It's not necessarily their fault if they suddenly owe 5% more than their home is worth, subby- but then I suppose it's hard to put nuance into a greenlightable headline.

Make it so mortgage holders pay the principal plus interest like they normally do on the value of the home, but interest only on the land. The government then holds title to the land, plus any rights (water, mineral, whatever), and the homeowner pays the equivalent of rent for the land.

Their monthly payments are lower, but they don't get a windfall later on if the price of land rises.

The article is a little vague regarding how this program actually works. If the homeowners are allowed to refinance the home at the new perceived market price, then it stinks in the sense that we, who pay taxes, are taking a hit (the difference between the present mortgage amount and the refi amount.) On the other hand, if they are refinancing the original amount at a lower rate, then this will help stave off further foreclosures, not all, but some.

The article does speculate that at the present rates, it might not make sense to refinance for some people. That is true if you have a mortgage at 6-6.5% I think that many of the people who are in trouble had one of those of what I call "voodoo" mortgages that went from 4% to 8% after the original "Hot sale" period.

"It's great. It's good news," says Lawrence Yun, chief economist with the National Association of Realtors. "Many homes are way deeper underwater.


I find this quote amusing. When the home market started heating up, Realtors had no problem advising homeowners to sell 200K homes for 500k and then hooked buyers of these overpriced shacks with these "marvelous" mortgage brokers who financed the 500k homes with the now famous "poison mortgages." And not a peep has come from them saying they should have seen this coming. Now they are on TV saying that this is the time to buy. Hypocrites.

DrSandyBeech: Now they are on TV saying that this is the time to buy. Hypocrites.

Realtors always say it's the time to buy.

Housing prices are rising: "It'll never be as cheap as it is right now to buy a home. Prices will keep going up and up. It's a great investment!"

Housing prices are falling: "It'll never be as cheap as it is right now to buy a home. Prices will soon start going up and up. It's a great investment!"

Obama expands assistance to poor decision makers


Poor (decision makers) or (poor decision) makers?


I suppose it could be both.

Obama's going to start helping republicans?

DrSandyBeech:

Lawrence Yun, chief economist with the National Association of Realtors.

Yeah, this guy should be tarred and feathered.

I agree with FoxNews on this. Let the banks fail, let the car companies fail, let the homeowners lose their houses, let the states go bankrupt then round up everyone with nothing and nothing to do give them a day to learn how to use an automatic rifle and send them to Iran.

Englebert Slaptyback: Obama expands assistance to poor decision makers


Poor (decision makers) or (poor decision) makers?


I suppose it could be both.

Both.

sgilman: Obama's going to start helping republicans?

I was thinking John McCain specifically. Oh, and Sanford.

Expands?

Penis

I'm 50% underwater in my house. I have a fixed rate and can still afford the payments so I'm not going anywhere though. Maybe in 5-7 years I'll be even (between what I pay down on the principle and the small increase in home values).

The plan only allows you to refinance, it doesn't adjust the total amount due to the bank. Taxpayers shouldn't see an hit at all due to foreclosures because the mortgages in question are already backed by freddiemac/fanniemae so you're already on the hook. Just the impact of the government refinancing the loans (administration costs).

Banks?

sgilman: Obama's going to start helping republicans?

Done.

No real problem with this as long as its your primary residence. Way better for people to keep living there, paying on the property and upkeeping it then having everyone who is underwater simply walk away and let the banks manage the mess.

I'd way rather they throw billions at THIS problem then letting people who managed to run up $60,000 in credit card debt keep being a financial moron.

Won't somebody think of the realtors?

I'm $20k in debt for my wife's teaching credential, which she can't use now that we've turned our schools into low-rent zoos. I can haz bailout now?

subby.... you forgot one key phrase from your headline there... "Thanks to the 69,456,897 poor decision makers that put this disgrace into office."

ragekage,

It wasnt my fault that my Worldcom* stock went to zero**, but that doesnt make my decision to buy any less poor.

Its possible to be both a "poor decision maker" and "not at fault".

Part of making decisions is calculating what idiotic decisions other people will make.


