From $70K to food bank (in 2 months), one family's struggle

[Liberal_in_LA]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/03/27/foodbank.family/index.html

From $70K to food bank, one family's struggle

ALTADENA, California (CNN) -- When she was laid off in February, Patricia Guerrero was making $70,000 a year. Weeks later, with bills piling up and in need of food for her family, this middle-class mother did something she never thought she would do: She went to a food bank.

Patricia Guerrero was laid off in February. Desperate to make ends meet, she recently went to a food bank.

1 of 2 It was Good Friday, and a woman helping her offered to pay her utility bill.

"It brought tears to my eyes, and I sat there and I cried.

Story Highlights
Patricia Guerrero went from making $70,000 to drawing unemployment checks

Desperate to feed her kids, she recently went to a food bank for the first time

Expert says charities are reporting a rise in middle-class families at food banks

Guererro: "It just happened so fast. It happened in a matter of -- what -- two mon

[chixydix]

1. God help me, I don't want to ask this but...what did she drive to the food bank?

Please, I'm not blasting "welfare queens" here, but I honestly can't figure out how this can actually happen without either criminality or a stupidity level the size of Jupiter...
:shrug:

edit: I read the article again...her mortgage is -interest only- (not one goddamn cent goes to principal)....I vote for
the Jupiter choice.
Sorry, no sympathy here.

[Lars39]

3. Does it matter?

She's trying to keep her kids fed and a roof over their head.

[slackmaster]

Yes, actually it does matter

In California, if you own a car worth more than $2,000 you cannot qualify for food stamps.

[chixydix]

42. I believe that is a federal requirement...therefore true in all states.

Maybe the amount is variable but I'm pretty sure it's close to the average.

[hfojvt]

72. I remember it being $5,000 and I remember that clearly

because I had property that I had paid $4500 for ten years earlier and that disqualified me, whereas if I had had a car worth that much I could have gotten the food stamps. That was about ten years ago in Wisconsin.

[slackmaster]

187. OK, my welfare mom friend just told me you can have any kind of car and get food stamps

But only if the car is your primary residence.

:rofl:

[slampoet]

210. Life is funny when you are a privileged dilettante eh?

[slackmaster]

213. My friend has a very hard life, and her sense of humor is the main thing that keeps her going

You should try one some time. :D

[truedelphi]

226. Wisconsin is not California

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheDebbieDee]

76. Same here in Missouri. I lost a job in March '96........

just 2 months after purchasing a 2 year-old used car. I qualified for unemployment but my car was worth too much for me to get food stamps.

I live in Kansas City and while there is public/mass transportation here, there are several large areas of the metropolitan area that are virtually inaccessible without a car and there are lots of jobs in these inaccessible areas!

Anyway, I know that this law had to be fallout from RR's "Welfare Queen" lie!

[tsuki]

209. That was the infamous Cato "Report" where they made up "welfare"

programs in California so they could "prove" welfare queens got $20,000 a year. Anyone says libertarian to me and I think liartarian.

[depakid]

88. Food Banks have nothing to do with food stamps

Even so, it does matter what she drives.

A large SUV -and these are PROLIFIC in LA is not only wasteful, but expensive. The article doesn't say, but my bet would be that she's still making payments.

[slackmaster]

94. She had to go to a Food Bank because she could not qualify for food stamps

Yes, it does indeed matter what she drives.

[high density]

101. I wonder what she is collecting for unemployment. NM

[slackmaster]

120. The maximum benefit here is currently $450 per week

Based on the highest quarterly earnings you had during the year that ended six months ago.

If she worked 9 months or more at $70 K per year, that's what she'd be eligible for, normally for 13 weeks with a possible federal extension depending on the economic situation.

[coalition_unwilling]

190. I think the maximum weekly unemployment beni in California currently

tops out at a little more than $640/week. This is based on my memory of my last bout of extended unemployment here in Los Angeles. But I may be mis-remembering, as this was back in 2005-06.

[crim son]

122. Those big vehicles aren't easy to unload these days.

If she owns one because she once made $70K/yr, it doesn't necessarily follow that she doesn't need help now.

[Mountainman]

4. Who here isn't living from paycheck to paycheck? Why shouldn't she drive?

If she has a car she probably owes on it. I guess in your world when you get laid off you cash in all your assets and go strait to the poor house.

[chixydix]

6. I didn't say she shouldn't drive, I asked what she's driving.

It probably isn't a 1995 Chevy. If I get laid off I sure as hell have enough assets to last more than 2 months! :eyes:

[Mountainman]

13. I see now what you said but it still is pretty cold.

People have a life style and they don't live like paupers waiting for the roof to fall in. This could be any one of us. I thought it was going to be me last summer. The company my wife worked for and the one I did were both about to go belly up. We both could have been laid off with only unemployment that would not pay our bills. We did not have the ability to stop the creditors from coming to get everything we owed on.

[hfojvt]

73. I'm not living paycheck to paycheck

I have about $4,000 in the bank, and if I had to I could cash my $30,000 in IRA money without penalty.

[nadinbrzezinski]

90. Congratulations but realize you (and I) are the exception, not the rule

MOST American families DO LIVE from pay check to pay check

[hfojvt]

118. I still think they need to plan better

because something like 90% of American households make more money than I do. I've never been past the 25th percentile for household income, and I also lost about $25,000 in real estate. But I know that once you get in a hole it can be hard to get out, and bad health and bad relationships ruin many savings plans.

[nadinbrzezinski]

127. Ok einstein, if you had a medical emergency YOUR SAVINGS

would be gone in tops a week... Yes I am familiar with CURRENT costs

This planning better and social darwinism crap does not belong here...

BY DESIGN the middle class is being destroyed and NO AMOUNT OF PLANNING will change that

[hfojvt]

159. I thought I conceded the dangers of medical emergencies

and who said anything about social darwinism? I think socialism typically involves planning. Living paycheck to paycheck makes you more vulnerable. If I can avoid it on my paycheck, then I think lots of other people can too. Some in the middle class seem to set themselves up to be destroyed - maxing out their credit cards, buying more house than they can afford, borrowing on their home equity, buying an expensive new gas guzzler. None of those have been forced on America (except for ridiculous house prices and rent in most metro areas). Americans have chosen them.

[truedelphi]

228. If you lived in California

Your $ 30,000 would last abt one year.

Rents are extremely high. Jobs are gone. (If you have a job, you may be okay, but don't lose one now.)

It took my husband and me abt a year to hit rock bottom. We had done many things right. But we had a job loss, followed by a medical misdiagnosis, and our lives went steadily irrevocably downward.

[Mountainman]

5. Well when you are down on your luck and believe me it will happen I hope people have sympathy for yo...

[chixydix]

9. Well, if I were stupid enough to take out an interest-only mortgage*, I'd surely be too stupid to

expect sympathy.

* and also failed to figure out how to put away a little nest egg from a $1200 a WEEK salary.
:eyes:

[Mountainman]

21. You think everyone's life can be condensed into your way of looking at it.

Life is way too complicated to be put into those simple of terms. But mostly we need to be concerned for each other. I'd rather live in a world were people got interest only loans but were willing to help out each other than in your world were we are so damned smart we will never need help nor will we give it.

[azmouse]

30. Hear, hear, Moutainman.

I hope things have improved in your life and your businesses. :hi:

[debbierlus]

78. Amen - I thought I was on a Repuke board for a minute

70,000 in California where a starter home can cost in the upper hundreds of thousands of dollars and rent for a apartment with more then one bedroom can bust your wallet 1,500 plus a month, it ain't exactly richville.

Plus, kids to feed...

This is such a problem. Everyone is having such a hard time, if someone they PERCEIVE to have been doing a little better then they are needs some help, they are stupid and don't deserve sympathy...

Let her and her damn kids starve. She should have never taken out a no-interest loan. In fact, she should sell her children, if she can't afford to feed them. :sarcasm:

[chixydix]

84. You are right, and I can't believe I'm such a shit. We just need to get Congress to

pass legislation that bails out anybody who gets in debt. That will fix everything. How did I ever fail to realize how simple it all really is?

[crim son]

124. You are certainly failing to see something.

I wish you well in your secure retirement.

[acmavm]

178. People, check out past threads from this poster. You will see a disturbing

pattern of arrogance and meanness that fit right in with its tone here.

70,000 a year in California is peanuts. That is why I don't understand why so many people live there.

[Gormy Cuss]

34. Would you have had a little nest egg if you were grossing $520/wk

and supporting two kids? That's the comparable income level in the Roswell area to a 70K income in Altadena.

[chixydix]

43. No, I would have (and do have) a comparatively HUGE one

from a similar revenue and circumstance.
I even have an HD Television that I bought for cash.

[shraby]

55. So give yourself a cookie.

You're making twice what many families are, and besides that, the article said she went to a FOOD BANK, not to FOOD STAMPS. There is a world of difference.

[chixydix]

57. I'll make another donation to Second Harvest. Cookies aren't my thing.

Any kind of cookies.

[SammyWinstonJack]

232. Condescending and RUDE! How do you manage too be both?

:shrug:

[nadinbrzezinski]

92. Now my turn to be cold

you sure you are in the right forum?

Now that we have established that realize most folks who got those loans didn't fully understand what they were signing and that they were profiled

Also realize that MOST FOLKS DO LIVE PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK... and that CULTURALLY this country does NOT save.

[dysfunctional press]

104. that doesn't make it right.

"...CULTURALLY this country does NOT save."

some of us do. my wife was laid off last month(i'm permanently disabled with a spinal disease) my $1100 ss check won't cover the mortgage/taxes...but we have enough put away to last at least a year if necessary. probably longer if we start selling stuff.
btw- my wife didn't qualify for unemployment, either.

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. I'm not saying it is right or wrong

just pointing a fact.

For that to change we need a slew of changes and to stop keeping up with the Joneses's

But for that to change you need a CULTURAL change... and the coming depression might provide the impetus for that

[StrongBad]

170. There will be no depression. Bank on it. nt.

[TheWatcher]

220. And if there is will you eat Crow for us live, right here on DU?

People really need to stop talking in such ridiculous absolutes. You have no clue whether there will be a depression or not, and neither do I. But things are getting bad enough where the odds certainly are shifting toward the probability.

[earth mom]

105. More like $800 a week with taxes etc taken out. Not enough if your mortgage is $2500/mo.

Your post reeks of superiority and is so holier than thou.

Obviously, you judge others so you can feel better about yourself. :eyes:

Btw, Do you have kids?

[gateley]

140. I hope I never become as judgmental, unsympathetic and cold as you appear to be. nt

[skooooo]

8. Right because "stupid" people should just go hungry.

:eyes:

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[skooooo]

14. Social evolution is not a Democratic principle.

And I have a hard time believing you are much of a Democrat. I think you're a troll here to stir up trouble. Get lost.

[chixydix]

35. I can't find anything in the rules that says I can't mention facts...please direct me to that.

Thanks!
:D

[LanternWaste]

62. What facts?

What facts?

Survival of the fittest is merely an opinion when applied to the socio-economic strata. That she mismanaged her money is (again) merely an opinion on your part. I'm not really hearing many fact, amigo...

[TheFriendlyAnarchist]

182. That she mismanaged her money IS a fact.

The question is, should she have to starve because she made a mistake? Everyone screws up, and generally we should be there to help them out when that happens. Liberal principles do not mean that there aren't stupid people or that people don't make debilitating mistakes. It's that we care about people to help pull them up to where they can stand, and hope that they learned something.

[annabanana]

16. social darwinism?. . . . . nice. . .n/t

[chixydix]

20. But it is a fact of existence. It isn't "good" or "bad", it just "is."

Ain't nuthin' you or I can do about it.

[skooooo]

23. Like I said, you're not a democrat.

So why are you here?

[chixydix]

28. I beg to differ, I am absolutely a registered Democrat and have been for

well over 25 years. Why would you tell such a public lie?

[brentspeak]

125. In practical matters, one's voter registration doesn't mean a whole lot

Robert Novak is a registered Democrat. Zell Miller is a registered Democrat. Neither one supports the Democratic party.

[angstlessk]

102. the fact of social darwinism is that the more vile and willing you are to kill your fellow man

the better YOUR chances of survival is...not necessarily survival of CIVILIZATION...get over your dumb self!

on edit: SEE THE NEW S&L DEBACLE AKA THE 'CREDIT CRUNCH'...WE BAIL OUT BILLIONAIRS WHILE DECRYING A WORKING MOTHER A VEHICLE TO DRIVE...SCREW YOU!

[Lars39]

24. You're on a progressive board.

Most thinking people have sympathy and empathy for their fellow human beings.

[Mountainman]

27. The problem with us I guess is that we don't deny our feelings.

Maybe we should only use our brains to find out what is best for us individually.:sarcasm:

[chixydix]

33. Sympathy is a noble response...supporting what APPEARS to be stupidity is not.

Sorry.

I guess the only proper attitude around here, since I'm new and haven't learned all the details, is that every person should be given anything they want or need. Does that sound about right?

[LanternWaste]

66. So it wouldn't be very noble of us to support your opinions?

"supporting what APPEARS to be stupidity is not."
So it wouldn't be very noble of us to support your opinions?


"since I'm new and haven't learned all the details"... then maybe, just maybe you could lighten up a bit, stop the criticism of a mother in need until you find out what DU is about. Then you can astound us with these "facts" you keep speaking of...

[chixydix]

68. There is nothing noble about co-opting another's opinion. Haven't you heard, they are like

assholes...?
:D

[LanternWaste]

80. Yeah... I heard that twenty years ago

Yeah... I heard that twenty plus years ago when it was a popular saying amongst school girls at my high school. But these days I like facts, and I'm not hearing too many of them...

[gateley]

145. chixydix,

"I guess the only proper attitude around here, since I'm new and haven't learned all the details, is that every person should be given anything they want or need. Does that sound about right?"

No, and you know that's not what people are saying.

It really hurts my heart to hear what you're saying -- especially here. It's an attitude I would expect from someone who doesn't profess to be a Democrat.

[Lance_Boyle]

49. S/he's on a *Democratic* board Big tent, right?

PT Barnum said there's a sucker born every minute. Nobody ever said we're obligated to have sympathy for them.

[Mountainman]

25. No it's not, not in my world, maybe yours. I my world we have empathy for people.

I give to anyone asking for money if I have it. I don't care why they need it or what they are going to do with it. At that point in time they have a need and I have the means. I was homeless myself for awhile. It was people who helped me get back on my feet that enabled me to get to a much better place today.

[fasttense]

37. No it's NOT survival of the fittest.

I believe in evolution but if you seriously look at which individuals (not genes) survive in the the wild, it is usually the luckiest, not the fittest. The calf who happens to have a sick mom gets eaten by lions, the wolf pup who was born to a pack with territory being taken over by man starves to death when his pack is shot, the lion cub who is killed by the new male patriarch who kills all the cubs to force the mothers to go into season after taking over the pride. They didn't die because they were unfit. They died because they were unlucky. Unless you can breed for luck, it has nothing to do with evolution.

Many animals form societies because that ensure survival of each individual. Even chimps and elephants have been observed helping each other and other species. To stand back and let your fellow man suffer, possibly starve, simply because they thought their job would last forever and overspent, is inhuman and has nothing to do with evolution.

[JanMichael]

53. so, this woman and her children should be allowed to die

according to your philosophy.

What a lovely society we reside in; a 25 year self professed member of the party of progressives is a social darwinist.

[chixydix]

63. No, no...we should bail her out and everyone else who ever made bad financial decisions.

That would be TRVE "democracy" (or something)
:eyes:

[JanMichael]

70. then what is your solution to this growing problem?

what should this woman do?

[chixydix]

75. Cut her losses and bail. Geez, it's not rocket science...she has a house

she can't pay for...how many solutions ARE there? :eyes:

[JanMichael]

77. Please describe your "cut her loose and bail" scenario..

Sorry--I am not stupid, but I need more than cliches to understand your course of action.

Declare bankruptcy?

Homeless shelter?

Live with relatives?

Please clarify your answer.

[chixydix]

83. Well, we don't exactly have her financial statement, so...

if the mortgage is more than the current worth of the house, the choices are limited...like to one, assuming she can't make the payments. She can't keep it. Down the road from that point I DO NOT KNOW! What am I supposed to say here, that I think the government (which one, local, state, federal?) should step in and pay off the note? Give her 6 months worth of mortgage payments? Pass a law that says the finance company has to eat it? Or forgive a year's worth of payments?

I lost $100,000 in payments about 20 years ago because I got into a bind and had to abandon my home. I didn't bitch or cry about it or beg anybody to bail me out, I just sucked it up and went away. Found a job and rebuilt my life. It happens all the time.

[JanMichael]

91. you don't exactly have her financial statements. Wanna know what else you don't have?

any information on this woman leading up to her divorce, leading up to why she lost her job, what could have happened to her in the interim...you really don't have squat, except for what the reporter CHOSE to tell you.

Everyone has a story. Everyone has had massive fuckups.

Think.

[AngryOldDem]

173. Could you recover as quickly in TODAY'S economic climate?

Answer honestly.

[Lars39]

79. She could owe more than what the house is worth.

She would still owe the difference.

[slackmaster]

95. She owes about $650 K on a house presently worth about $450 K

There is no clean, easy solution for someone in her situation.

Bankruptcy may be her best option.

[NikolaC]

149. Disgusting

:wtf:That kind of attitude is exactly the reason why this world is in such shit shape. Too many in this world have become cold, calculating, cruel, selfish, arrogant, greedy, lacking in compassion and empathy. It does not take much to have compassion and empathy for your fellow human being. I DON'T CARE if the person made some "foolish" financial decisions. The fact is that a person in need should not be overlooked, left to starve, become homeless or worse. What if that fate befell you (don't tell me that it won't ever happen, you don't know)? Would you think that you deserved derision and starvation, or ask for some help to get back on track?

It IS NOT weakness to show compassion. It IS NOT weakness to help those who are worse off than yourself. It IS NOT weakness to give to those who are in need,or to be the one who is in need. I am not talking about the corporations and banks that keep getting bailed out when they make "poor" financial decisions or choices either. How is it that they are worthy of compassion and a helping hand, when their victims are the ones who are suffering? Who decided that they should be the "fittest"? I pity you your coldness and closed mind. Sad.

[sandnsea]

61. I put people like this on ignore too

Why bother with the ignorance.

[Justpat]

186. Best response so far. n/t

[brentspeak]

126. Darwin himself disavowed connecting his theory to human social & economic philosophies

[Iris]

201. What? You expect people to actually READ his theories and think for themselves?

I wish I still had that kind of idealism!
x(

[bicentennial_baby]

138. Mmmm, I love the smell of Social Darwinism in the morning...

Is that you Herbert Spencer?

:puke:

[Iris]

200. Let's rephrase that "The children of stupid people should go hungry."

That's real nice.

[onyourleft]

10. What is the Jupiter choice? EOM

[chixydix]

12. The one with many moons.

:eyes:

[onyourleft]

18. Maybe I'm dense this afternoon, but I just don't understand what...

...you are talking about.

[chixydix]

65. If it's any consolation, you aren't the only one.

:D

[Breeze54]

164. Wow... I have sympathy for anyone living or working with you!

Did you also vote for bush?

[Selatius]

2. A person who makes 70K has more in common with someone who is broke than someone making 1+ million

70K sounds like a lot, but in relative terms, the people who really control this country, the big bankers and industrialists on Wall Street, can make several hundred to several thousand times more in one year, and they do it paying a lower tax rate than Patricia likely does, simply because capital gains taxes are at most 15%, as opposed to payroll income which can be as high as 35 percent.

Warren Buffett once quipped that his secretary is taxed more heavily than he is.

[gateley]

146. Yes --

Apparently $70K is considered Middle Class today. Not too terribly long ago, it would have been considered affluent.

[haele]

158. It depends on where you live -

$70K a year in Lower Alabama gets you a house that you can probably pay off in 10 years and enough savings that with a decent insurance, you can weather any medical emergency up to a major organ transplant with little problems. $70K a year in Los Angeles is more like $25K a year in Lower Alabama. One vehicle repair, one kid with a broken arm, a month out of work, and there goes a year's savings, if you have them. And you're probably living in a iffy neighborhood while still paying $2K a month for the cheapest decent apartment close to what passes for mass transit so you can at least get close enough for someone else to pick you up to get to work if something happens to your car.

The other thing that no one talks about is the drop in wages. I'm a senior journeyman electrician and installation analyst - one of the many mid-range semi-professionals that are considered technicians - with a family, and require regular wages and medical benefits to take care of my family. I work for a company because there are too many out of work technicians that lost everything trying to make it on their own, and even though I'm making a decent regular salary, I still live paycheck to paycheck - mainly because of medical issues in the family. Those issues aren't "stupid lifestyle choices", those are just pure bad luck. If I lost my $50K a year employment, even with my experience, age, and education, I can expect the only offers I would get would be "starting journeyman wages" of probably around $15 an hour on a "at will" - temporary contract basis.
Move? I can't afford to. Not only because of the costs of finding a new job in an area that is "a cheaper place to live" that would again, be starting over in a job at a wage much less than my current one, but the cost of the actual move, storage, deposits, and the emotional costs of determining what we will need to get rid of (try telling kids they have to get rid of their talisman items and all the things friends have given them over the years) and finding - and developing relationships with - new doctors and therapists in the new location that you can trust.

If you have no investments - physical, social, or emotional - it's easy to move once you make the decision. With kids and pets, it's a last resort. At this point in time, should something happen, I'd take what little I had and move the family in with my folks, and hope to have some time to find a job where they live that would pay even half of what I'm making now.

I know I'm working middle class, and I also both understand and sympathies the working poor. I do all I can to help out when I can, and have helped quite a few working poor with that all important "two months crash space" while they try to get their finances together after a devastating job loss, or whatever else I can do and still keep my own family safe and "above water". I also know that a month of not working would throw us on the streets, no matter how financially smart I have been acting.
"Making It" - not a matter of the cliche "bootstrap" mentality the social darwinists love to spout, it's a matter of luck and timing of opportunities - and social networking. Any one of the three missing, and you're hosed if something happens.

Haele

[azmouse]

7. This reminds me to send another donation to America's Second Harvest.

So many are in need because of *'s failed policies.

[chixydix]

17. Thanks for the reminder. I am a frequent donor to 2nd Harvest.

I just don't think there are a whole lot of people who made $70K up til a couple months ago who really need or deserve it.

[azmouse]

19. It's not for us to decide.

It's for those of us in a position to help to do it.

[chixydix]

22. I make no attempt to decide. That does not remove my right to wonder

how my money is used. Or should I cede that right in the name of political correctness?

[azmouse]

26. No political correctness involved.

When a hungry person shows up at a food bank, no one stands in judgement of how they lived their lives. They are hungry and they are fed.
It's the way it should be.

[Mountainman]

31. How much of "your" money is going to help people? $10 maybe?

I really get pissed at the fact that people feel they should decide where "their" money goes. Can I decide I don't want my money to be spent in Iraq?

[chixydix]

54. You can't decide but you sure can bitch about it...which is EXACTLY what I was doing,

in case you failed to grasp it. I bitch about my taxes going to the bullshit "war" in Iraq too. Nobody takes me to task when I do
THAT!!!

:eyes:

[Caretha]

143. When you donate to charity

your choice ended at the decision to donate to that particular charity. How that charity decides to spend their funds is entirely up to them.

[Dorian Gray]

162. If it bothers you

stop giving to an organization that may help a woman with a family who is in financial trouble. Simple enough. Nobody is forcing you to give money to an organziation that helps feed the hungry.

I certainly don't complain about how my money is spent when I donate to charities. I research who their clientele is, and I determine whether that is the place that would be best aided by the money I give. If you think there is someplace else that would be more beneficial to humanity, then by all means give there.

And is it really difficult to believe that a woman, laid off from her job $70,000 per year job, is having financial difficulty while raising her family? $70,000 sounds like a lot. After taxes, it's more like $48,000. And raising a family on that is not easy. Especially in California.

I don't understand where calling her stupid and getting on a self-righteous high horse is going to change the situation. Just don't give to food banks if you don't like that they actually may help someone who hasn't been homeless for ten years. They had the gall to help someone who has recently hit some financial difficulties. How dare they!

[AngryOldDem]

175. If you have doubts, then stop donating your money.

Pretty simple solution from where I sit.

Damn...I hope you never find yourself in a similar hole. I mean that sincerely.

[Midlodemocrat]

196. Then don't donate. Second Harvest doesn't want your money if strings are attached.

A gift not given freely becomes a debt.

And, your posts are beyond hateful. $70,000 in CA is absolute chump change and anyone who doesn't live under a bridge knows that. :eyes:

[shraby]

64. So now there's a "deserving" requirement?

First time I've heard of it.

[chixydix]

67. Well, Scooter Libby is virtually broke and been disbarred...should we take up a collection

for him? I'm just checking to see how far your charity reaches...

[sinkingfeeling]

15. Wow. She was making $70K in Feb. and in less then two months, she's 'burned through her

savings' and her tax refund. The article doesn't talk about her car, but she is estranged from her husband and has a $2500 interest-only mortgage. So why isn't her estranged husband paying child support?

[selador]

36. sympathy

doesn't mean one can't also look objectively at facts

she has an interest only mortgage witha $2500 payment on a 70k salary

that is ABSURDly irresponsible.

what that means is that, whether she likes it or not, she's a real estate speculator

because it cannot even remotely be considered a responsible conservative investment. it's pure ridiculous speculation

do i feel sorry for her? yes

does the fact of her home financing tell me she was woefully irresponsible?

yes

[chixydix]

40. Apparently we are not allowed to speculate on these kinds of anti-progressive

wonderments here. Let's shut up for a while.

[Madrone]

217. Well .... unless you can dig up info that she's a diehard Bush Lovin' Republican (TM)

That drops Buffy and Blaine off at school in her H2...WITH the support the troops ribbon stuck on the back AND while yammering on her cellphone. Then all bets are OFF. ;)

[high density]

29. Interest only mortgage costing 43% of her gross income

"Savings" (a tax rebate evidently) gone after two months...

Pity level: 0

Sorry but the house is obviously her big problem. Time to downgrade and live like the rest of us. I can only hope the house was originally purchased with her husband's income in the picture.

[Mountainman]

39. I think at one time they were a two income household.

She is more than likely a single mom raising kids without any child support. Of course she should be judged on what today is and not take any history in to count.

I really can't understand such cold hearted DUers. You have more in common with conservatives than you do with the rest of us.

[high density]

44. Cold hearted?

I expect people to have some sort of fiscal responsibility. If that makes me cold hearted then so be it. Fiscal conservatism isn't a bad thing especially when it comes to personal finances.

Read post #32 and then explain to us why we should pass the collection basket for them.

[Mountainman]

47. Yes cold hearted, your expectations only give you justification for being so.

[high density]

98. Yes, how stupid of me to expect people to live within their means

and hold themselves back from going on a half million dollar spending spree. Everybody should just spend willy nilly and then the government can come bail them out when the shit hits the fan. What a great plan.

[Mountainman]

109. That's not what happened.

We don't know the whole story.

[gateley]

148. You know something?

I hold the government -- or this administration -- responsible for this.

At my last job I couldn't believe that line workers were being hired for $6/hr and secretaries for about $11/hr. I made $9/hr at the front desk of a hotel 25 years ago. It was pretty good money, but not big bucks by any means.

So who do we hold responsible for the current wages being roughly equivalent to those of 1983? Who do we hold responsible that housing, food, gas, medical care, etc., have more than quadrupled (if not more) since then?

I remember when grocery stores started accepting credit cards for food! WHO has let this happen?

[slackmaster]

46. Mountainman, my original reaction was strong sympathy for her

Obviously she is in a difficult situation, and having a hard time making ends meet. Life has not turned out the way she had planned it.

Then I looked up the history of the ownership and financing on her house (of which her estranged husband is still listed as a co-owner).

She's the victim of piss poor planning. I'm not saying it's her fault at all, maybe her husband called all the shots. But her situation is the result of stupidity and lack of foresight.

[Mountainman]

52. I'll bet if you looked into most of our financial situations on this board you'd see

very similar things. The economy was soaring because of it. Who here will not be in dire straights if they lost their incomes. And how long could you hold out?

I just don't understand the mentality of judging people's choices then deciding if they deserve sympathy? We all are stupid in some way or the other.

[slackmaster]

56. I guess I am lucky to have a reasonable amount of financial sense

I must have inherited it from my mom.

[LondonReign2]

85. Sympathy is fine, but calling 'dumb' dumb seems to offend some

Yes, she is in a bad situation and we can feel sympathy for that. Nonetheless, it appears to be from her own (and/or husband's making). The fact that digging yourself into $650K of debt is far too common in this country today should not absolve her of responsibility for the mess she got herself in. The aboslute LAST thing this woman needs is to have people throw money at her to make it go away-- or the same thing will happen again.

She needs to ditch the house, sell her cars and buy a clunker, and cut every non-essential. Wanna bet she is still subscribing to premium cable?

[Mountainman]

89. I'm sure she will down size her lifestyle. And I am not saying to throw money at her.

What I am saying is I don't want to turn away any help (possibly training in handling money better) just because she made bad choices. In all our lives there will be times when we will be in tough situations because of bad choices we've made. It is just good that the majority of society sees fit to help out in some way.

I'm an alcoholic, I've been homeless, I lost everything because of bad choices. People helped me get back and now I'm pretty well off. I would do the same for anyone if I could, no judgment, no blame.

[slackmaster]

32. And now for the REST of the story...

According to public record data, Patricia and Ray Guerrero acquired the house in August 2002 from his parents Israel and Esther, who owed about $150 K on it at that time. (They had owned the place since 1992 or possibly earlier.)

That month, Patricia and Ray took out a conventional fixed-rate loan for $202,000. What they did with that money I cannot say, but let's assume they handed it over to his parents in payment for the house.

After a series of refinances and equity loans for God only knows what purposes, in August 2006 they apparently consolidated a bunch of debt into the $649,999 interest-only whopper that she's now stuggling to keep up with.

She can't get food stamps because, at least on the books, she owns a valuable piece of property. Maybe a nice car or two as well.

...Guererro: "It just happened so fast. It happened in a matter of -- what -- two months....

No Patricia, it took a full four years of BAD FINANCIAL DECISIONS to get yourself $450 K deeper in debt than she was when she and her estranged husband acquired a nice home for a very reasonable price.

She should hand the house back to her husband and walk away. Bankruptcy would be a reasonable course of action for her.

[high density]

38. $450k of debt in four years?

Sounds like they must have been living like royalty.

There are people out there that need help, but I don't think this situation is one of them.

[slackmaster]

41. Their trail of financing is quite clear

I'll grant that there may have been some kind of casualty in their lives such as medical problems that resulted in some or all of the debt, but the article doesn't say anything like that.

[Mountainman]

45. I doubt the 450k debt was acquired since they got the house. It more than likely

was there before hence a combination loan. That is what kept the economy going and now doesn't exist.

[slackmaster]

50. I haven't found any evidence of Ray or Patricia Guerrero ever owning another home previously

The $450 K in debt looks to me like the result of poor planning. They took out a series of refinances and equity loans that built up to $450 over and above what they owed on the house in August 2002.

[Mountainman]

58. Whatever, I just don't feel like I can say "tough shit"

I guess my Buddhism is not letting me do it. It is a lesson for all of us. We should at least thank her for that.

[slackmaster]

69. Far be it from me to say tough shit either, Mountainman

As I wrote in other replies, her situation may not have anything to do with anything she did wrong. It could be all her estranged husband's fault. Or maybe she's impossible to live with and he's blameless. Who knows?

The article cited in the OP properly depicts someone in a miserable situation that she was not expecting. But it omitted some very important information about the past dealings of her and her husband. That's all I am saying.

[chixydix]

48. I'm just a newbie here but I can't even begin to figure out why all these so-called 'progressives'

want to subsidize rich-until-recent assholes who did EXACTLY what the 'progressives' keep saying they should NOT do! Something is goofy here...
:eyes:

[JanMichael]

59. I doubt there were any "progressives" of your mindset working

in the bank that made this loan.

What's a real shame is that they didn't have your phone number when they clearly needed advice.

Perhaps you could advertise to make yourself more available.

[slackmaster]

71. You bring up what I think is a very important point, stripping out the sarcasm

What's a real shame is that they didn't have your phone number when they clearly needed advice.

They surely were lacking for sound financial advice when they needed it.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Justpat]

107. .

Why don't you take your nasty mouth and go back where you came from.

May you never find yourself in need in the future because with your attitude
the gods of karma will have made sure that you are penniless and without help.

This ignorant tripe really gets me. How old are you? Have you ever tried to
support two kids by yourself?

It seems from the article linked to in the OP that the woman made a decison
to feed her kids. The fact that she had the unmitigated gall to drive to the
food bank is unacceptable to you. I guess in right wing world when you need
help you should at least have the decency to crawl to the food pantry on all fours.

[catnhatnh]

119. I've watched your postings on this thread....

you go on a special list I keep next to my computer. For you my over/under is April 1st which is apropos....Some look good in earthtones and others in mineral tints...DU is Darwinian too...Welcome to DU.

[Mountainman]

60. Good for you, you brought your preconceived notions here and found support for them.

So now go back to where ever and tell all your friends how screwed up we are.

[MiniMe]

129. As you have said many times, you don't know the whole story

They could probably afford it when they got the mortgage. They were a 2 income household. How much of the income was her husband's? Perhaps he had a gambling problem, or there were some huge medical bills that they had to pay. We just don't know. $70,000 is not a huge salary in California, so her husband must have been the breadwinner in the family. Why wasn't he contributing anything to the family? You aren't much of a progressive, if you were, you would actually care about other people. I bet you blame the victim of most scams.

[proud2BlibKansan]

134. Yes, letting her kids starve is the best way to handle this

:sarcasm:

[soundguy]

51. So The Title Could Have Read

Single Mother glad she didn't buy into the interest only over financing like everyone else did. Could have been living safe in a house with an affordable mortgage.

I bet the Husband as part of the settlement had the house appraised and was entitled to part of it. Hence the way outrageous financing amount.

[azmouse]

81. Not everyone is as smart as you and your wife....

:sarcasm:

[NashVegas]

230. Oh, It Gets Even Better

The woman was a loan processor!

[slackmaster]

243. It doesn't take any brains to be a loan processor

They just move paper around and make sure that everything complies with a set of instructions that they are given by someone else.

[taught_me_patience]

82. She was making 70k

but didn't have more than 2 weeks of emergency funds. Is she not getting unemployment benefits? Why is she spending more than half her take home pay on an interest-only mortgage? This is just insane financial planning and I don't feel very sorry for her situation. She probably bought her house thinking that she could resell it in a year for 100k profit.

[slackmaster]

96. No, she and her husband bought the house for about $200 K in 2002

They built up a serious debt load over the next four years. Why? What for? I have no idea.

[taught_me_patience]

111. even worse

where did the 450k go? Probably useless crap, bmw's, furniture, and vacations. Too bad they didn't live within their means and now they could sell the house for 200k+ in profit and ride out the tough times. I have zero sympathy for her and will be resentful if a dime of my taxpayer money goes towards "bailing" out someone like this.

[DiverDave]

86. GODDAMN IT!...those of you that criticize this are beneath contempt!

Cant you see this from the KIDS EYES??
Nope, just holier then thou bullshit...god you make me wanna puke.

These children need FOOD and shelter, and you ...god whats the use...

The mom is in a pickle, the past is the past, her kids need food NOW...
I grew up hungry because my dad left us high and dry, so what would your pronouncement be?
I think I know, and it wouldn't have gotten us a house that was warm, or enough food to stop my stomach from hurting.


Fuck you, hard hearted is too soft a term, despicable is not enough...

Alert on me, tombstone me, I'll be damned if I would come back to a place that cares nothing for suffering...of ANYBODY!

[GreenPartyVoter]

87. No alert from me, hon *hugs*

[Liberal_in_LA]

93. The financial topics often generate into the Sympathetic VS. "I pulled myself up with my bootstraps"

<shrug>

[high density]

97. Where was her planning for the pickle?

She made $70k a year, had an interest only mortgage, and had no savings beyond an overpayment to Uncle Sam. This is just insane.

Anybody who wants this irresponsible woman bailed out are just as bad as the people wanting the banks bailed out in my opinion. We can't reward bad behavior with bailouts.

[slackmaster]

99. I am not at all sure that the situation is her fault

Her husband may have been the one calling all the shots, making all the poor decisions that resulted in a large debt that he then walked away from.

Or not.

In any case, if I were advising her I'd recommend basically walking away from the house and allowing the lender to foreclose. Or walking away from the house and declaring bankruptcy.

She has a negative equity position of about $200 K, kids who need food and shelter, and no job. Other than a knight in shining armor showing up or winning the lottery, there is no bailing someone out of that other than bankruptcy or several years of bad credit.

[high density]

110. Well I'm assuming she's 50% at fault

It seems she cosigned on the loan, and I assume she benefited from whatever the heck they spent a half million bucks on.

[Holly_Hobby]

115. I heard the interview of her on Sirius' lefty radio today.....

She said she had to remove her Tiffany bracelet and leave her Coach purse in the car when she went into the food bank.

[high density]

117. I hope you're being facetious

:yoiks:

[Holly_Hobby]

131. Not at all - it was on Sirius lefty radio - today

On edit - the host's name was Lynn Samuels. Channel 146. It was around 1:30pm EDT.

[high density]

133. That is simply amazing.

:nuke: :nuke:

[Holly_Hobby]

136. Here's the video

Watch for yourself, her statement about the Tiffany bracelet and Coach purse is a little over halfway through.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/03/27/foodbank.family/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

[high density]

139. holy crap!!

And people were trying to lay guilt trips on me over this woman. Look at that nice house too...

[depakid]

141. OMG: She was a loan processer!

Word to the wise:

These are the sorts of things that happen when one begins to believes their own propaganda!

[ProdigalJunkMail]

152. i wonder if she approved her own re-fi???

i mean, i know the processors don't APPROVE...but, working in the field i am sure there were some 'tricks' to get paid!

sP

[Dorian Gray]

166. Oh good lord!

She really is a piece of work.

[Lance_Boyle]

167. she's a real piece of something, alright. n/t

[slackmaster]

179. IMO she's the product of the Southern California consumerist culture

Many people here grow up believing they are entitled to a huge house in a nice neighborhood, a fancy car, clothing, jewelry, etc.

Breaking down and crying is a reasonable response for someone who has the illusion taken away suddenly.

[riderinthestorm]

189. I regularly work at our local food bank

Last week, the shelves were virtually bare - a phenomenon I have never witnessed in many years of helping out there.

Sounds like this woman has plenty of other assets she could/should sell to buy food for her family before she resorted to using a food bank. I'm surprised the food bank didn't screen her out - most have some way of determining a person's need before they distribute the food. Of course, she may have lied on the application but still.

[Holly_Hobby]

195. She should have gone to the pawn shop, not the food bank

Her bracelet could have bought a month's worth of groceries.

[slackmaster]

121. How absolutely awful

[DiverDave]

100. Congrats, you are number 4

on my ignore list, just cant seem to keep my food down thinking about your asinine and assholeish attitude.


The kids suffer, in your world, because the mom was not as smart as you?

How very HUMAN of you...I'd say more, but I better calm down...

[high density]

106. Well at least you took the time to explain rationally why she should be bailed out

before I got the ignore treatment.

:eyes:

[StrongBad]

180. We should not be forced to aid her via our taxes because of her bad decisions

Yes it sucks that her kids will suffer because her parents don't know how to conduct themselves as responsible adults, but we can't throw money at people who are solely responsible for their current situation just because someone screams "Won't someone think of the children?!?!"

I bet if she had not bought a house hundreds of thousands of dollars more than she could afford and also avoided spending conspicuously on Coach Bags and Tiffany bracelets she'd have no problem feeding her kids for a year or two without continual employment.

Sorry you're so emotionally influenced but you have to see the reality of this situation economically. You're probably a great person and great friend because of your empathy but I don't think your method of tackling financial responsibility issues is sound.

Have a good day.

[Liberal_in_LA]

113. How does it benefit America if she becomes homeless?

[Dorian Gray]

165. Who the heck is saying anything

about bailing her out?

But complaining about her feeding her children at a food bank? And complaining that the food bank would allow her to get fed? That's just gross! Since when do we advocate giving people who enter food banks tests on the assets that they held only a few months ago?

[Lance_Boyle]

169. she should pawn the bracelet and the purse first, THEN

consider the food bank.

Are we really expected to have sympathy for someone so clueless and self-centered that she admits she has to take off her ridiculously expensive jewelry before venturing into the food bank? It's like having sympathy for Paris Hilton when her inheritance went from ungodlysum to lesserungodly sum. Or for a billionaire who abuses the give-a-penny, take-a-penny system. No way.

[treestar]

225. I say bail them out with a lot of references to the bad behavior

and bad planning. She can be embarrassed and thus others seeing her as an example without making her suffer.

It's our overall culture, too, so she's probably not worse or dumber than most people in the U.S. today.

[slackmaster]

229. This is a plan I might be able to support

Full public disclosure of what happened in her finances between 2002 and now.

Have her file for bankruptcy. If she has a nice car, she sells that and buys a Chevrolet Aveo. She keeps her jewelry, sells off the appliances and furniture.

Bank takes the house and eats a $200 K writeoff when they sell it at auction. :nopity: for the bank.

Put her and the kids in subsidized housing. Give her food stamps, MediCal, the works, until she finds a job and gets back on her feet.

[demmiblue]

108. .

:applause:

Thank you for sharing your story. A family in need is a family in need... no questions asked!

Thank you for your compassion... people like you are the reason why I joined DU!

[proud2BlibKansan]

135. Phew finally a reasonable response

I was starting to wonder what happened to DU.

[kath]

231. She could buy a lot of food if she sold the Coach purse, the Tiffany bracelet, and all the other

"conspicuous consumption" type crap that she owns.

Did you read slackmaster's posts -- this family went from a $202,000 mortgage to a $650,000 (!!!!) one in FOUR YEARS. No mention of medical bills or other such mitigating circumstances. Must have bought a mega-shitload of overpriced designer crap to acquire nearly HALF A MILLION dollars of additional debt in four years. Talk about living beyond your means...

There are many people who have lived within their means who are in deepshit trouble in this Bushit economy. I feel a lot more sympathy toward them. The dipshit in this story needs to first sell off all her designer crap to feed her kids (which she absolutely can do) before expecting charity (govt or otherwise) to help her out.

[Runcible Spoon]

103. NOBODY is saying her kids should starve.

Obviously she needs help for groceries and basic necessities for the short term. However, it's just cold reality that she must give up that house. Nobody is "entitled" to a 450k structure; it's not a human right. Should we take people out of their functional little 2 bedroom bungalows and subsidize their moves into McMansions? The gov't needs to focus on housing and feeding EVERYONE, but not as upper middle class standards. The gov't needs to focus on predadory lending organizations, but not bail out irresponsible or downright corrupt borrowers who game the system.

Obviously we don't know her life story, or all of her financial woes, but the bottom line is she needs to readjust her expectations for standards of living. As a matter of fact, we should ALL get used to worrying about where our food will come from, because in the near future our entire way of life is going to change and we may and probably will take a drastic turn for the worst.

[MiniMe]

130. She also needs to get to court to get child support from the hubby

And it isn't really surprising that it has't happened in only 2 months. I posted this upthread and you mentioned it too, but we don't know what happened to get them in debt like that. Its possible that hubby had a gambling problem or something and kept it hidden from the wife until they absolutely had to take out a mortgage to cover the losses. It could have been medical bills. It could have been a million things. She wasn't the primary breadwinner of the family to qualify for that kind of mortgage, but she was basically left holding the bag. It would definitely be interesting to know more about hubby. I wonder if he cleaned out the savings account when he left?

And I agree with you, it is only going to get worse, for everybody. And then there is the problem of her finding another place for her and the kids to live. How much does a 3 bedroom apartment go for in that area? And are you going to be able to even qualify if you don't have a job. She needs to have a fire sale for the things that she can sell, and unfortunately, the house isn't going to be one of those things.

[Lance_Boyle]

171. The Tiffany bracelet and coach purse may have

something to do with it. But nah - easier to assume ex-hubby is a scumbag.

[MiniMe]

205. Didn't say he was

But the possibility is there. And he could have bought the Tiffany bracelet for her. Like I said, she needs to have a fire sale and sell those things to get cash. Even if she sells the house, she won't get anything from it. I still say hubby should be helping out. And as I said, she is in California, what does a 2 or 3 bedroom apartment go for where she is living per month? Would she even be able to qualify for a lease without a job? And people were wondering where the nest egg was. I have known several people who have been in the situation of the hubby leaving, and the hubby cleaning the bank account out on the way out. I'm not saying that is what happened in this case, just that it is a possibility.

[entanglement]

112. Maybe she should try and mend fences with her estranged husband?

For the sake of her children, if nothing else. (Unless, of course, physical or mental abuse was the cause of their separation). The long term solution to her problems (and those of millions like her) lies in the building of a genuine socialist society. I admit it is cold comfort for an individual faced with financial crisis and hungry children to feed.

[Radio_Lady]

114. Well, that's easier said than done. Have you ever tried it?

My estranged husband was "taken in" by another woman who was divorced from a wealthy husband. They were living in a home far better than the one that we owned. My ex-husband has lost his job and was driving a taxi to support himself.

He didn't have our two kids, our home with its mortgage, and our dog to contend with. I did that, and thank goodness I was able to scrape together two or three jobs at a time to pay for it.

"Estrangement" usually is usually followed by divorce, not reconciliation.

It would be interesting to know if Mr. Guerrero is paying ANY child support or alimony. Probably not.

Cordially,

Radio Lady

[slackmaster]

123. Mr. Guerrero is still a co-owner of the house and is not helping with mortgage payments

It would be interesting to know if Mr. Guerrero is paying ANY child support or alimony. Probably not.

Yup.

Of course we really don't know anything about him either. He might be disabled. The only things I am sure of are that Mrs. Guerrero needs to get out of that house, and that CNN has, intentionally I think, presented a very limited view of the situation.

The article is a human interest story intended to produce emotional reactions in readers and viewers. It's not about the economy or the housing crisis.

[Radio_Lady]

150. I agree with your summation and cannot fault your impeccable background checks.

Do you have a subscription to INTELIUS for this?

Thanks for posting.

I lived in that kind of a horror show from August 1970 to July 1972 (sole support of two kids, the dog, a house which I wasn't even living in at the time -- I had moved from Florida to Boston for a job).

