Comments on: Irresponsible Home Buyers Reaching Deeper into our Pockets

By: MasterPo

MasterPo — Tue, 05 May 2009 14:22:33 +0000

Why stop at a house? How about cars?

If you buy a car on a 60 or 72 month loan and 2-3 years into ownership you can’t pay why not have the gov bail you out too?

Afterall, you need your car to get to work, the doctor, go food shopping, take your kids to school, etc.

So why not bail out car owners too?

By: Rob Bennett

Rob Bennett — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:59:56 +0000

My guess is that a whole lot of us are going to end up becoming “crybabies” if the economy goes over a cliff.

I’d rather solve the problem than point fingers.

Rob

By: Rick Beagle

Rick Beagle — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:09:08 +0000

I am shocked, but I kind of agree with Kitty.

On the one hand helping with a SECOND mortgage outrageous to me, but on the other hand – it’s a mess. Question is how do you want to clean it up?

Rick Beagle

By: kitty

kitty — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 02:58:09 +0000

This is something I actually have mixed feeling about. Yes, this is all pretty outrageous. But I am asking myself what is cheaper for us and the economy? Is it cheaper to have these irresponsible buyers or is it cheaper to let all these houses foreclose? Taxpayers will not have to pay for foreclosures, but foreclosures affect responsible neighbors, drive the prices further down, lead to more foreclosures and hurt the economy. I also feel for the responsible condo owners living in complexes with multiple foreclosures, especially if buyers default on common charges too. Condo owners who are perfectly OK financially may find it difficult to pay when their common charges skyrocket or there is an assessment as the result of non-paying neighbors.

One thing that bothers me about this program is the complete lack of conditions of what happens if at some future point the prices go up again. I don’t think it is fair that the home buyer profit from it. I think there has to be some kind of a provision that would allow taxpayers and lenders to get paid from (any) future profits.

As to the rest – I am on the fence here because I just don’t know what will cost us more.

@Roger – great quote, thanks. Pretty scary, though.

By: Roger

Roger — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:27:05 +0000

Whenever I hear news like this, I’m reminded of Tocqueville’s comments in Democracy in America: ‘The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.’ (Or one of the many variations thereon.)

By: Clair Schwan of Libertarian Logic

Clair Schwan of Libertarian Logic — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:44:11 +0000

This is all part of the “everyone will get ice cream” campaign promises. It’s a sure way to convince some people that their actions and irresponsibility don’t matter. And, others like me will just stop being a tax paying enabler of this insanity.

We can’t lay all the blame on King Obama. There is a congress that supports these efforts, and silly Americans vote them into office for decades on end.

Also, many before our current King have greased the skids of expectations. Remember the $1+ million paid out if you had a family member killed on 9/11? Thank you King George.

Clair

By: SJ

SJ — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 19:36:04 +0000

Let’s all sign up for the brave new world. Looks exciting.

That’s the problem w/ democrazy and regular elections. But this does beg the question, what’s a better system?