The Houston Chronicle editorial board is pretty well known for saying very stupid things, but the editors have outdone themselves.
Now they want the Federal government to assume $1.3 trillion worth of crappy mortgages:
What Congress should do is refinance the subprime mortgages of homeowners who can make reasonable payments on their house (sic). This would limit the neighborhood-blighting, life-ruining foreclosures that will keep home prices falling and the economy hobbled.
Yeah, let’s insulate stupid and greedy people from the natural consequences of their stupidity and greed. I’m sure they’ll learn their lessons.
Filed Under Front Page ·
Comments
35 Responses to “Chron: Solve finances by printing $1.3T”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
Sorry - Since when am I (as a taxpayer) resposible for other people not taking responsibility for their own actions? You can’t tell me that they did not know when they signed on the dottedd line that they could not keep up the payments!
I live in a house that the Ugly House folks offered $12,000 for - and that was mostly for the land! I won’t hurt the “I want what I want - and I want it NOW!” folks to come down in the world a bit!
Oops! The should be “IT won’t hurt….”
Matt did you see the story on Nightline about the couple that mortgaged their house to speculate on Florida Condos? They are loosing their butts but still say they are not stupid or greedy!
Why can’t the government allow home prices to drop down to the level that I can afford one? It’s probably because they don’t want to fool with cash buyers who don’t have to conform to all their crappy, social engineering programs related to home financing. They’ve got the no-good deadbeats in the neighborhoods right where they want them, and by allowing them to stay, they can further control every facet of their pitiful lives.
Let’s see, in this “buy vote” scheme are there more voters out there that need to be bailed out or are there more voters who worked hard to afford their house and therefore don’t want to pay more taxes to bail out the ones that screwed up??? The politicans had better take a poll!!!!
The whole situation reeks of corporatism and a government that tends to meddle to much in people’s lives.
Follow the money trail and ask yourself who benefited most from the meddling… The home owner, who paid interest as long as he could, or the housing and mortgage industries.
IDIOTS! democrats are too stupid to be given responsibility over ANYTHING!
The Hildebeast wants to have a “freeze” on home foreclosures.
I guess I can stop paying my mortgage now.
What’s next, a “freeze” on car payments??
Maybe a “freeze” on repos of giant flat-screen plasma tv’s that people bought and can’t afford?
Democrat = Stupid
they are working on a bill for 400 billion and cornyn is in the middle of it.
after all everyone needs to feel good and play nice. lolly pops and mary jane for all.
T-Hawkk
Bush will sign the bill if passed. Refresh my memory, what party is he from? This is not a partisan issue. It is an issue of out-of-control spending, and the elephants are sucking up just as much as the jackasses.
Matt, you miss the Chron’s unstated conflict of interest–
Massive home foreclosures means fewer people in homes… means fewer households for Chron delivery drivers to dump papers on lawns of non-subscribers… means lower circulation numbers… means plunging advertising revenues.
Follow the numbers.
T-Hawk
You are exactly right. Chronicle = Democrat. ’nuff said.
Basically this is asking the taxpayers to bail out stupid people.
bob42
They both benefit. Democrats love it because they get more government, and Republicans love it because they get more corporate welfare. Combine this with an election and the result is a perfect storm, and when it’s over, they get the gold mine and we get the shaft.
trl3 - Don’t forget the big corporations who lent them the money thinking they would make a killing when the interest rate balooned.
anyone want some bear sterns paper?
the government has some for sale 29 billion worth.
Er………..uh……….um…………the Comical has MASSIVE print capability - why don’t THEY print us all up some cash? (makes as much sense)
dow - They’re putting it on rolls because it’s cheaper than TP.
maltboy - Bush ain’t no genius, either. You think I like him much??
But democrats are the definition of stupid.
Republicans are only half-stupid.
maltboy
I do not want to bail out the big corporations either, but the government is doing what they are doing claiming to help out the small guy.
No corporation every held a gun to the head of any home buyer and forced them to buy more than they afford and to put it of an adjustable rate knowing that if the market turned they could never afford to pay the note.
trl3 - My point is that both sides share the blame and therefore should bear the brunt. The government can claim what they want, but I seriously doubt the Republicans would be interested in bailouts if there wasn’t something in this for the corporations who line their pockets.
