August 25, 2007

A Bailout Of Home-Debtors?

Readers suggested a topic on the PIMCO chiefs proposal. “Mr. Gross’s diatribe should be THE weekend topic. Right problem, wrong solution. He can’t reconcile his points, so it becomes incoherent.”

One pointed out, “Let’s not forget, this isn’t some ‘Robin Hood’ do-gooder, ‘help the little man’ type of guy, this is Bill Gross, a very wealthy FUND MANAGER. When you fall for the illusion that such people are trying to help the little guy out, that’s when the crocodile strikes, pulls you underwater, and spins you around to prepare you for his next meal.”

“A bailout of home-debtors? Sure. Just pay for it by removing the deduction on mortgage interest.”

One questioned the logistics. “So pretend with me for a second that there will be a bailout. And pretend with me further that the size of the bailout is equal to the Iraq war funding. This is probably the right order of magnitude in order to bail out a significant fraction of FBs.”

“Does anyone believe that our gov’t would be capable of doling out the funds to those who are actually in need of it? (Hmmm. Katrina part 2 anyone?).”

Another added, “I was pondering whether or not idiot-Gross’ suggestion on a Federal bailout would even be effective. I eventually came back to the same ole’ things we talk about. 1) Won’t bring median family incomes up to be able to buy homes at current prices. 2) It wont help the job losses, loss of consumption, etc. 3) It wont get yields down on jumbo mortgages, and on and on and on.”

Another skeptic. “I cannot see how this would happen. A bailout of this magnitude? Remember that the LTCM and S&L bailouts were of companies and not a million or more homeowners, flippers, speculators, Wall Street slimeballs, foreign investors, hedge fund sharks, Cocaine Larry, and Bill Poole’s good friend Jim Cramer.”

“I just don’t see this happening. More to the point, how do you prop up housing prices? Cheap jumbos? A very good argument can be made that the ‘Law of Supply and Demand’ does not really apply to this specific instance of slumping housing demand.”

“The whole bailout would essentially be the gov’t buying part of the house, paying off part of the loan, reducing the interest rate on the house, and trying to prop the price. All of this would be needed.”

“It’s really better to get it over with. The Japanese wanted to ‘mitigate’ their problem bubble in the late 80’s early 90’s and are still suffering. We are in the same boat.”

“There should be a long discussion of national/gov’t/business hubris at this point, but I’ll pass.”




RSS feed | Trackback URI

119 Comments »

Comment by Professor Bear
2007-08-25 10:05:32

REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Taking Credit
August 25, 2007; Page A6

Mortgage markets have looked like ships lost at sea of late, so of course Presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd have dinged George Bush for not launching the lifeboats.

Senator Dodd finds it “troubling that President Bush is sitting by idly while millions of Americans face foreclosure on their homes.” Mrs. Clinton has proposed a bailout fund for homeowners facing foreclosure and a program of punitive regulation for whichever mortgage lenders and brokers manage to survive the shake-out.

Everyone on the Democratic side of the aisle seems to think the President should send in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make everything right again. Meanwhile, at least a dozen states have rushed in to heighten underwriting standards and forbid “above market” interest rates and other bad practices. One safe harbor: Congress is on vacation.

Amid the torrent, we found one voice of comparative reason this week: Congressman (and Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee) Barney Frank. Yes, Mr. Frank also would like to see his friends Fannie and Freddie loosed on the mortgage-backed securities market. But he deserves credit for speaking an awkward and politically unpopular truth: We got into this mess because some people bought homes who had no business buying the homes they did, and maybe no business buying a home at all.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118800573130508627.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Comment by arroyogrande
2007-08-25 10:44:35

“President should send in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make everything right again”

As Bob the Builder says, “We’re here to help!”

Comment by skooch
2007-08-25 11:25:45

I thought that was The Koala Brothers.

Comment by arroyogrande
2007-08-25 11:39:53

“Koala Brothers”

Oops, you’re right.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Neil
2007-08-25 11:34:13

As Bob the Builder says, “We’re here to help!”

I thought that was fire marshal Bob… ;)

Got popcorn?
Neil

Comment by SoBay
2007-08-25 15:50:44

‘I thought that was fire marshal Bob’

Homie don’t play that!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by jerry from richardson
2007-08-25 11:27:44

I wonder how much of their own wealth Senators Clinton and Dudd would be willing to hand over to the real estate gamblers

 
Comment by Mike a.k.a/Sage
2007-08-25 11:53:06

Home-Debtors don’t want to be bailed out. Not when the comparable house next door is selling for 30 to 50 percent less the they owe on the mortgage, like in Florida. Has anyone asked these home-debtors, why they do not want to be bailed out?

Comment by jerry from richardson
2007-08-25 13:15:31

Even if they do want to be bailed out, why should I have to help them pay the mortgage on a home they can’t afford? Should I also help them pay the note on a BMW or Lexus?

 
Comment by Hazard
2007-08-25 16:17:23

You know. it’d just be cheaper to give all the folks in this type of situation say $10,000 in cash and a good entry on their credit report. I bet most of them would take the offer and be glad to get it.

