Of money we dont have. Where is mine? Some funky ideas in the plans from various states to help homeowners that are in trouble…even covering 2nd mortgages that bought the boat, big truck, motorcyles and boobjobs!
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/States-look-to-help-the-cnnm-1309746059.html?x=0
I was with you up until you mentioned boobs. SAVE THE BOOBS
They may be too big to fail
As someone who has never missed a mortgage payment, I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand, we do want to keep people in their homes, and don’t want another bunch of foreclosures.
On the other, when are people/corporations/gov’t going to be held accountable for their screw ups. Why should I fund the people who don’t show any restraint when spending their money? Instead of making my mortgage payment, maybe I’ll go buy a new truck and get rid of the one that is 8 years old. I’d like a big saltwater boat too, will they pay for the fuel for it? I’m happy with my wife’s boobs, but if someone else will pay for them - she might as well get upgraded too. Oooh. I’ve put off buying a big home entertainment system. I guess it is time to get one of those too.
At some point, everyone will be demanding their own personal bailout or handout.
Because its easier to take your money (tax dollars) and give it to others, you know what a pain in the ass it is to get the banks to give up the cash!
Once again, the government plays its traditional role of reverse Robin Hood, stealing from the have-nots (non-homeowners in this case) to give to the haves.
On one hand, we do want to keep people in their homes, and don’t want another bunch of foreclosures.
Why?
If one looks at the market and realizes that the losses incurred by another round of foreclosures will likely be equal to the losses that the tax payers and bankers will be forced to incur via paying their mortgage, does it not makes sense in the long run to allow the foreclosures?
In the case of foreclosure the homeowner gets a net asset loss do to devaluation of their properties. Assuming these individuals are economically stable this will have no immediate effect on them. OTOH paying billions to prop up those that are not economically stable WILL have a near immediate effect on them via higher taxes and most certainly higher costs at the bank.
I just see no reason to put 1$ worth of tax payers money to “Keeping people in homes” that the bank, the people themselves and the market have deemed they can’t afford. Makes ZERO sense.
~Matt
Why is this called the “Hardest Hit Fund”? What’s the metric for determining the “Hardest hit”? Clearly there are people that have lost more as a percentage of net worth, and probably taken a harder hit by almost every metric you can imagine.
Why is losing your house the “Hardest hit” regardless of all other factors?
I mean a person could not have taken a “Hit” at all. Same income, same everything except they signed their name on the dotted line for something they can’t afford under conditions they can’t support. How is that taking a “Hit”? OTOH there are plenty of people that are in houses they can afford and have taken 10-20% or more hits in equity on those homes. What about the folks that have lost a significant amount of income but made sure they had contingency plans to cover the home or are simply living in a house WELL below what they could have gotten?
Why don’t they just call it “Fund to bail out people who lost their homes cause we really don’t care about anything else” fund?
~Matt
As someone who has never missed a mortgage payment, I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand, we do want to keep people in their homes, and don’t want another bunch of foreclosures.
On the other, when are people/corporations/gov’t going to be held accountable for their screw ups. Why should I fund the people who don’t show any restraint when spending their money? Instead of making my mortgage payment, maybe I’ll go buy a new truck and get rid of the one that is 8 years old. I’d like a big saltwater boat too, will they pay for the fuel for it? I’m happy with my wife’s boobs, but if someone else will pay for them - she might as well get upgraded too. Oooh. I’ve put off buying a big home entertainment system. I guess it is time to get one of those too.
At some point, everyone will be demanding their own personal bailout or handout.
from the article:
While many Florida residents now owe more than their homes are worth, Westcott said the state is looking to help only those in default because of a financial hardship, such as the loss of a job or a divorce. Those who mismanaged their money or can still afford their mortgages will not be assisted.
Arizona: They would also have to prove hardship that’s not due to a “self-inflected wound,” such as refinancing to take out equity or obtaining a mortgage based on undocumented income.
Reads to me like they actually share your concerns.