo]

19. Is this like the Healthy Forests initiative? "The problem with America is there are too many trees."

[Javaman]

21. What would be wrong with just freezing the current interest rates on the loans?

Then at that point renegotiate the payments? Is that to pollyannaish?

[EV_Ares]

22. Absolutely nothing wrong with that idea, in fact I believe Hillary suggested

something to that effect. It would allow the lender and the homeowner to work out a solution and everyone would benefit. They do not have to jack up the interest rate.

What Bush is doing is having you and me bail out the lender who made the bad loans in the first place by guaranteeing him he will get his money through FHA through taxpayer money making it sound like he is helping the home owner. In a very distant way maybe he is but the help really is making sure the lender gets his money.

[dysfunctional press]

25. a resounding NO! NO! NO! to any kind of bailout-

my wife and i bought a house we could afford, with a mortgage that we could afford. we make our payments. we don't have much of a life outside the house- but we make our payments.

why should stupid people who overextend themselves be bailed out? with OUR tax money?

or maybe we should just dump this house and go get one that we can't afford, and wait for our bailout...:shrug: