June 21, 2010
— Gabriel Malor There was already some rumbling in the papers and definitely in the financial blogs, but the new numbers confirm it: Obama is, in fact, dumber than a box of rocks.
A major reason so many have fallen out of the program is the Obama administration initially pressured banks to sign up borrowers without insisting first on proof of their income. When banks later moved to collect the information, many troubled homeowners were disqualified or dropped out.[...]
More than a third of the 1.24 million borrowers who have enrolled in the $75 billion mortgage modification program have dropped out. That exceeds the number of people who have managed to have their loan payments reduced to help them keep their homes.
[...]
But analysts expect the majority will still wind up in foreclosure and that could slow the broader economic recovery.
Like most of Obama's anti-prosperity policies, this was just a way of kicking the can down the road. I'm sure he hoped it would last until after the midterms, but—goshdarn them—it turns out that people with no income to pay off their loans are unexpectedly as likely to flake on government-subsidized loans as they are the original debt.
Economics is all about incentives and Obama and the Democrats—with all their rhetoric about keeping folks in the homes they cannot afford—have given people extremely odd incentives in the housing market. It's crashing down now..and it turns out that politics is at least a little about incentives too.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
01:18 PM
| Comments (96)
Post contains 256 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: Truman North at June 21, 2010 01:22 PM (e8YaH)
Posted by: Blackford Oakes at June 21, 2010 01:23 PM (w9BEi)
Posted by: Atomic Roach at June 21, 2010 01:24 PM (Oxen1)
Posted by: Truman North at June 21, 2010 05:22 PM (e8YaH)
Yeah, remember those old fashioned rules about 10% - 20% down, 26% - 28% debt payment-to-income ratios? Who knew?
Posted by: Count de Monet at June 21, 2010 01:25 PM (2g2ex)
Gabe trying for new post every 90 seconds.
Coincidence, I think not?
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at June 21, 2010 01:26 PM (T0bhq)
Who knew?
Posted by: The Rock Family at June 21, 2010 01:28 PM (LH6ir)
Maybe that's why he's got trouble finding a date on Saturday night.
Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at June 21, 2010 01:31 PM (ZxF0y)
dumber than rocks indeed.
Posted by: mim/ginaswo at June 21, 2010 01:32 PM (jeGiR)
Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at June 21, 2010 01:33 PM (WMMgf)
A major reason so many have fallen out of the program is the Obama administration initially pressured banks to sign up borrowers without insisting first on proof of their income.
Is that how the whole mortgage problem started in the first place
Posted by: TheQuietMan at June 21, 2010 01:33 PM (1Jaio)
Posted by: J.D. Hayworth, have you seen my infomercial? at June 21, 2010 01:33 PM (AZGON)
I work in the industry and I am not understanding the article. If borrowers are dropping out of the modification plan when required to provide income docs... This means they make too much money to qualify and don't really need a modification. A modification requires that you make too LITTLE to pay for your house. Why is this bad that people can't qualify?
Posted by: susanita at June 21, 2010 01:35 PM (4GUBG)
Posted by: pity t. fool at June 21, 2010 01:35 PM (Sg8sX)
Posted by: International Brotherhood of Rock Boxes and Hammer Sacks at June 21, 2010 01:35 PM (92zkk)
Posted by: Sen. john Mccain at June 21, 2010 01:36 PM (w9bVp)
"Administration officials say the housing market is significantly better than when President Barack Obama entered office. They say those who were rejected from the program will get help in other ways."
Really now? No lie is too big with this crowd.
Hard and fast income to debt ratio guidelines might not be the best way when processing loan mods and workouts simply because the money has already been loaned, so that part I get.
The part I don't get is that at the end of the day you really do need a source of income to make that new house payment. Without that minor issue addressed, not much else matters.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at June 21, 2010 01:36 PM (oIp16)
The Flash looks at Superman and says, "Boy, this is my chance. I'm so gonna hit that."
So, bam! True to his name, in less than 2 seconds he's down, he's in, he's done, and he's back up there with Superman.
Wonder Woman opens her eyes and shakes her head.
