Reply
New Member
KTCD
Posts: 3
Registered: ‎02-24-2009

Re: Housing Crisis Debate

This is a very complicated situation that defies a simple yes or no answer. While I agree that those who bought property that they NEVER could have afforded in the best of times don't deserve a bailout. Also, irresponsible people who's lifestyles are more like the rich and famous than middle class workers they are do not deserve it. But what about people like myself. I bought a 3 family house in a good neighborhood. I put down 25% and my equity in the property never went below 25% over the years. I have steadily restored and remodeled the units and take pride in ownership I have pulled out some equity to pay for some of the renovations. When I bought the property in 2001, my escrow was $460 per month (Taxes and Insurance). The city re-assessed me at the height of the bubble. My homeowners insurance company has steadily increased my premiums as I expected over the years but last year hit me with a 50% increase with NO explanation. Shopping around for another company was a fruitless waste of time. They all remained in lock-step. My escrow is now $1160 per month. Rents in my area have increased only slightly. The value of my home has slid though not as badly as some. The bank (BofA) was willing to re-finance my 300K 6.75% fixed mortgage for a better interest rate but wanted 3.5 points plus closing costs to do it on top of PMI. Funny the points equaled my savings account balance (Hmmmm). That deal would have benefited no one but the bank.

I have never been late with my mortgage. My FICO score has been "stuck" at 725 for over a year. I'm jumping through hoops to get a loan modification. If they just lowered my interest rate to today's rates, I could save over $400 a month. But while the banks all took the bail-out and improved their bottom lines, we "steady Eddy's" are not given the same opportunity. They have no incentive to give me a break. That is what I want the government to do. Give them an incentive. They took the hand-outs, now its time to do the right thing. 

New Member
Getting-Educated
Posts: 6
Registered: ‎04-27-2010

Re: Housing Crisis Debate

My vote would be YES, but not because I think the Govt. should bail people out. I vote YES because the homeowner is not solely to blame for this tragic economy. It is very important to understand that homeowners have been scammed as well. And until we come to a conclusive decision to work together to right this ship together, we will continue to sink.

 

I find it ironic that most of the people here are blaming the homeowners as the ones who caused this economic downfall. Although I do agree that many of the greedy type homeowners who purchased multiple homes and way above their means are faulty, not everyone falls into this category. In fact, there are many people who as stated in other posts are just trying to live life and better their families futures. Someone who purchased a single family dwelling to house their family CANNOT be blamed for this. Even if they purchased above their means, they still had to have someone approve their loan.

 

I am so tired of hearing people talk about how they managed to live within their means and survive this economic catastrophe. I am very glad that you did, please don't get me wrong, but stop kicking other people while they are down for making mistakes. Forgiveness and reconciliation of those who made mistakes MUST take place for our economy to recover. Anyone who thinks the homeowner is to blame for being allowed to have such aggressive loans needs help. And anyone who thinks letting them fail more will help, needs to get more education. Lack of education in this country is a major contributing factor to the way we all live, and our children and grand-children will really feel it in the years to come.

 

If you really listen to the media and hear what the so called experts who claim to know all have to say, they all state that GREED is the cause of this mess. Of course they don't say it directly like I am, but listen and hear for yourself and you can discern what they are saying. Money is not the problem, but the way in which we use money and desire money has caused this problem.

 

Short story behind my passion - My wife and I spent many, many years working for the same employer. Our reviews were at the top of our departments and we did our jobs very well. Because and I iterate BECAUSE of the current economic situation, our employer decided to downsize. I would like to mention also that our employer made a huge MISTAKE and decided to outsource work to other countries, which played a HUGE roll in our economic situation. They have since stopped doing that and realized their mistake. People are not talking much about this anymore, but outsourcing work has put a huge burden on the American worker.

 

As a result, we were both let go one week apart from each other, talk about devastation. And for those who say we should have seen that coming, you really need to clear the clutter out of your brains and HOPE it never happens to you. Other people with half or even less experience than us, were allowed to keep their jobs. Now since we can prove that our reviews were at the top of the department, by means of measurable goals, there is only one clear explanation for us getting let go, that would be MONEY. You see, since we had been there longer, it made sense to them to clear out those making more money and keep those people at a lower pay scale. Mind you, they won't say that, but then again, the loan providers don't admit they were greedy and conniving either. Wake up, it is so easy for an employer to find ways to let people go, if you think you are immune, you better think again.

