Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  2 3 4 5 6  Next ›  Last »  (51 total)
11:35 AM on 08/01/2012
greenery- 95 fans, under banking bosses of chris dodd, and barney frank--- bush warned of the problems, but the dems only said things were great and no problems. Bush did NOT warn, Bush WAS warned by William K.Black,2004, Bush`s response was to cut back the number of investigators, nothing was done and it continued.WHY?
William Kurt Black (born 6 Sept.1951) is an American lawyer,academic,author, and former bank regulator.Black`s expertise is in white collar crime.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:45 AM on 08/01/2012
Fanned. I love Bill Black too.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:34 AM on 08/01/2012
Update 7:00 PM: Adam Levitin points out, per Ezra Klein, that Obama could get rid of DeMarco via simply making a permanent appointment on a recess. Technically true, but Obama had that option to him long ago, in fact back in 2010 when the Senate let his appointee Joseph Smith hang in the breeze and Smith withdrew. And he also could have done it earlier this year, when DeMarco first made his opposition to principal mods clear (he deferred taking a stand as long as possible). To replace DeMarco at this juncture would be waving a red flag in front of Fannie and Freddie hating Republicans, and would bolster Romney’s campaign by giving them a solid anti-Obama talking point. And the reality, as we indicated above, is that Obama has never been serious about helping homeowners. He’s never crossed swords with the folks who demonize borrowers in distress, never had any of his minions get tough with recalcitrant servicers. He has plenty of latitude to make an impact, and the only thing he threw his weight behind was the cosmetic, bank-serving mortgage settlement. He’s clearly made the calculation, and he has determined he is well served with DeMarco in place as a scapegoat.

03:44 PM on 08/01/2012
Thanks for pointing to the naked capitalism site. I'll be making that part of my regular news feed.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:52 PM on 08/01/2012
You're welcome. I love NCs articles on financial fraud and politics - she tells it like it is.
04:22 PM on 08/01/2012
Great site. Thanks!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:30 PM on 08/01/2012
welcome. You might like Mandelman Matters too, if you are interested in bankster fraud.
11:15 AM on 08/01/2012
Why don't we give everyone a house, a car, a job and be done with it. It seems that's where we are headed.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:43 AM on 08/01/2012
Why don't we just hand the banksters the keys to the Treasury and be done with it? Oops, we already did.
01:56 PM on 08/01/2012
Is there something evil about expecting one to uphold their portion of the contract, i.e. agreeing to pay the terms of the mortage?
11:49 AM on 08/01/2012
He!!, make everything free...
11:10 AM on 08/01/2012
Republicans are scared to invest in anything related to Obama and I cant blame them. His bailout policy was a travesty and a failure, his Stimulus package was a complete nightmare disaster. Dozens of long time American iconic companies are now gone, the guy is not qualified to be in office. Community organizer as president......., whats next we will have a Cub Scout leader as president?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:01 PM on 08/01/2012
TARP was enacted by the Bush administration.
As to Stimulus here are 9 independent study results:
It worked (econometric):

Feyrer and Sacerdote.
Chodorow-Reich, Feiveson, Liscow, and Woolston.

It worked (modeling):

Congressional Budget Office.
Council of Economic Advisors.
Zandi and Blinder.

It worked a little bit (modeling):
Oh and Reis.

It didn’t work (econometric):
Conley and Dupor.
The Dole Will Only Rise From Here
11:09 AM on 08/01/2012
So, those of us who have paid our mortgages for years now, can we default and get the gov't now to pay for us?
11:33 AM on 08/01/2012
Those of us who have paid our mortgages have ALSO watched the equity in our houses shrink dramatically, have seen "bank owned" properies sell for pennies on the dollar, have watched foreclosed properties sit empty and uncared for, and witnessed the American dream of home ownership turn into a nightmare. Our economy is 70% consumer based. For however long the housing market remains down, so will our economy. Fixing the housing market needed to happen when we "bailed out the banks" it didn't. The writing down of the mortgages would give the American conumer its first actuaql help since the collapse of 2007 began. It would jump start the housing market and enliven the economy. THAT would be good news for all, even the people who paid their mortgages!
The Dole Will Only Rise From Here
11:37 AM on 08/01/2012
ok, long as we all get the same treatment, I can retire now if they take care of our mortgages.
11:53 AM on 08/01/2012
I would have to disagree. If some get write downs, it's generally going to be people that should NOT have been in the house in the first place. And now you're willing to give them a pass? I'm surely not. I HAVE paid my mortgage without even a hint of being late. Yes, my motgage is underwater, not as much as some, for sure. But I for one have no sympathy. Run the "bums" out of the damn house and get someone in who can pay for it already and be done with it....

