A growing consensus: foreclosures are the cure for the housing market

Sep 6th, 2011  
by IrvineRenter  in Library News

Astute Observations

Astute Observation by Greg
2011-09-06 06:30 AM

Nice carpet…

Astute Observation by Casual Observer
2011-09-06 08:56 AM

I lost money in the stock market.  Where’s my bailout?

Astute Observation by Kelja
2011-09-06 09:23 AM

IrvineRenter - thank you for calling bullshit on some of the so-called experts and pundits.

I like it when someone writes:

“Also, they are interested in turning many of these properties into affordable rentals, which are sorely lacking in many communities. Experts interviewed agree this would be a good move for the market.”

And they don’t name the ‘expert’. All to frequently, a reporter can pull a supposed factoid out of their ass and no one says boo.

Astute Observation by Duran
2011-09-06 11:09 AM

What is happening on Redfin? Half of the Houses I click on are marked as “Pending”

Has anyone else noticed this new phenom?

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2011-09-06 01:20 PM

Redfin recently changed their default setting to show both active and pending sales. Previously, when a house went pending it fell off the default search. If you look at the total available for sale it is about 400 homes higher than the inventory we show which only includes active listings.

Astute Observation by Duran
2011-09-06 01:39 PM

Thank you for the explanation IR…

Astute Observation by irvine_home_owner
2011-09-07 09:21 AM

You can turn this off, chose ‘Active Listings’ under Status.

- Fellow Redfin Addict

Astute Observation by Foreclosed on in Chicago
2011-09-06 12:23 PM

Great piece.  But I have to ask, Irvine Renter, what makes you think we are coming to the realization that more, not fewer, foreclosures are needed?  It is true, but I don’t see many light bulbs going on in Washington about it.

As someone who did a deed-in-lieu last year and would not change my decision for anything, I agree that this is the only “liberation” from debt that really qualifies for the name.

But I have a suggestion for you and all the other “angry renters” in the country.  You are right to point out that it would be patently unfair for government to “save” current debtors from their own actions.  Yet you do not move the debate forward by posing it as an “us vs. them” fight.

People who bought houses at bubble prices got screwed, and they don’t want to hear that others are waiting for them to leave so they can get a bargain.

Between the poles of “you are a victim and you need/deserve help” and “get out so we can have your house” there need to be other options.  There are probably some (not many) people who would be able to keep their houses if their rates are dropped.  On the other extreme, people who have squatted for years should be moved out promptly, however much it hurts the banks. 

And for people who are in the middle (the majority) there should be incentives for them to vacate the houses they can’t afford quickly and with the least damage to their families.  A fast-track to credit repair would help families buy less expensive homes, which would either enable move-up buyers to do so or take one more home off the market.

I think the time has come for all of us to stop painting this as a black and white, all or nothing dilemma with one way out, one group that wins everything it wants, and one that loses.  If we compromise amongst ourselves the terrorists (bankers) lose.  If we keep attacking our neighbors, they win.

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2011-09-06 01:18 PM

Good points. Thanks for sharing your opinion.

Astute Observation by Carl Pham
2011-09-06 01:29 PM

Hmmm.  Nope, on reflection, I quite like the pole of “get out so we can have your house.”  Sometimes folks need serious pain to learn their lessons, and those lessons have to be learned so your follies don’t drag the rest of us down, too.

How about you just be thankful we don’t have debtors’ prison anymore, and that you *can* walk away from your promise—which cost many of us years of living in unreasonably cramped conditions, and ravaged our savings—with not much more than a black mark on your borrowing ability?

Astute Observation by Foreclosed on in Chicago
2011-09-06 06:51 PM

Have it your way Carl.  Mutual Assured Destruction.

I guarantee you I’ll be buying a nicer house next year than you’ll ever be inside.  Hope it gnaws at you.

Astute Observation by newbie2008
2011-09-06 01:37 PM

You have valid points on how to better present the arguements.

I don’t see a purchase at a lower price a bargain.  It’s more of getting screwed less or paying a fairer price.  The lowered prices are still above historical afordability with respect to Price/Wages ratio.

The borrowers need to do what is best and right for their families, the govt needs to do what is right in preventing reoccurances and the banks need to stop giving way money to those that can or won’t pay back, then expecting the govt to bail them out via forgiveness, taking on the bad loan, or refinancing or repackaging the bad loans.  The govt is enabling the bankers to destroy the economy and banks for personal gain.

Astute Observation by Chapulin Colorado
2011-09-06 11:03 PM

Foreclosed on in Chicago, I thought the guv’mint already tried to help those loanowners who got screwed by the housing bubble/banksters/TPTB:  that was called HAMP and it didn’t work.  I’m all for helping out my fellow being, without taxpayers getting footed the bill.  If you have an idea, work it out.  But to me it sounds more like you are asking for more HAMP-like programs, so I’m not a bit convinced your desire to help those screwed will work without screwing “the renters”.  Maybe it is more wishful thinking.  If there is a solution, what is it?  Personally, after watching this unfold for 5 years, I think IRVINE Renter has it right.  It is not meant to be mean-spirited… but after 5 years to get it right, enough is enough!  Get rid of this debt cancer with the foreclosure surgery and chemo.  Sure it will be rough on loandebtors, but cutting there losses really may be the better solution.

