DUH!!..69% Say Those Struggling With Mortgage Should Sell, Buy Cheaper Home

[The Rabbi]

It is not that simple.
Many of those people are underwater in their mortgage.
Many of these folks were stupid enough to take out 2nd mortgages to put in a pool, or build a super deck or turn the basement into a very expensive home theater.
They may owe $375k but the value is $280k...where the heck are these people going to get $10,000's to pay the difference? Many of them are only paying interest payments.

Geezus. No wonder this country is screwed.
It's called bankruptcy. You can't pay your debts, you bankrupt. In some states even that isn't necessary. Just send the keys to the lender (jingle mail) and you're done. Most people end up renting as nice houses for less money than they were paying in mortgage payments.
Another example of a wasteful governmental program.

Holy shit your "solution" is bankruptcy. What kind of fake personal responsibility conservative are you?

Do you think taking government handouts demonstrates personal responsibility? What kind of moron are you?

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Bottom line.... he loves me.

Love you? I barely know you. Keep your crap in the flame zone.

poor poor ..... you know. LOL.

no, I don't know. So please take your shit to the flame zone.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Which is better for the economy as a whole.

End the Fed. Close Fannie and Freddie. End the bailouts. End mortgage subsidies. Repeal the CRA. Stop the damn meddling and let the free market work. That's what is best for the economy as a whole.

None of which is going to happen; so let's deal with reality and likelihood.

Also, I would contend that a TRUE free market would not be the best solution for anything.

 

[Douger]

Thursday, March 22, 2012

While most Americans agree now is not the best time to sell a home, they feel stronger than ever that those struggling to pay their mortgage should sell their home and buy a cheaper one rather than receive help from the government.
69% Say Those Struggling With Mortgage Should Sell, Buy Cheaper Home - Rasmussen Reports™

Almost 70% think logically that DUH.. if you are living in a home you can't afford..
SELL IT!!!!!

How can these dimwits sell a house they borrowed several hundred grand against when it's worth 1/3 of what they owe on it ?
My favorite site for reality checks.
Type in your favorite murkins house (the one with two Harleys a jet ski and a boat) and see what's up.Giving easy mortgage access to a murkin is like giving Uh murkin express card to a crack head.
Zillow - Real Estate, Homes for Sale, Recent Sales, Apartment Rentals

 

[Dr.Traveler]

My partners ex girlfriend is upsidedown in her house. Can't sell it and is struggling to stay in it. Selling isn't an option.

It's easy to judge someone else's bad scenario when were not experiencing it.

This.

There's a lot of folks that are in a position where through no fault of their own, they're now underwater on the mortgage with one or both of the homeowners out of work.

We bought a house we could afford on one income, paid the (now unheard of) 20% downpayment, and are thankfully not underwater. Yet. But home values have devalued to the point where if we'd need to sell the house in a timely manner, we'd definitely have to sell the house at the loss of the down payment.

 

[eflatminor]

But home values have devalued to the point where if we'd need to sell the house in a timely manner, we'd definitely have to sell the house at the loss of the down payment.

Bad investment on your part. Should have bought less of a home and/or but more on a down payment...or rented. Next time, you'll know better. Either way, it's not my or another taxpayer's problem.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

The properties I own have dropped in value significantly. While I am not underwater, I have lost 50% of the equity than I had in 2007. Those that borrowed against their property in the first years of this century are definately in a hurting position.

Its called ...the bubble burst. The mad scramble of overbidding is over. The bullshit of borrowing more then you need for the mortgage is over. Buying property and carrying mortgages is a gamble. It always has been and always will be.

What is unfortunate though is that the banks were bailed out, essentially clearing their gambling debts, and the homeowners were left holding the bag.

The banks do own a large amount of responsibility in this. When my wife and I started home shopping the bank offered us a whopping half a million dollars as an estimate for what they'd give us for a home. With a minimal down payment. Without going in to what I make a year, a half a million is an insane amount of money to loan a person like me. The odds I'd ever pay that back are almost single digit.

We realized (because we're both Math folks) that $500,000 was a ridiculous amount, got out the amortization formulas, and figured out that with the 20% down payment we'd saved we could afford just under half of that. We shopped and bartered and negotiated and came in well under that number for a nice house.

Which is now not worth nearly what we paid for it.