10:40 AM on 08/01/2012
What about helping the people that did pay there house note on time and didnt buy too big a house and did keep up the place? why not help the ones that are doing what they signed for and didnt get in over there heads? and this bill would only help a few, not all. they who did not get up to there eyballs in debt, deserve better.
All hits, all the time!
11:02 AM on 08/01/2012
There is that moral hazard indeed.

So principal write down is rewarding bad behavior or is it preserving the U.S. economy?

Very good question - we are hanging in there but at times feel like idiots when we see what other people are getting away with in terms of loan write downs, etc...

It creates a very sticky wicket in terms of what other borrowers will feel to be a system rewarding those who in some instances were not responsible.

I previously had no idea how many homes are behind really behind, with no sign in the yard, the occupants still in the home, you drive by, and for all appearances nothing is wrong...

That is because there are so many, that the banks cannot afford to proceed and glut the market further with repossessed homes which will drive down prices further - because the taxpayers are actually the owners of the many of those assets that are valued above what the current home prices would fetch, glutting the market will damage those asset values even further...

A big freaking mess alright...
11:56 AM on 08/01/2012
And those of us who lived in our cars for nearly 15 years so we could save enough money to buy a house we could afford.
10:35 AM on 08/01/2012
It isn't surprising that banks aren't loaning and companies aren't investing. With the government continually stepping in and talking about stepping in and modifying loans and contracts who knows what direction it might lurch next. It would be far fairer and less disruptive to have the government send every homeowner $50,000. Then if you paid your mortgage and didn't take out an equity loan to buy a boat, you could spend or save it (boosting the economy), if you are behind on your payments you can get caught up.
10:21 AM on 08/01/2012
What does Sheila Bair say about each of these intitiatives and is DeMarco right or wrong?

Just curious.....

I do agree that for those that are a year behind in their mortgages that it is unlikely they will pay and make their mortgages current. But the question begs - how many more have been harmed by the delay in implementation and who weren't a year behind while all this blather started and continued.

They would have to be found to be financially able to NOW to pay their mortgage based on debts, wages to qualify. If I remember there was once a discussion to create longer term mortgages (by agreement with the lenders who were getting an incentive to establish these longer term mortgages) which would rescue those that were harmed by the fraud committed by mortgage creators (i.e., Countrywide who found people to be qualified by changing their loan documents to fix their data so they would qualify for underwriters - and the borrower didn't know it).

There have been inventive proposals to stop the glut of the empty houses. No wise leader and lender will step up (despite the bailout we gave the financial crooks who created this mess).