 

And oh by the way, we were forced into signing a no suit document in order to get our severance, I wonder why that is, hmm. And we were very lucky to get a severance, we know that. Many people who have been let go did not. Had we not signed this no suit document, we would have forfeited our severance and we certainly would not have survived this long. I am sure their will be people who blame us for this as well, that is just the way people think these days. If you are not involved or being affected, then you think you are better than those hurting.

 

Because my wife and I went through some money management education "Dave Ramsey" training, we have been able to survive a very long time. But we started preparing for our future before the economic catastrophe. None the less, we still have had to deplete almost everything we had been saving, which was not our plan. But you know what, that is why we saved it, so we consider ourselves blessed. None the less, I am embarrassed at how I managed what God allowed me to have. I admit I could do better and I am trying to educate myself, so I can properly educate my children and grand-children down the road.

 

There are so many people out there willing to bash people when they make mistakes, but very few willing to reach a hand out (NOT UP), to educate them and prepare their way. I have so much more I could write, but I fear that it will only fall on deaf ears anyway, so I will just add a few more words of advice I was given.

 

Please, be quick to listen and slow to speak, and if you do have something to say, make sure you are helping the situation and not just speaking to be heard. There are a lot of people out there hurting, some justifiable and some not. Be careful when judging, as one day you might just end up on the wrong side of the argument. By the Grace of God I am going to educate myself and do everything I can to help those around me be better stewards of their money, minds and of their hearts.

 

Thanks for reading!!

 

 

Valued Member
sllbaker
Posts: 31
Registered: ‎01-21-2008

Re: Housing Crisis Debate

Absolutely not.  We should not be bailing people out.  Getting_Educated has a point that some compassion should be used in the proceedings, but that doesn't change the facts.  I've struggled, for many, many years.  I've worked my butt off to get my finances under control and live within my means.  My life was not always easy.  No one felt the need to bail me out when I was getting evicted 15 years ago.  Even though I had just been laid off, my husdand was a full time student who was injured at work and was on leave with out pay and we had a 2 year old baby.  We still got evicted.  We lost everything we had to lose.  We learned a lesson.  We started a savings.  We reduced our expenditures, took on second and third jobs and found a way to get ourselves out of the mess.  Now we both have good credit, no creditors and we make roughly double what we need to survive.  We live well within our means.  Why should I bail anyone out and take away sucha valuable learning experience?

 

You can argue all day that the loans should have never been approved and lump it all on the banks.  I do not believe the banks are blameless in this whole mess, but the fact remains that the buyer fell for the sell.  No one put a gun to their head and made them buy a house.  Renting is still an option.  You may not get the zip code you want and you may have to commute, but it's not like the only choice you had was a $600k home.  It's what they wanted, not what they needed or could afford.  Why should my tax dollars go to fund their lifestyle?

 

I didn't screw up, I shouldn't be penalyzed.


Starting Score: EQ529 TU?
Current Score: EQ752 TU 749
Goal Score: 800


Take the FICO Fitness Challenge
New Member
atlram
Posts: 2
Registered: ‎05-01-2010

Re: Housing Crisis Debate

Hello forum!  I came here because I'm researching a balance transfer card for my particular credit profile.  The question I posed to Google led me right here.  A little background, I peaked at a 729 (718 / 729 / 736) median score in early 2009.  That's when my existing balances caught up to me - or more accurately - when my bank decided to use my balances against me.  Despite only 35% usage, my bank decreased my limit in an amount sufficient to take me from 35 to 90% usage.  Once this threshold was hit they were able to take me from a 9.99% interest rate to a 28.99% interest rate.  The pain was immediate and my mistake was expensive to say the least.  I have remained current on my debt and now have my median score back up to 716 from a low of 646.  New goal is 750, then 800.  

 

To answer the original question - and I'm sorry for the long lead-in - but it took an extremely hard life lesson for me to learn the ramifications of irresponsible behavior.  Honestly, it's been the experience of a lifetime.  Leverage - as they say - takes backbone.  Mine is significantly weaker than it was 18 months ago, but it is on the mend.  As for life lessons, I would not expect anyone to help me for my own stupid mistakes.  I will admit when I have made them and I want to the see the same out of leaders.  Sadly, accountability is not something that I have seen out of current leadership.     