I didn't get any handouts from anyone -- don't remember how I handled the mortgage, which was $200 a month at the time. I don't even know if I could have qualified for any social programs then. There was one "Clintonesque" interlude with my father in exchange for money. I wish that had never happened because it ultimately destroyed our tenuous relationship. Mostly, it was work, work, work -- at one time three jobs -- until I remarried a man with three older kids and a home for my two babies and myself.

Anyway, thanks for your comments.

[Karenina]

116. I dread the inevitable crash America is facing.

So little solidarity. So little empathy. So much blame and finger pointing. So much arrogance. You are ALREADY turning on each other en masse, each proclaiming his own superior "worthiness."

One world is enough
For all of us
One world is enough
For all of us

It's a subject we rarely mention
But when we do we have
this little tension
By pretending they're a
different world from me
I show my responsibility
One world is enough
For all of us

The third world breathes
our air tomorrow
We live on the time we borrow
In our world there's no
time for sorrow
In their world there is no tomorrow
One world is enough
For all of us

Lines are drawn upon the world
Before we get our flags unfurled
Whichever one we pick
It's just a self deluding trick
One world is enough
For all of us

I don't want to bring a sour note
Remember this before you vote
We can all sink or we all float
'Cos we're all in the same big boat
One world is enough
For all of us

[leftofthedial]

132. it's happening everywhere

it was bad three years ago when I worked at the local food bank for several months.

It's gotten much worse now. They can't keep up with demand. It's a double whammy. Many of the people seeking assistance now are the people the shelters and food bank used to rely on for donations.

[Mike03]

137. My best friend in this world and his family live in Altadena

It's one of the towns in S.C. that has been changed radically over the past few years.

[condaggitt]

142. PLEASE READ THE CNN STORY WAS FAKED....she heloc'd the money

Here is what a poster on this blog researched Why didn't CNN do the same thing??????


http://thehousingbubbleblog.com/?p=4322



Someone looked up Guerrero on the local assessors database:

Here’s a little more information about Patricia Guerrero’s financial situation from public records (LA County Assessor and Recorder):

The 2,948 square foot house on a quarter acre lot was built in 1948.

She and her estranged husband Ray acquired the house, apparently from HIS PARENTS Israel and Esther Guerrero, in August 2002, at which time the debt load on the property was about $157,000.

Ray and Patricia took out a conventional fixed-rate first trust deed on the property on 8/14/2002 for $202,000.

I’ll spare you all the gory details of their various re-financings and equity loans, but the present note from 8/21/2006 is for $649,999.

So, it looks like they bought the place for a sweetheart deal and proceeded to jack themselves up to the tune of about $450,000 over a period of just 4 years.

[high density]

144. Watch the interview with her

It is ... umm, amazing?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3068672#3070482

[slackmaster]

174. We do not know what that extra $450,000 in loans was used for

Did the family have a major medical problem?

Was some of it used for home repairs, education, or other reasonable expenses?

Did they use it to help out a loved one who was having problems?

Did they have to pay fines or legal fees? Where is her estranged husband? Is he in jail? Is he disabled? Why isn't he helping with loan payments or child support?

Did they just blow it all on frivolous things?

They had a very nice house that they bought for a reasonable price. What happened to them between 2002 and 2006?

CNN should have dug a little deeper.

[Midlodemocrat]

197. How do you know that the extra money wasn't going to her in-laws for the fair market value of

the home? Oh, that's right. You don't. You don't know anything about her and her situation. :eyes:

[slackmaster]

202. Because the home wasn't worth anywhere near $650,000 in 2002 when the home was transferred

The in-laws were paid off long before the borrowing binge started.

[varelse]

147. I'm seeing many posts that would not be out of place on Free Republic

And that's sad, especially as it seems the point is being missed here.

First of all, this woman's situation is being used to illustrate and highlight a much larger issue, yet many of you are focused entirely on how "stupid" or "greedy" or "dishonest" she hypothetically is... and so miss the larger story being told here, which is not promising for any of us in the middle class.

1) 70k in California isn't enough to support a family with two young kids, at least in any of the areas I've lived in - it seems like a lot of money if you live in an area with half the cost of living we "enjoy" here or more sane housing prices, but it really (honestly) isn't.
2)House prices here went into the stratosphere years ago - that "reasonable" mortgage some of you are citing doesn't exist - and property taxes have climbed with the prices. Still, a $2500 interest only arrangement is appalling, and it is sad that the couple (everyone crapping on the woman here seems to forget the house purchase was a joint decision) fell into that trap.
3) This is a community property state, and "getting out of the house" may require cooperation from the estranged husband
4) If she becomes homeless or must allow the bank to foreclose on the house, it will hurt her chances in any upcoming custody battle
5) She's obviously new to being suddenly single, unemployed, poor, and in need of charity which a year ago she might have donated to or volunteered at, and for most of us, this kind of ignorance is bliss... until we are in a position to need that knowledge.

It really could happen to you - it might take a little more to bring you down than it took this family, but a medical crisis or job loss of one or both "breadwinners" in your family could also put you right there behind her in the food line.

This paragraph sums up the point that is being illustrated by the plight of this one ex-middle class family:

Stories like Guerrero's are becoming more common as middle-class Americans feel the pinch of an economic downturn, rising gas prices and a housing crunch, especially in a state like California that has been rocked by foreclosures.

There's the real problem, and all the vitriol you could possibly aim at ONE person caught in this massive, nationwide crisis isn't going to change that terrifying trend - or protect any of YOU from getting caught in it yourselves.

[high density]

153. Well you can call me a Freeper

That doesn't change the fact this woman is a moron financially. Watch the CNN interview with her that is linked on this thread, post #136.

[varelse]

154. The woman was not *the story*

Her story was used to illustrate the effects of this growing cancer on our economy... the house of cards is collapsing and it is taking the middle class down with it. It's not about one "moron" but rather about a nationwide crisis...

[high density]

156. This is a bad "test subject" for illustrating said effects

I am not saying this economy is a bed of roses nor am I happy over the idea of people losing their homes. But this woman is probably her own worst enemy. She had no savings. She lives in a large house she can't afford with stainless steel appliances in the kitchen. She takes off her Tiffany jewelry and leaves the Coach bag in the car on her trip to the food bank. But she has no cash to her name, and all of her current income is swallowed up on interest only payments on a house.

Yes, there are people in bad predicaments through no fault of their own, but the woman in this story is not worthy of anyone's pity in my opinion. I feel bad for her children who are going to get screwed because of her actions.

[varelse]

157. This family is unfortunately very typical of the at-risk or already "downed" middle class

Rather than see this as a ploy for pity - perhaps this news piece carries a different message: "Yes, it can happen to you" :shrug:

In my parent's neighborhood, it's already happened to the son of one of our neighbors - well ok - he "did it to himself" is one way to see it. Went from living married life in the modest suburban house left to him by his mother, to divorced poverty in a van.

I guess what I'm trying to get at here, is... there's LOTS and LOTS of chickens coming home to roost right about now and this isn't a good thing for anyone, even the 'smart' people with savings and fixed-rate mortgages are being pulled down by it. That's what I see represented in the article/interview.

Still, no human being is without imperfection (including the propensity to be willfully ignorant) and so in spite of this lady's Tiffany bracelet and her now-lost yuppie pretensions, I do feel some compassion for her, and hope that her family can find its way out of the pit they've dug for themselves.

[colinmom71]

203. You are assuming these conditions...

But no one here actually knows under which specific conditions this mother has felt the need to turn to a food bank.

Myself, I could also presume, per previous personal experiences, that she's having to deal with an unfaithful spouse who suddenly left her with the kids, mortgage, and various other monthly bills to chase his fantasy of regained youth. Yes, in CA she's legally entitled to make the estranged spouse pay his financial obligations for his family, but she has to get the money up to pay an attorney to enforce his obligations through the courts. Yeah, that probably worked as well for her as it did for my mom. We had a very nice and comfortable life before my dad left. BTW, my mom is STILL paying off debts resulting from my dad leaving (and the resulting credit problems) almost 20 YEARS later...

Odds are, the JOINT MARITAL decision to refinance the house occurred while this working mother felt *safe* to assume that her husband was doing so to make their family's life better, when what he was actually doing was to borrow money/use credit to finance his own idea of a fantasy life with some other woman/whores/whatever. And now Mom is left holding the "debtors bag", so to say.

Or, the husband decided that family life was just too taxing and that he would rather be an every other weekend type dad for his own convenience (for whatever reasons).

Eh, who knows?

[Gormy Cuss]

188. The woman *was* the story, and it's not the one of middle class collapse.

How convenient that CNN found someone who went to the food bank wearing a Tiffany bracelet and carrying a Coach handbag. Those details are the most important part of the story because after being set up to feel sympathy for this woman, the viewer is handed details to erode that sympathy and instead blame the subject for her own financial morass. Thus trained, the viewer will be skeptical of reports of widespread erosion of the middle class in the same way -- it's all caused by greedy consumers and has nothing to do with exporting jobs, or runaway housing prices or W's follies in the Middle East, etc.

[slackmaster]

192. Interesting interpretation - Gormy Cuss thinks the story is black propaganda

You may be on to something, but I still think the simplest explanation is usually correct: It's just a weak sob story resulting from sloppy journalism.

[Gormy Cuss]

194. There is a trend toward finding the most unsympathetic characters in these reports

and while it could be sloppy journalism, I've noticed it often enough lately that I'm starting to doubt that the simple explanation is correct here.

