75 billion for deadbeats

hedgehog

Registered
Forum Member
Oct 30, 2003
32,888
697
113
50
TX
live in an apartment if you can't afford the home, government has no business being in private business, just another socialist program that will bankrupt this country. Obama has no clue


Obama throws $75 billion lifeline to homeowners

MESA, Ariz. ? President Barack Obama threw a $75 billion lifeline to millions of Americans on the brink of foreclosure Wednesday, declaring an urgent need for drastic action ? not only to save their homes but to keep the housing crisis "from wreaking even greater havoc" on the broader national economy.

The lending plan, a full $25 billion bigger than the administration had been suggesting, aims to prevent as many as 9 million homeowners from being evicted and to stabilize housing markets that are at the center of the ever-worsening U.S. recession.

Government support pledged to mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is being doubled as well, to $400 billion, as part of an effort to encourage them to refinance loans that are "under water" ? those in which homes' market values have sunk below the amount the owners still owe.

"All of us are paying a price for this home mortgage crisis, and all of us will pay an even steeper price if we allow this crisis to continue to deepen," Obama said.

The new president, focusing closely on the economy, in his first month in office, rolled out the housing program one day after he was in Denver to sign his $787 billion emergency stimulus plan to revive the rest of the economy. And his administration is just now going over fresh requests for multiple billions in bailout cash from ailing automakers.

Wall Street has shown little confidence in the new steps, declining sharply on Tuesday before leveling off after Wednesday's announcement. The Dow Jones industrials rose 3 points for the day.

Success of the foreclosure rescue is far from certain.

The administration is loosening refinancing restrictions for many borrowers and providing incentives for lenders in hopes that the two sides will work together to modify loans. But no one is required to participate. The biggest players in the mortgage industry temporarily had halted foreclosures in advance of Obama's plan.

Complicating matters, investors in complex mortgage-linked securities, who make money based on interest payments, could still balk, especially those who hold second mortgages or home equity loans. Their approval would be needed to prevent many foreclosures.

"The obstacles have not gone away," said Bert Ely, a banking industry consultant in Alexandria, Va.

Another cautionary note came from John Courson, chief executive of the Mortgage Bankers Association.

"It seems to offer little help to borrowers whose loan exceeds their property value by more than 5 percent," he said, noting that that requirement would limit the plan's success in some of the hardest-hit areas in California, Florida, Nevada and Arizona and parts of the East Coast.

Indeed, Obama himself said, "This plan will not save every home."

The goal is to lower many endangered homeowners' payments to no more than 31 percent of their income. But that depends on a high degree of cooperation by lenders who have been increasingly wary of new lending as the crisis has deepened.

Still, the Obama administration, after talking with mortgage investors, appears confident that it is providing the right mix of incentives and penalties to make sure mortgage companies take part. Obama said he backs legislation in Congress to allow bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of primary home loans ? an idea ardently opposed by the lending industry.

"Taken together, the provisions of this plan will help us end this crisis and preserve, for millions of families, their stake in the American Dream," Obama said. Yet, he also added: "We must also acknowledge the limits of this plan."

He called on lenders, borrowers and the government "to step back and take responsibility" and said: "All of us must learn to live within our means again."

There's broad economic anxiety across the nation, an Associated Press-Gfk poll indicated.

Nearly three in four people say they know someone who has lost a job in the past six months as a result of the tough economic conditions, according to the poll, released Wednesday. And more than half say they worry about being able to pay their bills and about seeing their retirement investments decline. So far, Obama's job approval rating still is high, at 67 percent, and he is scoring strong marks for his handling of the economy.

The president unveiled his housing plan at a Phoenix-area high school in a state with one of the country's biggest foreclosure rates.

Nationally, Moody's Economy.com says that of the nearly 52 million U.S. homeowners with mortgages, about 13.8 million, or nearly 27 percent, owe more than their homes are worth after many months of declining prices.

How soon will the new plan show results?

"You'll start to see the effects quite quickly," Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told reporters in Phoenix, noting that rules governing the changes will be published March 4.

In theory, homeowners facing foreclosure or borrowers owing more on their homes than their mortgages are worth would have more opportunities to refinance their loans so that they have lower monthly payments. Lenders would voluntarily participate in the government programs.

The $75 billion Homeowner Stability Initiative would provide incentives to mortgage lenders to cut monthly payments in an effort to persuade them to help up to 4 million borrowers on the verge of foreclosure. The goal: cut monthly mortgage payments to sustainable levels, using money from the $700 billion financial industry bailout passed by Congress last fall.

Another part would specifically help people with dwellings whose market value has sunk below the principal still owed on the mortgages. Such mortgages have traditionally been almost impossible to refinance. But the White House said its program will help 4 million to 5 million families do just that ? if their mortgages are owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

To boost confidence, the Treasury Department said it would double its support to the two mortgage giants that the government essentially took over last fall.

It said it would absorb up to $200 billion in losses at each company by using money Congress set aside last year and will continue purchasing mortgage-backed securities from them. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are projected to need a combined government subsidy of about $66 billion, well short of the new promise of up to $400 billion.

Obama emphasized that his plan focuses on helping families who have "played by the rules" stay in their homes.

But, he said, it will do nothing to help "the unscrupulous or irresponsible." He cited so-called speculators who took out risky loans on multiple properties to make money by selling them during the housing boom, lenders who took advantage of naive buyers by glossing over the fine print, and people who willingly bought homes that were way beyond their means.

"This plan will not save every home," Obama said.

___

Associated Press Writers Alan Zibel, Mark S. Smith, Jennifer Loven and Martin Crutsinger in Washington contributed to this report.
Collapse ArticleTurn OFF Expand/Collapse Article
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
If it helps the right folks ok. And if banks start acting like banks. OK. Seems Fair as long as those that bought 4, 5 homes to rent them out get none.
 

ga_ben

Snarky
Forum Member
Oct 12, 2006
946
6
0
Acworth, GA
If it helps the right folks ok. And if banks start acting like banks. OK. Seems Fair as long as those that bought 4, 5 homes to rent them out get none.


Agree, those that wanted to be on "Flip That House" should not see a penny. Also those that lied about their incomes should not receive a penny. They should be in jail along with the brokers and bankers who allowed this to happen. Last time I checked mortgage fraud was a federal offense.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Forum Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,914
140
63
17
L.A.
Agree, those that wanted to be on "Flip That House" should not see a penny. Also those that lied about their incomes should not receive a penny. They should be in jail along with the brokers and bankers who allowed this to happen. Last time I checked mortgage fraud was a federal offense.

And I don't understand why these "financial wizards" at Citibank and others who wrapped these mortgages into securities and shopped them around the world as AAA aren't in jail for fraud as well.
 

MadJack

Administrator
Staff member
Forum Admin
Super Moderators
Channel Owner
Jul 13, 1999
105,664
1,945
113
70
home
And I don't understand why these "financial wizards" at Citibank and others who wrapped these mortgages into securities and shopped them around the world as AAA aren't in jail for fraud as well.

no, they get huge bonuses :rolleyes:
 

ga_ben

Snarky
Forum Member
Oct 12, 2006
946
6
0
Acworth, GA
And I don't understand why these "financial wizards" at Citibank and others who wrapped these mortgages into securities and shopped them around the world as AAA aren't in jail for fraud as well.

I would love to know that as well. Lets decriminalize drugs, release those locked up for drug offenses and replace them with these real criminals.
 
Last edited:

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
Still haven't met one person who over bought and is losing their house:shrug: . Swore i saw Obama map out a plan on who gets help and it look pretty fair to me if u can call something like this fair.

Fuck the banks and the media who want to blame the "lower classes"
for this housing nightmare

I am tired of good folks getting fucked and watching the Golden Parachute
brigade take this country down. That would be were the real money has gone.

Same old garbage. Blame the workers or the welfare people but don't say a peep about white collar crime.
 

MadJack

Administrator
Staff member
Forum Admin
Super Moderators
Channel Owner
Jul 13, 1999
105,664
1,945
113
70
home
Still haven't met one person who over bought and is losing their house

i only know of several builders around here that have many houses FOR SALE and they ain't being sold. and some are STILL building :shrug:

these guys i speak of are going down the tubes, no doubt.
 

Terryray

Say Parlay
Forum Member
Dec 6, 2001
9,747
2,020
113
Kansas City area for who knows how long....
no, they get huge bonuses :rolleyes:

or ones that mighta actually been laid off get taxpayers to pay for retraining.

the IHT reports "New York City hopes to spend $45 million to retrain laid-off Wall Streeters".

I guess there's so much bailout money sloshing around, why not help these folks who might be in a pinch, having not put much aside for rainy day (they only work as finance experts), not bright enough to get back on their own 2 feet themselves, and hey, living in lower Manhattan is pretty darn expensive!
 

rusty

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 24, 2006
4,627
11
0
Under a mask.
You should read the plan before you post.If anything its a plan that helps out the veterans.Which is great.But it is flawed because it doesnt help everybody that is current on there mortgage.(Which would be me).

Get a kick out of the people who cry socialist,and heres another welfare plan,when O does a 380,and puts out guidelines to help some of the honest american citizens,who most of helped defend against terrorism:SIB
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Rusty it may help if you fall behind. And another way. If some in your area start to go under. There homes sit there don't sell and go to hell. That can ruin your homes worth. It's better to help before that happens. This housing problem needs attention before we fall deeper.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
I don't pretend to know what's right or wrong - big picture - with this scenario. I do know that many people bought a home when times were good, and they probably didn't buy too much more than they could afford at the time. They subsequently lost their jobs, and their ability to pay, completely due to the economy. When there are this many foreclosures and the banks and mortgage companies will have so many homes for sale at bargain basement prices, I can't imagine it's good for the country.

My instincts tell me it should not be done, but I can get the idea of why it might be positive in some regards. I do know many went in over their heads, and many lended those same people money they shouldn't have. For those, I am saddened they will be getting money. I know I pay my mortgage, and some will be off the hook for bad decisions, and that sucks for me in some respects, although there's nothing I can do about it, and I remain simply thankful I am able to continue in a good situation - for now.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,553
305
83
Victory Lane
Charley Reese has been a journalist for 49 years.



545 PEOPLE

By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash.

The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.


What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party.

She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red .

If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

..................................................................
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Scott 545. Seems every 2 & 4 years they change some of the 545. But not much realy changes.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,553
305
83
Victory Lane
Yeh we got to get rid of term limits

Huckabee has some interesting thoughts about how to change things.

sure would piss off these people in power
 

rusty

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 24, 2006
4,627
11
0
Under a mask.
I don't pretend to know what's right or wrong - big picture - with this scenario. I do know that many people bought a home when times were good, and they probably didn't buy too much more than they could afford at the time. They subsequently lost their jobs, and their ability to pay, completely due to the economy. When there are this many foreclosures and the banks and mortgage companies will have so many homes for sale at bargain basement prices, I can't imagine it's good for the country.

My instincts tell me it should not be done, but I can get the idea of why it might be positive in some regards. I do know many went in over their heads, and many lended those same people money they shouldn't have. For those, I am saddened they will be getting money. I know I pay my mortgage, and some will be off the hook for bad decisions, and that sucks for me in some respects, although there's nothing I can do about it, and I remain simply thankful I am able to continue in a good situation - for now.

Chadman,under this plan you need to be current with mortgage.Guidelines are equity to ratio of whats owed on property,even thou you can still owe more that what your property is worth.

Bottom line you will get a interest rate reduction,but must be current on mortgage.
There are options out there for people 2months or more behind ,but this plan has nothing to do with that.

If you want bailout of a mortgage thats behind 2months or more,in most cases be prepared to pay at least 2000.00 in lawyer fees alone.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
So, Rusty - the current mortgage bailout plan are for those that are current on their payments, and they are just getting an interest rate reduction? No payments are being made for people? No cash payments to people? Are any payments being made for people, or just payments to the mortgage holder to reduce interest rates?

Thanks for your info - I really haven't looked into it. If the above scenario is true - then it seems to make more sense to me.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,553
305
83
Victory Lane
Atlanta could lose $11.3 million in jobs funding
Federal grant mishandled, audit alleges
By JEREMY REDMON

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Atlanta might have to forfeit $11.3 million for allegedly mishandling federal grant money intended to help people find jobs, even as the city grapples with a budget crisis in the midst of a crippling recession.

The Atlanta Workforce Development Agency spent that amount issuing contracts without competitive bids, making questionable expenditures and supplying services to ineligible recipients, according to an audit by the U.S. Department of Labor?s Office of the Inspector General.

? Atlanta and Fulton County news The audit recommends that the Labor Department seek to recover $11.3 million in federal Welfare-to-Work and Workforce Investment Act funds that were supposed to pay for job training and placement services. Douglas F. Small, a deputy assistant secretary for the Labor Department, said his department will make a decision about that recommendation by March 15.

Deborah Lum, the Atlanta agency?s executive director, said in a written response to the auditors that she strongly disagrees with their findings.

She issued a statement by e-mail in response to requests for an interview by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

?The city is confident that we provided sufficient financial controls and systems to plan, measure, implement and evaluate federal grant-funded programs,? Lum said in her statement. ?There is no final decision from the Department of Labor yet, and we will continue to work with them until a final decision is made.?

