Obama Punishes Responsible Parties

Strabes,

I’m sure many here will find your style a bit caustic, but I have to give your entire post a hearty and vociferous amen. I’m still baffled by what I perceive as a disproportionate response to this piss-hole-in-the-snow of a foreclosure bailout. The simplest explanation in this case is probably the correct one and that would be that many people are benefited by the banks being bailed out because they own stocks and bonds like all those cheering yahoo traders in the CNBC clip. So it’s almost as if people aren’t outraged because of the fundamentals of the situation – creating more debt to remedy the problem of too much debt, etc. – but they are outraged because they aren’t getting anything this time around.

The most pernicious part of this unfolding story to me is that the faux outrage is clearly taking a right-wing bent led by repulsive demagogues like Limbaugh and his copycat and sycophantic ilk.

Many amongst us are chompin’ at the bit for a real civil war and this type of agit-prop is the perfect catalyst. With a few more months of economic disintegration under our belts and some more stirring of the pot, how long before people start shooting each other just because of who they voted for.

Thanks for saying it kevinkr - there seems to be a lot of folks here who have started to believe their fantasies are coming true. To them, I suggest they leave their self-sustaining cocoons, go out among the masses and listen to them (or if they have a TV, just turn on CNBC). It will take a total collapse (the jar needs to break) before we see any real change - and yes, I may sound like a pessimist to those dreamers out there - even that will not likely lead to a change.

Strabes, once again I think you have hit the nail on the head. This is nothing but a huge distraction. It’s like a magic trick, look over here at this hand while I slap you silly with the other.
I am feeling more and more uncomfortable every day. I can almost feel the tsunami in the distance and it is coming our way.

Lisa G,

I tend to agree with you. Even though many think it cynical, elitist, or even (God forbid) "anti-American," it’s really hard to think of the masses in this country as anything other than breathtakingly pathetic. So, yes, people will need their access to food, water, and that most important of necessities, Cable TV blocked before they even begin to look about them.

[quote=mainecooncat]I’m sure many here will find your style a bit caustic,[/quote]
Yeah I tend to trust my gut and reveal my affective response in my posts when I’m feeling the need to question the accepted left/right paradigm. I feel that’s the type of dialogue that has a chance of breaking through. But I know it’s also a risk that some will just ignore me. There are some topics where I stick to "just the facts" but I felt a ton of emotion in this blog and all the responses. I felt like I was reading a lot of anger…some people explicitly said they were angry and enraged. I just found that response fascinating given the unbelievable stuff we’ve seen for 5 months now and they unbelievable crash that’s still coming which seems to generate not nearly the same amount of rage as this little announcement did.
I agree with you on the demagogue issue too. I’m shocked at radio shows on the left and right. The left raged at Bush, now they’re fine with Obama doing the same stuff. The right rages at Obama while Bush did the same stuff. Beck seems to be the only one that’s transcending the left/right paradigm just a bit by looking at the breakdown of community, the criminal government we have (both parties), giving Ron Paul a fair shot, looking at the Fed (he needs to go a lot further and look at the Rothschilds and the rest of the oligarchs behind the system, but I doubt that’ll happen). I bet Murdoch puts a leash on him at Fox.

[quote= castlewp] I am feeling more and more uncomfortable every day. I can almost feel the tsunami in the distance and it is coming our way. [/quote]
Yeah I’m really feeling it. I’m at a crossroads…have done 2 careers and am soon graduating with a 2nd graduate degree to start a 3rd career…helping people, counseling, psychology. But this collapse is drastically changing things. I don’t want to be anywhere near a city, so the plans I had are out the window. Plus surplus cash to pay for things like counseling aint gonna happen in smaller towns. So, I’m really having a difficult time just figuring out what I should do (I’m not worried about money, so that’s not the type of stress I’m talking about…it’s more of the "what to do with my life" issue). I wish I had a local community that I was already part of so I could start a sustainable community. But I don’t have that because I’ve been slaving away as a tool of the banking oligarchy, i.e. I’ve been chasing W2s in the corporate world away from family. I’d love to team up with smart folks who are out of the paradigm to build a community that really gets it and has the fortitude to standup to the establishment, but how does one find that? Ugh. Maybe I’ll just follow Jim Rogers’ advice and learn to drive a tractor. Cool Or maybe I’ll revisit my plan 10 years ago to do a top law school so I can join the oligarchy and screw the bourgeois out of its cash…why fight em when I can join em. Laughing

