[Wisconsin] Scott Walker Taking 25.6 Million From Foreclosure Victims

[Renae]

But my point was that the foreclosures affect us all. Regardless of whether you are being foreclosed upon, and regardless of if you signed on to a bad loan or not. Walker taking this money to close his budget shortfalls is only going to continue the trend for the homeowners of Wisconsin. He could have taken an easy step toward improving the economy in Wisconsin, but he's not.

As Tess showed, you're being very dishonest.

 

[OpportunityCost]

There is another angle I dont see adressed. So lets say they default later anyway. Do we have any business propping people up that may still default and hurt the market anyway?

 

[Renae]

There is another angle I dont see adressed. So lets say they default later anyway. Do we have any business propping people up that may still default and hurt the market anyway?

If you don't you might hurt someone else, see we should jsut let the Government pay all mortgages, it's only fair after all.

 

[danarhea]

 

[Kal'Stang]

Did you have a point with that Dan? Or are you just trolling?

 

[Renae]

Did you have a point with that Dan? Or are you just trolling?

Tis all Dan has. If a Republican did it, it's gotta be wrong.

 

[Objective Voice]

Victims? You make it sound like they were just randomly given notice they were out of their homes. If you cannot afford something, and you take out a loan for it anyway... how are YOU a victim? Aside of your own stupid.

Mr. Vicchio,

Not everyone whose home has been foreclosed on are in that situation because they took out a mortgage they couldn't afford. Many people who are in foreclosure are in that position because they lost their job and either haven't found another one OR one that pays near what they were making before. To think that there's only one reason people are being foreclosed on - because they took out a mortgage they couldn't afford regardless of their employment situation - is just plain foolish.

My neighbor lost his home because he got divorced. His was a two-income household, but when he divorced half of his household income was gone. He stayed with it for nearly 2-years before finally accepting the fact that he could no longer afford to make the mortgage payments. He tried everything he could to keep his home, i.e., held yard sales, refinanced, took a part-time job for a while, cut back on every expense. At one point my wife and I learned that he couldn't pay his electric bill (he was 5 months behind) and was living off battery power and taking showers at his job. He even applied for one of the mortgage loan modification programs but his mortgage holder jerked him around with the paperwork -TWICE! He finally gave up his home to foreclosure just before Thanksgiving of last year.

I have a co-worker who was impacted by the tornado outbreak last year who recently shared with me a story of one of her neighbors whose struggling to keep her home. The insurance and FEMA helped pay for repairs, but the business where her neighbor worked was completely destroyed. She's been out of work ever since. Her neighbor is a single parent who's husband died a few years before the tornados hit. This single mother is about to lose her home unless her loan modification is accepted and she's able to find work soon.

These are just two examples - perhaps rare - but it goes to illustrate that not everyone who is in foreclosure are going through it because they were irresponsible and bought more home than they could afford. Your way of seeing the home ownership/foreclosure problem is wrongheaded because you think everyone facing foreclosure are in that position for the same reason. They are not.

Now, to the topic itself, I agree with MaggieD (except for the "they get 12-14 months rent free" part...not sure where she gets that from).

Well, if you want to look at it that way . . . but I don't. Putting that money towards the state budget deficit helps every single taxpayer in the state. Foreclosure "victims?" They get 12-14 months rent free anyway.

As much as foreclosure victims need help, I think paying down the state's debt helps the entire state not just a small few. People may see this as unconscienable, but the less debt the state has the sooner they're able to be of help to its residents. Now, if Gov. Scott is cheating these foreclosure victims and applying the funds improperly, that's a different matter entirely. But based on the article, it's better to use the revenue to pay down the debt.

 

[digsbe]

Foreclosure victims? Damn the big bag banks for making people pay their loans off.

 

[danarhea]

Tis all Dan has. If a Republican did it, it's gotta be wrong.

