Americans split on homeowner bailout - poll

it sure isn't split on topix ...
90% DON'T want the government involved ... the other 10% are morons.

I am sure you are one of these "stupid" people who took out a loan that you could not afford. I say no bail and go rent. I guess you will have to learn the hard way.

Leria wrote:

<quoted text>
These people were not irresponsible, and they should NOT be punished for being lied to by realtors and others who said that they could afford more house than they actually could on their income.
People keep on saying "They should have known better!" How the *bleep* would they know better when they have NEVER BOUGHT A HOME BEFORE IN THEIR LIVES?!
Just sheer stupidity there. There should be a bailout, however it should just be that the terms of the mortgages are re-negotiated, to the point where if the realtors are losing money on these (and it would have to be a NEGATIVE percentage of interest before they would!).... they just have to suck it up and deal with that.

I am sure you are one of these "stupid" people who took out a loan that you could not afford. I say no bail and go rent. I guess you will have to learn the hard way.

Federalist Papers wrote:

<quoted text>
All you have to do is refinance with another mortgage/bank. If you have a good credit score you can use that to your advantage (then that loan can pay off your existing mortgage in full). You may want to read if there is a pre-pay penalty on your existing mortgage though.

It is not that simple for most people in this situation.

The problem is that many people - particularly those who bought homes in the last 4 years - cannot refinance beause they owe more than their house is now worth. If you owe 300k on a house now valued at 250k, you are not going to be able to refinance unless you can bring a lot of cash to the table.

Couple this with job losses, skyrocketing oil prices, and rising food costs, and you end up with short sales and as houses sit on the market, mounting foreclosures.

Even people who did the right thing and put down 20% and bought within their means are impacted as most will see their equity drop significantly and some will still end up with upside down mortgages.

It's a terrible situation, but a bailout of these homeowners will only make the situation worse. It has to play out. But I hope people have learned a valuable lesson at least. Houses are not piggy banks and if a deal sounds too good to be true, it likely is.

Leria wrote:

<quoted text>
These people were not irresponsible, and they should NOT be punished for being lied to by realtors and others who said that they could afford more house than they actually could on their income.
People keep on saying "They should have known better!" How the *bleep* would they know better when they have NEVER BOUGHT A HOME BEFORE IN THEIR LIVES?!
Just sheer stupidity there. There should be a bailout, however it should just be that the terms of the mortgages are re-negotiated, to the point where if the realtors are losing money on these (and it would have to be a NEGATIVE percentage of interest before they would!).... they just have to suck it up and deal with that.

Dis-agree. These presumably are adults making adult decisions. If they burn up their cars by not changing the oil, should the federal gov't. buy them new ones because "they didn't know any better"? What about breaking the law - should law-enforcement turn their heads because these adults don't know any better? If we do what you suggest, where does this hand-holding stop?

People need to take responsibility for the choices they make in life. Where are the people who bought houses and MADE money? Are they offering to give their profit TO the government? NO WAY. They made a choice. It worked well. They win. Likewise when people lose. Take the loss and move on. The government is NOT YOUR MOTHER, there to bail you out when you lose OR pat you on your back when you win. Each and everyone is responsible for OUR OWN SELF. Government bailouts or welfare or handouts just take AWAY from those who live responsibly and REWARD those who made poor choices.

Borrowers know darn well whether or not they can afford a house or not before they buy it. They don't have to be told by a bank or a lender(because they will lie to you anyway) and they know alot of times these people will be foreclosed on in a matter of 6 months. Even if you could afford the mortgage, some would not be able to afford anything else. Why would you want to do that? Our society is so materialistic, it's all about what you have. But I guess if you can have a nice big house for 6 months before you are foreclosed on that makes you happy so be it. I worked for a real estate attorney for 6 1/2 years and saw this everyday.

An old rule of thumb used to be: 1) Don't buy a house that is worth more than 3X's your annual salary . . . AND 2) Housing costs should not be more than 25-33% of your monthly take-home pay. Okay, I admit that was 'way back then', but thinking about how much of one's salary actually goes towards housing (be it 25%, 50%, 75%) is something seriously worth thinking about. If people would FIRST THINK and not be in such a hurry to get over their head financially, they'd be better off.

Leria wrote:

<quoted text>
These people were not irresponsible, and they should NOT be punished for being lied to by realtors and others who said that they could afford more house than they actually could on their income.
People keep on saying "They should have known better!" How the *bleep* would they know better when they have NEVER BOUGHT A HOME BEFORE IN THEIR LIVES?!
Just sheer stupidity there. There should be a bailout, however it should just be that the terms of the mortgages are re-negotiated, to the point where if the realtors are losing money on these (and it would have to be a NEGATIVE percentage of interest before they would!).... they just have to suck it up and deal with that.

Yes, they should have known better. Can't they read? Do they have any basic math skills? And they can afford a house?

