Readers suggested a topic around developments since housing bail-outs were proposed. "My thoughts are that getting behind some sort of bailout that would enable FBs to refi is a win-win for politicians and financial companies. If they can get Mr. Future Trailer Park Guy in a new mortgage that he could actually afford, maybe a 50 year mortgage, a guy like that would jump at it."

"What is the likelyhood of a bailout like this taking form? Would it take too long to get through the Congress to make a real difference?"

A reply, "I think there’s every reason to believe some kind of bailout will be attempted. This is why every single one of us needs to write, e-mail, fax and phone at least one politician and one newspaper editor/journalist. They need to hear what the consequences of their actions would be."

One pointed to Ohio. "Look at the proposed details of that Ohio bailout. I believe they would allow 'owners' (and I use the word loosely) to refinance into a 30-year fixed rate at 6.75%. How does that help the FBs? They can’t afford an interest-only payment. How are they going to afford a fully amortizing loan at 6.75%?"

One replied, "I can get on board with this type of 'bailout.' Sure, many won’t be able to afford 30-year @ 6.75%, but some will. So it helps those who are more financially sound (note that doesn’t have to mean wealthier - it means those who are careful with their finances) and weeds out those who, well, aren’t. Not everyone can be 'saved.' Propose something like this to them and, if they can’t handle it, then it’s time for them to sign a lease."

One answered, "Except this still inappropriately prices risk, and even worse, the government is the one setting the price. Let the market decide who can refinance into a fully amortizing mortgage, and at what rate."

Another added, "My idea about a bailout would be that the lenders give the bailout. If the lender thinks that they can save a loan by a re-write verses foreclosure then it’s the lenders or bagholders choice."

"This is a issue between the lender and the borrower. The lender or borrower should not be forced into a re-write either. Many of the borrowers had no intentions of ever living in the property, so how can someone like that be saved from foreclosure? In prior real estate cycles Lenders would agree to short sales and sometimes extend some grace periods to people in trouble or work with them so I see no reason why it should not be the current lenders problem rather than the taxpayers."

One doesn't think it's an issue. "The do nothing Congress will be on vacation soon, and the war spending bill will be front and center. The spring buying season (March 15 thru July 1) will be toast before anything can be proposed. Too little, to late."

The LA Times. "Borrowers, don't hold your breath for a bailout. The modest federal and state aid proposals advanced so far suggest that most people struggling with onerous loan payments are unlikely to get government assistance."

"The Bush administration has ruled out a blanket program to help homeowners stave off foreclosure, reasoning that it's 'not an appropriate role for the federal government,' White House spokesman Tony Fratto said."

"And at the state level, 'there is only a limited amount we can do for people who are affected right now,' said (California) Assemblyman Ted Lieu, chairman of the Assembly Banking Committee."

"Some of the country's largest mortgage lenders, including Countrywide Financial Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co., met with Lieu this week to discuss a private effort to keep at least some foundering California borrowers in their homes, participants in the meeting said Thursday."

"'We discussed a potential billion-dollar, privately financed bailout to prevent foreclosures,' said Robert Gnaizda of the Greenlining Institute, a fair-lending advocate."

"No commitments were made, however. A Wells Fargo spokeswoman said the bank had previously discussed the possibility of a private assistance fund with Gnaizda, but had heard too few details to be able to say whether such a plan might work. A Countrywide spokesman declined to comment."

"None of the three Democrats has offered more than general ideas for aiding borrowers, and none has called for a massive federal assistance program. 'Dodd has been extremely clear that he is not talking about any kind of bailout,' a spokesman for the senator said."

"One problem with even suggesting a broad-based rescue plan for homeowners who are underwater is that any bailout of borrowers also would be viewed as a bailout of their lenders, potentially including some lenders that allegedly preyed on home buyers during the housing boom."

"Using tax dollars to keep people from losing their homes would be 'socializing' lenders' losses, meaning society as a whole would be footing part of the bill, said economist Paul Kasriel."