Poll for the day question.....Federal Mortage Assistance

I have very mixed feelings about this. I can see pros and cons. Its better for everyone not to have a lot of empty foreclosed homes around. But if they couldnt afford the house to begin with maybe its for the best in the long run. On this one I really dont know.

I'm in favor! The government bails out corporations, why not a citizen. Many of them were laid-off from their jobs. Many jobs relocated in other countries. Many not able to make payments because they lost their jobs. Look at all the millions going to Iraq, and other places. So yes, I'm in favor of helping American citizens for a chance.

I'm for helping if it helps the homeowner and and the homeowner has got laid off or is facing another situation beyond their control. Helping out someone who just got stupid and bought more than they can afford. No way.

I also have mixed feelings about this. If the person lost their job or there were circumstances beyond their control I see no problem with it, however if they just bought a house that they couldn't afford then I say no.

For me, it would depend on the situation. I know people who lost their homes who didn't lose it due to ARM's, or job loss- in those cases, no, they shouldn't get assistance. These are cases where they simply stopped paying, or wasted money on other things.

In instances where major job loss, or huge ARM's are the result, I think the state should step in with some sort of program that helps the family keep ahead, without just handing them the money to bail out. Something like a deferment for X amount of time (the loan is put on hold for 2-3 months, and then the payments start right back up the way they should, with a maximum amount of times people can use this- say once for every 2 years they've paid on the house), or allowing them to refinance at a lower rate with zero closing costs, so that they are able to extend the loan and lower the payments, but without the credit approval that they would otherwise be required to get through a normal refinance.

I would rather they help the homeowners than the mortgage companies and banks but I guess truly you can't help the homeowners without helping the companies. Of course a certain criteria would need to be established. If they can't afford the house then no they shouldn't be helped to keep it but if for whatever reason they just got into a rough spot but are the way to recovery then absolutely they should be helped by whatever means possible.

I'm with the "mixed" crowd. I haven't really thought about this or gotten much info on how it would be done, but I suspect there are some problems with it. How do we determine who gets the help? Does it unfairly penalize the people who are scraping by but still meeting their mortgage payments? How much would this distort the mortgage market, and would it not create a moral hazard? These are all questions I don't have answers for, so I'll have to look into it some more to voice a firmer opinion.

Definitely.

Let me say that, while I am not in jeopardy myself, it doesn't matter.

How would I feel if I were? How devastating. I could be in the same situation.

I've always felt that the homeowners should have been seen to first, and the greedy, lying, manipulative, selfish mortagage industry should just let the chips fall as they may. Why should they receive welfare? I once thought that Republicans were against welfare, but I've known for some time that Republicans are only against welfare if they are not the recipients of it.

Here is a question that has been posed to me -- in the form of a question -- but is really a criticism of America from people of other countries, and it is this:

Who does America think it is? They go throughout the world, giving aid to people all over the world, billions of dollars of aid, to my country and to other countries, but they neglect their own people, especially YOUR people, Nalita. They are hypocrites. They should first take care of their own, before trying to be the caretakers of the world.

Well said, Citizens of the World.

I am still going with on a case by case basis. Not across the board

They should have put the money toward that instead just to the private enterprises.

They all cry foul to socialism unless it is to underwrite private industry.

I don't think we should help flippers or speculators anymore than we should help the thieves on wall street who bought and sold these mortgages all to hell and bought oil on spec.

What about Joe and Joanna sixpack.

I've got mixed feelings about this too. Why should someone else get help when we are struggling to pay all our bills and stuff also? Around here, people are just stupid...the ones that I know that went into forclosure bought more house than they could afford...or they just plain stopped paying the mortgage.

I am not for it. I would love to say that they should take it on a case by case basis, but not only will that not work out, but it will set a pattern. Just saying that it is better than helping corporations isn't a good enough reason for me. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Another thing, if you take it on a case by case basis, let's assume that a homeowner that was laid off deserves help. Does that mean that someone that was laid off say a few years ago will be able to apply to get help because they lost their house then? There are so many possible loopholes and I just don't think it would be fair. (I know that life isn't fair, but it is the best word that I could think of)

There are many other reasons that I can think of that I am not okay with this idea, but that is enough.

i agree Jim

No one seems to want regulation but lets face it as it doesn't come about unless there is abuse and there sure has been. Its the same with laws as they are not needed until there is a need. There is a need for regulation now and in the foreseeable future

Thanks for posting your content to the Group: We comment back

If it is done right it could help and not cost much in the long run.

I agree it's a hard call. It would have to be a case by case basis.

Part of the reason I'm not against it is the housing bubble; housing prices that made buying a home just out of reach for normal people in certain locations because the house prices are ridiculously inflated (largely so a family could buy a house, wait a year or two for it continue to appreciate for no reason) and then sell before they were snookered. Now that house prices will be dropping, not because the homeowner did anything wrong other than buy into the dream, people will be left with loans all out of proportion to the actual worth of the house. If something can be done to help honest hardworking people to own homes that should have been within their means, I'm for it. (Foreclosing doesn't do the bank much good either since they also will not get their money back for it).

I would like to see restructuring so that people can live in homes they should have been able to afford. I'm not sure how it can be done, though, and I do fear that private industry will be called in to "support" and somehow siphon the money from it's intent to themselves. We need a little less of that, thank you.

I think I am leaning towards NO. People need to be responsible for their own actions. If they take out a loan, they need to pay. If you can't pay, beg your relatives or move somewhere else. If the government bail out those people, it's not fair for other home owners who struggle to meet their mortgage payments. Why would people try hard to pay their mortgage then, if the government would just bail them out?

this is a sticky situation.. with the way the economy hit and things rose so fast.. it got out of hand really quickly first for those that did not have credit to begin with to back them up... such as credit cards and all.. how many people have credit cards they are paying on but stil using them for basic necessities.. those people are just still floating too and lucky they have not lost thier home yet...

we did lose our house to foreclosure.. and we did try to clear it up and save the house.. the mortgage company would no longer work with us.. and we had been trying... like 2 months before foreclosure.. we paid like 3 months worth of payments during that month... then we told them when we could come up with the 4000 they wanted to save the house... they woudl not give us one more day for the huge part of that money to come in the mail.. not even one day... so i think that we should get help... and it should be back dated a few years.. cuz the housing industry started with people who did not have credit to back them up.. and when the daily stuff you have to have raises, it really hits you..

like our gas bills went from being 100 a month to being 300 ore more a month and that was not including hte electric... then not to mention how the gasoline prices rose and the extra money for that.. then your groceries not to mention clothes for the kids... but wages did not increase... then it came.. my soon to be ex got laid off...

and because the rest of the kids had all tapped mom and dad out on both sides.. like usual.. there was no money left for us to even ask for.. not even for help with groceries... it gets bad... and for some.. there was no help... so the only action was to just let it go.. and move on with life...