Government verses foreclosures

[peterb]

The govt is ultimately us. The seperation is an illusion they’ve created to make you think you’re being “saved” by some benevolent power.
This is just another idea that wont work. In order to maintain any type of free market, they must be very careful with their level of intervention. Otherwise it becomes socialized and that’s the death of the market. So they can really only make it look like they’re helping.

[cr]

[quote=The author of the article]
It’s not too crazy, no? I mean, if you’re of the opinion that these borrowers should in fact be saved and given back home equity that perhaps they gambled on in the first place. The cost, NCRC estimates, $50-$100 billion.”
[/quote]

And what if you’re not of that opinion?

What a terrible idea. And what’s the banks say in all this? And who will these private equity buyers be? And what about current housing inventory sitting at unaffordable prices?

This is just another thing the Gov’t (and short sighted commentators) fails to understand. Forcing reductions in the value of assets discourages future lending for the purchase of those assets.

Everyone wonders why banks won’t lend the bailout money…What do you expect when their own money they lent is being written down on a daily basis.

$50-$100 Billion. Sounds like Bernanke.

[cr]

[quote=The author of the article]
It’s not too crazy, no? I mean, if you’re of the opinion that these borrowers should in fact be saved and given back home equity that perhaps they gambled on in the first place. The cost, NCRC estimates, $50-$100 billion.”
[/quote]

And what if you’re not of that opinion?

What a terrible idea. And what’s the banks say in all this? And who will these private equity buyers be? And what about current housing inventory sitting at unaffordable prices?

This is just another thing the Gov’t (and short sighted commentators) fails to understand. Forcing reductions in the value of assets discourages future lending for the purchase of those assets.

Everyone wonders why banks won’t lend the bailout money…What do you expect when their own money they lent is being written down on a daily basis.

$50-$100 Billion. Sounds like Bernanke.

[cr]

[quote=The author of the article]
It’s not too crazy, no? I mean, if you’re of the opinion that these borrowers should in fact be saved and given back home equity that perhaps they gambled on in the first place. The cost, NCRC estimates, $50-$100 billion.”
[/quote]

And what if you’re not of that opinion?

What a terrible idea. And what’s the banks say in all this? And who will these private equity buyers be? And what about current housing inventory sitting at unaffordable prices?

This is just another thing the Gov’t (and short sighted commentators) fails to understand. Forcing reductions in the value of assets discourages future lending for the purchase of those assets.

Everyone wonders why banks won’t lend the bailout money…What do you expect when their own money they lent is being written down on a daily basis.

$50-$100 Billion. Sounds like Bernanke.

[cr]

[quote=The author of the article]
It’s not too crazy, no? I mean, if you’re of the opinion that these borrowers should in fact be saved and given back home equity that perhaps they gambled on in the first place. The cost, NCRC estimates, $50-$100 billion.”
[/quote]

And what if you’re not of that opinion?

What a terrible idea. And what’s the banks say in all this? And who will these private equity buyers be? And what about current housing inventory sitting at unaffordable prices?

This is just another thing the Gov’t (and short sighted commentators) fails to understand. Forcing reductions in the value of assets discourages future lending for the purchase of those assets.

Everyone wonders why banks won’t lend the bailout money…What do you expect when their own money they lent is being written down on a daily basis.

$50-$100 Billion. Sounds like Bernanke.

[cr]

[quote=The author of the article]
It’s not too crazy, no? I mean, if you’re of the opinion that these borrowers should in fact be saved and given back home equity that perhaps they gambled on in the first place. The cost, NCRC estimates, $50-$100 billion.”
[/quote]

And what if you’re not of that opinion?

What a terrible idea. And what’s the banks say in all this? And who will these private equity buyers be? And what about current housing inventory sitting at unaffordable prices?

This is just another thing the Gov’t (and short sighted commentators) fails to understand. Forcing reductions in the value of assets discourages future lending for the purchase of those assets.

Everyone wonders why banks won’t lend the bailout money…What do you expect when their own money they lent is being written down on a daily basis.

$50-$100 Billion. Sounds like Bernanke.

[HereWeGo]

Insanity.

[HereWeGo]

Insanity.

[HereWeGo]

Insanity.

[HereWeGo]

Insanity.

[HereWeGo]

Insanity.

[DWCAP]

So they are gonna take the houses by eminant domain, from the owner I assume, or better known here as the FB. The bank will immediatly have to write off the difference between what they are owed, and whatever the government gives them. 30-50% of bank assets (of the newer, more troubled variety that is. I have a feeling that 150k loan from 1985 is rather safe, even now) suddenly go poof? Are our banks strong enough to take those kinda hits? Arn’t we trying to save the banking industry already? Wasnt the original point of the TARP to save the banking industry? How ironic would it be if they used banking industry bailout money to bring down the banks!

[DWCAP]

So they are gonna take the houses by eminant domain, from the owner I assume, or better known here as the FB. The bank will immediatly have to write off the difference between what they are owed, and whatever the government gives them. 30-50% of bank assets (of the newer, more troubled variety that is. I have a feeling that 150k loan from 1985 is rather safe, even now) suddenly go poof? Are our banks strong enough to take those kinda hits? Arn’t we trying to save the banking industry already? Wasnt the original point of the TARP to save the banking industry? How ironic would it be if they used banking industry bailout money to bring down the banks!

[DWCAP]

So they are gonna take the houses by eminant domain, from the owner I assume, or better known here as the FB. The bank will immediatly have to write off the difference between what they are owed, and whatever the government gives them. 30-50% of bank assets (of the newer, more troubled variety that is. I have a feeling that 150k loan from 1985 is rather safe, even now) suddenly go poof? Are our banks strong enough to take those kinda hits? Arn’t we trying to save the banking industry already? Wasnt the original point of the TARP to save the banking industry? How ironic would it be if they used banking industry bailout money to bring down the banks!

[DWCAP]

So they are gonna take the houses by eminant domain, from the owner I assume, or better known here as the FB. The bank will immediatly have to write off the difference between what they are owed, and whatever the government gives them. 30-50% of bank assets (of the newer, more troubled variety that is. I have a feeling that 150k loan from 1985 is rather safe, even now) suddenly go poof? Are our banks strong enough to take those kinda hits? Arn’t we trying to save the banking industry already? Wasnt the original point of the TARP to save the banking industry? How ironic would it be if they used banking industry bailout money to bring down the banks!

[Author]

Posts