 

In my opinion, the government made catastrophic mistakes by allowing Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac to reach the size that they did.  The investment banks - who behaved badly - were merely acting on the supply of securitizable products that were being served up on a daily basis.  The housing market was super-sized on gov't subsidies that ranged from Mortgage Interest Deduction, to $500k of capital gains deferral, to Gov't-Sponsored mortgage-backed-securities, and Community Reinvestment Act mandated lending.  The WAMU's and Countrywide's of the country grew bloated by piggy-backing gov't mandated lending.  The investment banks were - contrary to current public opinion - were actually facilitating this housing initiative by innovating financial products that could allow the this rush of housing capital.  The irony now is to watch  the same politicians that held up regulation of Fannie & Freddie before the crisis (Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, and Barack Obama), turn into such tough customers in the wake of it.  

 

History shows that we knew that this was coming.  Democratic Senators - those now in power - voted against reforming Fannie & Freddie in a party-line vote in 2005.  The discussion at that time was about the necessity to reform these broken Government-Sponsored-Enterprises ("GSE's").  These talks ended after 2 years when the Democrats ultimately stymied the bill.  That 2005 bill would have prevented most of the 2005-2007 vintage loans - i.e. those that caused us so many problems - from ever being written.  My question is this:  Do we really want the same people thatvoted against preventing this bubble, running the response of its' burst?    

 

To me, the answer is pretty clear.  Yes Wall Street behaved badly, but like everyone else in the country, they were acting on the incentives laid in front of them by the government's housing obsession.  We all know about the incentives to buy homes.  The banks on Wall Street were just unlocking the capital required to feed this beast, and they certainly did not create it.    

 

 

Valued Contributor
Jazzzy
Posts: 2,597
Registered: ‎07-29-2009

Re: Housing Crisis Debate

Hello, and welcome to the forums.

 

Politics is one of the topics not discussed in the myFICO forums, so I won't go there. OK...yes I will.

 

Just one question...am I mistaken that Republicans were in charge when this all happened? You have an interesting sense of blame.

Moderator
Moderator
Lel
Posts: 5,262
Registered: ‎03-18-2008

Re: Housing Crisis Debate

Discussion of politics is not permitted on the FICO forums, but for topics such as this it is hard to completely separate economic policy from the policymakers.

 

There is ample evidence to suggest that action (or inaction) by our legislators on both sides of the aisle help contribute to the housing crisis.  A while back, Time or Newsweek had an interesting article listing the people who shared the blame for the housing market crisis.  It was pretty clear that no party was solely or primarily at fault.  If I can find the archived article somewhere, I'll post it.  It was fascinating reading.

 

The housing crisis has affected everyone, even those who don't find themselves in difficult financial straits at this time.  The scope of the problem is unprecedented and mind-boggling.  The California crisis of the 1990s pales in comparison to the current quagmire.  Some people have said that the magnitude of the fall was unpredictable, but that's not entirely true.

 

Here's a link to an article from 1999.  I've posted this a couple times before, but I think it's worth mentioning again.

 

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

 

 

The most prescient quote from this article is this:

 

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.


''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

 

 


Finger-pointing at one party or another is not going to yield a winner in this argument.  The responsibility for the current situation is shared among many, in both the public and private sector.  Let's not turn this thread into a political blame game. 

New Member
atlram
Posts: 2
Registered: ‎05-01-2010

Re: Housing Crisis Debate

Sorry for the politics!  It is hard to separate policy and econ especially in light of the recent turmoil.  Lel, great link.  Peter Wallison needs to be Treasury Secretary.  He has been the most accurate policy expert for the last 15 years.  His archived articles over at the American Enterprise Institute provide excellent reading material.  He was sounding the alarm on the GSE's for the decade and a half.    

New Member
Getting-Educated
Posts: 6
Registered: ‎04-27-2010

Re: Housing Crisis Debate

I just had to respond one more time. "Atlram" I applaud your post and appreciate your openess. You indicated that it was due somehow to your irresponsibility???  You  quoted - "That's when my existing balances caught up to me - or more accurately - when my bank decided to use my balances against me." unquote -

 

Anyone who keeps their balances in the 20% - 30% of their limit is right on target. If you pay them off, the banks penalize you, if you use to much they do the same. And then if you use your cards responsibly and stay within an acceptible range, as you noted, you get penalized there as well.

 

How on earth can you say it was irresponsible to use a credit card in a responsible manner, only to have the bank change the rules on you. When the banks can change the rates and limits and whatever else they want, whenever they choose, I don't call that your irresponsibility. They have created a system where people shuffle things around, to try to stay ahead of them. The bottom line is we should all try to not use credit, but in our social society, we have little choice in many cases to ignore our credit scores.