BTW - there was NO directive from the federal goverment or any administration to put unqualified borrowers into houses they can't afford. I only rely on "LINKS" to those that claim otherwise where it states in the law that it was required or directed. You won't find it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Taking crap from where it comes
10:00 AM on 08/01/2012
Heres my personal problem,bought a house within my means,made my payments on time for 13yrs,lost my job used my annuity to pay morgage for a yr ran out of money,did whatever it took to make the payments for the next half yr all the while kept trying to fit into any of the programs availible I didnt,BOFA jerked me around they whole time had me jumping through hoops,misled me about what they were doing,and now its really doesnt look good for me and my family,all the while the couple up the block bought a house after me did exspansive remodel had a ballon payment ,defaulted on loan and some how they got a modification,they now pay less for their morgage then I used to pay for rent have a house twice the size of mine.How is any of this right and did I mention they didnt buy with in their means(I know what he brings home,in the trades with me)How is this right?I did what I thought was the right thing and now it looks like the bank is going to take my house,my future and this guy gets to keep his all because he bought well above his means and knew he couldnt make his ballon payment.WTF
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:40 AM on 08/01/2012
I'm sorry, but glad you told your tale. The paid tr0((s posting here would have people believe that EVERYONE in difficulty, such as yourself, was just a deadbeat and irresponsible borrower. Thank you for confirming that the 'deadbeat borrower' meme is nothing but propaganda put out by the bankster's paid poster tr0((s. Have you investigated suing your bankster for fraud-in-the-inducement when they promised you a mod and jerked you around the whole time? Hope you kept records. While I cannot discuss my settlement. I will tell you that I WON. I don't get to keep my house, but I got something very satisfactory in return.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Taking crap from where it comes
11:59 AM on 08/01/2012
Im glad to hear you won,and hope nothing but the best in the future for you and yours,and yes I do keep records as best I can.Im meeting with a lawyer this week to see if I can do anything to help myself,but the way things are its hard to have much hope.It seems those in my position are the ones getting screwed,and the irresponsible are the ones that seem to get a free ride.Thank you much for the good words
It must be true! I read it on the internet
09:57 AM on 08/01/2012
Back in the 1960's, when people wanted to get out from under a mortgage, they could offer the home for sale, for x amount down and TAKE OVER PAYMENTS { Loan Assumption).
This sounds like it would work out much better for everyone involved.
Why would a Bank want to readjust their Contractual Mortgage amounts, Just because
you cant handle it? Could all this be the reason BANKS WONT MORTGAGE NEW BUYERS?
This is the reason the economy isn't getting any better. Nothing makes sense .
The power of kindness is infinite
10:46 AM on 08/01/2012
This would not really be an option today as most homes are way under water. Why would anyone assume a mortgage of 100K when the house today is worth only 50K?
It must be true! I read it on the internet
12:46 PM on 08/01/2012
If the Banks want 20% down or wont even make a Mortgage Loan. A family needs a home
and feel they can make the payment, and it's cheaper than their present Rent.
I feel that we ought to leave the option open to the prospective buyers. You or I may not think this is very smart, but there are thousands of Americans that might very well, jump at the chance to own a home, with little or no down. They wouldn't qualify for a new todays market. I still think assumable loans, would be better than foreclosures.
09:54 AM on 08/01/2012
Savings and no cost to tax payers???????
Does money just come out of toilets now?
If you forgive a debt that has allready been paid for by the loaner then it cost the loaner that amount. That loaner is essentially the taxpayer. What world do these people come from?????
The American people before corporate friends
10:39 AM on 08/01/2012
Why would anyone pay 300K for a house worth 175K? Doesn't make sense to me, either. Why is he stiffing the taxpayer with all the deadbeat loans when they could be readjusted for the best outcome for everyone?
The power of kindness is infinite
10:48 AM on 08/01/2012
The amount forgiven is considered income I believe, and they would have to pay income tax on it. That would become a burden as well and many of those people would not be able to pay it.
09:47 AM on 08/01/2012
Finally a person with guts. Obama is wrecking this country. If you don't realize he has created a civil war. Hard working honest americans are being screwed every day by this adminstration. The lazy losers get benefits so he can stay in power. Time to take back AMERICA!!!
03:12 PM on 08/01/2012
the lazy losers? like the folks who have worked for years and are now unemployed because of the economy?
You are not taking back America-- you are giving it away to your masters.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
No more Kool Aid
Believe what you see not see what you believe
09:41 AM on 08/01/2012
So Obama's admin. is upset because DeMarco wont give tax dollars to people who have not made ANY house payment in a year. Sounds fiscally responsible to me! When thses new loans are defaulted on AGAIN in 6 months...then what?
Inventor and Innovator
10:06 AM on 08/01/2012
It is much more complicated than your claim, most lenders and servicers don't want to talk to home owners for the first year.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:41 AM on 08/01/2012
Or the third-party debt collector servicer (who is not the owner of the loan and has NO STANDING in a court of law) strings a borrower along for a year in a "trial payment period," all the while dual-tracking to foreclosure.
03:14 PM on 08/01/2012
throw the bums out? and sell to speculators for even less money-- while YOUR proverty is worth even less? --- Great idea! (not)
Raquel Casillas
"History is the most difficult of all belles lettr
09:40 AM on 08/01/2012
Drag DeMarco out right now!
09:37 AM on 08/01/2012
for people with incomes below $50K all mortgage debt should be forgiven.
above that all mortgage debt above 80% of market should be forgiven.

for people with income over $250K their homes should be taxed annually at 25% of the market value.
I got used to being wrong long ago
09:53 AM on 08/01/2012
Though I do not agree with you, Side,an interesting proposition. The tax on those who make more than 250K would probably be unconstitutional. By the way, my wife and I earn less than 250K per year, but more than 50K.
10:10 AM on 08/01/2012
Boy, you sure are generous with other people's money. Who's going to take the hit on these write downs? This country is being overrun by people with a loser's mentality. The poor, poor victims of the system. Get over it. Even losers should pay their "fair share" instead of mooching off the rest of us.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:58 AM on 08/01/2012
Really? Even losers should pay their fair share? What about the Too Big To Fail LOSERS who have received bailout after bailout? Shouldn't THEY pay their "fair share"? Or do different rules apply to them?