Maine, Strabes
You guys definitely have it in perspective. I don’t think you’ll get much argument here. Elsewhere? That could be another story! And thank you both for calling so much attention to the absurd left/right distraction ploy that continues to dupe most of the country. It amazes me that more people don’t see that. It’s one of the things that drives me nuts.
To defend some of the other people on the thread, I’m pretty sure most of the people here bitching about moral hazard are smart enough not to fall into the blame the little guy trap. I don’t think there are too many Rush devotees here! In my view, relativism aside, moral hazard is still a bad thing. And Strabes, if it will make you feel better, a lot of people did go pretty apoplectic over the Bank bailouts, too.
Maine, I read your #49 post earlier. It’s an absolute masterpiece. Many thanks.
Strabes, I know what Maine is talking about, but I don’t mind your style at all.
Peace
Greg

Hi Durango Kid,

I personally believe that a home is a great investment but not in the way the propoganda makes it out to be. For my wife and I, our home is an investment in our future…nothing more. We bought a very modest home (read crappy) in the best neighborhood we could afford 16 years ago. The neighborhood is still great…the modest house is slightly less crappy but comfortable and adequate for our needs. We have never been upside down in our mortgage and we have never borrowed a penny in equity to buy anything or pay down debt. Even with the drop in home values we still have 100K in equity not that it matters though because I would never tap the equity for any reason. It would only jeopardize our future.

We figured that we would have to make payments equal to our mortgage in rent and our goal was to end up retired with a home we owned free and clear right about the same time our incomes dropped due to retirement. The commodity that comes out of our house is security for our future. We feel that were were definitely "rational players" in the real estate game but then again we weren’t "playing".

Like many here, we did the right things…kept debt low, savings high, lived below our means, read AND understood everything we’ve signed etc. I’ve long thought the building economic crisis needed to happen and I truly don’t view it as a bad thing. The effects it will have on our society are a different matter though.That is what I fear. The fear that I’ll get killed defending my food is what sticks in my head.

 

It’s not true that Marie Antoinette ever said "Let them eat cake." It was attributed to her to rationalize cutting off her head during the reign of terror. Don’t forget that after Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI came Robespierre and Napoleon.

It’s also a little disingenuous to imply that this money would go directly to homeowners, as you point out, worth only a few mortgage payments. My understanding that this money is for the lenders to encourage them to refinance and the amount is about right to cover closing costs. Because lenders will still be taking a loss it’s hard to say whether letting the letting the house foreclose will still be more profitable. I am also skeptical about this plan.

I’m also not happy about making this a black and white, responsible versus irresponsible home owner issue. I personally am willing to help out anyone, no matter how irresponsible, if I know that person can change. And why aren’t politicians willing to do the right thing? They pave the way to hell with their good intentions because the right thing, for the foreseeable future, will also lead to much homelessness and poverty. Even if this is inevitable I can understand why politicians shrink from it.

"…In this version, the grasshopper receives government aid for his
hedonistic lifestyle while the hardworking ant suffers. Other versions
have shown a grasshopper playing the race card, arguing that the ant has an unfair advantage over "disadvantaged grasshoppers "

 

Maine, Strabes

Thanks for your thoughts. I’m right in with you - except you write it so much better than I ever could…

So you would say, "Be more careful next time!" to someone who’s primary asset has dropped in value by a third, who may be losing her own job, and whose husband’s income has declined by 50%? Sorry, Chris. You just lost some credibility with me. I would hope your first response would be more along the lines of: "How can I help?"