If we'd trusted the bank (You know, the financial experts we trusted with our savings) we'd be royally screwed right now. The average person did, and now they're the ones paying for it.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

But home values have devalued to the point where if we'd need to sell the house in a timely manner, we'd definitely have to sell the house at the loss of the down payment.

Bad investment on your part. Should have bought less of a home and/or but more on a down payment...or rented. Next time, you'll know better. Either way, it's not my or another taxpayer's problem.

Stop.

You act like we're talking about mansions here, Yes SOME people bought homes they couldn't afford even under the best of circumstances. But many other people bought moderately prices homes that were WELL within their budgets then were brought down by circumstances totally out of their own control.

Your "solution" isn't a solution at all. Rather it's just tossing people out of their homes.

 

[eflatminor]

What is unfortunate though is that the banks were bailed out.

Correct. No more bailouts.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

But home values have devalued to the point where if we'd need to sell the house in a timely manner, we'd definitely have to sell the house at the loss of the down payment.

Bad investment on your part. Should have bought less of a home and/or but more on a down payment...or rented. Next time, you'll know better. Either way, it's not my or another taxpayer's problem.

Not saying it is. And truth be told I'm not planning on selling for at least 5-10 years unless one or both of us lost our jobs.

Point is, even if you do everything right, you're screwed in this market. A lot of folks are taking the mightier than than approach on this, but the truth is it's just an incredibly bad market that will only get worse as you let folks fall into foreclosure.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

The properties I own have dropped in value significantly. While I am not underwater, I have lost 50% of the equity than I had in 2007. Those that borrowed against their property in the first years of this century are definately in a hurting position.

Its called ...the bubble burst. The mad scramble of overbidding is over. The bullshit of borrowing more then you need for the mortgage is over. Buying property and carrying mortgages is a gamble. It always has been and always will be.

What is unfortunate though is that the banks were bailed out, essentially clearing their gambling debts, and the homeowners were left holding the bag.

The banks do own a large amount of responsibility in this. When my wife and I started home shopping the bank offered us a whopping half a million dollars as an estimate for what they'd give us for a home. With a minimal down payment. Without going in to what I make a year, a half a million is an insane amount of money to loan a person like me. The odds I'd ever pay that back are almost single digit.

We realized (because we're both Math folks) that $500,000 was a ridiculous amount, got out the amortization formulas, and figured out that with the 20% down payment we'd saved we could afford just under half of that. We shopped and bartered and negotiated and came in well under that number for a nice house.

Which is now not worth nearly what we paid for it.

If we'd trusted the bank (You know, the financial experts we trusted with our savings) we'd be royally screwed right now. The average person did, and now they're the ones paying for it.

My brother went through the same. He went to the bank to get a loan on a nice little house he and his wife had found, and the bank insisted that they weren't buying enough house for their income. He insisted right back that that was the house they wanted and they needed to borrow 80% of the price, no more , no less.

It took him almost a month to secure the loan he wanted. Under the terms he wanted. That was 8 years ago, their home isn't worth what they paid for it now either, but fortunately they have both kept their well paying jobs and so are just making the payments and trusting that the value will eventually go back up.

 

[eflatminor]

...other people bought moderately prices homes that were WELL within their budgets then were brought down by circumstances totally out of their own control.

When one buys a stock, or gold, or a bond, or ANY investment, it's value can depreciate due to circumstances totally out of the the investors control. That doesn't mean they deserve a bailout.

...tossing people out of their homes.

You mean they might have to...RENT?! Oh God no! That would be just awful.

Wait, I rent. Hmmm...

 

[bripat9643]

So they will not be buying another home, they will be trying to find something cheap to rent.

Oh God NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! We can't have people living within their means. That's CRAZY!!!

Again, you're missing the point. Which is better for the economy as a whole. Subsidizing mortgages until people can recover, or just letting thousands of homes be returned to the banks?

You do realize that in EITHER case the banks are going to be bailed out right? That's a given, it's already happened. So. doesn't it make sense to let people who are at least trying go ahead and keep their homes when the situation is not totally their faults?

You're missing the point:

Why should 'A' be taxed to make good the losses incurred by 'B' when those losses are in now way the fault of 'A?'

The fact that 'B's house gets hit by a tornado doesn't create an obligation on the part of 'A.'

 

[eflatminor]

And truth be told I'm not planning on selling for at least 5-10 years unless one or both of us lost our jobs.

Excellent. I sincerely hope for the best for both of you. I hope you stay in your home and realize excellent appreciation.

but the truth is it's just an incredibly bad market that will only get worse as you let folks fall into foreclosure.

