Bailing out homeowners raises housing prices

High housing prices hurt people.

It is a moral travesty for the government to spend federal dollars on homeowners.

This hurts people that rent and it hurts the poor.

Shame on Obama.

:silly:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

But California real estate is so down we need a little support in prices.

prices are in free fall. Helping people facing foreclosure may help slow the fall, at best.

taxes to keep prices of houses from falling so they can pay more to buy a house or rent a house.

Again, shame on Obama.

there are plenty that have already been foreclosed. Happy Hunting!

:shrug:

I all depends on whose ox you want to gore.

I'm tired of losing equity in my house and I'll be damned if I will sell it to someone who is taking advantage of the current economic conditions to get a bargain price. Rather than sell the house I had on the market for 2 years, I am renting it out.

There will be PLENTY of foreclosed houses for "bargain-hunters".. The 31% is off GROSS, and if someone is caught in that particular trap, I'd be willing to bet that they are also neck-deep in credit card/car-loan debt too, and won't qualify anyway.. Once the moratorium lifts, expect to see a LOT more walk-aways..

Now, if they had mandated an upper loan limit of 4%, and "magically" turned all home loans into 30yr fixed @4% (for all homes valued under $400,000)...and re-appraised all mortgaged homes & then "written-down" the principles to match the market, we would see parity..but that's not gonna happen..

Of course, there's that little problem of a Depression eliminating jobs, too. Are you planning to keep yours so you can buy one of those cheap houses? Can you let everyone in on the secret?

I think plenty of people here would like to know.

Give money to the homeowners and they will spend it and lift everyone else up?

a decade or so, sending tens of millions more out into the streets, so that housing prices will drop.

Again -- do you really think you'd still have a job, if Obama let the economy crash so that housing prices were low enough for you? People can't buy houses -- even cheap houses -- without decent jobs.

And they can't rent them either.

is not saving the economy. IT is only raising the price of housing, subsidizing an already massively subsidized real estate industry and creating a barrier to buying a home.

Many of the young people that supported Obama are locked out of the housing market due to ridiculous prices.

been their major investment. 69% of Americans live in owner-occupied houses.

Many of the young people you're concerned about will lose their jobs if this Depression-lite turns into a Depression-deep. They won't be able to buy or to rent. Hopefully, some of them will have parents who manage to hang onto their homes.

Even the poor used to own their own homes in the US. Renting should only be for those in temporary situations. Anyone who wants permanent housing should be able to have it. The only difference between myself and someone who rents is that I was able to get a mortgage and I chose to do it (even though I'm poor I was able to because my credit was okay for a minute) because I was sick of making landlords rich.

the general population.

THere is nothing good about raising the cost of living. IF the government aggressively attempted to raise the price of food as it does with housing there would be riots and there should be.

The problem isn't people who decided to be in debt to a bank instead of in debt to a landlord. The problem is the capitalist class in general and their predatory practices.

and raising the price of housing increases disparity in wealth.

And most people that are foreclosed on have non-recourse loans and they can just leave their houses and rent. This is really a bank bailout disguised as a homeowner bailout. But its effect will be to spend billions more government dollars on the already massively oversubsidized real estate industry.

Water displacement and all.

You make some good points.

:hi:

Where I land is that, as always, housing prices should "correct"--whether that's up or down. In most cases, it still should be downward to get in line with historical numbers and an affordable framework for all. Never before have people spent such a large percentage of their income towards their homes. The best indicator of how a market moves is the ratio of mortgage to income which in my part of the country (the Northeast) is still absurd. If housing prices don't correct downwards, then we are just bandaid-ing the problem and enabling unhealthy economics (unaffordability) to continue. It's robbing Peter to pay Paul.

I do not own a home, and I wish no ill will on any homeowner. I have less sympathy, however, for homeowners who re-fi'd to get a new Escalade and a few flat screens. Others were flipping and trading up in real estate pyramid scheme. They are part of the problem--and for my money--should get no assistance. Job loss and other unforeseen tragedies should be thequalifications for the target population for economic assistance. Buying a house that was beyond your means should not be rewarded--what lesson would be learned here?

My wife and I got married 5 years ago and had the money then to buy a house, but didn't. Crazy prices, and they didn't make sense. No one HAD to buy. We're still waiting and we could put down 50%+, but want to remain conservative. Until the market gets to a reasonable level, we will sacrifice and rent.

Until housing prices return to levels where the median home price is equivalent to 3x the median annual income (per geographic region), THEN the gov't can start propping up the prices!

Until then, it's OBSCENE and WRONG