Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Two Different Solutions To Morgage Foreclosure

Posted 1 year ago on Aug. 28, 2012, 7:30 p.m. EST by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

From CBS News:

Las Vegas a casualty of the housing bust

August 28, 2012 6:57 PM

President Barack Obama's federal mortgage relief programs have helped 3.4 million homeowners with government-backed mortgages to refinance. He wants to expand that to 3.5 million more homeowners with mortgages guaranteed by private banks.

"If you are ineligible for refinancing just because you are underwater on your mortgage, through no fault of your own, this plan changes that," Mr. Obama said in February.

It will cost the government $4 billion to back the refinanced mortgages. That has met stiff resistance in Congress.

Gov. Mitt Romney advocates a different approach: Get government out of the way and let the market work. As he told the Las Vegas Review Journal last year: "Don't try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom, allowing investors to buy homes, put renters in them."

.

~ Discuss

39 Comments

39 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (34986) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

mittens the rotten bastard. They ( government ) should have let the TBTF fail and have covered the insured depositors savings and checking accounts and transferred home mortgages to a holding company ( to hold ) until the mess was straightened out.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I dunno - there may have been large consequences that were mostly avoided with the bailout.

But if the homeowners had been bailed out, then the money would have kept flowing from the homeowner to the bank through the loan mechanism -

not viable in the face of ballooning interest rates

I dunno. I just dunno.

But - if they are too big to fail they must be broken up - at the very least they cannot be gambling with their deposits.

That's insane.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (34986) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Truth - they are insane. They are running this country straight into the ground and the rich rats are starting to give up their citizenship and are running for safe havens.

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

I believe I read somewhere that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac want to block sell foreclosed homes to big businesses so that they can rent them to those who can no longer afford to buy a home because of the economy.

Do you really think our economy is in great shape and do you really think that four more years of the same administration will make things better?

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

No I do not think our economy is in great shape

and I do not believe that repelicans will do what is necessary to improve the economy. I do believe the current admin holds the economies best hopes - primarily because anyone new who opposes repelican policy will be fighting an uphill battle all the way and the current admin already has the terrain mapped out.

Repelicans will sell us all out - I'm not simply convinced of that - the last 14 years clearly establish it as historical fact.

here - and just scroll to the second article: Upon the Question of our National Default

and if the link doesn't work let me know - I'll have to do some word press research.

[-] 0 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Well let me explain to you what's going to happen if the present admin stays in office.

There will be more gridock - nothing will be done about jobs, nothing will be done about the debt but you can be sure there will be massive spending to make people think the governmet can turn the economy around.

The truth of the matter is it is not the government that stimulates the economy it's the people. Businesses are not hiring because of uncertainty - and when businesses are uncertain they don't hire.

Can Obama solve that delima by putting the country billions more in debt - no.

Can Obama taken uncertainty out of the business sector - no

Can Obama stimulate the business sector - no - for if he was able to do that businesses would be hiring.

It's the uncertainty with Obama that is causing the problem - every time you turn on the news there is more uncertainty about what he is doing with regard to the laws in this country. He doesn't believe in laws -

So I will wager with you $200.00 that if Obama gets elected, in two years we will be looking at a 17 trillion debt, the unemployment will still be over 8% and the economy will still suck.

Care to take me up on it?

[-] 3 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

It's the uncertainty with Obama that is causing the problem -

you are either a fool, or a liar

I paid attention to the budget debate last year. I saw very clearly where all of the uncertainty came from.

scumbag repelicans insist we will not raise taxes - never mind what historical precedents might exist.

Never mind the fact that spending on infrastructure is a necessity and it keeps people working - which means they can pay their bills and this helps keep the economy going.

piss off you repelican shill

[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

Europe rarely exceeds 50% home owership.

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (586) 1 year ago

Except that Barack Obama has also said what Romney said, and on more than one occasion. It doesn't matter if Barack Obama has helped 3.4 million homeowners if another 3.4 million homeowners lost their homes.

Barack Obama's is just pandering to the foreclosure market. Barack Obama had 3 plus years to create change in the foreclosure market, Obama's advocacy of parallel foreclosure has been constitution busting at it's worst.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

Except that Barack Obama has also said what Romney said,

bullshit

I call bullshit

[-] 2 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (586) 1 year ago

You can call bullshit, but here is what Obama's HUD director told Las Vegas Homeowners back in November of 2010.

http://www.parallelforeclosure.blogspot.com/2010/11/barack-obamas-team-in-full-retreat-on.html

I know it's a hard pill to swallow that Obama is just as bad as the republicans, and ultimately worse because people believe he is a savior.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

My expectation is that he did not personally design the program. You've provided an instance where the program has been seen to fail - yet no examination of the precise mechanism behind it beyond the assertions of a member of the bureaucracy - for all I know perhaps she was engaged in a bit of sabotage.

