A sadly true statement; yet stupid people by nature need a helping hand just as we try to help slow students.  

I was especially saddened by Congresswoman Laura Richardson, who could not keep up payments on her multiple houses (valued at over $1m total) and on her paltry salary of $170k, they were foreclosed! Ahhhhhhhhh!

Would I be so lucky to own 3, and rent one house on such a subsistant wage.

Yes, but they can still afford their expensive cognac 

It's official. Little-whip has won JU!

What bothers me about the foreclosures is that people aren't even trying to keep their houses and pay the debt they owe.  At least in Michigan, they have a bankruptcy class that basically keeps them for foreclosing in exchange for an appropriate payment plan.  you still have to pay, but it keeps you from losing your house.

Instead, people are just saving the payments that they should be making and waiting for foreclosure.  I know somebody who is living with their parents right now because they did that...and they live there along with their husband and 4 kids.  They had the bright idea that they would rent with the money they kept.  Unfortunately, they quickly found out that renters don't like to see a foreclosure on your credit history and only the really crappy places would rent to them.

 

There is a difference between helping slow students (become better students) and changing the rules so that slow students are accepted as normal students (without improving).

There is also a difference between other students helping slow students and the university taking from the money paid by normal students to promote the slow students.

 

From the article:

And all of that was done using their parent's house as security! Other people, who are not pittied as much, do not even have parents who can give them a house, however valuable.

How can anybody owe 450,000 dollars without medical emergencies? I don't get it. I myself am a big spender. I waste money. And I am stupid with credit cards. (I can afford it and have no dependants, so call me stupid but not irresponsible.) But even buying everything I want (except for a car or house) won't cost me that much, not over a long time either!

Monthly payments of 3,362 dollars are ridiculous. (I myself could just make them, with luck, but wouldn't ever even apply for loans or mortgages that would cost me that much.)

I don't understand those people. And I don't understand those who pity them and want to help them.

I can imagine that just next door to them probably lived another set of brother and sister whose parents did not give them their house to play with and who never even had the chance to waste that much money. Are they being pitied and helped because they have had a worse start in life than those losers?

 

If they had used the $454,000 they got in loans to buy another house. They would have considerably fewer problems if they had wasted the money on another nice house than on other luxury goods.

I wish I would have the lot in life they were handed!

 

I was thinking, heh, $454k could buy several houses.

Like Karma, I don't understand not *trying* to make payments. You know, just living in that house as long as you can get by with it (and my understanding is it can take quite a while for a foreclosure to go through, as evidenced by the Dec 06 stop date for payments and things I've read elsewhere) and not paying a cent.

Scumbags.

I have heard that beginning Oct 1 lenders will no longer do 100% financing.

LW, thanks for the insight into how it all works.

Also note this, which is a very good explanation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzJmTCYmo9g

(Although it doesn't address the idiots getting those loans except by referring to them as "unemployed black guys".)

Great comment LW. I find it ironic that I was never able to find someone who was willing to go all out to get me into a house. I have bad creadit but not sure if my credit was bad enough to keep me from buying a house. I had a job that paid good enough every time I tried, after all i was paying rent close to what my mortgage would be. Maybe it was for the best I never got involved in a house. LOL.

You know steve, I love it when you seem to think we are cold hearted people who don't want to help others, that we expect them to do it all on their own when you can't be any further from the truth. the thruth is we want to help, we want people to succeed in life, we just don't want to have to do all the work, pay for it and suffer for it while the beneficiary only has to enjoy it without a drop of sweat spilled. Not that you would understand that, I for one always ask those who think we should help others in this manner show proof when was the last time they did it, be the example before you ask others to do it.

Some believe we should pay more taxes, well when they show me they paid more in taxes simply because they beleieve we should have paid more, then I will consider the idea. Otherwise, practice what you preach first.

Heh, Charles, because of this crap it's going to get harder and harder to get into a house. I am so happy that we got ours when we did and that we got the deal we did.

Our mortgage is LESS than rent would be by at least several hundred a month. We do have to pay property taxes, but it's worth it to own our own place.

Well, one example is not really proof is it? Of course there will be stupid people, and you will also find examples of predatory lenders. In the latter case, the people might be entitled to some compensation. But not by the tax-payers. It should be by the lenders. Let the lenders pay for their irresponsible behaviour in those cases that warrant it. And yes, that probably means lawsuits.

The lenders lost their money because their customers spent it and didn't pay it back.

What exactly should they compensate their customers for?

_IF_ a government program is needed, why not support those who DIDN'T have their parents' house to gamble away, those who couldn't even get subprime loans because they had no property at all?

I'm not saying I understand socialism and its victim theory, but it seems to me that if we use a "poor people are victims" principle, those people would be victims even more than those who got loans and wasted the money. Shouldn't all poor people (i.e. victims) get the chance to waste money, not just those who had daddy's house to play with?