It’s nothing but a bipartisan feeding frenzy disguised as “relief”, and it’s our pantry that’s being robbed bare.
We need to do the same thing we did when the Republicans tried to ram amnesty down our throats. We need to bombard Washington with protests over this shameless pork barrel spending.
Mr. T-Hawk - I’m not trying to be argumentative, but the Dims are anything but stupid. They know exactly what they are doing, and they know the results. The stupid ones are the people who believe that this crap is good for everyone and who encourage them to implement it.
Makes me want to say….Lemon Curry?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3KBuQHHKx0
If I could only be smart enough to work at the chronicle. But I’d have to dispose of 1/2 of my IQ to be eligible for a position there.
The irony of this is, the person who budgets, lives within his means, pays his bills, including his mortgage, is totally ignored, except for needing more tax dollars to bail out the other folks. I just want to throw up my hands! Wouldn’t we all like to live in a $225,000 home with pool, game room, theater,etc. Well we don’t, and we don’t try to figure out some cheating way to get one. We live as we can handle.
I read an article in Money mag. about a single 35 year old who makes $70,000 gross working for the LA School District, she put 5% down on a $700,000 duplex with a 50 year mortage and the first five years was interest only. She was in the house for six months and was already concerned
about making the paymenst and was seeking advice.
#26 AZ - the artificial inflation of the homes, especially on the coasts, makes it impossible for middle class, even upper middle class, to afford a decent house of a decent size. And I am not talking about a McMansion either. I like to watch “Designed to Sell” and they are constantly showing houses built in the 50s, with less than 1400 square feet in California selling in the 500K to 600K range. It is ridiculous. Having these homes foreclosed on (and face it, many didn’t even put a down payment and with interest only they are not losing any equity) will bring these outrageous prices down to where people who want to pay their bills and have a regular mortgage can actually afford them. But that would hurt the realtor business and the tax man.
If someone wants to have affordable housing, the mortgage calculation needs to change. I understand that the mortgage holders need to be rewarded for taking the risks they take, but hey, do they really deserve X% for every month of unpaid balance? Does a buyer really need to pay a half a million dollars for a $200,000 dollars house? How about a different approach so that it doesn’t require thirty years to pay off a property.
27 I agree, because they are giving out these loans they are inflating the prices, a dog chasing its own tail.
New Jersey was really bad when we moved here in 1986, we paid $11,000 for 1.5 acres near Chester NY, sold it 13 months later for $33,000.
We were offered more, but we gave it to a young couple who could not afford more and were expecting their first baby.
Crazy upward prices are no good for anyone.
Do you really deserve interest on that bank CD you have? I mean, you’re not using the money…it’s just sitting there, collecting dust.
If anything, the interest rates have been too low to justify the risk. If you don’t want to pay your house off over 30 years, the answer is very simple: don’t! Get a 15-year note. Or double up on your payments.
One extra payment per year will wipe out a 30-year mortgage in only 24 years.
Do not forget there are many in the entertainment, internet, farming, etc. businesses in Calif. who will lose millions if real estate prices sink. And these people bankroll the politicians who vote for the bailouts.
Of course they are only concerned with the “little guy” being helped.
Matt, do you get 5 or 6% per month on your savings, I don’t. And it’s very presumptive of you to assume that anyone even has a savings account that amounts to much.
Oh, c’mon, Observer!
Anybody who passed Econ. 101 knows that the delta between the interest you get on that CD and the interest the bank charges a homeowner for a mortgage is eaten up by federal regulations, bookkeeping, salaries, rent & maintenance on the bank building, etc.
Regarding Bramanti’s comment that the rates are too low to justify the bank’s risk on a 30 year loan, he’s right.
A local school district is trying to sell 30-year bonds at 5%. No takers.
No…I get about 3.5% (Amegy’s money market). Then again, I’m not taking much risk.
It sure as hell isn’t as risky as lending it to some knucklehead to buy a house.