Foreclosures up 90% over the year

Don't bet on it...we'll probably be seeing some sort of 'forgiveness' legislation to cushion the impact of all of these masstiege-oriented folks falling back to their more humble origins.

I don't think the administration can afford to let this happen.

 

That rainy day fund is actually spelled,
d-e-f-e-c-i-t
s-p-e-n-d-i-n-g

If this were a state instead of a federal issue, it would be spelled,
b-o-n-d
m-e-a-s-u-r-e

In this country, there's often no/a reduced penalty for stupidity (taking out an ARM)...but we do punish each other for things beyond our control (homosexuality, for example).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos) [snapback]461199[/snapback]</div>

Oooops, didn't mean to 'spell it out for you' like you're stupid...I was just doing it for emphasis.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos) [snapback]461199[/snapback]</div>

I'm not so sure. Health problems always happen to someone else, and it's our right to consume whatever we can afford...but somehow I'm getting the feeling that folks may feel that this is "different somehow" though at this moment, for me, it's only a hunch.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 13 2007, 06:17 PM) [snapback]461199[/snapback]</div>

re our elected officials: As long as it doesn't cost 'em votes come election time [smile]

I'm not an economist or even close, so I think I'm beyond myself here, but it seems that if a big enough group of people feels the effect of something negative, then it becomes a problem (even if they did it to themselves)...and suddenly the government needs to step in and put a band-aid (brand adhesive strip) on the boo-boo. The problem actually, in my opinion, began when banks were allowed to make these sorts of loans in the fist place. Sure, everyone signed statements and viewed videos about what they were getting themselves into --and so legally understood the risks-- but an individual's due dilligence only goes so far against the overwhelming superiority (and mousetype) of some financial institutions and their counsel. Not to mention the terrifically strong consumerist messaging that we're all confronted with on a daily basis.

In a sense, the government did contribute to the problem, I think. It's like selling fast food everywhere and subsidizing the meat so it's all really cheap (compared to healthy alternatives)...then asking why we're all so fat. These loans were made with lots of salt and msg and designed to be REALLY tasty.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 13 2007, 06:17 PM) [snapback]461199[/snapback]</div>

I hope you're right...but am fearful that this type of hatred --like abuse and alcoholism-- is transmitted from generation to generation.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 13 2007, 06:17 PM) [snapback]461199[/snapback]</div>

May I live long enough!

 

Just like congress changed the bankruptcy law so Joe Sixpack has to pay off his Mastercard even if he declares bankruptcy (which is great for the banks that issue the card, but really screws Joe Sixpack), they'll do everything in their power to help the banks, no matter how badly is screws the little guy.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 13 2007, 07:41 PM) [snapback]461257[/snapback]</div>

Doesn't matter. Both Democrats and Republicans go to the highest bidder; it doesn't matter who Joe Sixpack votes (or doesn't vote) for.

 

thanks to the gotta have it now american attitude. screw saving up for anything, we can finance as we go! now i can have a big freakin' house just like all the people who made good financial decisions. the "why wait until you've earned it" mantra that's thrown in our face via advertising almost constantly... that irks me too.

 

I heard the other day on AAR that the average Japanese has ~$80,000 in their savings account, while the average American is ~$120,000 in debt.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Jun 13 2007, 08:21 PM) [snapback]461327[/snapback]</div>

Of course you heard that on "Err America" . . . it sounds scary . . . and can be made to look (on the very top surface) like "A BUSH MADE PROBLEM" . . . because "Err America" is comparing apples and oranges and not telling the whole story!

"Some factors in the debt picture soften an otherwise scary picture. A record 76% of household borrowing is mortgage debt, and the rise in that category reflects in large part the rise in the homeownership rate to 68.9% at the end of last year, though a bit under 2004's 69.0% record. Ten years ago, mortgage debt was 70% of total debt and the home ownership rate was only 64.7%. This debt is "good" in that it's used to acquire a (presumably) appreciating asset."
http://www.businessweek.com/investor/conte...1024_059650.htm

What are you liberals going to cry about next? . . . maybe the fact the the death rate from old age has skyrocketed???