Stop making excuses for stupidity. It's the home owner that made the error in judgment that has to suck it up and deal with it, not the rest of us taxpayers.

American wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, they should have known better. Can't they read? Do they have any basic math skills? And they can afford a house?
Stop making excuses for stupidity. It's the home owner that made the error in judgment that has to suck it up and deal with it, not the rest of us taxpayers.

The tax payers are already bailing out the banks for their bad judgement.

The rest of us are going to pay for this for a very long time, both and tax dollars and hugeequity losses. You aren't immune, just because you think you are more clever. This should never have been allowed to happen.

The housing market won't recover until home prices return to affordable levels. In the bubble areas home prices doubled or tripled over 3-5 years while household incomes hardly increased at all. Home prices must return to their pre-bubble levels before the housing market recovers. The proposed bailout will only slow the inevitable home price correction and extend the slump in the housing market for several additional years.

Patient buyer wrote:

The housing market won't recover until home prices return to affordable levels. In the bubble areas home prices doubled or tripled over 3-5 years while household incomes hardly increased at all. Home prices must return to their pre-bubble levels before the housing market recovers. The proposed bailout will only slow the inevitable home price correction and extend the slump in the housing market for several additional years.

Agreed. I'm all for righting wrongs, but the reality is a bailout will clearly do us all more harm and probably do little good for the affected homeowners in the long run.

pharriesand wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree with you.
My husband and I were smart enough to realize the dangers of these "ARM's" and stayed renters.

Then if they bail out the people that signed these contracts we should also give those of you that didn't a bonus.

Caron wrote:

<quoted text>
The tax payers are already bailing out the banks for their bad judgement.
The rest of us are going to pay for this for a very long time, both and tax dollars and hugeequity losses. You aren't immune, just because you think you are more clever. This should never have been allowed to happen.

If the Government bails them out, then I am not "immune" as not only do I have to pay my own mortgage, I will also have to pay taxes to support THEIR mortgage problems.

If there is a way to resolve the issue without my tax dollars then I honestly don't care one way or another. I simply resent that my taxes get raised again because others won't yake responsibility for their own risky business.

This is what is wrong with America anymore. No longer do you need to be responsible and provide for your own existence. Just count the govt to rescue you. The fact is if you needed an 80/20 loan, interest only loan, or did an adjustable when interest rates for fixed were at a 30 year low, and now are in financial trouble on your house, tough! You are to stupid to own a house and the idiots that loaned you the money deserve to get stuck also!

American wrote:

<quoted text>
If the Government bails them out, then I am not "immune" as not only do I have to pay my own mortgage, I will also have to pay taxes to support THEIR mortgage problems.
If there is a way to resolve the issue without my tax dollars then I honestly don't care one way or another. I simply resent that my taxes get raised again because others won't yake responsibility for their own risky business.

The Feds have already (illegally) bailed out Bear Stearns. Did you miss that? So, yes, you will most certinaly be paying for bailouts.

Are you troubled only by individuals being bailed out? Are you okay with corporate bailouts?

They are both wrong. But one is worse than the other.

I took $200 to the casino to go gambling… well I lost it all… do you think I should ask the government to bail me out ?

Tiny wrote:

I took $200 to the casino to go gambling… well I lost it all… do you think I should ask the government to bail me out ?

Why not bail out some homeowners? I think they are the ones instead of the Bears and Sterns type. They are always the winners and we little people are always the loser. The little people make mistakes and rebound. Corporations makes mistakes and do what? Get bailed out without ever losing anything. They can still take vacations, drive fancy cars, live in huge houses and send their kids to private schools but they are in bankruptucy proceedings or leaving with million dollars payoffs. Not fair. The new Boston Tea Party era is beginning and we the people are mad as heck and we are not going to take it anymore.

Linda wrote:

<quoted text>Why not bail out some homeowners? I think they are the ones instead of the Bears and Sterns type. They are always the winners and we little people are always the loser. The little people make mistakes and rebound. Corporations makes mistakes and do what? Get bailed out without ever losing anything. They can still take vacations, drive fancy cars, live in huge houses and send their kids to private schools but they are in bankruptucy proceedings or leaving with million dollars payoffs. Not fair. The new Boston Tea Party era is beginning and we the people are mad as heck and we are not going to take it anymore.

Which do you think would be able to pay the loan back to the Government, the Corporation or the Home Owner?

Caron wrote:

<quoted text>
The Feds have already (illegally) bailed out Bear Stearns. Did you miss that? So, yes, you will most certinaly be paying for bailouts.
Are you troubled only by individuals being bailed out? Are you okay with corporate bailouts?
They are both wrong. But one is worse than the other.

Illegally? How so? I would trust that the Corporation could pay back the LOAN moreso than the individual, so while both are wrong, the Corporation is the smaller risk.