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (586) 1 year ago

Diane E. Thompson warned the Obama Administration in July of 2009, in writing and at a congressional hearing on the housing crisis that she was invited to speak, about what was wrong with the Home Foreclosure situation.

Obama has not addressed Ms. Thompson's concerns over three years later.

http://swarmthebanks.blogspot.com/2010/11/not-breaking-news-because-its-almost-16.html

If you go to the link, you will find three links that show what Thompson said, and what the Obama administration was trying to claim as truth about home foreclosures.

This is now a second Obama higher up tooting the administration's alleged success even after being warned about what the REAL problems were.

I think Obama said it as well, but I will have to check around my other blogs to find him saying that HAMP doesn't really work.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I would be surprised if you could not find an admission by him that the program does not work as well as intended -

I do not believe you will find him stating:

  • Don't try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom, allowing investors to buy homes, put renters in them

I don't believe that has ever been his position. I Think part of the problem is that there are any number of individuals in the design and implementation process, and not all of them are committed to the success of the program.

I think there may be a lot of them who either believe the Romney line, or they are just jealous since they never got a bailout on their own home loans - I've heard from people just like that -

  • "I never got bailed out! Why should they?"

This of course ignores the fraudulent nature of the loan process behind the way the subprime market was handled.

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (586) 1 year ago

But when I can find the people who represent him saying it, and then there is this from Mother Jones. Mother Jones is a progressive magazine, and in their report they state that Obama and his people knew HAMP would fail even before it was implemented.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2010/05/obamas-hamp-and-goldmans-abacus-rigged-fail

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (586) 1 year ago

I think Obama has actually said the same thing as well. I have about a dozen blogs, I don't recall which blog I put the Obama quote on, it might have been on my Swarm the Banks blogs...(shuffles off to find that quote).

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (586) 1 year ago

This is my favorite (not) quote from Vicky Henry, operations specialist for the department of housing and urban development...Ironically, also in Las Vegas, back in November of 2010.

"We need a Darwinian flush for the housing market to recover," Henry said at a Foreclosure Prevention Summit sponsored by the city of Las Vegas at Historic Fifth Street School. "We cannot start recovery from the middle. We have to start from the bottom and I think it's reasonable to say we haven't reached the bottom yet. We need to let the foreclosure process work with some regulation and let the market come down as far as it's going to go."

"A Darwinian Flush", holy crap!. Have we been flushed yet? Pull the toilet lever once for Barack Obama or two for Romney as we circle the drain one final time.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I'm not in the admin - but that sounds like a serious disconnect from what the program was supposed to do.

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (586) 1 year ago

I don't have an answer for you. I can just guess that Obama is so strongly backed by Soros that once Wall Street is in his cabinet and within his administration, he just views economic reality through their view of the world.

Mother Jones article states that the Obama administration knew that HAMP would fail before they launched it. http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2010/05/obamas-hamp-and-goldmans-abacus-rigged-fail

Then this article questions why Obama has hired a former Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae lobbyist to be his national security advisor.

http://americaswatchtower.com/2010/10/21/barack-obama-names-former-fannie-mae-lobbyist-as-national-security-advisor/

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I don't know what is up with that.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

when the banks lost money Japan gave money to the homeowners

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

that is the way to do it, not that I have facts to back up that assertion, it just makes sense. It seems like the most likely method to keep the economy running smoothly.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

build the economy from the bottom

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

that does seem to be the only reasonable approach.

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

The Dems have completely mishandled the mortgage crisis. We should have let property values fall like a stone and get people out of loas they cant afford. Home ownership is not the utopia everyone thinks it is. Private home ownership should not exceed 50% of the population. The huge error is thinking homes only go up in value. They also go down in value. Homes rarely go up more than historically 2% a year. When they go down, its better to be a renter.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I think that is insane

You present a theory - one that does not account for the fact that the dramatic fall in home prices came as a result of default, that those defaults came as a result of fraud perpetrated by the banks writing the loans, fraud in the bundling and sale of those loans as AAA grade investment, fraud in the foreclosure process itself with robo signatures . . . .

  • that is fraud on top of fraud on top of fraud

  • and the fuckers should be shot

It is also a theory that does not take into account the massive disruption to the economy as a whole as the money stops flowing into the banks due to foreclosure, and the consequences all of that entails

AND FINALLY

It does nothing to curb rampant speculation in such widespread and diverse areas of the economy as housing, futures prices on food an fuel - all of which have a deleterious and undeniable negative effect on the welfare of humanity

  • world wide

I don't accept your theory, I don't like your theory, and I don't like you. No doubt, you and those like you are simply spawn of satan, cloven hooved and forked tongued, we should drive wooden stakes through your chests, sever your heads, and burn your bloody corpses . . . .

and quickly

before all of humanity is turned into nothing but a bunch of zombies

[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

You need to read more, either you are poorly informed or stupid, my guess is the latter.

Real estate doesnt just go up, it also goes down. Home ownership isnt a good idea for many many people.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

.

wait, what was your question?

[-] -2 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

Oh boy. Iceland. How many people there? 300000? Utterly insignificant. Plus what does Iceland have to do with real estate?

Is it that hard to stay on topic?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Iceland's people stood up to the IMF, and they stood up to their own recently elected leaders, and refused to be lumbered with the debts incurred by their own banksters. They also implemented direct democracy, which is a goal we all seek here at #ows.

I guess you really believe that "austerity" measures are the only way out of a financial situation created by greedy criminals simply because they have escaped prosecution.

[-] -1 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

Iceland is far too small and insignificant to use as an example for a country the size of the US. The entire population of Iceland could be vaporized in a second and all we would feel is a small ripple in the force, if that.

I commend them for standing up to the bankers but its not a transitive example. And lots of folks siad "Let the banks fail" here in America, me for one, and Obama, yes, Obama and Geitner said we had to save them.

There is a process called creative destruction, its the backbone of Capitalism, but you idiots think the government should step in and block creative destruction. So very very wrong. Real estate falling was a very good thing, it was unsustainable, far too expensive. Now prudent people who avoided ludicrous loans are back buying houses at far more affordable prices and the econ is beginning to churn a bit.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I stopped reading at "you idiots".

You are a patronising arsehole, who doesn't bother reading and researching, before spouting off the party-line bullshit you've been spoon-fed.

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

Good. And I knew you werent someone to spend much time on when you used Iceland as an example. Only an idiotic person would compare the largest country financially the world has ever seen with a country not even the size of Wyoming or the size of Fresno and extrapolate that the 2 are equal and can respond to things equally.

If Wyoming, which is twice the size of Iceland dissappeared tomorrow, most of America wouldnt even know. No one would feel a thing. Wyoming can answer questions far differently than New York or Cailfornia.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

umm - it sounded like a reasonable response to widespread fraud rampant in the savings and investment sector

[-] -1 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

No where can anyone find widespread fraud in the loan sector. No where. Yes I am sure there were pockets of "cowboy" mentality loan officers but STILL, someone has to sign on the bottom line for these loans. People not bright enough to question whether they could or would afford the home if it dropped in value have to look in the mirror.

Real estate goes up and quite certainly it goes down and a borrower has to be ready for both.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

wow

just wow

{ ahem }

Kay

  • the loans were often written without fact checking income statements - these statements would not and did not support the ballooning interest rate the contract stipulated

    • the home buyer was bribed with a loan often requiring no or greatly reduced equity requirements - the down payment;
    • the person writing the loan was given bonus payments for each loan contract
  • the bundling of these subprime contracts into derivatives, which were then marketed as AAA grade securities

  • Goldman Sux selling these securities as investments while betting against them with AIG

  • robo signing phoney loan contracts for court filing in the foreclosure process -

and you should consider this last point very carefully, you repelican shill because this is a final example of fraud, it is rampant, and integral to the entire wave of foreclosures that have taken place in the wake of the subprime market collapse. Without robo signings most of the foreclosures would not be taking place.

the fuckers should be shot.

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

•the loans were often written without fact checking income statements - these statements would not and did not support the ballooning interest rate the contract stipulated ◦the home buyer was bribed with a loan often requiring no or greatly reduced equity requirements - the down payment; ◦the person writing the loan was given bonus payments for each loan contract<<

So who is exactly fraudulent? Why should loan officers have to fact check income statements? Shouldnt the borrowers been honest and forthright in the loan app? The home buyer was bribed? honest people cant be bribed, fuck them if they lost their house, they took a bribe.

[-] 3 points by ZenDog (13178) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

So who is exactly fraudulent? Why should loan officers have to fact check income statements?

umm ahh umm

lets see, ahh

  • because it is bank policy

  • it may even be the law

AS for the rest of your comment, you should go visit the 60 Minutes website, I'm sure they have past spots on this available. Interviews with some of the American Citizens who were led astray with a kind smile and assurances by the experts that these bank products were just perfectly suited for their circumstances . . . are infuriating given the abuse they represent by the banking industry.

I find your ignorance appalling.

piss off.

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 1 year ago

Your link used the word bribe. That ends the discussion.

Yes or no: People should fill out loan apps honestly?