My Photo

November 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            

BlogStats


« DARPA’s Alpha Dog – The Latest Generation | Main | Morally Killing Al-Awlaki (updated 3oct2011) »

30 September 2011

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e54f86f2ad8833015435cde2a0970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Wrong Rights (Addended):

Comments

bill tozer

Yes, we have unalienable rights from our Creator. Very self evident. Right to shelter? Right to own a home? Right to own a home somebody else owns? So, let me see if I got this: I plunk down 3% of the purchase price, borrow a bunch of money from somebody who holds the title to the house and property and I start making payments until its paid off and I own the house outright. So, I can now stop paying and the person who holds title cannot do anything about my breach of contract? Somebody else owns the house and I have the right to call it "my home"? Well, if that be the case, I have the right to a car....not just any car,a nice new car. But I can't make the monthly nut and start missing payments. No problem, I have the right to keep driving the car I don't own outright. Heck, I have the right for car insurance and I just can't afford to buy auto insurance so government must buy it for me cause I be po folk. I laughed when GM gave away all those cars on the Oprah show knowing what would happen. Sure enough those po folk deserving of their new cars could not pay the sales taxes on the new autos nor the insurance! Letters starting coming in asking for somebody to pay the $1,000+ sales tax on their shiny new cars. If this law passes in CA, I just might make a down payment on a house, stop working, and start drawing Social Security. Can't make the monthly nut on SSI, but who cares. I will pay $150.00/month and live there until I die.... but darn, I could not ever again look in the mirror because of the self loathing on my reflection if I ever did such an reprehensible dastardly low life piece of grunt act. Only a real piece of shat would even consider not honoring their word.

Scott Obermuller

It is held as a common belief in this country that if your home value falls below a level you feel comfortable with, you can, in good conscience, walk away from the mortgage. I have been told countless times, by folks I had thought were decent, honest people that it was stupid to throw good money after bad. And these same folks complain about Wall Street greed. The fact that these folks had signed a contract to repay the lender at a certain amount for a certain period of time was irrelevant. This is THE reason this country will fall. There is no enemy from a foreign country that can do more damage to our republic than these deadbeats. They should create barb wire fenced enclosures in the desert and put these scum to hard labor for years for this kind of nonsense. They have the money, but consider themselves "victims" and want relief from the rest of us. There are folks who have sacrificed and taken on second jobs to pay their obligations. Our rights are clearly spelled out in the Constitution. If you would like additional rights, I would recommend Cuba or North Korea - the citizens there have far more rights than we do.

stevenfrisch

Yeah, just ask Todd. He knows how to do this. How about you provide us with the primer buddy?

Todd Juvinall

Sounds to me like the phony non profits who swipe our tax money. Their days of theft are numbered.

Steve Enos

Scott posts:

"It is held as a common belief in this country that if your home value falls below a level you feel comfortable with, you can, in good conscience, walk away from the mortgage.

I have been told countless times, by folks I had thought were decent, honest people that it was stupid to throw good money after bad. And these same folks complain about Wall Street greed.

The fact that these folks had signed a contract to repay the lender at a certain amount for a certain period of time was irrelevant. This is THE reason this country will fall.

They have the money, but consider themselves "victims" and want relief from the rest of us".

Yes Scott, I agree with you! They say they are "victims, no need to take responsibility.

They take the profits when things are good and then walk away and leave others and the taxpayers holding the bag for thier failed loans. Some of these "fine foks" stop paying their loans and still collect the rent from those that rent their spec development homes to.

This is a shoe that fits far too many.

Hey Todd... nice shoes, they seem to fit you very well!

Scott Obermuller

The Fed Govt started the ball rolling by jaw boning the banks into making "affordable" loans. ACORN went into full swing and signed up folks en-mass for idiot loans and the whole mess just snow balled. I'm talking about the stories I read about as the bubble was screaming upwards towards stall. Folks were admitting they weren't even reading the contracts. There were the lemmings that lined up to buy new condos in Las Vegas that would go up in price by 10K every 5 buyers. The reporter found a married pair of lawyers that had cashed out their IRAs just to make a fast buck. Are these the "unsophisticated" buyers we were told about? This was all greed - pure and simple. Unfortunately the entire market was brought down and now has caught up everyone. Todd was not one of these greedy folk, he was building, not trying to turn a fast buck. I'm talking about people worming their way into homes they knew couldn't afford. Now, the entire economy has tanked and lots of good honest folk can't make their payments due to loss of jobs or not being able to re-fi. The ones I am really steamed with are folks that still have good paying solid jobs that could easily afford the payment on their own homes, but saw no harm in walking away from their contracts. The fed govt has mucked up the whole thing.
Yes, there are some people in the financial arena that are crooked or greedy, but it took a whole nation of fools to really mess things up. Now the fools are crying for Uncle Sugar to print more money and bail them out. Meanwhile, fed, state and local officials are working overtime to drive the cost of new home development up and up. I can buy a good, late model home with acreage in some areas cheaper than I can even get a permit to build here. There isn't going to be a recovery at all, until vast and sweeping changes are made. We can tank into full socialism and suffer or reverse course and start working and building. Can't have it both ways.

Todd Juvinall

Why thanks SteveE, I do have nice shoes.

Steve Enos

Oh pleasse Scott, you now claim "Todd was not one of these greedy folk, he was building, not trying to turn a fast buck".

Scott spec real estate development is about one thing... turning a PROFIT!

Scott, this is fact, Todd took out loans to buy land and build spec houses for profit. Profit was his and any other spec builders motive... PROFIT is THE motive of spec builders.

I think there is nothing wrong doing things for profit.

Scott, I took my own money and took out loans, bought land and built spec... I did so for profit.

Any loss was mine, any profit waa mine and I never walked away from a spec house loan. I figured if you get the profits on the good days you also take responsibility for your losses on the bad days. I took the risks, I got the profits, I took out loans to do my projects. I paid the loans back in full regardless if I made money or lost money on the project.

I took the profits when it was good and I took the losses when the real estate market went south. I blame no one for the losses.

But what is really telling is when a spec builder takes out loans, finishes the construction, rents the house(s) out while putting it on the market for sale, collects the rents but stops paying the loans! So this isn't a fraud?

Sorry Scott, you nailed it in your 30 September 2011 at 08:55 PM post. Don"t try to defend poor old spec builders and their actions.

Take the profit, take the loss... take responsibilty for one's own actions!

Greg Goodknight

It's perfectly legal in California to walk away from a property that's upside down, and I'd argue it's also moral if you fulfill your duty to keep it reaonably maintained until you hand over the keys.

While not true everywhere, in Cal, mortgages are only secured by real property, and lenders in the business are aware of the risks. There are real downsides to walking away and I doubt anyone is cavalier about doing it.

Greg Goodknight

It's perfectly legal in California to walk away from a property that's upside down, and I'd argue it's also moral if you fulfill your duty to keep it reaonably maintained until you hand over the keys.

While not true everywhere, in Cal, mortgages are only secured by real property, and lenders in the business are aware of the risks. There are real downsides to walking away and I doubt anyone is cavalier about doing it.

Steve Enos

Sorry Greg, no sale!

Scott nailed the real issue in his above post, no need for backsliding on this issue. The basic issue applies to all. Scott posted the following about taking personal responsibilty for ones own actions:

"The fact that these folks had signed a contract to repay the lender at a certain amount for a certain period of time was irrelevant. This is THE reason this country will fall. They have the money, but consider themselves "victims" and want relief from the rest of us".

So Greg, do you agree with Scott's above statement?

Steve Enos

And in addition we have George's own statement:

"Under “other calamity” we find such things as tanking of the real estate market, or interest rate hikes that affect adjustable rate mortgages. With this new right under our belts, we get to stiff the lender if the market value of our house goes ‘under water’".

Yep, and it applies even more to real estate developers that take out loans to build spec houses and then walk from the loans leaving the bank and taxpayers holding the bag.