 

If the playing field was regulated and we could all have a clear understanding going in, without opportunity for anyone to change the agreement, you would not see as many people default or get jilted by greed. We cannot just up and decide to lower the rates or raise the limits on our credit cards, so why should the bank be allowed to raise or lower them mid-stream once we have used some of the credit. Now if they want to change the rates or balances and make them affective after the original loan or credit use, so it does not adversely affect our credit scores, then that would be fine. Then you could say you were made aware and still chose to go forward. But in no way can you convince me that the banks have the right to change a contract midstream and be able to clearly justify it. Especially when it affects our credit scores and we have no control over it. They are heavily to blame for our crisis these days, as well as each of us for allowing ourselves and them to be unregulated and to run widely crazy with no accountibilty.

 

It is so amazing to me how the lenders and credit reporting people (not what I want to call them), can change their practices and rules for judging anytime they see fit to make some extra $$. There is a reason that they changed your balances, it's called fees, exta charges, ultimately called greed. In your first paragraph I did not see anything that you did wrong according to the rules set in front of you. Not until they changed your limits, did you have any problems. And what justification was there for raising your interest rate, if in fact you were paying as agreed other than to take advantage of you in a crippling economic way.

 

This was not your mistake, rather this was a consequence of lenders being able to change the rules on you, and you having no recourse even though you did everything you promised you would do. I am so disappointed in how we take blame for things beyond our control, and especially when we have followed the rules and played the way we agreed (by contract) to play. I intentionally did not air all my dirty laundry in my first post, but I assure you I was swindled in a big way by the so called lenders who solicite people like you and I every day. I was backed into a corner and because I had very little exposure to things like this forum, I did the best I could. Unfortunately, there were people out there just looking for people like me who they knew had to make a decision even if it was wrong. They certainly did not offer to make sure the deal benefited me as much as it benefited them. I thought integrity and honesty were supposed to be what our forefathers meant to pass on. Maybe that does not apply to lenders and officials in chrge of overseeing those lending practices.

 

I try to teach my kids respect and responsibilty, but it is very hard to do that in a society that promotes cheating, stealing and lying as a way to get ahead, and to make it worse, it is legal to do it without regulation by someone. And just so I don't get bashed, NO I don't necessarily think the govt. are the ones to regulate, but someone has to.

 

I make this statement to my wife and children all the time - "I am not a victim and I will not play the role of one now or at anytime, nor should you. Fight when you are right, and yield when there are no clear cut winners and protect yourself." I apologize for my rant, but this topic really affected my family and I don't like to see anyone take blame for uncontrollable actions of unregulated lenders.

Valued Contributor
Jazzzy
Posts: 2,597
Registered: ‎07-29-2009

Re: Housing Crisis Debate


Lel wrote: 


Finger-pointing at one party or another is not going to yield a winner in this argument.  The responsibility for the current situation is shared among many, in both the public and private sector.  Let's not turn this thread into a political blame game. 


+1

New Member
Getting-Educated
Posts: 6
Registered: ‎04-27-2010

Re: Housing Crisis Debate

[ Edited ]

I apologize if it apears my posts are pointing fingers, I just don't think people should take blame if they are not at fault, just to make everyone else feel good. You are right though, there are a lot of people in the private sector who helped make this mess. And then there are those who just worked their rear-ends off to support their families, who got caught up in the whole mess. Those are the people who do not need to take blame or feel like they did something wrong by trying to live the american dream and purchase a home. It is a shame how people are trying to make people feel like they need to be special or have a 6 figure income in order to be able to purchase a home. I had a 6 figure income, nothing to brag about, infact it brought more stresses the more money I made.

 

My wish is for people to slow down and get educated as much as possible before any big decision they make. Only then will people be able to confidently improve their lives and the lives around them. Thanks for this forum, I really appreciate the dialog and being able to put my voice somewhere.


myFICO is the consumer division of FICO. Since its introduction 20 years ago, the FICO® Score has become a global standard for measuring credit risk in the banking, mortgage, credit card, auto and retail industries. 90 of the top 100 largest U.S. financial institutions use the FICO Score to make consumer credit decisions.

>> About myFICO
FICO Score - The Score that matters
Click to Verify - This site chose VeriSign SSL for secure e-commerce and confidential communications.
www.myfico.com is a BBB Accredited Financial Service in San Rafael, CA
FOLLOW US Social Media Facebook Twitter Pinterest Google+