[depakid]

236. Well, it's CNN -would that surprise anyone?

[Tiberius]

204. Interesting take

This is why I read D.U. - although I have little sympathy for this particular woman's plight, since they burned through over $400k on lord knows what... the idea that we are being desensitized is intriguing.

It's kind of like the rage I feel when I hear right wingers talk about "welfare abuse" and they get all huffy about it. Where's the outrage about the billions being pissed through in Iraq, and the waste there? Why is it okay for money to be wasted on the military industrial complex, but not a little leakage in social programs?

[varelse]

208. Good point

The choice of "poster girl" they chose was probably deliberate, and that is a shame.

[high density]

211. I am (obviously) very unsympathetic towards this specific woman

But I do agree that the middle class is being eroded fast and this is not a good thing. I don't think many people need to watch reports about this on CNN, bogus nor not, because they are experiencing it first hand.

[Gormy Cuss]

214. Look at how quickly people here pounced on her as soon as the Tiiffany/Coach anecdote was revealed.

Without it her experience felt somewhat similar to what others had seen themselves: having a decent job, house, etc. and seemingly doing just fine until there was a layoff or other financial crisis. While there are some who have been able to squirrel away sizeable rainy day funds, there are many who have not. In decent economic times most believe that they can get through a bout of unemployment if they are eligible for unemployment and can scale back expenses, get loans from relatives, or if all else fails by downsizing the vehicles and housing before needing to ask for help at a food bank. Of course when layoffs are part of a bigger problem in the economy, selling that car and house may be a bit harder than we would have thought.

Most of us also know a few spendthrifts too and when their financial house of cards collapses it's hard to be very sympathetic about it.

So after seeing reports like the one on CNN, when we hear that use of food banks is increasing dramatically one of the questions we'll have is "yeah, but how many of those people have only themselves to blame?" and that's a distraction from better questions like "Why are there so many more people struggling to get by? Are government actions (like wars) or inactions (like mortgage regulation) exarcerbating it?"

[haele]

215. Pawning the Tiffany Bracelet might net her, oh, $75 - $100.

Selling it on Craig's List or E-Bay might net her $200, depending on how nice and/or rare it is. Who knows if she hadn't already put them up on either and was waiting for a sale. And is still wearing/using them until she has to let them go.

I have a $1200 Uber-Gerbeschtine Cameo set with rare dogtooth pearl drops in the earrings that I purchased in Germany 30 years ago (for that price) when I was in the Navy and had gotten a re-enlistment bonus - lots money to burn. A Space-A trip to Europe ($20 round trip), and that set was the one vanity I allowed myself the entire time I was in the Navy (I fell in love with it as soon as I saw it being finished at the workshop). It's been on consignment for five years now, the price down to $600 (which means I will net $400), shows up on E-Bay occasionally, and still no one is buying - quite a few lookers, but no one has actually put money down for it. A pawn shop will give me $75 for the set.

I'd actually go to the food bank and hope someone will buy the set on consignment before I take it to a pawn shop.

Haele

[AngryOldDem]

177. That may be, but the point remains a lot of people are finding themselves in the same boat

...and they have been financially responsible and they have tried to play by the rules of the game. It's just getting harder to keep the head above the water.

As an example, I posted this on the Ohio forum the other day. Since 2001, food stamp recipients here have rised to 1.1 million from 600,000.

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/03/22/foodstamps.ART_ART_03-22-08_A1_NN9NE83.html?sid=101

[slackmaster]

176. Let me repeat the two critical data points and let you connect the dots

1. The Guerreros bought the house in August 2002 for about $200,000.

2. By August 2006, they owed almost $650,000 on the house.

What happened to that $450,000 of borrowed money?

[joe_sixpack]

238. And I'm seeing many posts

where people over reacted and became emotional before they knew more of the facts.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

151. our house is worth about $230K in real dollars

but we are mortgaged out to about $500K thanks to the people at the bank who helped us pay off our debts. I drive a kick-ass SUV that costs me over $100 to fill up about once a week. I have three kids and my wife is not employed. I have three flat screen TV's (one is well over 50"), computers (heck, I am typing from a laptop in my living room right now), a new bedroom suit with one of those beds that you can adjust on both sides and we just bought a hottub for the new deck out back. I fly first class everywhere I go...those international tickets get pretty expensive...but I'm worth it. My wife drives a really nice MiniVan...she wanted a Tahoe at first but liked the sliding doors better. We eat out A LOT...nice places too. Heck, even the kids like lobster. We are going to put in granite countertops next month...and then vacation in the Bahamas (or maybe a cruise) in July or August. My kids wear only new clothes and my wardrobe would impress most.

When we refinanced our house the first time we paid off all our cards...ran them up again and had to refinance and 'cash out' again about two years later. That took care of that...but now we are getting back into trouble with about $40K in revolving debt...and we didn't pay off the van last refinance...we went to Greece for 14 days.

Will you guys have the same compassion on me when I lose my job and have 90 days of money before WE are at a food bank?

If I had posted this information NOT on this thread I would have been called a worse than a pig...but these people did the SAME fucking thing (of course it is an approximation) and yet they are the darlings of the flagging economy...the tragedy indicative of our time...instead of the money sucking and flushing people that they are...

sP

[ProdigalJunkMail]

161. yeah...that's what i thought... n/t

[mikeytherat]

163. It would scare the piss out of me to rack of that kind of debt.

I doubt I could bring myself to sign the paperwork.

Mortgagor: "Just sign here, and you'll owe someone $650,000 in principle, and God knows how much in interest."
Me: (door slams and I run like Hell).

mikey_the_rat

[ProdigalJunkMail]

198. well, in our case it is hyperbole to make a point

and you are right...there is NO way I would allow lifestyle to rack up debt anywhere approaching those numbers. I can see getting into trouble through no fault of your own resulting in compassion...but what these people did was just plain unwise (bordering on stupid).

sP

[Madrone]

218. ...

Amen.

:applause:

[joe_sixpack]

239. We assumed she was a helpless victim

perhaps a little hastily. We were eager to exploit a story before we knew all the details. Thanks for pointing out a little cold reality here. You are absolutely spot on.

[CT08]

160. Ignorance of financial knowhow

"Guerrero is estranged from her husband and raising her two young children. She's already burned through her savings to help make ends meet, and is drawing unemployment checks. She has had to take extreme measures to pay for her interest-only mortgage of $2,500 a month."

She has been living above her means for some time before the layoffs. Interest Only Mortgage?!? what's the point of that? Half of her salary before taxes was going not to equity but just to pay the bank interest. Yikes! Pure robbery!

[Serial Mom]

168. This is the problem.... from appraisers to banks,

why the hell do they first appraise a little house for so much money out in California? Weather? Come on, it was GREED all along from the dot com build ups! They were making new millionaires each day, thus raising the prices of apartments and homes in regions, then appraisers raising the prices again and banks/mortgage brokers APPROVING these ridiculous loans.

I feel for this woman who was trapped by both her financial ignorance AND BY THE GREEDY housing market that was complicit in her racking up the huge mortgage she REALLY never could have afforded in the first place.

[mondo joe]

172. I don't like the idea of food banks being used to support an artificial lifestyle and to allow the

dad of this family to ditch his obligations, because it takes a resource away from people who truly need it and have no other options.

[slackmaster]

181. The dad may be a victim of circumstances beyond his control, but I completely agree

Anyone who owns expensive jewelry and lives in a large house does not deserve free food.

[mondo joe]

183. He may be. But the family appears to have some assets that others don't. I'm not interested

in making them destitute or homeless in order to use the foodbank - but I also can't support them using foodbank resources they might not NEED resulting in those without such assets going without.

[slackmaster]

184. You're spot on, joe

:hi:

[mondo joe]

185. A point of clarification: I did share some thoughts above on their use of the foodbank -

but those are just my thoughts. I also support the foodbank choosing how to manage its resources as it sees fit. It's their mission, their efforts and their job. They're closer to it than I can be, so I don't mean to second guess them.

Different foodbanks handle these matters differently. Some restrict services to people in certain zipcodes, some require additional means verification, others are more loose. They make these choices for a variety of reasons, and I can't say they're right or wrong.

[MiniMe]

206. I said this upthread, but we don't know exactly what happened

Who's debt was it that forced them to have to refinance that much? Wife, hubby, or both? Hubby was obviously the breadwinner of the family, there is no way she could have gotten that mortgage on her own. I agree, why isn't the father giving her support? I assume they are his kids, she should be getting child support.

She does need to sell her disposable assets, jewelery, etc. I don't know much about the housing situation in California, its obvious that she can't keep the house, but she sure isn't going to make anything on the sale. How much does it cost for a 2 or 3 bedroom apartment in that area? Or within an hour or so of that place.

$70,000 isn't that huge a salary in California, it is expensive out there. And was the lay-off a surprise? I'm guessing that this is going to be happening more and more often.

[mondo joe]

207. I agree - we don't know everything. But if their situation is one of

their own reckless making, or failure to properly take care of things even now (as in child support), I hate to see scarce foodbank resources being used here rather than for more genuinely needy people.

[Greyhound]

191. Many of the replies to this thread are enough to depress a hyena.

They are reich-wing propaganda and examples of just how thoroughly we've internalized the utterly heartless disregard for our fellow citizens that the neo-cons have pushed over the last 30 years.

