- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,909
- Reaction score
- 11,003
- Location
- New Jersey
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
AP said:By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer Martin Crutsinger, Ap Economics Writer – 50 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Nearly half of the 1.3 million homeowners who enrolled in the Obama administration's flagship mortgage-relief program have fallen out.
The program is intended to help those at risk of foreclosure by lowering their monthly mortgage payments. Friday's report from the Treasury Department suggests the $75 billion government effort is failing to slow the tide of foreclosures in the United States, economists say.
More than 2.3 million homes have been repossessed by lenders since the recession began in December 2007, according to foreclosure listing service RealtyTrac Inc. Economists expect the number of foreclosures to grow well into next year.
"The government program as currently structured is petering out. It is taking in fewer homeowners, more are dropping out and fewer people are ending up in permanent modifications," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics.
Besides forcing people from their homes, foreclosures and distressed home sales have pushed down on home values and crippled the broader housing industry. They have made it difficult for homebuilders to compete with the depressed prices and discouraged potential sellers from putting their homes on the market.
Approximately 630,000 people who had tried to get their monthly mortgage payments lowered through the government program have been cut loose through July, according to the Treasury report. That's about 48 percent of the those who had enrolled since March 2009. And it is up from more than 40 percent through June.
Nearly 50 percent leave Obama mortgage-aid program - Yahoo! News
$75 billion was made available, $495 million (approx) has been spent to save homes going into foreclosure, yet 50% are still dropping out and cannot keep up on the payments. Why? These people shouldn't have been approved for homes in the first place... someone should tell Mr. Obama and Barney Frank.
Nearly 50 percent leave Obama mortgage-aid program - Yahoo! News
$75 billion was made available, $495 million (approx) has been spent to save homes going into foreclosure, yet 50% are still dropping out and cannot keep up on the payments. Why? These people shouldn't have been approved for homes in the first place... someone should tell Mr. Obama and Barney Frank.
I'm pretty sure they already know. Nobody denies these mortgages were unwise. All that remains is what do we do with them while causing the least amount of economic damage.Why? These people shouldn't have been approved for homes in the first place... someone should tell Mr. Obama and Barney Frank.
[emphasis added by bubba]Nearly 50 percent leave Obama mortgage-aid program - Yahoo! News
$75 billion was made available, $495 million (approx) has been spent to save homes going into foreclosure, yet 50% are still dropping out and cannot keep up on the payments. Why? These people shouldn't have been approved for homes in the first place... someone should tell Mr. Obama and Barney Frank.
[emphasis added by bubba]
422,000 families are living in homes right now, enjoying a security they did not have but for this program. one which cost less than $1200 per salvaged residence. that sounds like an effective program ... especially when recognizing the alternative party of NO would have done its typical nothing (constructive) to address the problem
but what causes me to post is that statement you direct to Obama about his needing to be specifically informed of the inappropriate mortgages made during the shrub's watch
but unlike his predecessor, Obama is administering this in a fiscally prudent manner. that's why so many are not getting permanent modifications. the borrowers do not meet HAMP program creditworthiness requirements, even with a loan maturity extension and rate temporarily reduced to 2%. those other mortgage debtors fall into one of two categories (if not both). either they do not have the monthly cash flow in this weak economy to make even the reduced payments or/(and) the value of the collateral is substantially less than the debt which it secures. for many, walking away from their upside down mortgage is a better deal than paying a loan amount which far exceeds the value of the home in which they are residing
based on their whining about it, seems a number of our fiscal liberals ... recognize them as those who usually have some brand of "conservative" as their stated political lean ... would prefer the Obama administration throw taxpayer money away on mortgage mods to borrowers who cannot repay those borrowed tax dollars
How does blaming Bush address the failure of Obama's bailout that's failing?
$75 billion was made available, $495 million (approx) has been spent to save homes going into foreclosure
How does blaming Bush address the failure of Obama's bailout that's failing?
You mean he succeeded in bribing some families and make little bleeding heart liberals who think people are entitled to live off others hard work (that'd be those folks in homes they cannot afford still there because Obama is throwing other peoples money at them) think Obama is wonderful?:::Sigh:::
Program doesn't work, you call it a failure. It DOES work, you call it wasteful spending.
He really can't win, can he?
The plan should be shutdown IMMEDIATELY. Those 52%? So sad, too bad, you're in a home you DO NOT DESERVE, and you have no RIGHT to Tax Payer Money to keep you there.
Do you honestly think this many people are missing payments because they simply lived beyond their means?
If you can't pay your mortgage, you can't pay your mortgage. It's not like a few months of coverage for your loan will somehow make your financial insolubility 'disappear.' The idea, when initiated, was poorly thought out. Now, it is only painfully obvious.
Yes, I'd say that the vast majority are there because they lived beyond their means.
What percent of people in this program do you think made a 20% down payment and had a total mortgage of less than 2X their annual salary?
I am in agreement with you that the program has been unsuccessfull. However, I am tired of these ignorant statements about people not deserving a home. Do you honestly think this many people are missing payments because they simply lived beyond their means? I suggest you look at what home prices were during the peak of the bubble in places like california, nevada, etc, and compare them to now. Hopefully then you will realize what has happened and you will realize what it would be like to be in their shoes.
I don't give a DAMN what the prices were like at the peak. The PEAK was caused by too many people buying homes they couldn't AFFORD and now these people are getting bailed out by US, the taxpayers.
It would SUCK to be in their shoes, I'd like to think I wouldn't be so stupid as to GET THERE in the first place.
The real ignorance, is your position that I don't believe people "Deserve" a home. They do, however they do not DESERVE one they cannot afford. Nor do they deserve tax payer monies to keep them in homes beyond their means.
The point is a lot of people could have been responsible, and afforded it at the time of the purchase, but due to circumstances beyond their control they have defaulted on their home loans. A lot of people have lost a job, had their hours/pay cut, and house prices have fallen so much they cannot refinance.
I don't know where to find a statistic on the down payment.
From the most recent HAMP report:
Median Ratio of housing expenses to income is 44.8%.
The reason for hardship for the majority (60.2%) of those who have gotten permanent mods is loss of income.
and the cancellations:
"The most common causes of cancellations include insufficient documentation, missed trial payments, or mortgage payments already less than 31% of the homeowner’s income.
Servicers reported that more than half of homeowners in canceled trials receive alternative modifications, become current, or pay off the loan completely."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?