Truthfully not a big Drudge guy, but most importantly because it was on my Google Reader and I just got back inside after being out for a few hours. :)
It's ridiculous. We've known for over a year that loan modifications are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, everyone suffers. Homes will be repossessed, house values will plummet even more and vacant homes lead to crime. The result will be that people who pay their mortgages will live in crime-ridden neighborhoods and won't be able to sell their homes without taking a huge loss. While people who can't pay their mortgages will relocate to apartments in different neighborhoods.
The real question is how anyone can force bondholders to give up their rights to prevent load modifications. I'm not sure how that problem was solved.
The Santelli rant made my day. The fact that the guys on the floor were cheering him on made it even better. During the Great Depression FDR badgered Wall Street until investment froze. We can't let that happen again.
Gil - Not going to have the time, but perhaps the relevant stat in this piece sums it up well: 70% of foreclosures are not the owner's primary residence. (Also just read elsewhere that over 50% of modified loans re-default within 6 months, 36% within 3 months, so modifying loans as a solution seems to be a horrible idea even if it did NOT have other negative impacts.)
Ezzie: Read that stat again in the article. There's more to it than that. The issue is whether we will have a large number of empty homes for sale in our neighborhoods. I think the answer is yes.
I agree there's more to it than that, but a) I don't think the current impact is as bad as you think; and b) I don't think that loan modification is the way to solve the issue, both in the present and certainly for the future.
(Found via Yeshiva World, forgot to insert.)
ReplyDeleterick santelli is awesome. Im surprised you got this via YWN when it was drudges lead headline for hours...
ReplyDeleteTruthfully not a big Drudge guy, but most importantly because it was on my Google Reader and I just got back inside after being out for a few hours. :)
ReplyDeleteI don't think anyone on the floor of an exchange is a good representative chunk of the US.
ReplyDeleteAnon - In belief?
ReplyDeleteThat was invigorating! Anyone care to translate Chicagoanese? It's challenging for me to understand accents from outside New York. Will pass on to RD.
ReplyDeleteI like that!
ReplyDeleteNice post.
It's ridiculous. We've known for over a year that loan modifications are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, everyone suffers. Homes will be repossessed, house values will plummet even more and vacant homes lead to crime. The result will be that people who pay their mortgages will live in crime-ridden neighborhoods and won't be able to sell their homes without taking a huge loss. While people who can't pay their mortgages will relocate to apartments in different neighborhoods.
ReplyDeleteThe real question is how anyone can force bondholders to give up their rights to prevent load modifications. I'm not sure how that problem was solved.
The Santelli rant made my day. The fact that the guys on the floor were cheering him on made it even better. During the Great Depression FDR badgered Wall Street until investment froze. We can't let that happen again.
ReplyDeleteGil - Vehemently disagree, both in the present and certainly for the future. Now if only I had the time to explain why...!! (Maybe later! :) )
ReplyDeleteI saw this live before work this morning and actually applauded! He spoke for many of us.
ReplyDelete"...whether we want to subsidize the LOSERS' mortgages..."
ReplyDeleteYep, conservative compassion at its best.
Gil - Not going to have the time, but perhaps the relevant stat in this piece sums it up well: 70% of foreclosures are not the owner's primary residence. (Also just read elsewhere that over 50% of modified loans re-default within 6 months, 36% within 3 months, so modifying loans as a solution seems to be a horrible idea even if it did NOT have other negative impacts.)
ReplyDelete>Yep, conservative compassion at its best.
ReplyDeleteThats irrelevant.
Was he right or wrong?
Ezzie: Read that stat again in the article. There's more to it than that. The issue is whether we will have a large number of empty homes for sale in our neighborhoods. I think the answer is yes.
ReplyDeleteI agree there's more to it than that, but a) I don't think the current impact is as bad as you think; and b) I don't think that loan modification is the way to solve the issue, both in the present and certainly for the future.
ReplyDelete