RichardfromHB

Rising Number of Renters Could Spell Trouble for Consumer Price Index

Living in a high concentration of Hispanics, I notice that the population of HELOC abuser homeowners more closely resemble the existing households of the minority populations, larger family size, more extended families in the same household, ect. This may be an indicia of economic stress/status, but may actually have a positive influence on social structures. For example, some believe that both parents working leaves the kids free to get in trouble (most teenage pregnancies occur between 3 and 6 in the afternoon). With Granny or Auntie in the house, kids might get additional guidance. It takes a village, you know.


On May 08 09:11 AM herbert hoover wrote:

> Rents are falling and foreclosures are rising. The number of households
> is falling with children moving back to their parents and elderly
> moving back in with their children. We soon will see more three generation
> families living together than at anytime since the 1930s.

Another Happy Day for Banks: Cramdown Bill Fails

A similar cramdown proposal was floated last fall when the TARP funding was first being debated. Obama urged that the cramdown be unlinked so as to not delay the TARP emergency funding. In retrospect, the banks got all their trillions and can now sit back and pick off the bills that might give them any haircut. Ah the American way.

Banks Receive Good News - No Cram Down

You don't really describe the existing law correctly. Fed bankruptcy judges for years have had the power to rewrite/modify secured loans on boats, second homes, apartment complexes, etc., JUST NOT 1st homes of the debtor. So McCain could get 8 of his 9 home loans reduced if he needed to in order to be viable after bankruptcy. It's just the guy who owns just one home that can't get any help. Is it really unfair for the little guy to enjoy the same write offs the big guys have used for years? Get you facts straight before you spout the bankers' talking points.

Citi's Flip-Flop on Mortgage Cramdowns: A Really Bad Idea

Only one other commenter had it right. This is not an issue about sanctity of contract. Corporations and high asset individuals have had the ability to ask a bankruptcy judge to modify their loan agreements for many years. Current law allows cram downs for mortgages on vacation properties, but not for those on first residences. Applying the same rules to first homes is NOT socialism, just an end to hypocricy. It also wouldn't be the end of the world as we know it since banks still wrote loans for yachts and vacation homes until the greedy guys broke the system.

A measure to allow judges to reduce ('cram down') principal amounts of mortgages for troubled borrowers cleared a key hurdle Tuesday when it was approved by a U.S. House panel. Most lenders oppose the move, saying it will increase the cost of borrowing.

You are proceeding from a false premise. For years, bankruptcy has been used gleefully by corps to renegotiate their commercial loans and to break their union contracts. Elites can modify their yacht loans, vacation home loans, and their rental property loans in bankruptcy court; just not their first residence. Applying the same rules to home loans presents no hint of socialism or any greater moral hazard than enjoyed by upper income individuals. If our Swap problem has origins in defaulting mortgages, it would seem that preventing additional defaults would tend to stem the problem.

Mortgages and Lending In The Subprime Meltdown [Housing Tracker]

There is a reason that they call it predatory lending. A whole bunch of unregulated mortgage brokers who know how to work the system to make their points and fees on a public that trusts them too much and is not sophisticated enough to even evaluate the terms of the deal, much less know what they said in their applications. Then Fall St. sells the notes and derrived instruments back and forth and maes more pionts and fees. After the teaser rate period and the ARM resets, defaults are rampant and the house of cards comes tumbling down. Fall St. has no moral superiority to the screwed homeowner who will never own another house. They become the permanent lumpendevelopment of America while Fall St. is well taken care of by Congress who have been well financed by Fall St. for years. Just hope that the sleeping giant is not awakened by the sudden downward spiral of the working class' economic position.

Alternative Bailout Plan: Good and Bad Ideas

How can anyone figure out how to insure an asset when its current value is unknown? They even want to stop the "mark to market" rule. The core concept proposed by Bush is flawed. Call some hearings and ask some economists. Google Sweden 1992 banking crisis. They had good success promptly steering their financial institutions back to safety. Learn the lessons, write it for the Dems, and own it. The tweeking that was done to the Bush proposal resulted in a toothless and weak 100 page bill that tried to bury and hide its weakness from the voters. Rather than condescendingly claiming that the American people didn’t understand (Cf, McSame of Obama at first debate), or that the leadership didn’t explain it well enough, the reality is that if you vote in favor of bailing out the bad actors, you may lose votes from constituents in five weeks at the next election. That is your moral hazard. The bill that failed would not have prevented one of the 10K daily foreclosure, could have been filibustered until Bush spent all $700B, would only have made some parachutes "non-deductible", merely required a report “suggesting” how the taxpayer will be paid back, and allowed the same lobbyists to set prices for their trash that the taxpayers would pay. As a final insult, instead of providing more confidence through transparency, the failed bill would allow Paulson to suspend the mark-to-market rule. This is intellectual dishonesty that will further erode confidence in our banking system. Do a better job on all these issues and allow bankruptcy judges to implement the rewriting of loans, or face the wrath of the voters. I think many voters would accept the temporary governmental equity position in the banking sector as long as the bad guys aren’t seen as maintaining their ability to subvert the programs and continue to rip off the system. Don’t pull another FISA cave.