Now you may not believe that the proposed mortgage modifications will help, and I’m with you there. You may also think that Ms. Serrano shouldn’t be looking for handouts. OK, maybe that’s right, too, especially seeing as how she isn’t even behind on the payments, yet. But I think it is pretty dang harsh to tell Ms. Serrano that she screwed up. What, pray tell, do you think she did wrong, exactly? How many families would NOT be in tough shape under those conditions? I’m lucky enough to have a fairly stable job at the moment, and my wife does, too. I took a thirty-year fixed mortgage before the bubble started, so I’m doing OK. But if you suddenly removed a third of the value of my primary asset AND 75% of my income, I’d pretty much be wondering how I’d be able to feed my kids. I have some savings and some ability to weather a storm, but that’s a pretty big headwind right there.

Bad example.

[quote=phredd] I would hope your first response would be more along the lines of: "How can I help?"[/quote]
It’s warming to see others on this site who maintain a tender, loving, community-oriented heart in the midst of so much rage. Thank you for sharing your sentiments. These sentiments lead us to the right solution…let the federal system which could care less about the people fail, let the Federal Reserve (different from the federal system) and the heartless banking establishment which created this collapse fail, let us go back to local communities where we develop charity for our fellow man again and life returns to being about relationship and love rather than chasing a W2 to pay a 1040 to make the Rothschilds and Rockefellers zillionaires!
And just a quick clarification for those who might’ve cringed when they read this: when I say tender, loving, community-oriented heart, that is not the same as "bleeding heart liberal." Bleeding heart lib is someone who has let envy and contempt quash tenderness and love so they believe in big government controlling people because they no longer feel the innate goodness in the individual and the abundant life that can result from a free community. But the right needs to avoid becoming equally contemptuous in their fight with the left…that’s what we hear in a lot of radio shows…they’re so bitter that they can’t stand tender words and loving emotions in the public square…but being callous defeats the whole purpose of resisting tyranny.

Harsh? I prefer to think of it as honest. Yes, Ms. Seranno and her husband made a poor decision buying at the very top of an obvious bubble. Yes, I think they should be more careful next time. No, I don’t think they "deserve" anything from me, or you, or this guy.

The adage that timing is everything takes on even greater meaning in a recession-battered economy, where the outcome of every business decision is good, bad or uncertain.

Just ask Joey Rispaud, Michael Vosganian and Kaveh Ebrahimi, who, by sheer serendipity, are stars in a three-act play set in the year-old recession - a drama playing out with a cliffhanger ending.

Joey Rispaud’s timing could not have been better, or more impressive.

After graduating last summer from California State University, Northridge, he put three goals on his agenda: Marry his fiance, buy a home and start a family. He’s done all three.

"I accomplished all the goals I wanted to accomplish in becoming an adult," said Rispaud, 27, a manager at the TGI Friday’s in Woodland Hills.

It sounds simple, but it wasn’t.

Rispaud and his bride, Diana, paid $279,000 for a two-bedroom, two-bath townhome in Saugus, a short sale put together by his wife’s mother, Anita Levy, an agent at the Remax office in Santa Clarita.

The couple moved in on Dec. 8, one year after the recession officially started. They are paying about $2,000 a month for their mortgage - just a little more than what they were paying for the two-bedroom apartment they’d been renting in Reseda.

They bought the house the old-fashioned way: They saved enough to put down a 3.5 percent deposit, and secured a 6 percent fixed-rate loan.

Rispaud had been looking for a house since 2006, and sometimes wondered if he’d ever be a homeowner. Even after they found the Saugus town home, it took five months to close the deal.

But Rispaud is patient - an asset that allowed him to wait out an overheated real-estate market.

"We could easily have gotten a $600,000 or a $700,000 home at a zero-percent interest rate for five years, but there was no way I could afford that (kind) of house," he said. "One way or another we were going to get stuck."

Of course, there was a lot of second-guessing from friends who would drop by Friday’s and tell Rispaud he was an "idiot" for not taking the real estate bait as housing prices soared.

"Now they are upside-down or bankrupt. It worked out for my wife and I really well," he said.

Yay Joey! Way to defer your immediate gratification and live within your means!

I think it’s past time for us to honestly face our past mistakes and errant trajectory, and not just about sloppy house-buying practices either.

How are we ever going to tackle the larger challenge of facing up to the fact that we are on an unsustainable path with respect to the Three Es if we cannot stomach the thought of even relatively minor economic miscues having consequences?

What are the long-term prospects of a society that rewards living beyond one’s means and does so by removing money and opportunity from those who didn’t? Are we really all entitled, whether bankers or homeowners, to have others pay for our mistakes?

If the answer is "yes" I need to drastically change how I am raising my children because I am quite firm when it comes to linking their actions with consequences.

I am all for helping people out, but I think that should be at the individual, family and community level.

[quote=cmartenson]What are the long-term prospects of a society that rewards living beyond one’s means and does so by removing money and opportunity from those who didn’t? Are we really all entitled, whether bankers or homeowners, to have others pay for our mistakes?[/quote]
Nobody here disagrees that society shouldn’t reward people for living beyond one’s means. That’s the fault of global banking oligarchy and the debt money system.
Nobody here disagrees that people aren’t entitled to have government steal from everybody to pay certain people. But letting rage about the oligarchy destroy the heartfelt impulse toward community and helping neighbors is a massive mistake. Mistakes are part of life…it’s BS to suggest certain smart, responsible people don’t make mistakes…and people are innately designed to live in relationship, in community, which is how we need to deal with our mistakes…they draw us into relationship. The idea that we’re atomistic pods out there who don’t need each other is absurd. I join your rage at the government and monetary system. But I find it disturbing that the rage only got extra heightened when Obama suggested helping people avoid foreclosure.

"But I find it disturbing that the rage only got extra heightened when Obama suggested helping people avoid foreclosure"

I don’t mind if Obama wants to take his own money and help people out I just don’t like him pointing a gun at me and forcing me to pay to help people out.

The math is not that difficult to figure out whether you can afford a certain monthly payment, my younger brother took on a monthly payment that was higher than he could afford, he ended up taking out another loan so he could make the payment, yikes! when he told me that I asked him what he was thinking, he blamed the loan company instead of himself. He lost the house and is still paying on the $30k loan he took out, I feel sorry for anyone who makes such poor choices but it’s not my problem.

Greg

[quote=greg]The math is not that difficult to figure out whether you can afford a certain monthly payment, my younger brother took on a monthly payment that was higher than he could afford, he ended up taking out another loan so he could make the payment, yikes! when he told me that I asked him what he was thinking, he blamed the loan company instead of himself. He lost the house and is still paying on the $30k loan he took out, I feel sorry for anyone who makes such poor choices but it’s not my problem.[/quote]
Sure. But he wouldn’t have been able to do that without a corrupt banking oligarchy that was purposely inflating a bubble to destroy people’s assets. The bank would’ve been telling your brother "don’t worry about debt dude, everybody does it, based on our numbers (and we’re the banking experts) you can totally afford this, you deserve it, this is what people do to be successful, this is standard stuff, it’s the american dream man, you’re good to go, just sign right here, that’s all it takes and you get a house." And while the bank’s telling him that, Greenspan is saying cost of debt has appropriately adjusted to a lower risk environment. Government institutions like Fannie are pumping the propaganda. Literally everyone is making money on it. Whole sub-industries of realtors, builders, mortgage brokers are forming, etc, etc.
So direct the rage at that oligarchy. Direct the rage at the $10 trillion that’s been stolen from us and given to the banking cartel. Rage at Bush/Obama for paying those jack*sses. That’s the true enemy…not your brother.

The longer this call and response goes on the more befuddled I get. Aren’t we pretty much in agreement here that shelter for everyone is a good thing? And yes, actions have consequences, which some of us already learned as children but we’re talking about consequences that have gotten out of control of our individual actions. I don’t want to continue this thread with another personal account of whether I was a smart home buyer, seller, renter, or more-responsible-than-tho person. Sorry Chris, even though I agree with you totally about not expecting the government to bail us out every bad decision - we are talking about more than bad decisions here, we’re talking about consequences of robbery of citizens on a grand scale. It’s uncharacteristic of you to continue this discussion by referring to the predicament of people possibly loosing their homes as "sloppy" or a "minor issue". If we are still paying taxes then we are going to be committing that money to projects that are larger than those on individual, family or community levels. If one person is helped by this use of my federal tariff then I’m happier than seeing it go to almost every other extended hand (or vault) that’s being filled in much larger quantities.

strabes

He’s the one who made the choice so he’s to blame, he had all the numbers he needed to make a proper decision, I don’t care what excuses he makes for his bad judgement. I’m not sticking up for the banks either but the Fed sent out false financial signals and many people made serious financial mistakes based on these signals, hey! you can’t help but make money, right?

"So direct the rage at that oligarchy. Direct the rage at the $10 trillion that’s been stolen from us and given to the banking cartel. Rage at Bush/Obama for paying those jack*sses. That’s the true enemy…not your brother."

I have no rage at my brother or anyone else that made poor choices, it’s the system that encourages and rewards this type of behavour that enrages me.

Greg

A) The $75 billion goes directly to finance and mortgage companies.

B) $75 billion is insignificant compared to the size of the problem.

C) The problem is that house prices got to be too high, and they are still too high relative to incomes.

D) House price need to fall to correct that problem.

E) Propping up this housing mess in the fashion of the bailout will not solve the underlying problem, but extend and possibly compound the mistake. House prices need to fall, not "be stabilized."

F) The only question is "who’s going to pay?"

I do not see the bulk of the housing troubles as "due to unforeseeable/uncontrollable circumstances". This was not a tornado or a hurricane. This was an entirely predictable and foreseeable credit and property bubble. People lose lots and lots of money when bubbles burst. Always have and always will.

People who bought more house than they could afford or who cashed out their equity are completely responsible for those decisions.

Is it tragic? You bet. That’s why I spent so much time trying to warn people. I feel like I did everything I could. Was it avoidable? Yes.

But that’s all water under the bridge.

The question is what now?

Personally I think the bondholders and shareholders in the failed banks and mortgage companies should suffer a total loss of their holdings. No rescue for them. Maybe they’ll pay closer attention next time to really understanding what they companies they entrusted their money to were really up to. Is that heartless and uncompassionate? Or are we saying there’s something fundamentally different about the decisions that go into selecting houses and investments?

This is not about debating the merits of shelter nor is it about assigning blame. To me this is about individual and collective responsibility. Where individuals made poor investment choices, there will be consequences. If not, what’s next? The government stepping in and resetting people’s retirement accounts to their all time high levels? I mean, why not? After all, who’s against everyone having a glorious retirement?

The reason I am quite firm in these view is because I hold the belief that these rescue operations are increasing the chance that the US, my country, will suffer a complete breakdown in its currency and economy.

This bothers me.

A lot.

The longer we treat symptoms and fail to acknowledge causes the longer and worse this crisis will be and the greater the risk of a complete catastrophe of the currency. Trust me, that will make the housing troubles look positively tame in comparison.

But if I were to design a housing rescue package that treats the causes and not the symptoms, what would I do? I’d design something that makes houses affordable again by bringing their prices down.

  1. Reset the mortgage value of any mortgage written since the start of the bubble down to the value it was prior to the start of the bubble and force the writers of the loans to eat the difference. Maybe next time they'd be more diligent in their loaning practices.
  2. Forbid the selling of those houses for more than that new amount, plus some adjustment for inflation.
  3. If people were talked into loans that no reasonable human could understand, or were tricked, I would re-write those loans to whatever their current income could sustain and force the lender(s) to eat the difference. Maybe next time they'll be more diligent in their sales practices.
  4. Anywhere fraud or illegally deceptive practices were committed, I would return a bit of accountability to land by putting the responsible parties through the criminal justice system. And not just a few token mortgage brokers either. I'd have a preference for putting the highest possible responsible parties through the wringer.
  5. Anybody who still has too much house for their income after this plan had too much house for their income anyways.
Now this plan is going to disappoint a lot of other people who will see the values of their houses largely return to the beginning of the bubble, but that was inevitable anyways. At least if the past 70 bubbles are any guide.