Yea, what I posted in post number 4 is all wrong, except that you didn't say why you believe it is wrong. You attacked me instead. If you had just one iota of honesty in your entire body, you would have responded with an honest answer. But you didn't. So, once more, on account of your blatant dishonety, you are going back on ignore. I knew it was a mistake to take you off ignore in the first place.

To everybody else - Read post number 4 and tell me where I am wrong. Then we can debate it. Thank you.

To Mr. V, goodbye, and this time, it is for good. I do not speak to dishonest posters.

 

[Kal'Stang]

What is the pattern here? It begins with the banks, and it ends with the banks. The lenders at the banks have degrees in banking. They know what homeowners can and can't afford. The homeowners, in many cases, are not that savvy. They are factory workers, construction workers, restaurant workers, and other non-monetary trades, who don't know economics. It is up to the banks to separate those who can afford a loan from those who cant. After all, that's what they went to school for, and got their degrees in. Instead, they lied to the homeowners, convincing them that they could afford what they couldn't. They also falsified income statements and other paperwork in order to push their loans through, and make the bank money. In addition, they threw in hidden charges, which the homeowners had no idea existed until they had to begin paying them. The banks especially screwed most of our soldiers and vets who were buying their first home. Then, when the loans began to go underwater, they falsified documents in order to make illegal evictions. Throughout the process, the banks were acting as a criminal enterprise.

But, according to you, it's all the homeowners' faults. You know, there is a difference between free markets and criminal markets. There is also is a difference between supporting free markets and supporting an ongoing criminal enterprise.

I disagree with you because it doesn't end with the banks. Nor does it start at the banks. It starts at home (or where ever you live). It starts by you doing your homework and educating yourself. If you go out and buy a TV are you going to buy any ole TV? Or are you going to do your homework and find out which type of tv has the least amount of problems? The same goes with buying a house, you do your homework. Because if you do not then you truely are stupid.

These are a few things that you should do when looking to buy a house. Figuring out how much you make per month AND per year as both are important. How much you have set aside for a down payment. How much that down payment will affect how much you have to pay per month to pay off the house. How you are going to save up for any balloon payments that must be met. Do you have a relatively secure job? (IE one with a low turn over rate and a job that is in demand and looks to stay that way, even in rough times) What is your credit score across all 3 checks. What if anything are you willing to sacrifice to get a house. (IE tv, internet, cell/phone etc etc) Check out the highest property tax rate for the type of house that you want to get. (because you gotta pay them taxes!)

These are just the things that are from the top of my head. And every single one of them you can, and should, figure out before you even think about looking at any houses...much less going to the bank or realtor. And it is all common sense stuff. And I would bet that half the people that are in trouble today didn't even do half of this when they decided to buy a house.

And in the end, when all is said and done, this whole process does not end until you sign your name on the dotted line. Through out the whole process of buying a house you should check everything at least twice. And I do mean EVERYTHING. This includes what the bankers and realtors told you. And you should do your best to find the stuff that they didn't tell you about. (because there is always something that they don't tell you about) One should never trust the car salesmen (metaphore in case you miss it) because they are just out to make money and don't care about you.

So yeah, in the end, if you do not do your homework and lose your house because of that then yes, you are stupid.

Note: With the exception of the very first sentence all of the "you's" in this post is generic and does not refer to anyone in particular.

 

[danarhea]

I disagree with you because it doesn't end with the banks. Nor does it start at the banks. It starts at home (or where ever you live). It starts by you doing your homework and educating yourself. If you go out and buy a TV are you going to buy any ole TV? Or are you going to do your homework and find out which type of tv has the least amount of problems? The same goes with buying a house, you do your homework. Because if you do not then you truely are stupid.

