Will America view Obama's foreclosure plan as "rewarding those who acted irresponsibly" or a "necessary fix" to stop the bottom from falling out in house value?
I'll weigh in tomorrow. For now I'm curious what you think.
Naturally, I fall into the "rewarding herd stupidity" crowd. It may also be a needed fix, but I'm afraid there's really no downside to being financially irresponsible.
I'm currently in a house where our debt to earnings is around 16%, about to build a new house that puts us at 26%, the banks are now restricted to not go above 45%, and this is down from 60%...
Of course, I'm a Libertarian, so I think anything the government does that takes $ is bad. I'm also a scientist, and I think if people can't fend for themselves, they should pretty much starve to death or at least not be incensed to pro-create and spread their ineptitude. This makes me a bad person, I know. (did you see idiocracy by chance?) Strangely, contradicting the other two stances. I'm not a godless heathen.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that if this thing is supposed to help America, it should help everyone equally, not just people who were financially irresponsible. Isn't that how socialism is supposed to work?
I guess it could be viewed both ways...rewarding the people who overexposed themselves and helping out those who have become a casualty of the economy.
Having just lost/gained a job last year I could have easily fallen into a needy category. However, I believe that the bulk of the people in the "help me" category kept up with their friends by building McMansions and did not care about their debt to earnings ratio. If everyone were allowed to refinance at much lower rates and not just new home buyers perhaps it would "help" more individuals/families.
Naturally, I fall into the "rewarding herd stupidity" crowd. It may also be a needed fix, but I'm afraid there's really no downside to being financially irresponsible.
ReplyDeleteI'm currently in a house where our debt to earnings is around 16%, about to build a new house that puts us at 26%, the banks are now restricted to not go above 45%, and this is down from 60%...
Of course, I'm a Libertarian, so I think anything the government does that takes $ is bad. I'm also a scientist, and I think if people can't fend for themselves, they should pretty much starve to death or at least not be incensed to pro-create and spread their ineptitude. This makes me a bad person, I know. (did you see idiocracy by chance?) Strangely, contradicting the other two stances. I'm not a godless heathen.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that if this thing is supposed to help America, it should help everyone equally, not just people who were financially irresponsible. Isn't that how socialism is supposed to work?
My brother and sister in law aren't too thrilled... I've only been keeping up on local news, so I obstain from opinion...
ReplyDeleteI guess it could be viewed both ways...rewarding the people who overexposed themselves and helping out those who have become a casualty of the economy.
ReplyDeleteHaving just lost/gained a job last year I could have easily fallen into a needy category. However, I believe that the bulk of the people in the "help me" category kept up with their friends by building McMansions and did not care about their debt to earnings ratio.
If everyone were allowed to refinance at much lower rates and not just new home buyers perhaps it would "help" more individuals/families.