EconProf I see absolutely no merit in this plan with respect to selling the home back to the original homeowners.
I agree with the first part of the plan which would be to take the home away from the homeowners using emminent domain.
However in no way whatsoever should the home be “given” back to the homeowner on any terms. The home should be sold on the open market. If the current homeowners want to buy it then they can compete with anyone else.
The rate of recidivism with regard to rampant consumerism is quite high. I work with so many people who are SO qualified with respect to gainful employment, strong downpayment money, who have simply elected to be prudent over the past few years. These people would form a much strong base to the homeownership pyrmaid rather then current overburdened base owner.
I am very disturbed by this “family upheaval” that everyone keeps writing about. Renting a home is not an upheaval. I don’t like it but it is not the end of the world and to sensationalize it is crazy. Pity the poor homeowner who HELOCd himself to foreclosure so now he has to suffer through the upheaval of foreclosure so he has nowhere to park his boat.
So yes, I like the first part of the idea but a much stronger implementation of what to do after the home is taken should be considered. If the home is taken through emminent domain then the deal with the original owner would be they get to walk with no ding to the credit and if the home sells for more then they owe then they get the profit.
The better lesson for them will be that they learn to live within thier means. What a treat.