I agree with George and Scott's initial post on this issue.

Take the profit, take the loss... take responsibilty for one's own actions!


Scott Obermuller

I see now that it's greedy to try to earn money. Todd made a reasonable effort to construct something of value and earn money. He risked and he lost money. That's a far cry from people obtaining the use of a house with little or no money down and no reasonable way to pay the money back. Or people that have the money to pay their obligations on their own home, but decide to stiff their fellow Americans. Stop blaming Wall Street for that. Sure Greg, it's legal, but does that make it right? I don't care how blase or not they are about welching on their debts. And look what this does to our economy. Remember, these are the same folk that now want to pick our pockets, claiming they are victims. Downside? They have folks like you defending them. It's legal, so it's alright. They'll claim they were victims of the economy, and they'll have good credit in a few years. Yes, they might in the long run suffer. I can see a few scenarios where they will screw themselves. But as long as there is enough of them, they'll find an audience in the halls of power.
The bottom line is that the proposed laws will completely kill our housing situation in this state. The very wealthy will benefit in the end from this nonsense. The middle class will suffer even more and the poor, as usual, will fight over the ever-diminishing scraps. The govt led the way into this mess, and now they are making it even worse.

Greg Goodknight

Yes Scott, it is right. The folks lending money were in the business of lending money and misjudged the risk. The money was lent with the understanding that if payment was not made as agreed, the lender could and would foreclose, but far too often lenders were not in the business of owning the paper; they were in the business of floating the loan until it could be sold to Fannie or Freddie and they'd be able to take the origination money and get some exercise.

And then we're back to the GSEs Fannie and Freddie, the Tweedledum and Tweedledumber of mortgage lending, and the real lenders were the folks who bought the bad paper and the folks like Lehman Bros. who were in the business of selling insurance that they expected to never have to pay out on.

Greg Goodknight

The unintended side effect of not allowing foreclosures to take place will be that no mortgages will be made without some combination of huge down payments and high rates.

The Foreclosure Modification Act may be the best possible vehicle for driving down home prices and destroy even more equity that Sacramento could possibly dream up. Maybe they could time it so that prices will plummet just as California wakes up to find out what their state and local unfunded liabilities are.

Steve Enos

It's not my fault, the dog ate my homework!

If you stake out ground at least have the integerity to stand on it and apply it to all.

Greg Goodknight

Enos, what do you imagine you're babbling about?

stevenfrisch

Greg, I think he is babbling about the point that Todd holds himself up as some sort of paragon of virtue, while engaging in the very activities he criticizes others for, and no on here holds him accountable for it.

The very behavior George is deploring in his commentary is the behavior Todd has engaged in.

Todd Juvinall

So what do the Steve's think thy know? What a hoot! Also, perhaps they should look in the mirror for the countrys problems rather than trying to blame others. They are in a business of taking not making and they have brought our country to its knees. They actually don't know anything about my situation which was published three times in the newspaper and then copy/pasted many times by both of those lovelies. What is so funny is they have no information but sure make allegations out of thin air. I would suggest they are simply jealous. But they are funny.

Greg Goodknight

Dream on, Steves. There's no hint of TJ's giving up a spec house ahead of forclosure in Rebane's piece against taking the right to forclose away from lenders.

You guys hijack every thread that mentions loans to take potshots at TJ. Give it a rest.

Todd Juvinall

Oops, and SteveF, please point to any post where I hold myself up as a paragon of virtue. Other than maybe a humorous passage of self efficacy, I am the humblest fellow I know. You and the other Steve are perhaps the biggest sourpuss bloviators I have ever read on these blogs. You are the ones full of yourselves and we all know what you are full of.

Scott Obermuller

Greg - you and I will just have to disagree on this one. If you stand up for the right to buy a house you know you can not pay for and stand for the right of folks that walk away from their obligations just because it doesn't suit their fancy, you have lost the right to complain about the banks, lending institutions or the govt to bend you over a barrel and clean out your wallet. As you yourself said - it's legal!
Herman Cain for president!

Greg Goodknight

Straw man of your creation, Scott. I've been a clear foe of subprime mortgages from the start.

President is a lousy entry level for politicians. So is Senator and Governor. Republicans seem unclear on this concept.

Bob Hobert

Greg, when the banks and mortgage lenders are told they cannot foreclose and must allow people who deliberately choose to not honor their contract to stay in their (the banks') homes, mortgages will cease. The moral argument you try to make is irrelevant to that end result. I'm appalled at several of the people I know in our county who have "strategically" defaulted on their mortgages. It is simply wrong in all of my concepts of what is moral. Perhaps as Groucho once said - "You don't like my morals? I have others." Where will that lead us... I guess then if you stop making mortgage payments the PG&E bill and your car payment (talk about upside down) are fair game too. Then there's NID, your credit cards,the neighbor kid who mows your lawn - moral is moral.

Steve Enos

Well seems Scott and Bob get it.

bill tozer

I can understand someone walking away from their home. Upside down, can't afford the monthly nut due to illness, working less hours, or whatever curves are thrown at you. Maybe paying the mortgage is simply killing ya or you are too tired to bus tables at night after your day job. I can understand someone walking away from a mortgage or a marriage or parking the new vehicle at the lot and tossing the keys in the slot. WHAT I don't get is people who stop paying and DO NOT walk away, i.e.' living rent free. They know they can play the game and it will take a year or so the move their ugly butt cracks to the curb. Oh, they play the game and might agree to a lower payment to stall and fall behind again, typical of the growing percentages of re re re-modifications. Grow a pair and walk away if you must, but do it quickly. That case last year or so where a judge ruled an elderly couple could stay in the bank's home indefinitely brought cheers from the uninformed. Upon closer evaluation, the couple had paid off their house in full. But, they wanted more out of life and took out a huge home equity loan, took a nice world cruise, bought some shiny toys for themselves and their adult children and found themselves unable to pay for the ride cause they had little income while enjoying their spending spree. Yep, remove the consequences of one's actions and join the free ride. Play the sympathy card and hop the gravy train...but please, walk away. Just do it.

Greg Goodknight

Bob, you're miximg a number of different things here. One is this insane idea Sacramento will abrogate all existing mortgage contracts; it will never happen.

Second, I don't know of anyone who has walked away from any mortgage that wasn't seriously underwater with any reasonable hope of recovery.

Third, you may have noticed that Dickensian debtors prisons are no more,and the idea that a mortgage is a moral obligation to keep driving towards the cliff of bankrupcy has no basis in any moral or legal code I am aware of.

I think you may have read my words to mean exactly opposite to my intent. Perhaps if you'd quote the "moral argument" you think I've made; I've no clue what you're talking about.

Paul Emery

During the heat of the sub prime frenzy mortages were made by lenders with the expectations that they would default. Mortgages were bundled up and resold as mortgage bonds with the expectation of default so that the originators could sell them short and reap a huge profit. All this was done with the understanding that the banks and insurance companies would be bailed out by the taxpayers which happened through TARP, which was a Bush program It was a con all the way. In the end the banksters didn't lose money they made billions that are now part of our national debt.

The borrowers were necessary chumps in the con who couldn't resist the deals offered.

There are thousands of properties right now in California that are in default and nobody's paying a dime on them because no one knows who even owns the property because they changed hands so many times.


Read "The Big Short" by Michael Lewis. Washington Post Reviews

"If you read only one book about the causes of the recent financial crisis, let it be Michael Lewis's, "The Big Short."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/12/AR2010031202291.html

"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/12/AR2010031202291.html

Megan

I wonder what rights Sacramento will claim for itself once we all get our new, payment optional homes? Will they tell us how often we can use the stove, how big our refrigerator can be, how many children are allowed to sleep in each bedroom, how long we can spend in the shower? Government doesn't give handouts without expecting our freedom in return.
And George, I'm waiting for a post on Anwar Al-Awlaki. Ben and I have been arguing about it all weekend, and I can't wait to show him that you agree with me ;o)

Steve Enos

So is this moral?

So a a spec home builder, real estate developer takes out loans to buy lots and build houses to make profit. The builder finishes the construction and lists the houses for sale. But the builder rents the house out while putting it on the market for sale and collects the rents. But the builder stops paying the loans and keeps renting out the houses until they are forclosed on.

Is this moral?

Mikey McD

No perversion has crippled our country more than the evolving/'progressing'/enslaving definition of "rights". For the government to give another a right, they must first take a right away from me.

The entitlement mindset in this nation is debilitating. The right to health care, a house, cell phone, a job.... I'm with Megan "Government doesn't give handouts without expecting our freedom in return."

http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=arc_ayn_rand_man_rights

Bob Hobert

Really Steve O - if it weren't for bashing TJ would you have anything to contribute - anything at all? Maybe you could number your rants and just submit a number instead of endlessly repetitive text so we could scroll thru your comments quickly onto someone who has something to say.

stevenfrisch

Really Bob, why should Todd get away with behavior that many here roundly critique from others in society? Its fine if people here claim the problem is the Community Reinvestment Act gave money to irresponsible poor people, but don't hold their friends to the same standard? Bullsh*#. The hypocrisy is amazing.

Bob Hobert

"Bob, you're mixing a number of different things here. One is this insane idea Sacramento will abrogate all existing mortgage contracts; it will never happen."

Greg - I didn't mean to imply that. Guess I got the moral idea from your comment here-

"It's perfectly legal in California to walk away from a property that's upside down, and I'd argue it's also moral if you fulfill your duty to keep it reasonably maintained until you hand over the keys."

If you can make the payments I do feel it is immoral to walk out on your contract. I think we agree on the dangers of the Foreclosure Modification Act. The worst is it displays the mentality of our legislators who obviously are learning nothing from the California housing/economy crash.

Todd Juvinall

Bob the Steve's don't know anything but they just get a tingle up their respective legs thinking they do. They are simply two inconsequential hypocrites in the county and a dime a dozen. They are both actually spewing their own self hatred by projecting their shortcomings on others. What a hoot! I actually enjoy their speculation, it shows the creativity of conspiracy nuts.

see is

Greg Goodknight

My loan adjusted again yesterday, now down to 3.57%. Sweet.

"Mortgages were bundled up and resold as mortgage bonds with the expectation of default so that the originators could sell them short and reap a huge profit. All this was done with the understanding that the banks and insurance companies would be bailed out by the taxpayers which happened through TARP, which was a Bush program It was a con all the way."

I recall Barney Frank (D-Fannie) was hawking Fannie Mae as a great investment with their problems left behind just days before the implosion. Was Rep. Frank just in on the Bush scam?

Regarding staying in a home after stopping payment, the banks will not foreclose or approve a short sale unless payment has stopped. The one person I know who went through a short sale would have kept the property, except that the condo in question had dropped from $285 (at the peak) to about $110K market value. They had put $80+K down, which was lost. Wells Fargo, the bank, was in with the developer, and didn't lose as much money as my friend did.

If banks wanted to, they could initiate foreclosure early, but they're not, for their own benefit. They'd rather keep the asset on their books at the old price a while longer, and not flood the market. In addition, abandoned, empty homes are targets. If empty, vandals may deface it, thieves may strip it of fixtures. As long as the squatters leave when asked by the bank, I see any squatting as being between the bank and the soon-to-be-former owners.

In the case of TJ, not to condone the actions, but I suspect he had a lot more skin in the game than the bank did. "Strategic default" may sound like a scam, but it's more akin to applying a tourniquet just above the knee, sacrificing the lower limb in order to stay alive. You're not winning, just not losing as much as you might otherwise.

If mortgage makers wanted claim to unmade payments prior to foreclosure, they'd write contracts making that claim. They're not, and they're taking their time to foreclose. Their choice.