"Wow, what just happened?"
The Invisible Man rolls off the top of her and says, "I don't know, but is my ass ever sore!"
Posted by: notropis at June 21, 2010 01:37 PM (BgTfY)
"White House, may I help you?"
"Yeah, this is Stupid. Can someone unstick this mothe******er from me? Please?"
Posted by: tangonine at June 21, 2010 01:40 PM (C8Pcc)
Do you all mean to tell me that affordable housing is not just a fancy name for giving houses away for free? because I could have sworn that affordable housing was just a fancy name for giving houses away for free.
And by "for free," I mean that our kids will pay for it with increased taxes and interest rates. Which I also thought was just understood here.
Posted by: Truman North at June 21, 2010 01:42 PM (e8YaH)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at June 21, 2010 01:42 PM (RkRxq)
Posted by: Bags of Wet Hair at June 21, 2010 01:45 PM (C8Pcc)
Posted by: Michael Steele at June 21, 2010 01:45 PM (w9bVp)
Do you all mean to tell me that affordable housing is not just a fancy name for giving houses away for free? because I could have sworn that affordable housing was just a fancy name for giving houses away for free.
And by "for free," I mean that our kids will pay for it with increased taxes and interest rates. Which I also thought was just understood here.
Posted by: Truman North at June 21, 2010 05:42 PM (e8YaH)
And by "affordable" I mean affordable after my booze, drug, and whorehouse expenses.
Posted by: WalrusRex at June 21, 2010 01:45 PM (xxgag)
Posted by: tangonine at June 21, 2010 01:47 PM (C8Pcc)
Posted by: Apache Chief at June 21, 2010 01:47 PM (e8YaH)
Jim is SD,
"Hard and fast income to debt ratio guidelines might not be the best way when processing loan mods and workouts simply because the money has already been loaned, so that part I get."
People are greedy. They want their rate/payment lowered even when they can afford the payment with no problem. Either that or they want their mortgage lender to take the hit and lower their payment because they bought too many cars or have too many credit cards. Sorry, dude, that is not the mortgage company's problem. The only way to keep the program confined to people who really need help is to make a guideline. It isn't like the government is giving the servicer enough money to make them whole on the deal.
Posted by: susanita at June 21, 2010 01:48 PM (4GUBG)
Huckabee dreaming.
Ron Paul dreaming.
Rahm Emmanuel crapping.
Obama lying about moratorium.
Gates not containing.
Onion wasn't joking.
Hayworth disassebling.
Florida flip-flopping.
Emmanuel favor-trading.
Malor e-book salivating.
Electricity rising.
Iran banning.
Mortgage program failing.
Not that we are all caught up, we sure could use a soccer thread (not).
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at June 21, 2010 01:48 PM (T0bhq)
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at June 21, 2010 01:49 PM (swuwV)
Posted by: Intrepid at June 21, 2010 01:49 PM (92zkk)
Posted by: Justin Camp at June 21, 2010 01:51 PM (nF4Jh)
____________________
Maybe we can Steyn in for Uighur Wednesday!
Posted by: Anachronda at June 21, 2010 01:57 PM (3K4hn)
Posted by: susanita at June 21, 2010 05:48 PM (4GUBG)
Actually dude, it IS the mortgage company's problem. They are the ones stuck with the non-performing asset.
My point was NOT that they shouldn't have any guidelines, but that enforcing A-paper rules now when the original loan was likely not even made under those rules is silly.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at June 21, 2010 01:58 PM (oIp16)
Posted by: McDonalds burger flipper at June 21, 2010 01:59 PM (554T5)
Posted by: tangonine at June 21, 2010 01:59 PM (C8Pcc)
Posted by: Retread at June 21, 2010 02:01 PM (LVSCd)
Posted by: Ira at June 21, 2010 02:06 PM (bJm7W)
Posted by: willow something like this at June 21, 2010 02:09 PM (HyUIR)
Posted by: Matt at June 21, 2010 02:09 PM (J3jFV)
Posted by: willow something like this at June 21, 2010 02:10 PM (HyUIR)
Posted by: Matt at June 21, 2010 06:09 PM (J3jFV)
Joe The Plumber
Posted by: hey, what about Me! at June 21, 2010 02:11 PM (HyUIR)
Posted by: drfredc at June 21, 2010 02:12 PM (ljMiA)
You mean, people need money to pay for things?