*going old school
**close enough

boobsrgood: I'm $20k in debt for my wife's teaching credential...
Come to South Dakota, she can make that in a year as a teacher.

Being a poor decision maker himself...he apparently has sympathy for other poor decision makers.

This is like watching the meticulous five year old open presents on his birthday.

Yay! My tax dollars go to fund the people who priced me out of the market.

What's the point in voting anymore? It's PMITA either way, but at least we get to choose the lube. Go America!

This is like watching a slowly declining senior citizen butter a pillow.

Snarfangel: Make it so mortgage holders pay the principal plus interest like they normally do on the value of the home, but interest only on the land. The government then holds title to the land, plus any rights (water, mineral, whatever), and the homeowner pays the equivalent of rent for the land.

Their monthly payments are lower, but they don't get a windfall later on if the price of land rises.

Oh, I'm sure that would go over really well with the GOP. In fact, I'm not sure that would go over well with anyone, considering how tightly property ownership has traditionally been applied to the American Dream for so long.

vernonFL: DrSandyBeech:

Lawrence Yun, chief economist with the National Association of Realtors.

Yeah, this guy should be tarred and feathered.

I'm not singling out Mr. Yun. I am pointing out what he is saying as a representative of a group that is supposed to know about the real estate market. A group, collectively, that should have counseled their seller clients about realistic home prices and vetted the mortgage brokers they recommended to buyers. Unfortunately they were blinded by the "6% commission on a 500K home is better than 6% on a 200k home" syndrome. Once the home was sold and the buyer was hook, lined and sunk by the 5/1 arms and 80/20's and 120% mortgages, they gave a fark what all that was going to do to the market. Now they are concerned that the "homes are deeper Underwater." Well DUH, they helped create that monster and have never expressed any type of concern that their memebrs dropped the ball.

I'm not trying to blame it all on the Realtors. But if we are going to blame the homeowners for being irresponsible (and many are, especially those that bought more home than they could realistically afford), The banks for offering crappy loans and crooked mortgage brokers, They should also be included in the long list of those that participated in this fiasco. Instead they stand around quietly looking around to see if no one notices them and forces them to come clean and accept some of the blame.

Hopefully they did notice and will work with their members to be the professionals home sellers and buyers perceived them to be.

Funny, considering that the government of the previous 8 years specialized in placing poor decision makers in important posts and then lauding praise on them when they fark up royally.

Do I like the fact that tax dollars are going to help people who got themselves sucked into a black hole of debt? Of course not, especially since the money is eventually going to crooked lenders, but it's a hell of a lot better than the consequences of throwing all those people out on the ice. If reincarnation was real, then these people could just kill themselves and come back to try life again, this time reading the fine print. But it doesn't work that way, and most people won't just crawl into a hole and die because society decided they were too expensive to manage. You will have to deal with them at some point.

Thank goodness we re-financed at 4.625 and the end of May. We were not 'underwater'. In fact our house was worth a lot more than I thought it was going to be given the current state of the market. Its just goes to show how screwy the economy is when there are people who are, for whatever reason, loosing their home and we are saving $500 a month because I was actually paying attention to mortgage rates in April and May.

//Thanks Obama??

jaymzz: Yay! My tax dollars go to fund the people who priced me out of the market.

What's the point in voting anymore? It's PMITA either way, but at least we get to choose the lube. Go America!


THIS. I'm so farking pissed off at my fellow leeches, excuse me americans, right now that I may root for N. Korea next round. I don't want them to win but if about half of you farks would just die and stop taking my money I'd be cool with it. you lazy, irresponsible twats.fark you.

Wait, I thought this was about Wall Street

But I wanted a big house.

/time to rid the world of the parasites

Of course he did. They're the bulk of his constituency. It's compensation for voting for him (as if easing of the white guilt wasn't enough).

sgilman: Obama's going to start helping republicans?

WIN

125% LTV?

Well, I guess it's not their bad loans have caused any problems so far......

Obama's gonna pay for my gas and my mortgage.

So many in this thread are happy about more of their tax dollars blowing out the door?

schadenfreudian: Of course he did. They're the bulk of his constituency. It's compensation for voting for him (as if easing of the white guilt wasn't enough).