As a parent myself, I know that there are many times when you allow the child to experience the direct, unmitigated consequences of their actions, and times when you mitigate those consequences, and even more times when you step in before the child follows through with their behavior.

You don’t allow a child to experience the consequences of running into a busy street, for example.

Becoming homeless might be, for many, an awfully harsh consequence for a decision that was less than thoughtful at the time it was made.

If your child goes along with the other children in a group in which they decide to do something kind of dangerous and irresponsible, would you administer the same consequences to him versus when he decides, all on his own, to do something dangerous and irresponsible? I think most parents would recognize that the community in which one finds oneself does have some contribution to one’s behavior. Not 100%, of course, but its not so black and white, either.

In a community in which everyone is refinancing into, or buying, a house that they couldn’t really afford, yet their neighbors are doing it and the banks are saying go for it, is it really still completely the individual who is solely at fault? It would be nice if all humans were of fine upstanding character, but the truth is, most humans are closer to pack animals than rugged, intelligent individualists.

I work in a homeless shelter where people have paid dearly for bad decisions they have made. Now we spend a great deal of yours and mine monies to get them back on their feet. That’s how it is. We can work on the preventative side, spending money on educating people "do NOT take that first hit of meth!" in an attempt to help people make better initial decisions, but how much education did you see going on during the ARM mortgage burst? Much less education than is available to people making bad decisions about drugs, or crime, or junk food habits… and yet, we, in our humanity, still reach out a hand to help those people. We don’t deny people treatment for health issues due to lifestyle choices - it would be enormously cruel, and inhumane.

[quote=Chris]The reason I am quite firm in these view is because I hold the belief that these rescue operations are increasing the chance that the US, my country, will suffer a complete breakdown in its currency and economy.[/quote]
The US’ economy and currency are finished…that’s a fait accompli. The global bond market is pretty clear about that. This $75B doesn’t matter. That’s what I don’t understand…people should have been raging long ago and I don’t get why a tiny $75B caused such a stir…the only thing different is that it’s targeted at little people, so I had to assume that’s what brought out people’s envy/anger (and that’s a problem). The global margin call has a long way to go. And a run on treasuries must happen…it’s unavoidable given the unbelievable irresponsibility of empire government and the banking oligarchy (I suppose it might be avoidable if it’s true that the Rothschilds really have a few hundred trillion in assets…they could prevent the end of the dollar if they wanted to manipulate it that way for some reason). When that happens, US treas rates will go double digit, global money velocity will go to zero, the dollar will be over, the US empire will be over, and we can then adjust back to a society of local communities…as long as the government doesn’t impose tyranny to prevent it (and I think there’s plenty of evidence they’re going to try that).

[quote=Chris]

  1. Reset the mortgage value of any mortgage written since the start of the bubble down to the value it was prior to the start of the bubble and force the writers of the loans to eat the difference. Maybe next time they’d be more diligent in their loaning practices.[/quote]
Absolutely! That’s what I’ve been saying and I can’t figure out why this idea doesn’t get pushed in the mass media (except of course that the big bankers own controlling interests in media companies like Reuters). That’s what needs to be done. Make the banks bite this by writing down the principal (actually it’s the assetholders that would bite it…the investors/Wall St bankers/China who bought all the securitized loans from the loan writers). THEY are the ones that need to feel the market-driven pain because they own the assets, they drove the bubble, and because they’re the ones that created the incentives for little banks to engage in poor loan writing, and that would accelerate the pace of banking evolution from big Wall St oligarchs to institutions that are more connected to local community.