Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Two Different Solutions To Morgage Foreclosure

Posted 11 years ago on Aug. 28, 2012, 7:30 p.m. EST by ZenDogTroll (13032) 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



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years 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.


[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years 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) 11 years 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?


[-] 0 points by Shayneh (-482) 11 years 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?


[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 11 years ago

Europe rarely exceeds 50% home owership.

[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (647) 11 years 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.


[-] 2 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (647) 11 years ago

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


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 DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (647) 11 years 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.


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.


[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (647) 11 years 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.


[-] 1 points by DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (647) 11 years 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 (647) 11 years 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 DebtNEUTRALITYpetition (647) 11 years 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.



[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 11 years ago

when the banks lost money Japan gave money to the homeowners


[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 11 years ago

build the economy from the bottom


[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 11 years 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 TheRazor (-329) 11 years 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.


[-] -2 points by TheRazor (-329) 11 years 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) 11 years 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) 11 years 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) 11 years 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) 11 years 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 TheRazor (-329) 11 years 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.


[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 11 years 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.


[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 11 years ago

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

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