Wrong. The market must be allowed to work if it is ever to recover. Then there's the idea of moral hazard.

 

[bripat9643]

The very wealth didn't over expand the supply of credit.

Wait what? Holy shit man. Buy a book or sumthin.
Who do YOU think over expanded the supply of credit? Poor people? Dentists? Pharmaceutical reps?

The government over expanded, you fucking economic ignoramus.

Do you know a thing about banking or the federal reserve?

 

[syrenn]

The properties I own have dropped in value significantly. While I am not underwater, I have lost 50% of the equity than I had in 2007. Those that borrowed against their property in the first years of this century are definately in a hurting position.

Its called ...the bubble burst. The mad scramble of overbidding is over. The bullshit of borrowing more then you need for the mortgage is over. Buying property and carrying mortgages is a gamble. It always has been and always will be.

What is unfortunate though is that the banks were bailed out, essentially clearing their gambling debts, and the homeowners were left holding the bag.

The banks do own a large amount of responsibility in this. When my wife and I started home shopping the bank offered us a whopping half a million dollars as an estimate for what they'd give us for a home. With a minimal down payment. Without going in to what I make a year, a half a million is an insane amount of money to loan a person like me. The odds I'd ever pay that back are almost single digit.

We realized (because we're both Math folks) that $500,000 was a ridiculous amount, got out the amortization formulas, and figured out that with the 20% down payment we'd saved we could afford just under half of that. We shopped and bartered and negotiated and came in well under that number for a nice house.

Which is now not worth nearly what we paid for it.

If we'd trusted the bank (You know, the financial experts we trusted with our savings) we'd be royally screwed right now. The average person did, and now they're the ones paying for it.

I agree with everything you just said. The banks held out the carrot.... they did not force anyone to sign for the loan though. I do agree the banks are partially responsible for all of this... they lowered their standards of who they loaned money to. Hopefully it goes back to the way it was... 20-30 down cash down payment and a microscope shoved up your rear end to see if you even qualify to apply for a loan.

Again.... just becasue you were offered half a million...does not mean you could afford it. Good for you for knowing what you could afford to borrow and pay for.

If the average person is to stupid to know what they can and cant pay for... they should not be taking out a mortgage. Simple as that. I also believe the average person knows if you buy a car and you don't make the payments.....it gets repossessed. So they aren't as stupid as they are making themselves out to be when it comes to borrowing money from a bank.

 

[bripat9643]

It is not that simple.
Many of those people are underwater in their mortgage.
Many of these folks were stupid enough to take out 2nd mortgages to put in a pool, or build a super deck or turn the basement into a very expensive home theater.
They may owe $375k but the value is $280k...where the heck are these people going to get $10,000's to pay the difference? Many of them are only paying interest payments.

So what? Why should I be taxed to bail them out?

LOL you've already bailed out the banks, and no doubt will again, especially if all the sudden they are sitting on thousands of empty over valued homes.

The fact the government raped me in the past isn't a convincing argument that it should continue to rape me in the future. Let those banks go under.

 

[bripat9643]

End the Fed. Close Fannie and Freddie. End the bailouts. End mortgage subsidies. Repeal the CRA. Stop the damn meddling and let the free market work. That's what is best for the economy as a whole.

None of which is going to happen; so let's deal with reality and likelihood.

Also, I would contend that a TRUE free market would not be the best solution for anything.

OF course you do. That's what all Marxists believe.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Two of the biggest mistakes people make is buying too much house and too much car.

Living beyond, or even just at the edge, of your means is a surefire formula for misery.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

So what? Why should I be taxed to bail them out?

LOL you've already bailed out the banks, and no doubt will again, especially if all the sudden they are sitting on thousands of empty over valued homes.

The fact the government raped me in the past isn't a convincing argument that it should continue to rape me in the future. Let those banks go under.

The government is going to continue to "rape you" regardless of whether we help these people out or not.

But let me ask you. Let's suppose all these people just go to bankruptcy court, who does that help? Do you not recognize that either way the banks are going to make out? Please don't tell me you honestly believe that if suddenly banks have thousands of foreclosed homes on their books that the government isn't going to further help them out? No matter which party the POTUS is from. It WILL happen. So, all the crying and gnashing of teeth about "no more bailouts" is for naught. That cow has left the barn.

I don't even know that that is a bad thing anyway, the more money our government loans out the lest they have to waste.