<p>That’s sweet. Congrats.</p>
<p>Aren’t there grown-ups any more?</p>
<p>A lot of people in this situation who occupy these houses gambled. They gambled on housing pricing continuing to raise at double-digits so they could refi later at a fixed rate or that they could leverage themselves into a bigger home or into a nice profit or into a refi cash machine. When it works, it pays off big but when it doesn’t work, they’re screwed. Now these folks get a do-over. When risk-takers no longer have to worry about the down-side, that’s no longer capitalism.</p>
<p>What about the folks who knew that we were in a bubble and decided to wait until the inevitable correction to buy? If the government doing what it can to prop up prices that are overinflated as it is, these people are screwed.</p>
<p>I’m a homeowner and it’s in my best interest to see prices kept up but it’s to the point, where I would have to get an ARM if I had to buy this over again now and I have always had a fixed rate loan. A severe correction is really needed and if the powers-that-be are determined just to drag things out and let the air of the market slowly, there will be darn few buyers. Why buy now when you now the market will come down at a gradual rate over the course of several years?</p>
<p>And NO government money at all is going into this “bailout”. It’s a voluntary program on the part of the lenders, etc. </p>
<p>The S&L bailout cost the US Treasury lots of money.</p>
<p><a href=“FDIC: Banking Review”>FDIC: Banking Review;
<p>No, but they are sticking their noses in here, aren’t they.</p>
<p>So Barrons, do you believe in government bailouts?</p>
<p>The Bush proposal isn’t much of a bailout. It’s voluntary, and it isn’t going to help many people. It’s a political, psychological bailout.</p>
<p>I still don’t like it. ;)</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/business/07mortgage.html?pagewanted=2[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/business/07mortgage.html?pagewanted=2</a></p>
<p>Amazing how fast some of this debt went bad. As soon as the contracts were signed…</p>
<p>Selling stuff that you know is bad…</p>
<p>[NY</a> Times Advertisement](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/business/06hedge.html?em&ex=1197176400&en=c2ac74546c7c3d89&ei=5087 ]NY”>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/business/06hedge.html?em&ex=1197176400&en=c2ac74546c7c3d89&ei=5087 )</p>
<p>The real government bailout continues next week with the Fed meeting. ;)</p>
<p>Who gets help?</p>
<p><a href=“http://finance.yahoo.com/loans/article/103997/What-the-Mortgage-Bailout-Means-for-You[/url]”>http://finance.yahoo.com/loans/article/103997/What-the-Mortgage-Bailout-Means-for-You</a></p>
<p>Certainly when needed and can be done without major costs to the taxpayers. When it comes to markets we all know psychology is very important. If some stabilty can be brought into deeply impacted areas (NOT the Pacific Northwest BTW) some unneeded bloodletting might be avoided. There is still a large market for good home loans so it’s just a matter of smoothing out the hysteria and allowing the credit market to rise to the new challenges. Will it work–maybe. Just like the Roosevelt programs of the Depression, it may do more to improve psychology than actual economics. And that’s enough.</p>
<p>I like that only owner occupants are allowed to benefit.</p>
<p>Lowering rates at this point would be like giving crack to addicts.</p>
<p>You are going to need a lot of crack to take care of a 20 year inventory of homes. This has to be one of the largest mismatches of inventory to sales.</p>
<p>[Times-News:</a> Magicvalley.com, Twin Falls, ID](<a href=“http://www.magicvalley.com/articles/2007/12/07/ap-state-id/d8tc9g081.txt]Times-News:”>http://www.magicvalley.com/articles/2007/12/07/ap-state-id/d8tc9g081.txt)</p>