Does this piss you off??

From today's WSJ.....

 

I sortof agree. They don't give a fuck about the homeowner, but having a bunch of foreclosures and noone to sell them to could cause a chain reaction that winds up hurting everyone.

That said, the bailout is only delaying the inevitable.

 

Once again...it's the borrower's fault. They were informed repeatedly about the downfalls of 2 and 3 year arms. They were told repeatedly to start paying their bills so they could refi into a conforming product. They didn't...so they're looking for a handout.

I can't tell you how many times I consolidated someone's debt into a mortgage...got them debt free (outside of the mortgage). Increased their cash flow dramatically...only to call them 6-8 months later to do a credit check and find they've missed a mortgage payment and run up their cards again.

 

Your point is noted.

Remember, this is the money and personal finance forum - before this slides into political debate, I just wanted to remind you there's a whole forum for that.

Thanks.

 

Sure...this happened. But isn't it the BORROWERS responsibility to determine what they can spend each month? And if the deal is a stated income deal and a borrower tells the lender he owns a furniture store and makes $500,000 per year (that shit happens a lot)...the borrower did it to himself.

I still like how the media calls 2 and 3 year ARMS....mortgages with teaser rates. Whatever.

 

For some yes, for others no. Smart people know what they are getting themselves into and can do basic math. Stupid people need and expect to be babysat.

 

Aren't some? If you get a 2 year rate that's negative ammortization, wouldn't that be 'teaser'?

 

Isn't that sort of an elitist attitude toward social systems??

I believe we have an obligation to protect each other from each other, but when something doesn't qualify as illegal, isn't it the 'BUYER BEWARE"?

 

I'm outta here then, you all can debate it.

 

It really doesn't bother me at all. There is plenty of blame to go around - although I still don't understand why the rating agencies don't get their share, as the caused an awful lot of this mess.

But the federal government backs the system, so they certainly do have the right to step in when they see fit. Besides, the losses a company might take on a frozen interest rate would be less than it would on a foreclosed property - especially one where the owner posted no down payment and the property has dramatically decreased in value.