Todd Juvinall

What is also fascinating to me is the SteveF denial he is a taxpayer leech. The SBC issues "plans" for just about anything a government grants-man thinks should be studied and holds conferences all over the district paid for by tax grant money. By his own admission, Frisch states proudly how many millions his "non-profit" has funneled. Many of us have asked him to list the permanent private sector jobs he and his ilk have created in the Sierra's and he has never supplied that info. So, when we see the Solyndra like use of taxpayers money that SBC and like organizations get, we need to reassess priorities of the tax money. The 45 jobs created by the last two recipients of the solar tax money come at a cost of something like a million buks a job. That is what SBC and its ilk have done to our country and they must be stopped. Many of us are working on that. So, bottom line for America and SBC 's SteveF is this, look in the mirror, stop fibbing and tell the taxpayers you have taken enough.

Todd Juvinall

Greg, your last post is spot on.

Todd Juvinall

Greg, also, TARP never made it to the Toxic Assets as promised. It is still being pursued by Issa and others to see where Bernanke spent it.

stevenfrisch

By the way Todd, Sierra is already plural, as I have demonstrated to you in the recent past, so I find it interesting that you would continue to use "Sierra's". Intentional ignorance is so un-becoming.


stevenfrisch

That should read Sierra Nevada is already plural.

stevenfrisch

Finally, the point that the Toxic Ass Relief Fund never made it to the banks is ludicrous. Who held and insured your loans that you defaulted on Todd? My guess is they received funds. Inquiring minds want to know if any of them came from Citizen's Bank.

Greg Goodknight

Bob, I got to run (need three approaches, holds, yada yada, to get current, safety pilot not yet waiting) so I'll just be quick...

There is nothing in any moral code I know of that binds someone into following an upside down property and an onerous interest rate into poverty in order to keep the bank happy. If keeping a property means poverty-stricken golden years, it's time to get out of it. If keeping the property means scrimping on food, clothing and medicine for your children, it's time to get out of it.

That's different from fraud, signing mortgage docs with no intention of keeping to the promise.

Tally ho.

stevenfrisch

It is indeed ironic that I errantly added an apostrophe to 'Citizens'--but at least I am capable of admitting an error.

Greg Goodknight

Frisch, I am looking forward to the day you admit that science was and is on the side of the climate realists. That you can admit to a trivial error of punctuation says nothing.

The Sierra/Sierras is an issue of mixed languages. The Rocky Mountains are the Rockies. It's no big deal to me if some Anglo-American is ignorant of Spanish and habitually apply the English rule to the Sierra Nevada range. In fact, I suspect the old timers in Nevada County did it long before the Frisco carpetbaggers came in and started to laugh at the mountaineers for being so stupid.

stevenfrisch

Well Greg when the evidence proves increases in greenhouse gas emissions and its associated affects including climate change are not anthropogenic I will admit I am wrong. You will just have to wait; and I suspect you will be waiting, and denying the evidence, for the rest of your life.

My comment regarding Todd's pronunciation was more about his inability to adopt change when demonstrably wrong than the arcane debate over the pronunciation itself. I think you knew that.

I love the reference to 'Frisco carpetbaggers'! It guess xenophobia should be a criteria for gauging a source.

Todd Juvinall

Greg, you have described the self proclaimed smarty Frisch for what he really is. He is truly a carpetbagger. It is my understanding he couldn't make it as chef at the Truckee bistro and had to find something he could really do well at. That turned out to be government loans and grants. Along the way he becameskx an expert at telling everyone else how dumb they are. He knows nothing about the details of anything I do or have done outside the public record so when he attempts to make some point about me it is truly from his self bloated skullcap. The reason he and the other Steve are failures in life is because no one can listen to their self important rants and hope they leave. But, hey, let them live in the Sierra's because we need comic reliwf.

Steve Enos

Once again Todd posts an off topic, personal attack stream of name calling insults.

George, do you have any standards?

Jen T

Steve Enos when is the last time you contributed to a solution, ever? Your hatred of Todd is noted (time and time again), be on your way.

Steve Enos

So Jen T. follows Todd and posts an off topic, personal attack insults vs. posting about the issue of George's story and fails to even use her full name to boot.

George, do you have any standards here?