Small said the city could submit documents before March 15 to dispute the findings in the audit, which might allow the city to forfeit less than or none of the $11.3 million.

The city will be given a second opportunity to submit records before June 15, Small said.

Lum?s agency serves under the office of Mayor Shirley Franklin, according to its Web site. And it operates out of an office building near Turner Field on Pollard Boulevard, where it offers job training and help finding work, including help writing r?sum?s and access to a telephone, fax machine and e-mail.

The jobs agency?s largest source of funding is federal grant money.

Its budget balance as of Dec. 31 was $5.1 million, according to city records.

A spokeswoman for Franklin said the mayor was not available for comment.

While struggling with repeated multimillion-dollar budget shortfalls, Atlanta has laid off more than 680 employees, eliminated more than 1,100 positions, announced furloughs for about 4,600 city workers and instituted a hiring freeze.

City Councilman Howard Shook, chairman of the city?s Finance Committee, said he had not heard of the federal audit until contacted by the AJC.

?Obviously, that would be another unwelcome blow? to the city?s budget, Shook said of the possible forfeiture of $11.3 million. ?The last thing the general fund needs is another huge, unexpected demand on it. Obviously, this will prompt a lot of questions.?

This is not the first time the city agency has come under the microscope. In 1998, state and federal labor officials investigated allegations about the agency ? then known as the Private Industry Council ? ranging from instances of waste and mismanagement to charges of cronyism and political favoritism in the awarding of job-training contracts.

Also that year, the state Labor Department suspended funding for the city agency and asked Atlanta to return $364,000 in unjustified expenses. And in 2000, a federal jury awarded three fired employees $473,721 in damages after determining the city dismissed them from the agency for speaking out against improper and possibly illegal activities by other workers. Franklin was elected mayor in 2001.

Federal auditors said they started looking into the city?s spending practices after an outside auditing firm reported ?material weaknesses in Atlanta?s cash management and financial reporting? in 2002.

The federal audit covered the city agency?s spending from 1998 to 2004.

Lum said all the federal grant funds at issue had been spent by the time Franklin appointed her to become executive director of the city agency in March 2003.

Also among the audit?s findings:

? Auditors questioned $5.9 million for contracts awarded without evidence of full and open competitive bidding processes.

? The city could not provide contracts or invoices to support $2.5 million in expenditures.

? City contractors were paid $657,465 for ?unallowable or unsupported costs,? including payments without invoices, invoices with duplicated payments and invoices without any evidence of payment approval.

? Atlanta?s records show $300,000 in unsupported costs posted to a ?Board of Directors? account that was charged to a Workforce Investment Act program.

? The city mingled federal grant money with non-Labor Department funds.

? The city could not demonstrate that it always complied with eligibility requirements when enrolling people in Welfare-to-Work and Workforce Investment Act youth programs.
..............................................................

In the meantime in Atlanta, they are shutting down fire stations and laying off police and fire.

They say nothing about the deadbeats that go to work in Atlanta offices everyday and play games on their computers and waste time. These fawkers are protected.

Its really amazing how this shit goes on and on forever .
 

rusty

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 24, 2006
4,627
11
0
Under a mask.
So, Rusty - the current mortgage bailout plan are for those that are current on their payments, and they are just getting an interest rate reduction? No payments are being made for people? No cash payments to people? Are any payments being made for people, or just payments to the mortgage holder to reduce interest rates?

Thanks for your info - I really haven't looked into it. If the above scenario is true - then it seems to make more sense to me.

This is correct.Not to make light of the Sub-Prime mess,but they would be involved also.

Theres are more complicated,and most would qualify.Heres were the govt. and lender would have to help up to 38% of there total income.

Inother words there home must not be no higher than 38 percent of total income.Then there rate adjusts to a yearly percentage rate after the first 5 years that is todays(4.5 to 5% roughly).

This is the part that people dont like,and I guess I dont blame them.But lets be realistic.Who still owns a home that was mortgaged during the subprime boom??Answer.....Not many.
 

ryson

Capitalist
Forum Member
Dec 22, 2001
1,142
9
0
IAH
Who still owns a home that was mortgaged during the subprime boom??Answer.....Not many.

A big part of that is due to people not only took an exotic/sub-prime loan once they closed they opened a HELOC and sucked every bit of equity out of the property. I understand some people got in over their heads however if they opened a HELOC on top of the exotic they deserve to lose their home.

my .02
 
Last edited:
Bet on MyBookie
Top