Housing Rescue with YOUR money!

[BraggSurvivor]

Housing aid bill clears key Senate hurdle
Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12:44 PM EDT
The Associated Press
By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) — A massive foreclosure rescue bill overwhelmingly cleared a key Senate test Tuesday, drawing broad support from Democrats and Republicans alike.

The Senate voted 83-9 to speed up work on the $300 billion mortgage aid plan, putting it on track for a final vote as early as the end of the day.

The resounding vote reflected a keen interest in both parties in claiming election-year credit for helping homeowners amid tough economic times.

Still, the measure faces a veto threat from President Bush and disputes among Democrats about key details. Those challenges will probably delay any final deal until mid-July.

Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., the Banking Committee chairman, said the legislation "would allow us to begin to put a tourniquet on the hemorrhaging of foreclosures in this country."

"What better gift on independence could we give the American people than a sense that this, their Congress of the United States, can come together, despite political differences, and craft legislation to make a difference for our country," Dodd said.

Senate passage would set the stage for high-stakes negotiations to resolve Democrats' differences. Conservative Democrats known as "Blue Dogs" are concerned about how to pay for the measure, while members of the Congressional Black Caucus — most of them liberal — call it "unacceptable," arguing it doesn't do enough to address the needs of African Americans.

Leaders also are divided on how high to place loan limits that apply to government mortgage insurance and financing.

The centerpiece of the package is a foreclosure rescue program in which the Federal Housing Administration would provide $300 billion in new, cheaper mortgages for distressed homeowners who otherwise would be considered too financially risky to qualify for government-insured, fixed-rate loans.

Borrowers would be eligible for the housing rescue if their mortgage holders were willing to take a substantial loss and allow them to refinance, and would ultimately have to share with the government a portion of any profits they made from selling or refinancing their properties.

The measure was advancing as a widely watched housing index said U.S. home prices fell in April at their steepest rate since the index began in 2000. The Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller home price index of 20 cities fell by 15.3 percent in April versus a year ago, according to Tuesday's report.

A separate report from the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight said U.S. home prices fell 4.6 percent in April from the same month last year, when the index peaked. The government index is calculated using mortgage loans of $417,000 or less.

The bill would tighten controls and create a new regulator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which provide huge amounts of cash flow to the mortgage market by buying home loans from banks.

It also would provide a $14.5 billion array of tax breaks, including a credit of up to $8,000 for first-time homebuyers who buy a home in the next year and boosts in low-income tax credits and mortgage revenue bonds.

In a letter to Democratic leaders last week, the 42 House members of the Black Caucus said the bill is plagued with "glaring omissions," including affordable housing funds for states affected by Hurricane Katrina and grants for states and localities to buy and fix up foreclosed properties.

To draw GOP support, Senate Democrats diverted the affordable housing money to pay for the foreclosure aid program.

The Senate bill provides $3.9 billion in grants to deal with foreclosed properties — compared with a House plan providing $15 billion — but the White House singled out the funds in its veto threat, and Blue Dogs are demanding that the money be offset with cuts elsewhere.

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the Financial Services Committee chairman, said he'd be willing to yank the money and add it to a separate measure in the interests of a deal.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Does ANYONE REALLY think that any money will go to the "poor" home owner?!?!? Bullcrap!! This money will be used to bring liquidity to banks...


Everyone has a right to own a home, but does that mean people also have a right to steal, murder or enslave another to get it?

Unless you force (or steal money from others to pay) people to build new homes or take away their old ones, how exactly are these homes going to get built?

That's right ... not only do you get to pay your own mortgage, as well as for your own food and gas, all while suffering depreciation of the value of the equity in your home; you also get to pay for morons who were too stupid to read the 45 different places where the home loan paperwork said that payments were due every month and that the rate would become variable after six months.

You cannot support a "right" to own a home without eventually also giving people the right to steal, murder or enslave.

And once people realize they have a right to steal, murder or enslave to get a home, they are going to find this much easier than producing their own good homes. So everyone wind up with dilapidated, rundown shacks, if anything at all.

[Chris]

I used to get so annoyed watching TV and seeing those home shows "Jill and Don make $75,000 combined, their budget for a new home is $800,000" wtf!?

Sorry Jill and Don, you bought something you can't afford and had no business buying, you deserve no help. Learn to life within your means.

http://consumerist.com/consumer/clip...ord-252491.php

[FVR]

Again, those who play by the rules, make the right decissions based on homework, those that put off imediate gratification so they can take care of their responsibilities.......................Gets FCK'd.

I am so tired of being responsible. How can I sign up to get that "I deserve" mentallity.

