Housing Bill

Quick Vote
How do you view the housing rescue bill?
Needed boost to economy 27% 32355
Bailout of reckless homeowners 73% 89636
Total Votes: 121991


That'd be my thought...

I don't see how this would boost the economy. Taking money from some taxpayers, so they can't spend it on anything else.. The taxpayers (us) pays for anything, and everything...

More evidence that people don't need to know or understand an issue to cast a vote. I'll wager that not single vote in that poll has even read the legislation. Considering the minuscule amount of aid directed toward homeowners as opposed to the lending institutions, whoever formed that question should be fired. Considering about 7 decades now of evidence to the contrary I'm not sure how anyone with the reading comprehension skill of a 3rd grader believes the housing market doesn't affect the economy.

LTRT wrote:Quick Vote
How do you view the housing rescue bill?
Needed boost to economy 27% 32355
Bailout of reckless homeowners 73% 89636
Total Votes: 121991


That'd be my thought...

Where was this poll taken from? Msnbc? WND? CNN? FoxNews? Just curious as to the basis of the reader of the website.

Bman wrote:

LTRT wrote:Quick Vote
How do you view the housing rescue bill?
Needed boost to economy 27% 32355
Bailout of reckless homeowners 73% 89636
Total Votes: 121991


That'd be my thought...

Where was this poll taken from? Msnbc? WND? CNN? FoxNews? Just curious as to the basis of the reader of the website.

Good question Bman. I've been wondering for a while whether or not it's fully legal to quote from another news source without at least a reference to the site/source. Copyright, etc.

Bman wrote:

LTRT wrote:Quick Vote
How do you view the housing rescue bill?
Needed boost to economy 27% 32355
Bailout of reckless homeowners 73% 89636
Total Votes: 121991


That'd be my thought...

Where was this poll taken from? Msnbc? WND? CNN? FoxNews? Just curious as to the basis of the reader of the website.

CNN...I could've posted the link but they change the 'quick vote' about every 8 or so hours. I just made the assumption that posters knew that 'quick vote' was from CNN.

meta4 wrote:Good question Bman. I've been wondering for a while whether or not it's fully legal to quote from another news source without at least a reference to the site/source. Copyright, etc.

Are you being a little facetious there?

LTRT wrote:

meta4 wrote:Good question Bman. I've been wondering for a while whether or not it's fully legal to quote from another news source without at least a reference to the site/source. Copyright, etc.

Are you being a little facetious there?

Uh, no. Not at all attempting to give you a shave, just knew I could count on you to be made an example of without getting your feathers all ruffled.

I was a little tired when I posted. It occurred to me that freedom of speech occasionally attracts people who try all sorts of different tricks. Leveraging the letter of the law to promote their brand of silence.

i see it as much more than just a bailout for reckless homeowners. it has been proven that some banks used deceptive practices to dole out "unpassable" loans. regardless of whether someone not among those who obtained the loans feels about it, if fraud is used by the lender it makes a legal difference..

this is bill is designed to allow fannie may and freddie more stability in the long view, to provide them with purchase power while the market is enticingly low. to help at-risk homeowners it includes Increase the Federal Housing Administration's role, Establish a stronger regulator for the GSEs, Permanently increase "conforming loan" limits, Create home-buyer credit, Bar down-payment assistance for FHA loans, Create an affordable housing trust fund, Bolster Fannie and Freddie.

they are gov sponsored agencies. totally different animal from bailing out bear sterns or bank of america in my opinion. private industries that over-bit and created failures in their business for potential profit should suffer the financial consequences...cut back their power players pay and perks, close down a bunch of branches--whatever. there are still fraud investigations going on with the big banks.

meta4 wrote:

LTRT wrote:

meta4 wrote:Good question Bman. I've been wondering for a while whether or not it's fully legal to quote from another news source without at least a reference to the site/source. Copyright, etc.

Are you being a little facetious there?

Uh, no. Not at all attempting to give you a shave, just knew I could count on you to be made an example of without getting your feathers all ruffled.

I was a little tired when I posted. It occurred to me that freedom of speech occasionally attracts people who try all sorts of different tricks. Leveraging the letter of the law to promote their brand of silence.

Maybe this one is a little better:

Quick Vote
Is nude dancing a form of art?
Yes 26% 8463
No 36% 11477
Depends on who's dancing 38% 12038
Total Votes: 31978

floridafun wrote:i
they are gov sponsored agencies. totally different animal from bailing out bear sterns or bank of america in my opinion. private industries that over-bit and created failures in their business for potential profit should suffer the financial consequences...cut back their power players pay and perks, close down a bunch of branches--whatever. there are still fraud investigations going on with the big banks.

Excuse me but when was Bank of America bailed out? They bailed out (bought) countrywide, which I think they were stupid for doing.

This bill allows homeowners who can't afford their ARM's to refi into a fixed rate with Fannie/Freddie. That's what is causing the stink. There is also a temporary loan to Fannie/Freddie to help them make loans available to these people.

Mostly this bill overhauls the FHA and how mortgages can be worked under Fannie/Freddie and gives them more flexibility to make loans to people in need. It also requires mortgage lenders to show buyers what their payments COULD go to.

So it's not a bail out for the GSE's, it's just making them more able to help out people that shouldn't have bought the homes they are in in the first place.

The Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA) is doing similar work and they are a not-for-profit. Personally, I'd rather see more companies like this than more money going into the GSE's, but this bill is also designed to try and help urban areas with foreclosed houses, something the NACA isn't doing.

Card, your post makes it seem that all homeowners in distress would be eligible for aid and my understanding is that only about 10% of these people would be eligible under the legislation. Also, this portion of the package is funded by FHA premiums so in a sense one might argue it is self funded. Personally I would prefer to see a bigger home education aspect included with follow ups at years 3 and 5 which is when most people have problems (IMHO) and fall prey to bad decisions. I would also like to see homeowners required to undergo counseling prior to being able to refinance. Part of my studies included analyzing the affordable housing markets of mid sized cities and it was amazing how many riskier borrowers where doing fine until they got caught up in refinance situations they didn't really understand. Rock Island IL. has some really good programs out there and one thing that stuck out was that they require lender notification to the agency when a homeowner is 15 days past due. This early notification has led to almost 100% of their delinquencies being able to be resolved without foreclosure.