Posted on 03/25/2010 3:54:54 PM PDT by tobyhill
The Obama administration plans to overhaul how it's tackling the foreclosure crisis, in part by requiring lenders to temporarily slash or eliminate monthly mortgage payments for many borrowers who are unemployed, senior officials said Thursday.
Banks and other lenders would have to reduce the payments to no more than 31 percent of a borrower's income, which would typically be their unemployment insurance, for up to six months. In some cases, administration officials said, a lender could allow a borrower to make no payments at all.
The new push, which the White House is scheduled to announce Friday, takes direct aim at the major cause of the current wave of foreclosures: the spike in unemployment. While the initial mortgage crisis that erupted three years ago resulted from millions of risky home loans that went bad, more recent defaults reflect the country's economic downturn and the inability of jobless borrowers to keep paying.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
WHAT ON EARTH?
Can you believe this?
Ain’t Utopia grand?!
My Wife got Unemployment for six months and found a job paying 25% less than she was making last November. Since I am Self Employed, I had no income for about two months during my Chemotherapy.
Needless to say, our income was drastically reduced, but my obligations were not. I was forced to take money from my Retirement Funds and because I am only 56, I will pay a 12.5% Penalty and regular Income Tax for the privilege of spending my own hard earned money.
Now King Obama makes one of his Hugo Chavez Proclamations and people who failed to save any money get a free ride while I get reamed by the State and Federal Government for Taxes and Penalties on my own money?
Man, what a sucker I am...
Yeah, like the BANKS!
Sigh. I guess we'll see them roll over just like the insurance companies did. Obama might call out the "pitchforks".
While I have a degree in psychology, I really don't want to have to utilize it just to communicate with the mentally unstable democrats (yes, I guess that is redundant, isn't it).
Somebody at the Post realized that the writers were speaking the whole truth about Obama’s plans and they’ve since changed the headline. Follow the link and the headline now reads, “Obama readies steps to fight foreclosures, particularly for unemployed.”
To “fight foreclosures” makes Obama sound like much more of a man of the people than the fascist-sounding phrase “order lenders...”
I’ve saved an archive of the original page and original headline.
You’re right, they changed the headlines to make it sound less Commie.
I can't wait until he "orders" the end of elections (liable to happen).
It is not the banks, the banks are only facilitators of cash and credit flow.
YOU have to object.
Just do it.
well I guess I was real stupid eh? I got laid off last fall, still haven’t found a job. Thing is, I knew the layoff was coming and planned for it - we sold our house right as my job was ending, and we’ve been renting ever since.
D’oh! Guess I should have just freeloaded and waited for The One to send me some Obama money from his special stash to pay my mortgage eh! Silly me.
Well, I respectfully disagree.
We disagreed LOUDLY to health care. But the insurance companies kept their meek little heads down and went along with the plan. I’ll never understand why they couldn’t see how short-lived Obama’s word would be. They could have killed the bill with an information campaign.
The bank bill could go the same way. They’ll ignore those of us who don’t “need” the bailout. Only the banks can fight back on this one-—with us at their backs.
Sounds about as legal as “Obama orders all non-Democrats into Concentration Camps and bank accounts and property confiscated”.
Of course, when did rule by other than “Sez me!” be adopted by the “make up the rules as we go” Dems?
I asked some elementary kids who paid for their nice new school building (2 years old) and their teachers and books!
OBAMA did!
“And the WaPo doesn’t find this . . strange? What if Pres Bush had “ordered” private businesses to do something? Would they not be up in arms?
Can Zero get any more dictatorial? I’m afraid the answer is yes, and he probably will, with the help of the propoganda arm of the demo-socialist party, the lame-stream press.”
If Chavez/Putin/Mugabe/etc can do it, then clearly “international law” says Obama can do it.
0bama is preparing for 2012, when he is out of a job.
Does congress have to write and pass a law on this? Im sorry I did not read the whole article the title depressed me too much
Maybe so...but how does it benefit to do nothing? I certainly dont favor what Obama and Congress are doing. But do you really think nothing should be done?
I agree 100% that barrowers signed a contract. However, the terms of that contract was made under very different circumstaces. A $1500 mortgage payment may not have been a problem for someone to pay in 2004. Now in 2010, that person has been laid off and income is slashed significantly. If he can no longer afford the payment, what do you want him to do? Skip the grocery store and skip the doctor appointments just so he can pay a mortgage he is now $100,000+ underwater?
Either way, the banks are going to be left with toxic debt they will end up writing off anyway. If a house today is $100,000 underwater...it aint recoving that equity for decades. Lets be realistic here.
That money is long gone. The only question is when and how is it going to be written off.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.