Comment by Hazard
2007-08-25 16:21:02

With the provision the house/mortgage is no longer their obligation.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Professor Bear
2007-08-26 07:51:15

This idea is a good one, as it would ensure that for at least 60 years, lending standards would be much higher than they have been recently.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by need 2 leave ca
2007-08-25 10:06:55

No BAILOUT of any kind. Just these politicos pandering for votes. Don’t use my hard earned money to bail out greedy speculators that are the ones now holding the bag. I didn’t buy into this at the start of the bubble. I shouldn’t be paying for it now. Nobody bailed me out of my stupidity when I was younger. I had to take care of myself and suffer the consequences. Let all the new homedebtors do the same.

Comment by lainvestorgirl
2007-08-25 10:29:16

By the way, this bailout issue is now all over LA talk radio, probably because we now have Alarcon (city councilman from Pacoima) advocating it. Most talk radio hosts are conservative, so they’re totally raging against it, most notably John and Ken.

Comment by arroyogrande
2007-08-25 10:51:15

“most notably John and Ken”

Are any of the KABC guys talking about it (Doug, Larry, Al?)

Comment by lainvestorgirl
2007-08-25 11:21:14

Last night John Zigler.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by lainvestorgirl
2007-08-25 11:28:04

I listen to those other guys frequently, but have been busy this week so I’m not sure.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by implosion
2007-08-25 11:24:25

Isn’t Pacoima a real POS area? I haven’t been to socal for 17 years.

Comment by lainvestorgirl
2007-08-25 11:28:48

If the Valley is the armpit of LA, Pacoima is the @-hole of the Valley.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Ghostwriter
2007-08-25 11:33:17

I agree. I built my house in 1985 and the economy got bad again after that. I got a 15 year fixed rate and now mine is paid for. Those larger payments were harder to make, but we did without other extras and now we have a paid for house. We struggled, and so can everyone else to buy a house. I for one, resent bailing out idiots who think they must own every new thing that comes on the market. Let them figure how to get out of it on their own, or in several years we’ll just be bailing the idiots out of some other mess. I would feel bad if these were not hardship cases of their own making, but 90% were nothing but greed and entitlement and I don’t think any of the rest of us should have to pay for it.

 
Comment by Jerry
2007-08-25 11:36:14

Remember all of these lenders/banks, builders, agents etc all made “big money” these last five years. Now reality has set in. The money train has crashed and now we must feel sorry for all those who said, ” buy when you can still afford it as real estate always goes up”, “stand in line and take a number”, “don’t worry, if interest rates rise, you can just refinance”, . May they all rot in hell along with the flippers, investors, who also drove the market prices higher. This country is going into a depression, worst than 1929 when 80% lived in rurel verses today where 80% live in city areas. Bankrupt governments won’t be much of help and good paying jobs are limited. History won’t be kind as we brought this on to ourselves because we just had to have everything “now”, the good life, regardless if we could afford it.
There is a price to pay for everything and by god were paying it now.

Comment by jerry from richardson
2007-08-25 15:18:31

We haven’t paid for anything yet. The worst is yet to come. I am not looking forward to it.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2007-08-25 10:10:05

“It’s really better to get it over with. The Japanese wanted to ‘mitigate’ their problem bubble in the late 80’s early 90’s and are still suffering. We are in the same boat.”

The U.S. is at the fork in the road where we have to decide on whether to take our lump quickly and restore the economy to a semblance of equilibrium which can form the foundation of a recovery from the bubble mania, or follow the Japanese mistakes of the early 1990s that set the stage for fifteen-plus years of economic malaise. So far, so bad.

Comment by arroyogrande
2007-08-25 11:42:27

“take our lump quickly”

We as a country have a habit of doing the “dragged, kicking and screaming” thing.

Comment by implosion
2007-08-25 13:30:42

Not to mention ignoring issues until they reach a crisis stage.

 
 
 
Comment by arroyogrande
2007-08-25 10:10:26

LA Times “Land Blog” - Comments on LA City possibly bailing out strapped homeowners:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laland/2007/08/la-times-say-no.html*comments

Comment by arroyogrande
2007-08-25 10:12:06

“Comments on LA City”

Side note, judging from the comments, it’s a dead issue unless you are a politician that wants your head on a platter.

Comment by Ben Jones
2007-08-25 10:20:07

I talked to this blogger yesterday about these proposals and what you guys thought of them. The more I went into it, the more preposterous the whole thing seemed. Consider that 70% of the families in this country don’t have a mortgage. And many of the FB’s who are underwater don’t want to be ’saved.’

I understand that politicians are courting voting bloxs, but why Gross wrote this is not clear. Wasn’t he talking about hooker heels just a few weeks ago?

Comment by diogenes (Tampa,Fl)
2007-08-25 13:14:44

“I understand that politicians are courting voting bloxs, but why Gross wrote this is not clear. Wasn’t he talking about hooker heels just a few weeks ago?”

Remember when BIll Gross was the “BOND KING” in the 80’s and 90’s as bonds performed very well relative to stocks. His kingdom is falling apart as cheap money made bonds a bad bet. Now, he is losing his mind and grasping at straws……….remember King Richard’s comment when losing the battle: “a horse, a horse..my kingdom for a horse”

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by GH
2007-08-25 10:14:11

They will need to be willing to pay approximately 50% of all mortgages (tax tree) for the life of the loans, perhaps more, so will need to bring several tens - possibly hundreds of billions of dollars to the table. What about new buyers? Do they get bailed out too?

 
 
Comment by Ben Jones
2007-08-25 10:15:49

‘Get with it, Mr. President. Create a Reconstruction Mortgage Corporation. Or, at the least, modify the existing FHA program, long discarded as ineffective. Bail ‘em out — and prevent a destructive housing deflation that Ben Bernanke cannot avert. After all, you’re the Decider, aren’t you?’

The more I read this guys rant, I get the feeling he isn’t even being serious. Why would he taunt this way? And notice he said that a 2-3% cut in the Funds rate would do no good!

Comment by arroyogrande
2007-08-25 10:43:13

“The more I read this guys rant, I get the feeling he isn’t even being serious.”

Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, aka mad *bull* disease.

Comment by Jen Bones
2007-08-25 11:05:44

I read Gross’ commentary yesterday morning. My first reaction was that he was being facetious (and it takes one to know one). As it turns out, the correct spelling of the word is f-a-t-u-o-u-s.

Luv,
Jen

Comment by foolishrenterinLA
2007-08-25 19:30:27

Gross was being honest…. Until the mortgage is paid off, the “homeowner” is the bank/lender, so of course he wants them bailed out! I’d expect nothing less outta him.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by KM
2007-08-25 10:43:30

I think you nailed it Ben. Much of this is sarcasm!

Comment by Jen Bones
2007-08-25 11:42:07

No, he didn’t.
No, it isn’t.

Comment by ric
2007-08-25 12:15:24

Gross is overweight FNMA.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by chris Brennan
2007-08-25 16:30:52

yes and FNMA does NOT have a guaranttee from the govt. Gross knows that the housing correction will be so severe that the govt will take care of GNMA but Fannie and Freddie securities will underperform the mkt (these securities are 40% of his total return fund) . Bush admin does not like quasi gtee for FNMA and this will kill his fund.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Ghostwriter
2007-08-25 11:38:51

Most people couldn’t afford their mortgages if the interest rates were zero. Remember a lot of them had interest only and they said as many as 27% couldn’t even afford to make the first month’s payment. Zero interest will not help the $12k a year guy buy his 500k American dream house.

Comment by diogenes (Tampa,Fl)
2007-08-25 13:19:05

It will if you can go neg-amortization for the next 20 years.
It’s like renting with a balloon payment, but this gets him on the “property ladder”, and George Bush can claim that under his administration their are more “homeowners” than ever in the history of America. God Bless us, God bless us all!!!

 
 
Comment by mrktMaven FL
2007-08-25 14:33:24

“The more I read this guys rant, I get the feeling he isn’t even being serious. Why would he taunt this way? And notice he said that a 2-3% cut in the Funds rate would do no good!”

This might have more to do with class warfare and politics than a real bailout. Here is a link to the WSJ article titled “Payback” and one of the paragraphs that probably set off Gross :

For the sake of people trying to climb into the middle class, let’s hope that one lesson will be a rethinking of policies designed to saddle them with money pits. The Democratic presidential contenders are currently outbidding each other in ways to help “homeowners” (a dubious term in the present instance) avoid foreclosure. What might really benefit these citizens is being freed to return to renting, where some real bargains will likely be had in the months and years ahead.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118775029242304955.html?mod=todays_us_opinion

Comment by mrktMaven FL
2007-08-25 15:29:36

In Payback the author argues it’s HUD and the Clinton administration’s fault for the current foreclosure debacle. On the other hand, Gross argues it’s the current administration’s lack of regulatory enforcement in the lending arena that caused the current foreclosure debacle. Payback concludes ‘walking away’ and renting as the solution to the debacle. Gross concludes government bailout is the solution since government failed to prevent the debacle in the first place.

 
 
 
Comment by zeropointzero
2007-08-25 10:18:51

Bailing out failed buyers is just “reinforcing failure”

Money for consumer education (a little) and fraud enforcement (a lot) going forward is an investment in keeping this from happening again down the road.

Where would you prefer your money to go - to reinforce failure, or to invest in the future?

Let mortgage companies provide relief to borrowers, if they want, by modifying onerous arm resets downward or extending payment periods. Of course, thanks to securitization of loans, this is probably available to less than 10% of mortgage holders.

Comment by jerry from richardson
2007-08-25 11:32:04

Why would government want to prevent this from happening again? The goal of any government is to keep growing and collecting more taxes. They are like a virus if left ot their own means.

 
Comment by Ghostwriter
2007-08-25 11:40:46

Maybe cap the ARM where it’s at and extend the mortgages to 50 years.

 
 
Comment by joe momma
2007-08-25 10:22:06

The second they mention bailout people all over the country will stop paying their mortgage. Why bother when Daddy is going to pay it for you?

Heck, if they do that I WILL get a home I cannot afford and line up with them. Free houses for everyone!

Comment by Ben Jones
2007-08-25 10:25:41

That’s a good point. Look at how people rushed to file bankruptcy prior to the new law.

 
Comment by IUnknown
2007-08-25 11:04:08

“The second they mention bailout people all over the country will stop paying their mortgage.”

People all over this country will stop working too. I think a good many of us are fed up with the government rewarding bad behavior and punishing good. The moment there is a bail out, I will quit my job, convert my savings to gold coin, and live off welfare.

Comment by jerry from richardson
2007-08-25 11:34:30

Since I have no interest in being a lifetime leech, I would probably grab my assets and leave the country. Australia or New Zealand would be a great destination.

Comment by hd74man
2007-08-25 12:00:19

RE: I would probably grab my assets and leave the country. Australia or New Zealand would be a great destination.

Aussieland rating as #6 best place to live in the world.

US rated @ 16th, and headed lower.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by diogenes (Tampa,Fl)
2007-08-25 13:22:25

Those facts are probably incorrect.
We have more “diversity” and Europe’s “diversity” is growing daily.
The usual line in academia and journalism is that “diversity” is what made this country great.
So, you must be wrong.

 
 
Comment by implosion
2007-08-25 13:43:40

I’d be willing to give that a shot.

hd74, do you have that list, or a link?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by hd74man
2007-08-25 14:21:57

I believe I got those ratings out of an issue of International
Living a few months back.

I’m also pretty sure there was a back-up Goggle article too.

I think the top 5 were:

Switzerland
France
Luxumberg
Norway
Denmark (?)
Austrailia

Not much diversity in these countries.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Ghostwriter
2007-08-25 11:43:44

Since mine’s paid for maybe I’ll heloc it to the top.

Comment by BP
2007-08-25 12:00:52

I am at about at 80% paid. I have a 0 balance heloc setting there for $250,000. The day it looks like it will pass I will write a check to myself for $250,000 and have the time of my life.

 
 
 
Comment by Anthony
2007-08-25 10:25:36

Funny, many people on this blog have had such high regard for Bill Gross.

I’ve never liked him. He had been predicting from 2005 onward that the Federal Reserve was going to cut interest rates within the next quarter. He is in it for his own greed: get people to invest in his bonds so he can make a quick buck. No better than Jim Cramer, just not as obnoxious.

Comment by mad_tiger
2007-08-25 10:55:02

Bill Gross is one of the numerous celebrity investment managers/economists/financial analysts/financial journalists who are very smart and yet for the most part are proven to be very wrong.

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2007-08-25 11:00:08

He’s one man with an agenda. Granted.

But one of the other Pimco managers very publicly sold his house to rent a couple of years ago. They also described the “plankton” theory of housing (you cut out the first time buyer, and everyone else eventually suffers).

So, while Gross has been speaking with an agenda, I don’t believe he and the other PIMCO guys are complete shills.

Comment by Crapburner
2007-08-25 18:49:51

Let’s hope PIMPCO and Gross are the first to push up daisies when the big ARM reset washout hits everyone in 2008-10.

Another Crony Capitalist wanting a taxpayer bailout.

Privatize profits, socialize losses…..

 
 
 
Comment by mike d.
2007-08-25 10:32:10

Bail ‘em out — and prevent a destructive housing deflation that Ben Bernanke cannot avert.

the problem with this line of reasoning is that what we really need is housin deflation. especially in the more bubbly markets, but in truth throughout wide swaths of the country, we will not have a healthy housing market w/o prices first going down to historical price to income levels. all of the talk is focused on maintaining values, but that’s the root of the problem imho. it should be crystal clear to everyone by now that it’s simply too risky to lend money on houses at current prices.

Comment by jerry from richardson
2007-08-25 11:36:36

Why fix the foundation when you can just put plaster over the cracks forming on the walls? That’s been the American way since the 1970’s

 
 
Comment by arroyogrande
2007-08-25 10:39:42

” Ben Jones - I talked to this blogger yesterday about these proposals and what you guys thought of them.”

Same blog (LA Times House and Land blog), on Bill Gross and a bailout…

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laland/2007/08/pimcos-gross-ba.html*comments

Some of the comments are pretty funny! My contribution:

“Bill Gross, before you bail anyone out, let me go out and buy a house I can’t afford. As long as you are incentivizing risky behavior, I want in on it!

After all, why should renters and those that didn’t extract equity out of their houses get to keep their money? I should get paid for buying something I can not afford. Everyone tells me that owning a home is the “American Dream”. Why shouldn’t I get the rest of America to help buy it for me, especially as I can’t afford it. And don’t ask me to rent a house, as people would look down on me, and I wouldn’t be invited to dinner parties.

Great idea Bill! Keep up the good work!

(PS I’m planning on buying a Ferrari and a Yacht that I can not afford…how about campaigning for a little help from my fellow Americans on these ones as well). - arroyogrande”

Again, if you want to be tarred and feathered, and run out of town on a rail, support a bail-out.

 
Comment by Blackbox
2007-08-25 10:57:15

Looks like it’s time to remove any money you may have in a PIMCO Bond Mutual fund. Also, check your 401K. Time to vote with your redemptions.

Comment by diogenes (Tampa,Fl)
2007-08-25 13:26:56

I have $143 left a a fund that was $7000 a few years ago.
It’s been drawn down as performance has been worse than MM.
That’s probably why Bill G. wants a bailout.
His PIMCO funds are already getting flushed. He needs to show performance, and he can’t.

 
Comment by rj
2007-08-26 06:55:53

Already did.

 
 
Comment by are they crazy
2007-08-25 11:00:47

Now dont kill me, please. On strictly a practical level, rather than the chaos of moving 2,000,000 families (number I saw recently of projected foreclosures) out, devaluing the properties and loans, rehabbing and reselling the properties and moving 2,000,000 different families in, why not just devalue and reloan the people that are already there? The devaluation is going to happen so why not skip all disruptions, expenses and possible spinning into recession? I know all the moral issues and agree, but when one tries to imagine what this will all actually look like to the real people involved, including all those that didn’t do anything wrong and aren’t in trouble who will see their property devalued, it doesn’t seem like toughlove is going to pay off in the long run because we’ll all pay for it as much as a bailout. Every person that owns a home is not greedy and didn’t necessarily contribute to this mess. The saddest part that I’m not hearing anyone talk about is the only real innocent victims - millions or children who are having their worlds turned upside down.

Comment by Groundhogday
2007-08-25 15:59:23

In some sense what you are proposing will happen. But lenders will do the devaluing by renegotiating loan tems to keep homeborrows in homes. And lenders will have to eat the losses.

This is a perfectly rational lender strategy, but might not happen as often as it should because a “lender” these days might often be distributed in little slices across the globe. It will be hard for all these little slices to make any sort of decision, rational or not.

 
Comment by hd74man
2007-08-25 19:18:18

RE: millions or children who are having their worlds turned upside down.

I have little empathy for the legions of spoiled brats who think any job without A/C is beneath their dignity.

 
 
Comment by BJ
2007-08-25 11:03:29

Where do the bailouts stop?
If 1 million people suddenly decided their car loans are too high and let them be repossessed do we bail them out too?

I am so very tired of the sob stories of people “losing ” their homes.

Where are the MSM stories about all the financially responsible people who have been priced out of the market because the free money/ get rich quick schemes drove the prices to the stratosphere?

 
Comment by breakthespecultors
2007-08-25 11:04:49

how about a mandatory ‘intelligence test’ requirement before anyone is allowed to buy a home with borrowed money? if you can’t understand how a mortgage works, then you don’t get one!

 
Comment by NotBuyersMarketYet
2007-08-25 11:09:34

Any attempt would raise home prices even higher
interest write off => higher home prices
low interest => higher home prices
lax lending => higher home prieces

When are they going to learn? Hands off free market.

 
Comment by stanleyjohnson
2007-08-25 11:14:49

Apprentice winner, Kendra, says all housing is local and decline in home valves is all blown out of proportion. And when an Apprentice winner speaks…………….

Comment by diogenes (Tampa,Fl)
2007-08-25 13:28:30

Sounds like she’s been coached by the Realtors ™.
That’s their story.

 
 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2007-08-25 11:25:45

The excuse that they use for bail-outs is that homebuyers were victims of lenders .So, if they think that these lenders caused the poor homeowners harm than they should be appealing to these same lenders to re-write these notes . Shouldn’t the Feds tell these lenders to re-write their notes for marginal homeowners that obtained loans that would adjust beyond 7% on the interest rate ,so those lenders can avoid some loss. All they have to do is re-write the old money .If the borrower still wants to walk because they don’t have equity ,than so be it .

If a borrower is so up-side down that a re-write will not save them ,than they either lied to much about their income on the application or they were just speculators that had no intention of living in the property .
I believe that the re-write rate has to be high enough to be profitable for the investor . Maybe they can give a 5 year break in rate to give the homeowner time to catch up income wise with the payments and than the interest adjusts to market rates or something like that at the end of 5 years . But this burden of a bail-out should be between the lender and the borrower because they are the contracting parties in the faulty fraudulent loan contract .
IMHO the Feds and the lenders can only correct the problem for future borrowers by greater enforcement of regulations and disclosures ,but the FB’s on the books cannot be saved by a tax payers funded bailout . Also, because of demand and affordability , nothing can prevent a market correction that will eat away at the equity of millions . So be it .

I just think this whole idea of using Fannie/fred as a loan Company to bail out bad paper is just a bail-out by the taxpayers in the final analysis . The money from Fannie/Freddie should be used for “new money” on purchases for people who can afford the down payment and qualify for the payments .

Comment by diogenes (Tampa,Fl)
2007-08-25 13:34:12

“Shouldn’t the Feds tell these lenders to re-write their notes for marginal homeowners that obtained loans that would adjust beyond 7% on the interest rate ,so those lenders can avoid some loss.”
The loans were not held by the lender………they were SOLD to the bond market as income stream investments, guaranteed by the security of real estate.

The liquidity crises we saw last week was the holders of the contracts getting screwed……….payment defaults, Loans not performing as promised.
The buyers finally realized the paper was CRAP. The quit buying. There is no way to ever unravel the CDO’s and MBS’s that the LEVERAGE FUND BOYS packaged together to sell as AAA securities.
Forget about it.
The buyer should PAY as AGREED.

Comment by Housing Wizard
2007-08-25 14:47:15

I agree that the buyer should pay as agreed ,but sometimes the lender would save more if they agree to re-write a toxic loan and enter into a new agreement with the borrower .
The MBS holders must have a servicing company that services the note ,so they could be the party that tries to make the new contract with the
certain percentage of borrowers that can benefit by getting out of a toxic loan . I’m not saying that the borrowers should get a low interest rate but at least a rate that is liveable .Some of these people are going up to 13% or more interest in a 6 or 7% market and that’s just to high to charge a borrower on a first TD.

 
 
Comment by pismoclam
2007-08-25 20:43:21

They can’t rewrite the loans ’cause they sold the paper to the chinks and germans. The only paper they can rewrite is the domestic sales.

Comment by returntothemotherships
2007-08-26 00:02:42

I think this is where people just aren’t listening or stuck on stupid. There is is nobody to renegotiate the loan with. The loans were packaged up with hundreds of other loans and sold as securities. It would be like a guy at Mc Donalds asking the kid behind the counter where the cow he’s eating came from. He’s eating parts of as many as 100 cows all mushed together in a big press and grinder. Once its in the mix it ain’t the same animal. There may be small oganizations to help these idiots pay their mortgages, but the banks have no incentive to help bail them out

 
 
 
Comment by lainvestorgirl
2007-08-25 11:32:33

OT, but there was a realtor at the dinner I attended last night. She’s low end, caters to the immigrant crowd. Says prices are down in Panorama City from around 500K to 400K. That’s a big haircut for someone earning $100 a day. On the other hand, 400K still seems pretty steep for a small house in one of the lousier parts of the Valley.

Comment by jbunniii
2007-08-25 22:46:21

How did a $100/day manage to buy a $500k (or $400k) house in the first place? They would barely qualify to rent an apartment in LA without housemates.

 
 
Comment by Leighsong
2007-08-25 11:33:30

Give me aspirin!

We’ve saved all of our lives and became debt free for what? A bailout for the stupid? And to think I served my nation for 21 years.
(Hangs head in shame).

Comment by polly
2007-08-25 17:58:25

Thank you for your service. Please, hold your head up high.

 
Comment by bubblehead
2007-08-25 23:23:38

“Give me aspirin.

Indeed. It sickens me to think that my wife and I saved for five years for 20% down. We still are paying a loan down.

But the Grasshoppers will get the free lunch, paid by the Ants.

 
 
Comment by Leighsong
2007-08-25 11:42:27

Rant…and to make matters worse, they are still BUILDING! Does insanity know no limit?

 
Comment by Tom
2007-08-25 11:52:05

This mortgage Lender is trying to suck some homeowner into a loan. He keeps saying “Don’t worry, Don’t worry”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjm4GaP8fmU

 
Comment by RJ
2007-08-25 11:56:45

From the Washington Post article:

“Only the central bankers can solve this, with a series of liquidity injections and perhaps a series of rate cuts”.

He is advocating the monetization of ponzi type speculative finance run amok. This is not going to help the average homeowner unless it reignites psychotic asset inflation. Why not just sign an executive order adding 150 points to everyone’s fico score and cut checks equal to 20% of the appraised value of their homes. That way they could refi into a normal fixed rate 30yr mortgage, as long as they don’t spend the check on something else.

Comment by hd74man
2007-08-25 12:05:52

RE: reignites psychotic asset inflation

Great adjective use.

Dr. H. “Gonzo” Thompson would be proud.

 
Comment by jerry from richardson
2007-08-25 13:32:07

So where do those checks ceom from and how about responsible people who did not buy a house they couldn’t afford? Somebody who buys a $150K house gets a check for $30K, someone who buys a million dollar house they couldn’t afford gets a check for $200K? Talk about rewarding irresponsible and criminal conduct.

 
 
Comment by Tom
2007-08-25 11:56:59

I think everyone is moving from FL and MI to Montana for jobs.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070825/D8R820QO0.html

Comment by hd74man
2007-08-25 12:12:31

It’s a bogus slant.

People live where they believe they have some sort upward mobility.

The “boomer carpetbagger” retirees from out of state have driven up the cost of housing far beyond the local income scales for the lastest generation, so they’ve fled.

No takers for the menial low-wage Montana “serf and “slave” wages taking care of arrogant, snotty, bi-coastal interlopers.

 
 
Comment by ACH
2007-08-25 12:24:13

I could support tax relief on the debt forgiveness. Trying to prop the prices, “Keep people in their homes!” spoken in a pious and pleading voice, interest rate reductions, or anything that prolongs this crap just will not work. The problem is too large. Ok, I keep hearing it’s just CA, FL, AZ, etc. It really isn’t just there. This problem appears to be everywhere. I live in a rural southern state (very rural!). Houses are not selling well here. Jobs are a real problem. This mess is here, also! It just doesn’t look like it is.
This is my point: we need to get this gone. These homeowners that are stuck like this should have the debt tax relief. Let them move on. Anything else will prolong this. See Japan, Inc. for the past 15 years or so.
Roidy

 
Comment by Max
2007-08-25 12:52:50

I’ve set my eyes on a yellow Lamborgini Murcielago, can the government cut me a check? It’s about $250K.

 
Comment by wawawa
2007-08-25 13:14:14

You think foreign governments would lend us hundreds of billions of $ to bail out US home owners after we screeeewed them with our toxic CDO, MBS and etc. ?

Comment by Jerry F
2007-08-25 18:53:34

Just wait tell the foreign governments really see the prime “stuff” they bought by the “trusted” grading services Moodys. Standard Poors etc. Yes, the Wall St. boys pulled a fast one, made their big money and set up trusts, hidden accounts etc that will take years too find where all of their money is from this perfect scam.
If it brings down America and our economy so what. That’s capitalism. Some win, some loose. The Wall St. boys won big time. Now we are seeing the beginning of the costs for their victory and sleepless nights for many in the world who fell for the
“Perfect Scam”.

 
 
Comment by kurtv
2007-08-25 13:44:56

Man, it just kills me– KILLS ME that for the first time in my life, I’m on the same side of an issue as all those crappy, mindless, hypocritical and otherwise totally worthless (and possibly dangerous) conservative talk radio pundits. A bailout is wellfare. No, actually it is more like wellfare fraud. So what about me? Do I get a bailout on my rent? Can I rent a place that is too expensive for my budget and have the government make up the difference so I don’t get evicted from my apartment? What about all the cars being reposessed from people who can’t afford them. Do they get a bailout too? Et cetera. The only thing that would be remotely fair is for everyone of a certain income level to be paid a “stipend” to help cover their rent, mortgage or whatever. And what taxpayer would agree to that? And what about simple math: 2 Million homes x $300,000 per home = $600 billion dollars if the governement “buys” homes in foreclosure, which is essentially what we are talking about. And realistically, the number of homes affected could easily be more like 10 Million, which equals something like $3 trillion. (especially with the inevitable and massive “bailout” fraud scams which are sure to ensue). Only one thing can result from an effective bailout: hyperinflation. If you are 100% or more in debt, hyperinflation is your best friend. If you have lived within your means and saved for retirement, hyperinflation f@cks you bigtime. One of the earlier posts was right on… fund this “bailout” with a repeal of the the mortgage deduction, and let’s see how popular it is…

Comment by Michael
2007-08-25 18:46:18

Mortgage interest deduction would be tiny compared to a housing bubble pop. I say just get rid of the mortgage interest deduction, bailout or no bailout. It distorts the price of housing.

 
 
Comment by Don
2007-08-25 13:45:11

The FED caused this bubble to begin with, by keeping interest rates too low for too long. If we want to prevent this from happening again we should just abolish the FED and let the market set rates. The FED is just a cartel of private banks anyway and they are running things for their own account. Let’s cut them off!

Comment by ACH
2007-08-25 15:20:32

Oh, don’t forget the Regulators were sound asleep as well.
Asshats.
Roidy

 
 
Comment by joe momma
2007-08-25 13:59:52

Got my sights on a $2 million home in Southern California. Sweet! As long as Daddy is going to footing the bill maybe I should be looking in the $3 million range…

Decisions decisions…

 
Comment by jimo
2007-08-25 14:51:10

so my son, a US Marine, dutifully pays off his school loans, and serves in Iraq while the US Government bails out these boo hoo specuvestors? now i’m starting to get pissed …

Comment by Crapburner
2007-08-25 18:58:42

Foolish boy….got the arms pointed in the wrong direction…should be towards the banks, Wall Street and its mendaciously bought pols…the real enemies of citizens, savers and soldiers.

These guys on Wall Street laugh at you guys in uniform everyday by their actions towards the free citizens of our nation….bailouts, derivatives, loans and corporate combines that defy reason and gravity.

 
 
Comment by Lee Adler
2007-08-25 14:55:15

Lee Wheeler and I talked about the “Gross proposal” in our last podcast. I was so mad, you can almost here me spitting into the mike. LOL Here’s the clip. http://wallstreetexaminer.com/gross.mp3

 
Comment by hank
2007-08-25 15:18:58

anyone caught thi headline -
Fed bends key banking rule to let bank of America and Citibank lend money to their brokerage arms. i.e. our money in banks is being lent to bail out wall street underwriters.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/24/magazines/fortune/eavis_citigroup.fortune/?postversion=2007082417

From the article
“So, how serious is this rule-bending? Very. One of the central tenets of banking regulation is that banks with federally insured deposits should never be over-exposed to brokerage subsidiaries; indeed, for decades financial institutions were legally required to keep the two units completely separate. This move by the Fed eats away at the principle.”

time to move out of dollars - FXY (yen), FXF (swiss franc), FXE (euro), GLD (gold), DBA . I dont trust the corrupt Fed - they are largely responsible for this mess with ultra-loose monetary policies. dollar has lost 1/2 its value over last several years. transfer of waelth from wage earners and savers to wall street speculators and debtors.

 
Comment by darkmatter
2007-08-25 15:23:27

I prefer to talk about a bail-in. This pisses me off that i got a 15 yr mortgage in 2001 and have it almost paid off. What I think we need to do is have the government make a program that will provide me the money I could have sold my house for in 2005 and put that in my bank account. That way I won’t feel so agitated that the person across from me bought their house in 2004 on a negam for 500k more than my mortgage and their payment is less than mine (they are going to explode in 2009).

I’m kinda feeling left out of the gold rush here. Slide me some tax dollars.

 
Comment by Melvin Frumph Hoppe
2007-08-25 15:59:06

this just in from the nytimes

Home Prices Across the Nation

Compare local real estate markets to the national median.

http://tinyurl.com/26vutk

and

Drop Foreseen in Median Price of U.S. Homes

http://tinyurl.com/yphgsv

 
Comment by eye4value
2007-08-25 16:38:15

Many of the people that now find they can not afford the mortgage payment of “their “ home actually only bought because they thought buying was a great investment. And I’m not even talking about flippers here. The industry just wanted a warm body on the loan papers. Everyone seemed to benefit, from the agents, homebuilders, developers, County governments, lawyers, bankers, mortgage brokers, bond rating services Wall Street, to investors in mortgage backed securities. The guy that actually bought the house could have rented a better place, and still can, for less money than his mortgage should/will be.