This from self proclaimed Democrats...:eyes:

[ProdigalJunkMail]

199. roll your eyes at someone else

and take your self righteousness and park it somewhere. These people used the 'equity' in their house to finance a lifestyle they could not afford. While the banks are partly at fault for allowing this to occur, some of this HAS to fall on these people as they knew damn good and well that they were living paycheck to paycheck and that one little blip would cause hardship...I have little sympathy for them...they CHOSE this!

sP

[Greyhound]

233. Thanks for making my point.

:eyes:

[high density]

212. I have "heartless disregard" for people who act like total idiots with their wallets

And I am simply stunned that people here have endless tears for this woman who lived way beyond her means for a few years and then was so short sighted that she had to suck off of a food bank after she was unemployed for two months.

I'd love to go out and spend a half million dollars on stuff and have a 3000sqft house, but GUESS WHAT: I can't afford it. This woman couldn't afford it either but she did it anyway and now her children are going to suffer.

[Greyhound]

235. Ditto.

I only hope that when you screw up there are people around to give you the help you would deny others.

[shrike]

193. Well, I've read just about all of this lovely thread

And have a few comments to make:

I've worked with a few people who run food pantries, and it's not uncommon for "affluent" people who've had a run of bad luck to use them. (Pantries often rely on donated items.) Most people in those circumstances are far too embarrassed to admit to anyone that they use them. After reading the comments on this thread alone (there's another one going on the Money Boards at Msn.com) I can understand why. Given the state of the country today, I wouldn't be surprised if this woman gets death threats.

As for her and her husband "helocing" their home, am I the only one who remembers that a few years back, this was the thing to do? EVERYONE was telling us to make use of the equity in our homes. Put it in the market: you get a tax shelter AND make money; everybody wins. Consolidate your debt: HELOCs are tax deductible, after all! It'd be insane to pay non-deductible interest, right? So get that HELOC. And while you're at it, take that nice vacation, finance that car. I remember some schmoe on national TV stating that untapped equity in the home is like "keeping money in your mattress."

And for the "if everyone jumped off a cliff, would you do it" crowd, I myself did NOT do it. I own my home free and clear, thank you. And have retirement assets worth about $260K (I'm in my forties), but that's beside the point. I'd bet any amount of money that the same schmoes yelling at this woman for being reckless and stupid would have admonished ME a few years back for not "utilizing my equity." Quite a few of them would have been DUers, I think. What a dummy you are, you could be making money off that house. Reducing your tax burden.

I'm so cynical now after eight years of Bush that I have to think that this drumbeat of borrow, borrow, borrow, mortgage, mortgage, HELOC came about because of all the MONEY to be made selling, re-selling mortgages, mortgage securities, bundling mortgages, etc. Just reading about it makes me dizzy. NOW they're going to tell us we need to tighten our belts, that it's all our own fault, and we happily beat up on some (probably) shallow yuppie woman who owns Tiffany bracelets. Never mind that someone (upstairs) got awfully rich, we'll al just turn on each other. We always do.

My fellow Americans are such suckers sometimes.

[art43302]

216. Before everyone tears up there's more to the story.

As Paul Harvey would say "and now for the rest of the story!"

Here's a little more information about Patricia Guerrero's financial situation from public records (LA County Assessor and Recorder):

The 2,948 square foot house on a quarter acre lot was built in 1948.

She and her estranged husband Ray acquired the house, apparently from HIS PARENTS Israel and Esther Guerrero, in August 2002, at which time the debt load on the property was about $157,000.

Ray and Patricia took out a conventional fixed-rate first trust deed on the property on 8/14/2002 for $202,000.

I'll spare you all the gory details of their various refinancings and equity loans, but the present note from 8/21/2006 is for $649,999.

So, it looks like they bought the place for a sweetheart deal from his parents and proceeded to jack themselves up to the tune of almost $500,000 over a period of just 4 years.

I feel like passing the hat so we can all take up a collection in order to help this poor woman keep her little house.

What happened to the 500 grand that they won't be paying federal income taxes on? That's $125,000 a year AFTER taxes plus her $70,000 she made and I am sure her estranged husband had a job.

[Thickasabrick]

219. Welcome to DU!! Whoa.....that does change things somewhat...

did you do all that research??

[slackmaster]

224. Maybe the same source as what I posted in reply #32

Public record data from the County of Los Angeles, available to anyone who bothers to look for it.

[Liberal_in_LA]

227. That does change the story a bit. Thanks for doing the research and welcome to DU.

[Johnny Harpo]

221. I Can't Help But Feel That Almost Everyone Missed The Point..

the implied impact here is how very fast one can go from 'something' to 'nothing'.

It doesn't have anything to do with what kind of car you drive, or what kind of clothes your wearing, or what neighborhood you live in.

It doesn't matter if your smart or dumb, rich or poor, white or black, male or female, married or single, young or old.

The thing is once your income stops, life as you,ve known it up to that point comes to an aburpt halt! And the reality is, more and more people are in the same dangerous position.

I know, I've been there more then once myself. And I can tell you many, many people don't have a clue what to do if it happens to them. But then again how many have told themselves that 'it will never happen to me, my job is secure'. Fact One: NO JOB IS SECURE BEYOND YOUR NEXT FULL PAYCHECK!

Once your out of work, your only 'job' is to find another job. If your lucky, maybe you won't have to take a pay cut.

As for what to do? Fact Two: IMMEDIATELY CUT BACK ON EVERYTHING!

Think you can't get along without it? Fact Three: THINK AGAIN!

Got a Cell and a Land Line? Drop The Land Line!
Got the Super Deluxe Cable Package? Cut Back To Basic!
Got Two Cars? Only Use One!
Shower, Shave and Shampoo Daily? Cut Back To Three Times a Week!
Change Your Casual Clothes Every Day? Wear Those Levi's or Sweats For a Week!
Eat Quality Balanced Meals? Its Time For Mac & Cheese, Beans & Franks, and Lots of Pasta!

Fact FOUR: IF IT HAPPENED ONCE, IT CAN HAPPEN AGAIN!

I could go on but I know you get the idea. Thanks for putting up with my rant.

Now to go to the other side: What the hell did she think would happen at 70K a year and a $2500.00 a month house payment? What did she think? SHE DIDN'T! After all it wouldn't happen to her!

Thanks Shrub! You pathetic waste of flesh!

[slackmaster]

223. This woman has had a negative net worth for possibly two years

Unless you have a whole lot of savings or liquid investments to counterbalance it, when you go under water on a large housing debt you are in grave danger. If this woman had lost her job a year ago the story would have been the same.

She got into trouble when she and her husband started on their equity borrowing binge in 2002. I have no idea why they added $450,000 to their existing debt over a 4-year period. It's unfortunate that CNN did not elaborate on what happened in her family.

What they did show us - A nicely remodeled house with top-of-the-line appliances, a wine rack with a bunch of bottles in it, and the woman's "Tiffany bracelet and Coach handbag" going to the food bank sob story, was enough to cause many people to question her priorities and the soundness of her financial judgement.

When you look a little deeper you can see the instruments by which the couple got into debt, but gain no insight into WHY they borrowed all that money and where it went.

If they had good reasons to take out all those loans between 2002 and 2006, adding that information to the story would have boosted the audience's sympathy for the family. From the video it's clear that some of it went to home improvements, but not anywhere near $450,000. The kids are way too young for college, so count that out. In the absense of that kind of information or anything about WHERE her husband is and WHY he isn't helping leaves me highly suspicious of the wholesomeness of this situation. The conspicuous absence of a vehicle in either the shot where she was walking with her children, or in the view of the front of the house, makes me wonder just what she drives and how much that cost.

Without additional information I am left with the impression that her husband is either very sick; or he is incarcerated and the money went to bail and legal bills; or some very nasty relationship dynamics led him to walk away from her. But in the latter situation no decent man would abandon his children, and if medical problems were the cause of the financial strain surely CNN would have seen fit to include that in the story. That doesn't leave any likely explanation I can think of other than some kind of run-in with the criminal justice system, and it's understandable why she wouldn't want to discuss that.

No, Johnny Harpo, this situation did NOT develop suddenly. Maybe she failed to see it coming, but it took years to happen.

[varelse]

237. I nominate this post as the most constructive one on this thread

that is the point... it can happen to anyone, it can happen faster than most people can adjust to it, and the only way to afford yourself and your family any protection at all, is to start by staring that fact in the face, and acting accordingly.

thank you for this post :)

[seriousstan]

222. "interest-only mortgage of $2,500 a month" ?

I should not have to subsidize stupid.

[High Plains]

240. No one is asking you to subsidize anything.

[SoCalDem]

234. According to the story on her I saw the other day, she lives in Riverside

her house looked pretty darned nice, and I can understand why she does not want to "lose" it.. But the sad truth here, Patricia, is this.. You have been playing house..living in a house you could not afford.

Separations & divorces almost always demand a sharp curtailment of spending and a rather quick decline in living "style"..

It sucks..but those are the facts.

She may NEVER EVER work again for $70K, so she needs to release that dream, and concentrate of getting ANY job she can.

Instead of her mother renting her house and moving in with Patricia...Patricia should have sold everything she could, and should have filed for bankruptcy and moved in with her mother...and saved every penny she had and could make...for about a year..

When everything you "have" , has a payment due on it every month, you do not OWN anything..

She would be doing her kids a favor by not prolonging the inevitable..

When she is spending everything she takes in to just pay the INTEREST-only payment on "her" house, she might as well stuff it into the garbage disposal..

[wellst0nev0ter]

241. Whatever Lifestyle Or Choices She Made Before

It doesn't matter anymore. Her lifestyle now, even if she takes the advice of all the concern trolls in this thread will likely involve foodbanks for a while.

All you said concern troll should just have to deal with that.

[slackmaster]

242. Please restate that in English

:argh: