I don't understand. If you signed up for a mortgage you can't afford, who exactly are you protesting? Shouldn't you be picketing yourself?

if ACORN hadn't strong armed banks into giving loans to people who shouldn't have qualified for them in the first place, we wouldn't be in this mess. Not everyone can own a home, especially not a 3000 sq ft home. Get over it. You should not have signed a loan without knowing what was in it. I was smart enough to demand a fixed rate loan when i bought my house and I was 22 years old. Yeah, I only bought a 1300 sq ft home that is over 40 years old. But I could afford it... and i am not being foreclosed on because I was smart and many of these people were not!!!!

"If banks and corporations get help facing the consequences of bad financial decisions, should individual homeowners get a break, too?"
Why not?

You don't pay your bills, you get kicked out. End of story. Maybe instead of protesting you could get a job or another job or maybe you could use that time to draw up a budget.

Isn't ACORN getting some of the stimulus money?

Yea, we should give them a break. You know what we should do? We should give all of our incomes to the government and then they can give out to everyone equally!

Isn't that a great idea?? I mean, its worked in the past right??

If you don't pay your bills you can't stay. What the hell is wrong with people?!?

Why should any of us pay? What kind of precedent is all this mess setting? Why should I pay my taxes, my mortgage, my insurance, my cc bills?

"Why not? "

First off, because the latter was wrong too. Second, this would start such a downward spiral to no one paying for anything.

The amount of help they would receive would be minimal if we gave them an equal percentage of what the banks bailout was.
Also every person in america is going to be getting $14 more a week, I mean this big ol' stimulus bill and that is all that they give. I mean, it should be enough to keep people in their houses right?

And this stupid, stupid, dare I say...stupid group is getting stimulus money. I wonder how many Americans would approve of that?

Whats wrong is there is no such thing as personal responsibility anymore and if you think its bad now, I'd be willing to bet its going to get a lot worse in the next 4 years.

Yeah, there are some people who honestly got screwed and those people who HAVE BEEN paying their bills and are doing everything right should be helped. However, I truly believe that is the minority and the majority are people who didn't read the paperwork and just signed off on something they couldn't afford (sound familiar? Isn't that a beautiful irony?) and to those people I have no sympathy.

What about an incentive to homebuyers who were actually responsible and didn't contribute to the market collapsing?
Squeaky wheel gets the grease I suppose.

Hainan, it seems like the reward for being responsible with your money is that you get to stay in your house, no tax break necessary! And on the flip side, if you can't handle your bills, then you get kicked out and you have to figure out what you can afford.

It does seem to me that if you can't pay for it you shouldn't have it, but given how bad this crisis is they should get an extended amount of time before they get evicted so they can find a place to stay. Since so many are getting kicked out at once it's harder to do that than it was in the past.

Yeah but i get to stay in my old house, and they will be rewarded for ignorant behavior with staying in nicer houses...

I guess maybe giving them 60 more days as long as they continue paying what their mortgage was before it lapsed sounds fair. But if they don't pay anything then kick them out!

Hainan, huh?

I'm saying that if you are responsible, you get to stay in your house, and if you're not, you should get evicted.

modus, i see what you are saying, and that is what I think should happen.
But if they do get a pass and get to stay in their homes, where is the benefit in that for me?

Yet another reason why I should have bought a house when I couldn't afford one! If I had done that I could live somewhere for FREE. I would love to not have to write out my monthly check for rent.

This makes me so mad. If you don't pay for it, it's not your home anymore. It's the bank's property and refusing to leave after you've been evicted is trespassing. I can't stand the nerve of these people to call it "civil disobedience".

If the bank's been bailed out by the government, is it the bank's property or taxpayers?
I find 'civil disobedience' easier to stomach than the levels of 'fraud' we're bailing out on Wall Street.

Hmmm. Does this also extend to renters? I really could use that extra 1,000 a month to spend on the toys I've always wanted.

"If the bank's been bailed out by the government, is it the bank's property or taxpayers?" And there's the real reason certain liberals supported the bailout. Control.

It was wrong to bail out banks and it would be wrong to bail out homeowners.

Well Steph considering congress didn't stipulate anything regarding the funds that were given, nothing belongs to the tax payers, it was a gift.

This really irritates me. I know there are some people who are genuinely trying to pay their bills and still can't make ends meet, but these people are the minority. Majority of these people bought homes they couldn't afford and didn't read their paperwork. I don't care if the banks sweet talked them and whatever, you are supposed to be responsible adults. Clearly a lot of these homeowners missed the responsible boat.

But we have bailed out the banks, and plan on giving them more, possibly with actual strings attached from here on - so the question remains: does the government need to be increasing homelessness that taxpayers will have to deal with when the government is at the same time, using taxpayer money to bail out banks that helped create the situation? We're punishing some people while others who made millions creating the situation walk away.

Yes, but what's to stop people from just not paying their mortgage?

I love how people are making comments about those who are evicted to get jobs. Say that to someone in Michigan, where there are no jobs. Trust me, my mother got laid off of her 6 figure job and hasn't had luck with finding a job in the last 3 months. She's been looking all over the country, but to say the least, she's been in her house for 20+ years...which was way before she was making 6 figures.

People shouldn't assume that everybody is delinquent because they're not handling their priorities. This economy sucks, and those of us lucky enough to still have jobs shouldn't be pretending that everybody is able to get these jobs. After all, even if someone who has a family to support is working at 3 different fast food restaurants at minimum wage doesn't mean they can afford their house they're in, despite them having a job and trying to keep up with the payments that once were much more affordable.

GS-bank records, tax audits, salary records.

That sounds really great, I'm dead serious. But who makes that call? Is it going to go all the way back to before people signed onto their notes? Who's going to decide whether the person should never have signed in the first place? There seems like there would be way to much grey area.

Wait a second. We could use money raised by taxes to pay everyone's bills. And the government could own the means of production, which means the taxpayers, in essence, own them. That way the proletariat can no longer be exploited by the bourgeoisie!

Why hasn't anyone thought of this before?

GS, they can set up a review process and there should be plenty of documentation of the loan histories: we're either going to pay for state assistance or this so it's not as if taxpayers can dodge getting involved.

I agree Lady - we seem quick to judge and condemn these homeowners a lot of weird forces came together to create today's situation.

What would the parameters be? I'm honestly curious as to your opinion.

Yeah I'll admit it. I'm quick to judge. How can anyone not be? People who are fiscally responsible make up very little of the population or else we wouldnt be here right now nor would Suze Orman be a millionaire by extolling common sense. If everyone spent less then they made, we'd be fine.

Losing a job sucks and its def. tough out there right now, but if you have been saving like we all should and if you're willing to set aside your pride just to make your mortgage payment, then I'd be willing to bet that 9 times out of 10 you'll be ok.

But honestly, how can we expect that from people? How can we expect our people to be responsible when the govt is rewarding them for not paying their mortgage? How can we expect them to read something before signing it when our own elected officials can't do the same?

The stench of self righteousness is overwhelming.

"if ACORN hadn't strong armed banks into giving loans to people who shouldn't have qualified for them in the first place, we wouldn't be in this mess."

Hainan, please stop spreading this lie.

"according to a string of 1999 and 2000 reports in American Banker, a 173-year-old publication calling itself "the leading information resource serving the banking and financial services community" – ACORN was an outspoken, consistent advocate for exactly the kinds of regulations that experts across the political spectrum now agree could have prevented the global economic crisis.

On August 4, 2000, American Banker reported on ACORN protests at nationwide offices of Lehman Brothers – the investment bank that went bankrupt last month because of its investment in over-valued mortgage-backed securities:

"Acorn members said they want Lehman and other investment banks to sign a code of ethics, pledging to adhere to 'best practices' in the mortgage lending business. Though the banks are not lenders, the group argues that they provide capital and financial support to abusive lenders by buying and securitizing their loans.

'They have to look at the terms of the loans they are funding and say they won't buy or securitize loans with unconscionable terms,' said Bertha Lewis, executive director of Acorn in New York. 'These secondary market players can see what kind of loans these are. They must refuse to buy loans from predatory lenders.'"

ACORN's campaign to get investment banks to adopt best practices for the mortgages they bought was aimed at drying up the secondary market for the toxic mortgages now at the bottom of the fallen financial house of cards. If investment banks didn't buy the shady loans, predatory lenders wouldn't receive the capital to make such loans, ACORN reasoned.

Ten days later, on August 14, 2000, as banks congratulated themselves for making more loans to minorities than the previous year, American Banker reported that ACORN voiced skepticism about the meaning of Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data:

"ACORN questioned whether the reported growth in lending was due to subprime loans, which may be cause for alarm, said ACORN National President Maude Hurd. 'Not all loans are equal. We have seen too many mortgage companies prey on black and Latino homebuyers, taking advantage of their desire to share in the American dream by overcharging them. Without knowing the specific breakdown of what kind of loans people were getting, it's hard to say what these numbers really show,' she said."
http://www.citylimits.org/content/articles/viewarticle.cfm?article_id=36...

The banks should refinance the loans at lower interest so that the mortgage payments would go down. That way many could stay in their homes. The banks would have to absorb some of the cost. But these foreclosures are ruining neighborhoods, drastically pushing down prices, and hurting responsible homeowners who are finding their neighborhoods half deserted and now undesirable.

hausfrau...you're right. However, spending less than you make means for some people not sending their children to college, and for others, dropping out of school. That also means not having means of living if you are working in an overpriced city because you can't afford to leave where you grew up. But there's always moving to the dangerous neighborhoods with slums and project buildings filled to the brim with people who spend less than what they make that aren't educated because they are too fiscally responsible to pay for college.

(Keep in mind that you go nowhere with an associates degree)

"The banks should refinance the loans at lower interest so that the mortgage payments would go down. "

I think this is the start of a good plan to help correct the problem. Then if the same person defaults again, they get evicted.

This situation is far more complex than blaming irresponsible homeowners. I actually think that those who bought what they could not afford are the minority. With thousands of people losing their job everyday and many not being able to find work after their unemployment runs out, what do we expect? People aren't going to make their mortgage payments, rent payments, car payments etc. And someone said that you go nowhere with an Associates. I would have to say it's hard to go anywhere these days with a bachelors. Not so long ago when a college graduate started looking for a job it didn't take them very long. Now they are lucky if they find something and if they do, it's usually for very little pay and probably not in their field of choice. I know two people who are going through this now. One friend is cleaning old people's homes and ass*s for $9 an hour and the other last I heard was working at Borders.

Isn't spending more than we make the big issue? Yes it would suck to not be able to send your kids to college. But plenty of people pay their own way through.

I disagree that you can't go anywhere without a college degree. Yes they are very helpful, but plenty of people are making decent livings without any college diploma.

No self righteousness here. Just common sense.

Ladychaos you bring up a lot of good points, but people who spend less than they make can still send their kid to a community college or state school and since they are low income they will get assistance and be able to take out the loans. There are plenty of parents who don't have the money to pay for all of their kids education and the kids still go and they are fine. And I'm sorry but people who live in high cost of living areas always have the option to move, and IMO, should be looking to move if they can't afford it or just come to terms with the fact that they will rent forever.

Irresponsible people are the majority of this issue. If they weren't we wouldn't have had such a housing boom of such a magnitude because there is no way that simultaneously millions of American's savings would have accumulated enough for a down payment. It's just not possible. Therefore it is very logical to deduce that the majority of those people were buying something they couldn't afford.

This post made me throw up in my mouth a little.

'Irresponsible people are the majority of this issue. If they weren't we wouldn't have had such a housing boom of such a magnitude because there is no way that simultaneously millions of American's savings would have accumulated enough for a down payment. It's just not possible. Therefore it is very logical to deduce that the majority of those people were buying something they couldn't afford. '

So the banks and mortgage companies that invented ARMS, nothing down mortgages, and other new types of mortgages are in no way responsible? Not at all? Its easy to blame families and call them irresponsible, but its soooo hard to blame corporate America for any of the trouble we face.

"The banks should refinance the loans at lower interest so that the mortgage payments would go down."

I am 100% against this, or rewriting contracts or any of it.

I've mentioned before that my husband and I are looking to buy (we actually have been since 2006). We didn't buy during the boom because we couldn't afford anything we liked without an ARM. Now, prices are starting to drop, but getting financing is harder, thus we are banking on prices dropping even more ('cause why buy a home right now when you are almost guaranteed to be upside down in it immediately - even with a big downpayment).

Prices need to drop to the point where homebuyers can afford a 20% downpayment. In my area, a reasonable sized house in a nice, suburban neighborhood starts at $400k (for two bedrooms, mind you). In olden times when the bank required a downpayment, homebuyers would ahve to bring $80,000 to the table.

Bailing out homeowners and other such prices keeps prices artificially inflated. Why? Because those homeowners will eventually have to sell. If they can't sell their home for the price of their bank note, then they will foreclose.

Refinancing at lower rates punishes current homebuyers because THEIR interest rates will go up as banks shift the risk onto the people that they can still legally raise rates on.

I realize that life is not fair, but we have to work in reality. Until responsible homebuyers feel confident about buying homes and can afford them this issue will never resolve itself.

If someone can offer me a logical argument for why bailing out current homeowners in distress will NOT keep prices articifically inflated and will NOT screw new homebuyers on their loan rates and terms, then please share. I'm sure it's going to happen anyway, and I'd like something to make me feel better about the situation.

"So the banks and mortgage companies that invented ARMS, nothing down mortgages, and other new types of mortgages are in no way responsible? Not at all? Its easy to blame families and call them irresponsible, but its soooo hard to blame corporate America for any of the trouble we face."

Yup - banks are to blame too, and they ARE suffering. However, that isn't an excuse to give homeowners who made poor choices a free pass. They signed their loans, and they should be held accountable to them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/business/27loan.html?pagewanted=print
This is an article referencing a large cause of the housing crisis. Home equity line of credit. People were greedy and took out loans on the equity of their houses. This is nothing but irresponsibility. On the banks end and the person end, and no one needs to be bailed out.
And if the home owners in foreclosure are going to get their interest rates reduced, than I want mine done as well. I wonder if those of you for the refinancing think it would be ok that everyone in the us regardless of credit got to refinance their home to a lower percentage?

Good points kranky, you are always so well spoken

Back at 'cha Hainan!