Why not just print money, tax the rich (not the mega rich, but the middle class rich), increase fees and energy prices, force cap and trade before any practical renewable "green" energy system is in place, tax the private producers and give it to the public sector union machine and the leisure class.
Oh wait - the democrats are already doing this. Ah! - hard to imagine why America is swirling down the toilet.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at June 21, 2010 02:12 PM (0fzsA)
Posted by: rawmuse at June 21, 2010 02:17 PM (uBv4L)
You know, with all the money spent, they might have just handed over the Paid deeds along with the you can pay if you wanta loan.
Posted by: hey, what about Me! at June 21, 2010 02:17 PM (HyUIR)
Is something specific happening in 7 days that hasn't for the last 64? Or is this a Ring reference?
Posted by: Methos at June 21, 2010 02:19 PM (Xsi7M)
Actually dude, it IS the mortgage company's problem. They are the ones stuck with the non-performing asset.
There are other remedies for the borrower in that case, for example -bankruptcy. The mortgage company should not modify a loan because the person just doesn't feel like paying a reasonable payment. A few foreclosures are cheaper than mods for everyone.
Posted by: susanita at June 21, 2010 02:19 PM (eRsMQ)
Er, crap. Is that what you mean?
Posted by: Methos at June 21, 2010 02:20 PM (Xsi7M)
Oops, my bad, I forgot I'm a white male who hasn't fallen behind in my payments.
Posted by: rockhead at June 21, 2010 02:21 PM (RykTt)
Posted by: Jean at June 21, 2010 02:21 PM (CPefM)
Posted by: rawmuse at June 21, 2010 02:26 PM (uBv4L)
Posted by: notropis at June 21, 2010 02:27 PM (BgTfY)
There are other remedies for the borrower in that case, for example -bankruptcy. The mortgage company should not modify a loan because the person just doesn't feel like paying a reasonable payment. A few foreclosures are cheaper than mods for everyone.
Posted by: susanita at June 21, 2010 06:19 PM (eRsMQ)
What does the bank get from a BK other than the asset back? Then the institution takes the write-down. Besides, shoving that watermelon through the snake might now work out so well. If foreclosing were such a swift and good resolution, the banks would have done that already. The problem is when that property is upside down, keeping the borrower in the house is the most profitable alternative for the bank, assuming that the borrower can now make the payments.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at June 21, 2010 02:27 PM (oIp16)
Posted by: notropis at June 21, 2010 02:28 PM (BgTfY)
Posted by: Washington Mutual at June 21, 2010 02:32 PM (R4rMI)
This was created during the "throw money at the problem" times. We've already moved past that stage into "maybe debt matters" stage.
Obama is still stuck on "Hoover did it".
Posted by: wtfci at June 21, 2010 02:38 PM (R4rMI)
Posted by: nerdygirl at June 21, 2010 02:41 PM (YVlF6)
I just drove by the starter home I sold 45 days ago.
The buyer was a low income single mom who put down 3% on an FHA loan.
There are already waist high weeds in all the flower beds and the landscaping is overgrown from all the rain we've gotten. I left the place looking nice. In 45 days it's a shit pit.
Fits in with the rest of the neighborhood that went to crap over the past 7 years. Down the road, there's a home for sale. The sign out front says, "Buy this home with just $500 down."
The fuck? Are you jacking me?
Poor assed people who don't have enough cash flow to maintain a home SHOULD NOT BE ENCOURAGED TO BUY A HOME. They fuck neighborhoods up by not taking care of their shit, then defaulting.