 

Baaahhhh Haaaaaaa Haaaa . . .

too funny! :lol: :lol: :lol:

I should have done a little more searching . . . .

"Are these numbers from Irvine, California-based RealtyTrac to be believed? Are they in fact hyping the numbers because part of their services include listing houses for sale, and buyers looking to get a deal on properties in distress--pay $49.95 a month to subscribe to RealtyTrac?

Here’s the deal. RealtyTrac gets its total number of foreclosures--176,137 in May--by adding up “default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions,†according to their press release. Does that mean that some properties get counted multiple times? You bet it does.

Were there 176,137 foreclosures in May? Nope. A house can go through several permutations: first the default, then the bank repossession, then the auction, and in some states this can go on for many months with many different filings; therefore, many of these homes are counted multiple times. So do I trust that 176 thousand number? Nope. But I do trust the percentage increases."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/19206921

Percentages, smentages! <_<
A 90 percent change from a much smaller number is, after all, A MUCH SMALLER NUMBER!!!!

And for the same $49.95 per month, you too can get a much smaller list of distressed properties from RealtyTrac.
Shouldn't they be discounting the cost of their subscription???? <_<

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 13 2007, 10:30 PM) [snapback]461401[/snapback]</div>

Yes! Please DO vote green, SteveO

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ Jun 13 2007, 10:30 PM) [snapback]461401[/snapback]</div>

Wow, burritos is a quick learner! :lol:
Now, repeat after me . . . Eeeeerrrrrrr Aaaammmerrrrriiccaaaa. :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Jun 14 2007, 12:37 AM) [snapback]461411[/snapback]</div>

I do whenever possible, but only if the the Democrat is basically a Republican in sheep's clothes (*cough* Gore 2000 *cough*).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Jun 14 2007, 12:41 AM) [snapback]461383[/snapback]</div>

That's a little like getting excited about high school test scores going up due to cheating. I'm all for a rise in home ownership and the associated spillover benefits to society as a whole, but not when the rise is the result of so many questionable lending practices in (a small part of) the mortgage industry.

There was an article in our local paper this weekend about a national homebuilder that built 107 starter homes a few years back. Of the 107 homes, there have been 41 foreclosures. The builder carried the mortgages on 37 of those. How would you like to own one of the remaining homes is that neighborhood?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Dragonfly @ Jun 13 2007, 10:21 PM) [snapback]461327[/snapback]</div>

I am guessing that the $120k includes a mortgage while the $80k in Japan doesn't. The whole 'savings' issue is false. Many americans put 10% of their income or more into retirement accounts and that is not savings and is not counted in the savings rate. The most important would be what is their debt to income level and how much unsecured debt they have. In my case I have 150K in savings and 160k in debt (all mortgage) so does that meant I am 10k in the hole or do we count the equity (200k) I have in the debt?

BTW in Japan the real estate is such a burden that they have 100 year home loans!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sufferin' Prius Envy @ Jun 13 2007, 11:41 PM) [snapback]461383[/snapback]</div>

So many people have such a huge misconception about home ownership... It is better than renting, as you aren't throwing all your money away... however when you take into account taxes and repairs and all the other associated costs that go into owning a home, it's really just a bottomless pit you throw your money into. Land is an appreciating asset, because there is a fixed quantity with an every increasing demand from the population. A house is, as we've seen, only as valuable as the market says it is. Debt used to purchase an item that will fluctuate in value can't really be considered "good". If you buy at the top of a bubble and sell at the bottom, you're going to lose a lot of money. I know some people whose houses are worth 30k less than what they paid for them a few years ago. Doesn't really seem like the debt they incurred to purchase those houses is "good" debt now, does it?