[Sam Reeves]

I believe most folks that participated in the balloon note loans did so honestly believing that they would be able to continue paying for the loan. A big part of these were college students expecting to double their income once they are their spouse finished school. At the same time the banks didn't expect the foreclosure rate to be so high.

But if you take a gamble you should also be willing to except a loss if need be.

I wonder if Uncle Sam is going to cut back on education or just raise taxes to pay for this.

[FVR]

Most of the people that I know of and who have heard of, who are, or who have had foreclosures, ARE STUPID BASTARDS WHO SHOULD NOT EVEN HAVE A BANK ACCOUNT. They can't afford their mortgages but have ipods, blue tooths, exp. SUV's, 5 or 6 tv's, major cell phones that do the internet thing.

They just prioritize for their wants, and expect everyone to feel sorry for them. And, the US political parties do and will again, take money from the hard working Americans who are trying to succeed and doing the right thing.

[BraggSurvivor]

Originally Posted by Sam Reeves

I believe most folks that participated in the balloon note loans did so honestly believing that they would be able to continue paying for the loan. A big part of these were college students expecting to double their income once they are their spouse finished school. At the same time the banks didn't expect the foreclosure rate to be so high.

But if you take a gamble you should also be willing to except a loss if need be.

I wonder if Uncle Sam is going to cut back on education or just raise taxes to pay for this.

The banks KNEW exactly what they were doing.

Remember, it takes a village, everything your rulers do is for "da children" and your rulers love you. And if you don't believe that just turn on the nightly propaganda any night of the week and little Brian Jennings, little Catey Couric or Tom Lockjaw and they will tell you so.

This bill is for the Bankster's and Pig men. Homeowner's are included just to pacify the masses. They won't get diddily squat!! Better tell your congressmen to stuff it!

[Sam Reeves]

Originally Posted by FVR

And, the US political parties do and will again, take money from the hard working Americans who are trying to succeed and doing the right thing.

Until this changes the banks will not have much of an incentive not to put morons into big houses and pretty cars.

[Sam Reeves]

Originally Posted by BraggSurvivor

The banks KNEW exactly what they were doing.

Of course the banks knew what they were doing. That's how a nation gets controlled by a few people in a "democracy".

It's the same that happened in Germany, that happened in Russia, that happened in China and now it is happening here.

Karl Marx was upset that Europeans didn't immediately embrace socialism. He said that it should be second nature since Europeans were already prone to it due to centuries of Feudalism. I guess we never learn. A bunch of serfs we are.

[Assassin Pilot]

NOOOO! Not my money!

Wait a minute.... what money? I just spent it all on ipods, TVs, "major cell phones that do the internet thing" (my favorite one, thanks FVR), a big house, a swimming pool, club memberships, and buying everything on TV that said "this is a must have".....

Some people just don't know when to stop. I feel sorry for all you guys who pay taxes. When you do the math, $300 billion / 300 million Americans = $1000 per American . There goes the new recliner from the living room.

EDIT: reminds me of an old but still funny picture we can all relate to, especially now.

[Teotwawki]

Somehow I always end up on the wrong side of these take and give programs.

[Chris]

Actually.... the thing is the government in the 90s went down on banks for not lending to more "subprime borrowers" used to be you just couldn't get a house, but the government wanted more people in homes, so.....

[bulrush]

Originally Posted by Chris

I used to get so annoyed watching TV and seeing those home shows "Jill and Don make $75,000 combined, their budget for a new home is $800,000" wtf!?

Sorry Jill and Don, you bought something you can't afford and had no business buying, you deserve no help. Learn to life within your means.

THANK you and dittos. Here's a virtual beer for you.

People wonder why so many US citizens (and sometimes businesses) are so irresponsible. It's because the gov't bails them out, that's why. You can't learn anything if someone keeps bailing you out. Ever hear of "sink or swim"? That's how my mom learned to swim. Her dad tossed her in the lake, that's what they did back then.

Just down my street a couple bought a house that had been empty for years. They stayed only 1 year. I bet they got an ARM and after 1 year, the interest rate went up, they couldn't afford the payments, and they left.

BTW, my housing budget is 35% of my TAKE HOME pay, not GROSS pay.

[bulrush]

Originally Posted by FVR

Most of the people that I know of and who have heard of, who are, or who have had foreclosures, ARE STUPID BASTARDS WHO SHOULD NOT EVEN HAVE A BANK ACCOUNT. They can't afford their mortgages but have ipods, blue tooths, exp. SUV's, 5 or 6 tv's, major cell phones that do the internet thing.

They just prioritize for their wants, and expect everyone to feel sorry for them. And, the US political parties do and will again, take money from the hard working Americans who are trying to succeed and doing the right thing.

I love you guys. You make me all teary-eyed.

[BraggSurvivor]

Originally Posted by bulrush

THANK you and dittos. Here's a virtual beer for you.

People wonder why so many US citizens (and sometimes businesses) are so irresponsible. It's because the gov't bails them out, that's why. You can't learn anything if someone keeps bailing you out. Ever hear of "sink or swim"? That's how my mom learned to swim. Her dad tossed her in the lake, that's what they did back then.

Just down my street a couple bought a house that had been empty for years. They stayed only 1 year. I bet they got an ARM and after 1 year, the interest rate went up, they couldn't afford the payments, and they left.

BTW, my housing budget is 35% of my TAKE HOME pay, not GROSS pay.

Pray, tell. How do we generate the money? Either we have to tax for it, print it, or borrow it.

If you tax to get it, you're taking the product of my efforts to give to someone that may be happy sitting around watching Jerry Springer and eating twinkies.

If you borrow to get it, then you're in someone else's pocket. Like most of the West in the debt of the East. Clearly, this is not a great long term strategy. Just try borrowing from everyone around you long enough and see how long your "credit" holds out. Or, just look at the events unfolding today and you're an eyewitness to events unfolding in real time. Tell me in three years what a great idea this was.

If you print to get it, then you increase the total supply of money and each unit of money is worth less. Inflation. The biggest tax of all. Again, tell me in three years how smart an idea this was.

Don't you think it's actually most fair and equitable that people get to keep what they earn? That in a world where I work harder than the twinkie eater, I deserve more? Or, is it that you prefer to incent poor behavior?

If you reward work and honesty, you get more work and honesty. If you incent bad behavior, you get more bad behavior.

After all, economics is just the study of incentives....

[Teotwawki]

Gotta tell ya'll about a family of four adults that lives near us.

Everyone of them is on SS disability but only one of them is legit (MD or something). The other three are healthier than I am. All three work in the gray/black market - tax free cash only. The elder male is a stone mason.

They live an upper middle class lifestyle mostly on "our" nickel. Very nice house, pool, lots of land, manicured lawn, designer furniture and clothing, late model cars.

I believe that sometimes people do need a safety net - but NOT a big comfy recliner.

[Rick]

You increase income by increasing GNP. It's no different than increasing productivity within your company (Slightly different because it's more than GDP but relevant for the example). Produce more widgets in the same amount of time and you increase your company's income.

[Teotwawki]

Originally Posted by Rick

Produce more widgets in the same amount of time and you increase your company's income.

Reminds me of a story...

An old guy with an old pickup truck finds a great direct from the farm source for pumpkins one fall. He buys a pickup truck load and takes 'em to a street corner in the city.

Over the weekend he sells every pumpkin.

A friend asks: How much did you make?

Old Man: Figure, figure... Oh... I lost $10.00!

Friend: Well what will you do now?

Old Man: Guess I need a bigger pickup.

----

Point being - production alone does not equate to increased revenue / wealth.

If no one is buying your widgets or you cannot sell them for a profit you go out of business.

Now this same fella perhaps could have made a $10.00 profit but being an honest man figured in his tax liability of $20.00.

Want to increase gross national or domestic product? Reduce tax rates. Old man selling pumpkins is happy. His customers are happy. The farmer is happy.

Everyone is happy except for...?

[Ole WV Coot]

Reward for Stupidity, now if I had thought of that I could found a place within all the corruption. Does anyone buy what they can afford anymore, or am I just dumb, don't play the system or what? Dumb ole me got out of anything well before the crap hit the fan. If I can see it from the bottom why was it such a big mystery at the top? I do know this mess is costing me $$. The interest rates are not worth mentioning. I wonder if these people who always overbought, ran up credit cards could have handled the interest rates of the late '70s. I remember 7% VA & 7.5% FHA home loans in 1970 and the high teens in late 70s. Would I get bailed out today? NO WAY. I don't owe anyone anything, and that would automatically exclude me from gov aid.

[Rick]

It certainly does increase revenue. It does not necessarily increase wealth. I sort of assumed a profit was being made in my example. But my example stands. If you want to increase INCOME you only need to increase productivity. To Bragg's question, "How do we generate more money", the answer is increase GNP.

[Sam Reeves]

Originally Posted by Rick

It certainly does increase revenue. It does not necessarily increase wealth. I sort of assumed a profit was being made in my example. But my example stands. If you want to increase INCOME you only need to increase productivity. To Bragg's question, "How do we generate more money", the answer is increase GNP.

Keep in mind that needs to be taxable income in order to support the government and keep the wheels turning.