What Rick said in his rant was "an extra bathroom", instead of your revised version of "a fancy upgraded bathroom". His description was emphasizing that the house was more than the owner could have realistically afforded to start with. Second mortgages and real estate flip-deals were not mentioned either. Funny how the story has been twisted and retold to distract from his original and valid complaint. I've become immune to this type of stuff from Obama's worshipers who are convinced that he can do no wrong.
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
Obama's stimulus plan is to bail out the irresponsible[/FONT]
President Barack Obama wants to spend $75 billion to reduce mortgage payments so roughly 9 million people can stay in their houses.
That's in addition to the $400 billion given to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for the same purpose. That's nearly a half-trillion dollars! Has anyone thought to run the numbers on this?
That comes out to $52,778 for every homeowner either already "under water" or close to it. In the meantime, the middle class is getting a tax break of $8 a week. Sounds like a fair trade, doesn't it? And many Americans won't see a tax break at all.
So, how would this program work? Lenders will be encouraged — and paid — to reduce at-risk homeowners' mortgage payments down to 38 percent of their monthly income. At that point, the government will pay to have the mortgages reduced to 31 percent of their monthly income. Which begs the question:
How did these people get loans in the first place when their mortgage payments were over 38 percent of their monthly income?
There used to be some tried and true standards for home loan qualification.
First, your debt-to-income ratio had to be reasonable.
Usually, total debt above 42 percent made you a bad candidate for a loan.
Obama is asking lenders to get just the mortgage payment down to near that level then the government will lower it even further. It's incredible.
There also used to be a little matter called a credit score. This was thrown out the window by the social engineers who deemed it unfair that people who didn't honor their obligations were being locked out of the American Dream.
Then there was the matter of a down payment. Twenty percent was customary. That, too, was ditched for many so we could cram as many unqualified homeowners into as many homes as we possibly could. And, no, the lenders were certainly not without blame.
They bowed to the requests of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in order to play ball and grow their companies.
The second major component of the Obama plan is the part that just confounds me. This is aimed at those whose home value has dropped. Somehow it's just not fair that your house isn't worth what you paid for it so
Mr. Obama is going to allow you to refinance at 5 percent with no money down. It was the fact that people had nothing in their homes to start with that made it easy for them to just walk away. Has it occurred to anyone that if someone walks away from their mortgage obligations just because their home value drops, they probably shouldn't have gotten the loan in the first place? Maybe we'd be better off just to write all these people a check for $53,000 and be done with it.
I don't ask for much. I pay for the roads with my gas tax. I pay for the schools with my property tax. I pay for other state and local government services with my sales tax. Just what am I getting for my federal income tax?
It's a curious thing. It seems the more I pay the less I get. I don't get food stamps or subsidized housing. I don't need free health care or classes on sexually transmitted diseases. I don't need to be rescued from a hurricane I don't have sense enough to get out of the way of. I don't need energy assistance or college grants.
I'm a responsible citizen. Who's going to bail me out? Nobody! Until I'm irresponsible enough to warrant it,
the only part of the bailout bill I get is the bill.
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090222/COLUMNIST0130/902220347