What is the best solution?  I don’t know.

Astute Observation by Truth
2011-09-07 06:59 PM

“People who bought houses at bubble prices got screwed, and they don’t want to hear that others are waiting for them to leave so they can get a bargain.”

Um, no, mostly they screwed themselves, or just got unlucky, so too bad, pay the dues, or move along. Is anyone going to rescue me because I had money in the stock market before it dropped in 07/08? No, and I’m not asking them to, which separates me from these whining house-sitters.

Astute Observation by Truth
2011-09-07 07:16 PM

You are absolutely correct about Washington, though - this administration just keeps moving in the wrong direction on housing, with counterprodutive (costly) proposal after counterproductive (costly) proposal, and probably will again tomorrow night, when the President speaks to the nation.

Astute Observation by Walter
2011-09-06 01:24 PM

I know two households with mountains of debt on option ARMs indexed to 1 yr Treasurys. I now look like a fool because my warnings have not come to pass.

They brag about how low their payments are and how they are saving so much on interest. If the fed keeps rates at 0 for the next three years, how does this play out?

I have stopped talking.

I think the Fed/banks will foreclose a few, short sale a few, mod a few and let them pay for decades, and hope some have ‘morals’ and pay back the debt.

This will take a long, long time.

Astute Observation by newbie2008
2011-09-06 01:52 PM

Walter,
“...hope some have ‘morals’ and pay back the debt.”  the borrow are excercising an option in the borrowing contract and through the laws.  I don’t agree with them, but that’s what many of them are entitled.  The banks and WS have also gotten Congress and the Fed to throw money to the them for converting the non-performing defective loans to non-performing good loans.  The GSEs accepting the new loans, warts and all.  So now they’re the taxpayers responsibility.  I say stop and have the guilty pay, but I know that I’m in the minority and so are most of the people on this board. 

Most want the goods and have someone else pay for it. I recall IR’s blog of ex-friend losing the house, but ordering expensive wine on IR’s tab, because the wine that IR order was beneath his standards.  That’s just the state of affairs.  Sad but true.

Astute Observation by Walter
2011-09-06 02:22 PM

I agree. Issue is interest on my savings are being diverted to the debtors. The gov wants the loan owners to keep their nice wine cellars and keep voting them into office.

Astute Observation by IndyLew
2011-09-06 06:06 PM

The best way to deal with a market and social collapse is to throw everyone on the street as quickly as possible?  How about this instead:  the solution to the apartment and housing market and the present social destruction being wreaked upon the United States, is to have decent jobs at decent wages.  The top 1% has accelerated its total assets, while the bottom 90% is in a morass of epic proportion.  US policy to destroy jobs by shipping them overseas, to destroy families by economic hardship, should stop forthwith.  No chance.  Invest accordingly.  Until there are secure jobs and benefits, and a general feeling of peace and stability, foreclosures will continue. 
  The bank/loan industry has learned nothing: If you want to see the next wave of the same story, look at the subprime and even sub subprime of the auto loan racke…market, going on.  The shift to seven year auto loans even on used cars to people with no credit, sound familiar?

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2011-09-06 09:08 PM

“The shift to seven year auto loans even on used cars to people with no credit, sound familiar?”

Those loans are reprehensible. I remember in high school going to a used car lot where the operators would buy $200 to $300 cars at auction and sell them to people for $1,200 if they put $200 to $300 down. Basically, these guys financed their profit at 18% on jalopies. Great “credit enhancement” deal. Those guys were only one step above the payday loan crowd.

Astute Observation by newbie2008
2011-09-06 09:17 PM

At least the used car dealers didn’t ask the federal govt to bail them out for bad car loans.  The one sided deal was pay or the car would be reposed (car foreclosure).  The sharks even required insurance to cover their loss upon collisions.  Too bad the banks were not that honest and the govt so enabling to bad behavior.  (Sorry that’s too judgmental in today’s PC speak.)

Astute Observation by thrifty
2011-09-07 09:06 AM

Artificially supporting the market in any way is not working. However, I suspect it will continue until the situation is so bad that the simple and obvious (and oldest) remedy - selling to the highest bidder - is all that’s left. Given that all markets are local, it will vary in timing.

Astute Observation by Barbara Dresser
2011-09-07 03:27 PM

This must have been written by a bankster laughing all the way to the bank.  Most mortgages written during the last 15 years or so are full of fraud.  Because of this there has been a huge transfer of wealth from the middle class to the rich.  That is what is causing our recession.  Read all about it at www.livinglies.wordpress.com.  Wake up people.  You have been duped!

Astute Observation by Ring
2011-09-07 03:36 PM

This piece is off the charts wrong. If these properties were commercial real estate it would be immediately understood that the principal should be reduced. Both parties to these deals believed the appraisals, although in the case of the lenders they very likely tried to get a larger appraisal so they could do the deal. If the necessity is to reprice the market, then principal reductions accomplish it cheapest. Sorry, but the views here are the problem, not the solution.

Astute Observation by Walter
2011-09-07 07:09 PM

Then why am I seeing so many short sales in commercial real estate?

Are you a commercial real estate professional with first hand knowledge of these deals?

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

<< Back to main