So If Gross and others really want to bail out the little guy they really need to give him the return that he originally thought he was going to make. Now, that is clearly silly, so I suggest that we look at the other names on the list to find out whom they really want to bail out.

 
Comment by eye4value
2007-08-25 16:52:48

It’s Jan of 2005 and I sell my house that I paid 200K for in 2002 to my brother for 500K. He gets a no doc loan with no money down. Even in the inflated market of 2005 I probably could have only sold the house for 400K and that’s based on only 1 sales comp on my street of 30 homes.

I pass 50K back to my brother under that table and thank him very much.

When his teaser rate goes from 1% to 10% he stops paying the loan and now has been living in the house for 1 year while the bank figures out what to do. So now people are calling on the Government to bail him out.

My God, the about should be mortgage fraud and the parties sent to jail, not bailed out by the taxpayer.

 
Comment by adaylate
2007-08-25 17:01:52

RE: I would probably grab my assets and leave the country. Australia or New Zealand would be a great destination.

Too bad they will not let you in. Why do you think they are such great places to live?

 
Comment by SimpleSimon
2007-08-25 17:34:55

It’s unclear to me why Gross or anyone else for that matter would propose a bailout. Even if it could keep nominal home prices from falling ( which is highly unlikely anyway ) it will produce more inflation in the cost of living everywhere else (food, gas, electric, etc) so people’s monthly nut stays equal and they still fall into foreclosure????

Comment by tg
2007-08-25 18:56:41

Maybe because he knows it is going to be worse than it is “suppose to be”. Getting out in front of the curve can make him look awfully smart later.

 
 
Comment by lagunabeachinvestor
2007-08-25 19:20:04

I didn’t have time to read the comments, so if this has already been said, sorry.

I think Gross is doing a 180. Wasn’t he against bailouts a few weeks ago on an interview with CNBC or on on of their panels? Could it be that PIMCO has now bought a significant amount of toxic CDO’s or other packaged mortgage crap at pennies on the dollar and now wants a bailout because they know it will increase the value of their investment significantly?

Anyone out there know how much/what PIMCO has bought?

 
Comment by nyc-is-different
2007-08-25 21:03:40

“And pretend with me further that the size of the bailout is equal to the Iraq war funding.”

Overstatement? Probably not.

 
Comment by Nico
2007-08-25 22:40:48

Why in the world has every media writer, politician, pundit, columnist, commentator, editor, ink slinging hack, anchorperson and all the rest of them identified the subprime borrower as “Victim”? It’s everywhere, to a man or woman, a constant drumbeat of victim, victim victim. My head’s going to explode!!

Truth is, for the most part these “barrowers”are boobs, chumps, dupes, addle-heads, fools, clods, dimwits, donkeys, lunkheads, lamebrains and morons.

Most became insolvent when they signed the loan docs and opened the champange. You don’t even have to get a GED to understand that you will never in 100 lifetimes pay off a $500,000 if your real cash flow is $30,000 a year or less and you plan to eat too.

Now we must rescue these “victims”. Save the American-Dream. Give me a break.

Everyone from the hapless “borrower” all the way up to Angelo Mozilo himself were in on the scam right from the begining. They all deserve what’s coming. And what a scam it is !!!

 
Comment by Curt
2007-08-26 06:28:48

I agree with this post from the BMIT board:

I could envision a “bailout” under the following circumstances.

1) The house has been the buyer’s primary residence continuously for 5 or more years.

2) The original loan had at least a 10% down payment

3) There are no seconds or HELOCs on the property.

Comment by Professor Bear
2007-08-26 07:52:22

But your straw man example sounds like a case where no bailout is needed.

Comment by Curt
2007-08-26 15:37:40

YUP

 
 
 
Comment by aeyra
2007-08-26 07:34:55

I’m sure they’ll shoot for a bailout irregardless of what the public thinks. They’ll only end up shooting themselves in the foot since the US dollar will completely go to hell along with any creditiblity that the US government has left. For the record, a lot of people seem to think that if we hyperinflate our currency that gold and precious metals will go up in value trememdously. If we indeed are flooding the economy with worthless dollars, why is gold still at $650/oz? Me thinks that there is much more gold out there than your goldbugs say. I see gold as money, yes, but it doesn’t have the buying power most people think it does.

Comment by Lowballer
2007-08-26 12:16:07

The central banks tread gold as a competitor to the money they print. Gold is a barometer of global money printing, so it’s in their best interest to keep the price managed. Price is low because of: gold leasing/naked paper shorting and central bank dumping. None of these will last forever. CBs already dumped most of their gold on the market and into private hands.

Not an investment for momentum players.

 
 
Comment by The Learning Man
2007-08-26 10:30:55

I say we all pay $400 each per year to the Housing Bubble Commission Fund to help bail out the stupid buyers and the greedy sellers/mortgage brokers. Any takers???

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post