But if you think about it, it means that voting for him got them results. Unlike most Republicans with their candidates.

Got nothing; got nothing to lose.

/Negative net worth.
//Student loans FTW.

Ok, Just because the house is worth less, their original loan terms haven't changed. If they could afford the payments when they got the loan, they should be able to continue affording them now. Unemployed? Plan for it. Save money. Don't overextend yourself, stupid.

As for the Boobies on this thread where some retard says it's not the owner's fault the house is worth less than what they owe, guess what? It's not my fault either, Why the fark should I pay for it for them? I have my own farking mortgage, thank you very much.

Fark Obama and fark you idiots who voted for him.

DrSandyBeech: "If the homeowners are allowed to refinance the home at the new perceived market price"

They're not. The program allows people refinance what they owe. The thought is that people are trapped into ARM rates that are ballooning and if only they could refi to a fixed rate, they could afford to stay (which has been shown statistically false over the last nine months.)

The government intervention is necessary to achieve that, because no (reputable) bank would refinance an underwater mortgage under normal conditions, let alone Current Economic Conditions.

The hit the taxpayers take, is the few grand the banks get as a straight-up 'gift' for refi 'costs' and the few grand that the government kicks in toward the mortgage holders principle.

They're extending the program limit from 5% to 25% under, as almost no-one took advantage of the original program; because if you were only under 5% you probably weren't going to benefit from a refi.

But the government has a lot of earmarked money sitting around 'to help people' and fark if there's a government agency on the planet that isn't going to spend every last penny of their allotted funds.

It was much better when Bush and Obama were giving hundreds of billions of dollars to poor decision makers who RAN BANKS.fark the consumers! They're only responsible for the economy moving at all!

Mentat: Snarfangel: Make it so mortgage holders pay the principal plus interest like they normally do on the value of the home, but interest only on the land. The government then holds title to the land, plus any rights (water, mineral, whatever), and the homeowner pays the equivalent of rent for the land.

Their monthly payments are lower, but they don't get a windfall later on if the price of land rises.

Oh, I'm sure that would go over really well with the GOP. In fact, I'm not sure that would go over well with anyone, considering how tightly property ownership has traditionally been applied to the American Dream for so long.

This wouldn't be a program for every home buyer, just those who have chosen...poorly.

Just to play a bit with numbers, let's assume someone purchased a home for $400K, $200K for the land and $200K for the improvements, and has paid $50K so far on the principal. If the value of the land drops to $100K, they owe $50K more than the property is worth.

If we insist the government does something to help the poor person (for whatever reason, whether out of sympathy or out of some economic argument), the government can take over the land, move the $50K principal to the house itself, and then rent the land back. The homeowner now owes $150K on a $200K home, so he's not as likely to abandon it. Since the land is now worth $100K, the government charges an appropriate rent, the equivalent of an interest-only loan on the new, lower value.

The mortgage payments are now more affordable, but if the neighborhood becomes suddenly more desirable -- say the land raises in value to $300K over the next few years -- the government is the one that benefits from the windfall, and not the homeowner that required a bailout.

After all, the American dream shouldn't be to socialize losses and privatize profits.

i love being a renter.

purple helmet: Ok, Just because the house is worth less, their original loan terms haven't changed. If they could afford the payments when they got the loan, they should be able to continue affording them now.

RIGHT! So why do they need government assistance and where is this money going?

purple helmet: Ok, Just because the house is worth less, their original loan terms haven't changed. If they could afford the payments when they got the loan, they should be able to continue affording them now. Unemployed? Plan for it. Save money. Don't overextend yourself, stupid.

As for the Boobies on this thread where some retard says it's not the owner's fault the house is worth less than what they owe, guess what? It's not my fault either, Why the fark should I pay for it for them? I have my own farking mortgage, thank you very much.

Fark Obama and fark you idiots who voted for him.

This.

If you are upside down on your car, your wedding ring, or any other asset, it's your own damn problem. House is no different. Save, put more money down, don't take out loans - nobody is forcing you. Live within your means. There are $30K houses out there - anyone can afford these. Leaches.

RIGHT! So why do they need government assistance and where is this money going?

Acorn and the Black Panthers.

Currently, homeowners who owe 5% more than their homes are worth can refinance mortgages through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, part of a two-pronged approach to reduce the rapid-fire pace of foreclosures.

They just want as many people as possible under Barney Frank's control.

/ewwww

Ok, so Obama is going to pay my mortgage now like I was promised? And how about the gas for my car? Oh yeah, and when do I get my middle class tax cut?

toonz: jaymzz: Yay! My tax dollars go to fund the people who priced me out of the market.

What's the point in voting anymore? It's PMITA either way, but at least we get to choose the lube. Go America!



THIS. I'm so farking pissed off at my fellow leeches, excuse me americans, right now that I may root for N. Korea next round. I don't want them to win but if about half of you farks would just die and stop taking my money I'd be cool with it. you lazy, irresponsible twats.fark you.

Cut back on your earning, and enjoy some free time. The more you earn, the more these assholes get. Working hard to get ahead only makes you a feast for the parasites.

ragekage: It's not necessarily their fault if they suddenly owe 5% more than their home is worth, subby- but then I suppose it's hard to put nuance into a greenlightable headline.

The payment is still the same, if they aren't selling the negative appreciation doesn't affect them?

Using your logic: I owed 20% more than my car was worth the second I drove it off the lot, where's my bailout?

essucht: Ok, so Obama is going to pay my mortgage now like I was promised? And how about the gas for my car? Oh yeah, and when do I get my middle class tax cut?

You sure you're not talking about Osama?

Obligatory

I just closed on my first house and have a curren LTV of 90% and a 30 yr fixed rate mortgage at 4.875% so I'm getting a kick out of these replies... not so much at the article though....

purple helmet: Ok, Just because the house is worth less, their original loan terms haven't changed. If they could afford the payments when they got the loan, they should be able to continue affording them now. Unemployed? Plan for it. Save money. Don't overextend yourself, stupid.

As for the Boobies on this thread where some retard says it's not the owner's fault the house is worth less than what they owe, guess what? It's not my fault either, Why the fark should I pay for it for them? I have my own farking mortgage, thank you very much.

Fark Obama and fark you idiots who voted for him.

Many of these "underwater" in their homes treated the house as a piggybank. Interest only loans, no downpayment, etc.

They would get a loan, refinance 6 months later (and taking cash out on the perceived increase), spend and repeat. You betcha they ended up underwater.

Now it's time to pay the piper.

The old school practice of 10% - 20% down, may be the best. If all these folks in trouble had put some of their own money in the game, they would have thought it through in more detail

ringersol: The thought is that people are trapped into ARM rates that are ballooning and if only they could refi to a fixed rate, they could afford to stay (which has been shown statistically false over the last nine months.)

I'm wondering where these ballooning rates are myself. I have an ARM tied to the 1-year LIBOR, and there hasn't been a whole lot of ballooning going on:




I'm not familiar with what other indexes ARMs are based on. Which ones are trouble?

Hotlinking saved me from writing pretty much what's in the caption.
/My Representative. And he may run unopposed again.

GaryPDX: Currently, homeowners who owe 5% more than their homes are worth can refinance mortgages through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, part of a two-pronged approach to reduce the rapid-fire pace of foreclosures.

They just want as many people as possible under Barney Frank's control.

/ewwww

I really dislike a wide variety of politicians in America, but that guy takes the cake.

This all comes back to poor public education. If a stable economy relies on the public understanding of the basic, fundamental components of economics, then they probably are important enough to be required teaching.

Because an ignorant mass public can sometimes (like in this case) do more harm than good.

Yakk: I agree with FoxNews on this. Let the banks fail, let the car companies fail, let the homeowners lose their houses, let the states go bankrupt then round up everyone with nothing and nothing to do give them a day to learn how to use an automatic rifle and send them to Iran Poland.

*sigh*

ragekage: It's not necessarily their fault if they suddenly owe 5% more than their home is worth, subby- but then I suppose it's hard to put nuance into a greenlightable headline.

Investments and buying homes are risks. You are responsible for the risk, not me. Its their fault they bought at the height of the market. Its a poor decision.

Speaking of poor decision makers

I didn't RTFA. Is this about rich bankers, rich automakers, idiot SUV owners wanting a clunker bailout, or the Bush administration? I couldn't quite glean the exact poor decision makers from the subby headline.

(Tho I suppose there is the unlikely event that this is the Fark tradition of piling on the po' folk. That's always great fun and nobody important gets hurt.)

GaryPDX: They just want as many people as possible under Barney Frank's control.

/ewwww

America the Gimp.


Ewwwwwww!

Is this like the military expanding assistance to the underskilled bullet-dodgers?

apotheosis27: i love being a renter sucker giving all my money to some dude chilling on the beach in Miami instead of owning my own residence within my means.

Bobucles: This all comes back to poor public education. If a stable economy relies on the public understanding of the basic, fundamental components of economics, then they probably are important enough to be required teaching.

Because an ignorant mass public can sometimes (like in this case) do more harm than good.

Economics was only a one semester class in my public high school. Most of the time we learned about things like writing a check.

/Still better then most private schools I guess

All that money keeping millions of people from going homeless should instead be shovelled into a dozen B2 stealth bombers. Same with health care. Let the plebs die destitute and homeless, put that money into spy satellites and covert goat mind reading programs.

"It's great. It's good news," says Lawrence Yun, chief economist with the National Association of Realtors. "Many homes are way deeper underwater.

IDK sound like a righteous dude!

/totally

Obama expands assistance to poor decision makers

Isn't that what all the bailouts have been about?

painendstheass: All that money keeping millions of people from going homeless should instead be shovelled into a dozen B2 stealth bombers. Same with health care. Let the plebs die destitute and homeless, put that money into spy satellites and covert goat mind reading programs.

As someone who spends and saves responsibly and watched housing costs continue to slip just out of reach around here as irresponsible twits who make less than me priced me out, AND now i'm still renting (pissing away money) while they get to default and keep their homes...

ON MY F*CKING DIMEfark em.
when they get out of the gutter they can remember this little lesson & do it right next time.

oh and shoot the bankers and cut the military budget while we're at it.

sgilman: Obama's going to start helping republicans?

Came here to say that.

Conservationist: The Right: natural selection.

The Left: one big happy family, ESPECIALLY the incompetents, who always vote Democratic.

yes. that's how it works.

After President trust-fund fast-track harvard (wink-wink) twit, and Sarah Palin, I can't WAIT to see your next choice for qualified, experienced leadership. I think the next logical step is a sock puppet. (it's be against gay rights/pro anti-sodomy laws while simultaneously operating with a fist up its ass.)

yeah. You guys are f*cking great.

Another idiot move by an idiot. I am not surprised. All the idiots I know getting their houses foreclosed on are liberals. Not surprising either. Idiocy goes full circle.

toonz: now i'm still renting (pissing away money) while they get to default and keep their homes...

Stop believing the Realtor propaganda. Renting is NOT throwing your money away. Unless you like living in a van, you have to live somewhere. Unless buying is SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper than renting, you might as well keep renting and save/invest the money you aren't pissing away on a mortgage, taxes, insurance, and maintenance.

Do you ask people why they are pissing money away on food?

Crosshair: Do you ask people why they are pissing money away on food?

I only eat food that appreciates in value.

I get about a 3% return on my feces.

Poor decision makers, eh? That's a bit of a facer.

It's not just poor people with liars' loans (OMG ACORN), that are being impacted. We're now talking about responsible homeowners who found themselves, after 10-20 years of steady employment, without a job - sometimes both wage earners lose their jobs. People-who-are-better-than-everyone-else are always going on about how one should have 6 months living expenses. The average unemployment period is longer than that now; homeowners have run through their savings; and if anyone in the family became ill or suffer an accidental injury, there's the rest of their savings thanks to our f*cked up health care costs.

So shove it, eh?

Crosshair: toonz: now i'm still renting (pissing away money) while they get to default and keep their homes...