Posted by: Warden at June 21, 2010 02:48 PM (QoR4a)
Posted by: nerdygirl at June 21, 2010 02:57 PM (YVlF6)
Posted by: GarandFan at June 21, 2010 03:31 PM (6mwMs)
I work in the industry as well, Susanita- HAMP requires that you make SOMETHING in order to qualify for a modification- believe PITI (monthly principle, interest, taxes, insurance) has to be something like 31% of your net income, if memory serves. You make too much, you no get HAMP. You make too little or nothing, the magic 31% don't get attained and you get no HAMP modified mortgage.
The point being, for a while loan servicers modifying these bum mortgages took verbal income figures as a basis for doing HAMP modifications... when verifiable income docs became necessary, the borrowers with unverifiable income figures (that is, those that were making shit up) alluva sudden went bye bye. Ergo, Ear Leader yet again looks like the pinheaded sideshow dope he truly is. One can chant all the catchy slogans and march in circles outside banks all one wants, but a bankruptcy is a bankruptcy no matter how much the community wants to organize or prance in front of styrofoam pillars.
But not to worry- there's a new federal directive set to take effect Aug 1 that allows those that are unemployed and in imminent default a minimum (that's MINIMUM) of 3 months' forebearance on paying their mortgages, with the option on the table for loan servicers to extend that period.
Wheeeeeeeee! Now you can have a mortgage and not make payments on it! Ain't life a grand thing?
Posted by: buster mcdissenter at June 21, 2010 03:31 PM (ifZme)
I work in the industry and I am not understanding the article. If borrowers are dropping out of the modification plan when required to provide income docs... This means they make too much money to qualify and don't really need a modification. A modification requires that you make too LITTLE to pay for your house. Why is this bad that people can't qualify?
Posted by: susanita at June 21, 2010 05:35 PM (4GUBG)
It could also mean that even with the modification, they still don't make enough money to make the new modified payment.
Posted by: not a piping plover at June 21, 2010 03:31 PM (HHtwf)
Posted by: Glib Tunafish at June 21, 2010 03:41 PM (4ab4T)
Posted by: Prezidizzle Obizzle at June 21, 2010 03:59 PM (kmEfr)
Poor assed people who don't have enough cash flow to maintain a home SHOULD NOT BE ENCOURAGED TO BUY A HOME. They fuck neighborhoods up by not taking care of their shit, then defaulting.
Posted by: Warden at June 21, 2010 06:48 PM (QoR4a)
Feature, not bug. Haven't you noticed everything else the administration has been doing? This is where they WANT to go!
Posted by: Merovign, Strong On His Mountain at June 21, 2010 04:14 PM (bxiXv)
I sell real estate in California and the people getting into these programs are families hoping to stay in their home just a little longer before they file BK. Yes, they're milking the system put in place by Obama and yes he is as dumb as rocks to think they wouldn't.
The last four listing I took were for folks who lost their jobs and haven't found work; were forced to take a new job with a 40% paycut; lost a business; or had their hours cut to two days a week. From my observation, this makes up the majority of people losing their homes today. Are they flaking on their loan mods? Yes. Are they technically freeloaders? Yes. Would you do the same if you were in their shoes? Yes.
Posted by: Suzie at June 21, 2010 04:49 PM (A2nrS)
And there's the rub, Jim in SD-
most of these folks can't or won't make the payments... seems to me there was a post here a couple weeks back where folks were openly talking about spending their money on everything BUT their mortgages (think it was a NYT article excerpt?) because, well they could get away without paying their mortgages....
So you got the folks that never shoulda got mortgages sitting in homes they can't pay for either unable or gleefully unwilling to make payments on said houses.
Hard work is its own reward. Hard work is its own reward...must....repeat.......
Posted by: buster mcdissenter at June 21, 2010 05:02 PM (ifZme)
Posted by: passionate conservative at June 21, 2010 07:53 PM (qpv9W)
Ah, but is he dumber than a Barbara Boxer?
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at June 21, 2010 10:49 PM (DWVNq)
Posted by: Wallace Cleaver at June 22, 2010 07:07 AM (SZy+Y)
Posted by: Pneumatic fittings at February 21, 2011 04:56 PM (lAAFE)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2449 seconds, 224 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Methos at June 21, 2010 01:20 PM (Xsi7M)