VH - just remember...some people are born stupid, others have to continually work at it to get it right.

And this differs from past busts how? Every credit boom ends this way, why is this one different. For reference, ask your teachers about the S&L industry, the dot.com era and the subprime credit card monoline era.

in the programs and lending standards that lenders used.

most recent stats are 0.78% foreclosure rate and 5.59% delinquency rate through the 3rd quarter, 2007. It is important to recognize this is a geographic specific problem to just 7 states.

this is a noble effort, maybe too vague and full of unknowns, but a noble effort none the less

the universe of the loans eligible is small and manageable

so we'll see how it works out

In the subprime credit card bust, lending standards and programs were sound?

Do you know anything about it or are you just answering for the sake of answering?

are these real estate secured credit cards?

is a credit card a loan?

I'll take that as a yes, you don't know anything about the credit card bust.

i'll take it that you don't know anything about the significance of real estate on the economy versus unsecured credit.

No I do not. Pleaes explain it to me.

I'd say this plan is just as much a bailout for lenders as it is for homeowners.

there isn't a lender worth his or her salt that warehouses these loans longer than a month, so it may be more accurate to say it is a bailout of the investors and the homeowners

You're right - investors. I was just thinking that this scheme would be a tremendous relief not just to the homeowners, but also to whomever is having to foreclose on the house.

To the extent it actually helps to stem a tide of foreclosures, it will be a bailout for all property owners - investors, themselves.

Explain to me why the government must step in with this plan...if the investors are so concerned about "stemming the tide of foreclosures", why doesn't the investor simply go to their borderline customers and present them with a restructuring plan, or slow down the rate of increases.

If you see someone is going to have a helluva time swallowing a 2% increase, and another 1% six months later, why not soften the increases to half a percent and string them out a little longer. I would imagine it would easier for the customer to afford, and if they are modest enough increases over a longer period of time, less chance of losing the loan to a refi sooner than later. Plus less chance for the investor haveing to sit on a bunch of nonperforming loans/foreclosures and having to accept short sales. What am I missing here?

the govt. played no role other than to bring the parties together bbs. This plan is the investors plan, and they were willing to freeze those loans that have a chance of repayment. It really is very modest in the numbers of homeowners it will help.

I'm not defending the plan. I don't know enough about it. I said last week:





I have no idea - I assume those are the same objective that the investors are trying to achieve through the rate freeze workout.

The individual investors could not opt to freeze or modify these loans on their own with their own customers?

no, recall the customers and their advocates wanted 30 year freezes, it took the bully pulpit to get them to do this much

I just wanted to share this

you are a real trouble maker there Ms. Becka!!!!!!!

But not enough trouble for you to delete the post, I see.

LOL, my button is worn out!!

that was a humorous cartoon!

Give it a few moments to register.

care to elaborate bbs?

Does it need elaboration?