Stop believing the Realtor propaganda. Renting is NOT throwing your money away. Unless you like living in a van, you have to live somewhere. Unless buying is SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper than renting, you might as well keep renting and save/invest the money you aren't pissing away on a mortgage, taxes, insurance, and maintenance.

Do you ask people why they are pissing money away on food?

well CURRENTLY renting actually is probably the better way to go, but I'd just like to be able to get something better than a 60 year old shoebox with a bad roof, & walls and floors like PeeWee's playhouse next to a highway for under $500K around here at some point.

Soymilk: Poor decision makers, eh? That's a bit of a facer.

It's not just poor people with liars' loans (OMG ACORN), that are being impacted. We're now talking about responsible homeowners who found themselves, after 10-20 years of steady employment, without a job - sometimes both wage earners lose their jobs. People-who-are-better-than-everyone-else are always going on about how one should have 6 months living expenses. The average unemployment period is longer than that now; homeowners have run through their savings; and if anyone in the family became ill or suffer an accidental injury, there's the rest of their savings thanks to our f*cked up health care costs.

So shove it, eh?

Yep, shove it. If you made the bad decision to raid your 401(k) to keep paying for your depreciating home while you and your spouse were both unemployed then yes, shove it. Also, if you have 10-20 years of steady employment, you have a lot of equity built up in your home, and you don't qualify for this program. You can sell your house at firesale prices and still walk away with a check, not having to write one.

It still comes back to: this is your problem, not mine. You take a risk when you buy ANYTHING including any home. If you would have sold in 2006 at the height of the market, we wouldn't have taken all your profits away, so why are we taking all your losses away now?

not2conceited: It still comes back to: this is your problem, not mine. You take a risk when you buy ANYTHING including any home. If you would have sold in 2006 at the height of the market, we wouldn't have taken all your profits away, so why are we taking all your losses away now?

My goodness, so high and mighty. I hope nothing catastrophic ever happens to you or yours that will require you to dig into your savings, refinance your house, drop out of college, or delay going to a doctor for an illness because you've lost your family's health insurance along with your job.

Why are people still looking at their homes as investments?

Look at it as a place to live. You need one, no matter what your circumstances, so suck it up and pay your just debts on it.

Or walk away and let the true owner (the bank) get it back.

When I read the headline, I thought we were giving more money to the banks, or American vehicle manufacturers.

This is just as smart as the last 2 cock-ups

Soymilk:

My goodness, so high and mighty. I hope nothing catastrophic ever happens to you or yours that will require you to dig into your savings, refinance your house, drop out of college, or delay going to a doctor for an illness because you've lost your family's health insurance along with your job.

I hope nothing happens to me or mine either, but since hope and pixie dust only get you so far, I also save for a rainy day. I am also realistic about the risks I take.

In the end, the responsibility rests on the shoulders of the person who made the decision. I didn't decide to buy a house that got foreclosed on, so why am I shouldered with bailing out the moran that did?

Who chose to work for the company that laid them off? Who chose to go to an expensive college instead of a trade school, only to drop out? Who chose to refinance their house to buy that Escalade that's now worth 40% of what they paid for it? Answer: not me. Not yet. If I have made a poor decision, I should be the one to pay the piper because I am the one that made the decision. That's what freedom is all about.

Soymilk I want to take you along next time I go to the casino so you can subsidize my time at the high roller table. If I win, I get to keep the money, but if I lose, you get to pay me back. Sound good?

Is this a repeat from pre- great depression??? WE ARE SCREWED!

toonz: jaymzz: Yay! My tax dollars go to fund the people who priced me out of the market.

What's the point in voting anymore? It's PMITA either way, but at least we get to choose the lube. Go America!


THIS. I'm so farking pissed off at my fellow leeches, excuse me americans, right now that I may root for N. Korea next round. I don't want them to win but if about half of you farks would just die and stop taking my money I'd be cool with it. you lazy, irresponsible twats.fark you.



I have no problems with this statement. pay for your own shiat.
( I am an ex-pat living in a poor country in europe, I only pay taxes after I break the 90k mark each year.. ) hahahahaha

So I live cheap buy forign land and get more tax breaks.

I'll come back to the states when O'scamo is either out of office or dead of a heart attack.