These are a few things that you should do when looking to buy a house. Figuring out how much you make per month AND per year as both are important. How much you have set aside for a down payment. How much that down payment will affect how much you have to pay per month to pay off the house. How you are going to save up for any balloon payments that must be met. Do you have a relatively secure job? (IE one with a low turn over rate and a job that is in demand and looks to stay that way, even in rough times) What is your credit score across all 3 checks. What if anything are you willing to sacrifice to get a house. (IE tv, internet, cell/phone etc etc) Check out the highest property tax rate for the type of house that you want to get. (because you gotta pay them taxes!)

These are just the things that are from the top of my head. And every single one of them you can, and should, figure out before you even think about looking at any houses...much less going to the bank or realtor. And it is all common sense stuff. And I would bet that half the people that are in trouble today didn't even do half of this when they decided to buy a house.

And in the end, when all is said and done, this whole process does not end until you sign your name on the dotted line. Through out the whole process of buying a house you should check everything at least twice. And I do mean EVERYTHING. This includes what the bankers and realtors told you. And you should do your best to find the stuff that they didn't tell you about. (because there is always something that they don't tell you about) One should never trust the car salesmen (metaphore in case you miss it) because they are just out to make money and don't care about you.

So yeah, in the end, if you do not do your homework and lose your house because of that then yes, you are stupid.

Note: With the exception of the very first sentence all of the "you's" in this post is generic and does not refer to anyone in particular.

Needless to say, I disagree with most of what you said, although I do agree with some of it. But you were honest enough to say what's on your mind instead of calling me names. That is appreciated. Let me respond to what you posted:

1) You address the issue as one of caveat emptor, while I address it as caveat vendor. I believe that there are limits as to what sellers should be allowed to do. Granted, if a homeowner is stupid, he deserves what he gets. But lets go back to your analogy. For used cars, I believe in the lemon law. If a used car dealer uses deceptive trade practices to sell you a car, he should be gigged very hard for it, and you should have compensation for his dishonesty. In the case of the banks, we are talking about bankers that convinced prospective homeowners that they could afford what they couldn't, and even falsified income records in order to get loans approved. Personally, I believe that this amounts to fraud, and that those who commit these kinds of actions deserve long prison sentences. Instead, they were rewarded. It is all about the commissions they could get by signing up new loans and generating lots of money for the banks, and to get those commissions, they acted in a predatory fashion.

I do have a strong Libertarian-right bent in many areas, but consumer protection is not one of those areas. In the 1800's, people died from products that were sold in medicine shows. You don't think we need regulation there? I do, and I thank my lucky stars that we have an FDA. Right here in Houston, dealers used to buy cars that had been flooded out at auctions, fix them up to look like they had never been flooded, and then put those cars on their lots, thus fooling people who ended up buying those cars which did not last too long on the road. I thank my lucky stars that we now have lemon laws to prevent this kind of fraud. And yes, I also thank my lucky stars that the government is getting involved in another fraud that was perpetrated on prospective home buyers. I believe in free markets, but markets that are predatory are not free. They are criminal.

Thank you for your response. And if you disagree with what I am posting, feel free to tell me that I am full of crap. As long as you debate the issue with me, instead of attempting to change the subject and make me the issue, you and I will get along just fine.

 

[Renae]

There is a huge difference between selling a lemon (which is knowingly selling a faulty vehicle) and a homeowner buying a house they could never afford "because the banker told me I could".

Drive by any Military base, more so any training base and you'll see lots of "WE FINANCE E-1 AND ABOVE!" One of the first things they tell you upon arrival is "DO NOT BUY FROM THESE PEOPLE." Why? They'll put you in a car, oh yeah, real nice rides too. Shame you cannot afford anything after that...

While the practice is horrible, ultimately it's the dumb 18 year old kid out of boot who signs the paperwork who is to blame for being stupid.

 

[OnWisconsin]

I would have to argue that its not so much the kid's fault it is the predatory lenders fault. It's basically the same thing as someone setting them up to fail. They WANT these 18 year old kids to fail so their derivatives cash out. These banks/people are worse than the nigerians who try to get you to take their family fortune by simply sending them $500. Its scumbag capitalism at its finest/worst.