Steve Enos

You see... George picked the topic of this story and his KVMR commentary and the topic is very clear.

Scott also nailed the issue above. This basic issue applies to all. Scott posted the following about taking personal responsibilty for ones own actions:

"The fact that these folks had signed a contract to repay the lender at a certain amount for a certain period of time was irrelevant. This is THE reason this country will fall. They have the money, but consider themselves "victims" and want relief from the rest of us".

An then we have George's own words, from his commentary on this topic:

"Under “other calamity” we find such things as tanking of the real estate market, or interest rate hikes that affect adjustable rate mortgages. With this new right under our belts, we get to stiff the lender if the market value of our house goes ‘under water’".

Al I have said is it applies even more to real estate developers that take out loans to build spec houses and then walk from the loans leaving the bank and taxpayers holding the bag.

I agree with George and Scott's posts above on this issue.

Homeowners and real estate developers take the profits and they should also take the loss and the responsibilty.

It's simple, folks need to take responsibilty for their own actions.

As Scott posted above so clearly... "They have the money, but consider themselves "victims" and want relief from the rest of us".

George Rebane

For the record SteveE, your never ending disappointment with the standards I apply to this blog's comments and commenters is duly noted by me and damn near everyone else whose eyes have graced these pages. Thank you and enough!

Brad Croul

Supposedly, the underlying reasons for developing this piece of legislation is because,

“real estate lending institutions have failed to provide a simple method of loan modification and foreclosure prevention” and that “foreclosure has become a method of increasing a lending institution, loan servicer, mortgagee, trustee and beneficiary's bottom line and profits by turning borrowers out of their homes.”

One of the provisions is that it only applies to those who owned their homes since 2007 and have occupied the home for two years. It does not seem to apply to post 2007 home sales.

This proposed amendment is too late to help those who already went under. I don't think it is needed since those who survived the downturn have somehow managed to stay in their homes without this amendment.

Bob Hobert

Greg, I agree if they are destitute and declare bankruptcy. But not with those who "strategically" walk away from mortgages they have been paying and can continue to pay. It gets back to George's point about the Foreclosure Modification Act and what that will mean for us Californians.

Greg Goodknight

No Bob, neither morals nor the law requires one to become destitute before letting the bank take possession of real property that is dragging them towards destitution.

George's piece is about the gov blocking foreclosures. You're complaining about individuals choosing foreclosures. Not the same thing At All.

Mikey McD

The problem is much bigger therefore, the solution must be much bigger:

#1- End the Fed (central planning/social engineering by force) and artificially low interest rates.
#2- allow crappy (poorly underwritten) banks to fail.
#3-Get the Federal government out of the mortgage business (Freddie/Fannie).

Solutions need not be more government control/power. Free market solutions allow freedoms to stay in tact.

Greg Goodknight

It isn't xenophobic to notice where the carpetbagger came from.

"Well Greg when the evidence proves increases in greenhouse gas emissions and its associated affects including climate change are not anthropogenic I will admit I am wrong. You will just have to wait; and I suspect you will be waiting, and denying the evidence, for the rest of your life."

Steve, the issues (at least for me) have never been regarding the increases in CO2 (I expect most of the increase from 0.03% to 0.04% is from man); the issue is about making wild claims from computer models that have grossly oversimplified cloud behavior and have already been falsified.

Warmist Cal physics professor emeritus Richard Muller put it this way... clouds only have to increase 2% over the model's predictions over the next few years to wipe out all of the predicted warming. It goes away.

It might also surprise the Frischs of the world that the catastrophic positive feedbacks aren't specific to CO2. If you assume that clouds trap more heat than they reflect, and a warmer world will create more moisture laden atmosphere, *any* additional heat source will possibly hit the tipping point for a runaway positive feedback warming.

However, this has never happened in the 500+ million years the Earth has been nurturing visible life, with CO2 as high as 10,000ppm (1%) near the beginning, during a worldwide ice age.

Steve, the wind is no longer filling Alarmist sails. You will be having to face reality sooner than you think.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad