September 05, 2007

Ain't gonna be a housing gambler bailout. Why? Because politicians like to get re-elected and the bubble blogs made them listen


It's funny, a lot of 'em thought giving away free taxpayer money (like New Orleans) to failed housing gamblers would've been politically popular. So the wildly-unpopular and politically tone-deaf Bush and the Democratic Congress got together on the bailout idea, thinking it'd help both their anemic ratings.

Not.

Americans aren't quite as dumb as Dodd, Clinton, Obama, Schumer and Bush thought they were. And tax paying Americans who live within their means, read the fine print of contracts and have a sense of personal responsibility are OUTRAGED that our corrupt and incompetent leaders were thinking of bailing out failed flippers.

Ain't gonna happen. Mark my words. And it's because of you HP'ers, and the bubble blog community. Nice work everyone. We're ahead of this story, and we're driving opinion via the copy/pasters at the MSM now.


Is America really pro-bailout? - Politicians are sorely misreading public opinion of imperiled homeowners who bought into the bubble.

Here's one tale of sub-prime woe you may not have heard. Casey Serin, a twentysomething real estate investor in Sacramento, bought eight houses in four states with little or no money down, couldn't sell them and couldn't pay the mortgages, and so naturally began losing them to foreclosure. He then began keeping a self-pitying online diary he called Iamfacingforeclosure.com.

Serin hasn't drawn much notice from politicians or the media, but real estate bloggers have so vilified him that CNet's news.com granted him the title "world's most hated blogger." And cases like his help explain the disconnect between public opinion and bailout-happy politicians and the elite media: According to a recent Fox News poll conducted by Opinion Dynamics, there's 70% opposition to a taxpayer sub-prime bailout.

"It is amazing all the sympathy we are seeing from politicians for people who knowingly took out loans they couldn't afford, often lying on their applications to do so,"
commenter "srl" posted at the LA Land blog I write for the Los Angeles Times. "Usually," added "Brian," "when the facts are examined closely, we find people who . . . took a chance that house prices would keep rising, that they could remodel the kitchen, buy the truck and the motorcycle, put it on the credit card and pile that debt into the next refinance. ."

You can find thousands of similar comments on scores of "housing bubble" blogs. I asked Patrick Killelea, whose blog (patrick.net) has long predicted the current housing crisis, to quantify his readers' feelings about a bailout. "It is easy to quantify," he replied. "100% against."

43 comments:

Anonymous said...

same way they misread the anti-amnesty sentiment. run by monkeys.

hendry said...

Fannie/Freddie already bought $210 billion of toxic debt from the lenders. Get ready for inflation. The Fed has no choice but to monetize the toxic debt or else the entire international banking system will collapse. All those toxic CDO's will be held to maturity on the books of the GSE's and HUD. This won't stop home prices from collapsing as the demand has virtually disapeared, but the Wall Street crooks got away with it again.

Tav said...

1:04 AM, Tav said...

I think the poor homeowners should be bailed out because they were misled. I agree with Jim Cramer, Chris Dodd and Barack Obama that the government should do something.

The real parasites here are those homeowners who can afford their mortgage. They're pieces of RethugliKKKlan trash as far as I'm concerned.

Anonymous said...

Keith,

Just because you hate speculators and want to see them all die, suffer, end up on the street, etc....does not mean it will happend.

Consumer spending is the only thing that keeps the US economy churning along. We don't produce anything of value in this nation aside from weapons and pornography. If the home as a piggy bank/home equity scam were to completely die as a result of housing meltdown the US would be in ruins overnight.

The taxpayer will suffer hard from this bailout and inflation could be so bad that a hamburger that costs $2 now will cost $6+. The middle class will be destroyed and so will follow the upper level professionals that depend on the middle class for their income. Elites will still be on top.

The alternative is something like 50%+ unemployment, food shortages, and total anarchy.

Anonymous said...

Can I get a bailout for my divorce!

Econ_E said...

Haven't heard of Casey Serin.

HAHAHAHAHA.

HPers and every bubble blogger/poster never hearing of Casey Serin is akin to obese American children never having heard about ice cream.

Anonymous said...

You're so naive.

There will be a giant aid package. It will be peddled as help for the little guy, but in reality will pad the big banks bottom line.

Book it.

Anonymous said...

Psssss...

There never was a Bush bailout. There are democrats who want to give taxpayer money away with both hands (like Hillary!) but the Bush proposal is basically to allow some buyers to refinance...

Marky Mark

Anonymous said...

Bombs in the yard...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYe-OTKe6FI

cobra2411 said...

Don't be so sure there will be no bail-out. This isn't over by a long shot and people are already crying like little Nancy-boys for cuts and assistance. This tells me it's alot worse then we're being led to believe. I think it's alot worse then even what you can get reading between the lines...

When the Fit hits the Shan... There'll be bail-outs.

Think of it as the next reality series. "CDO Survivor: See who can escape from the pits of subprime and avoid the booby traps and hidden time bombs to be rescued by helicopter Ben..."

uniball said...

I thought "Faux News" was unreliable and extremely biased. Why are you quoting their poll?

real estate 101 said...

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BAILING OUT THE FOCKED BORROWERS.

IT'S ALL ABOUT BAILING OUT THE BANKS!!!!!!!!!!

They want to keep the borrower paying. Slaves to debt. Got debt?

Read and re-read Proverbs 22:7

The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.

borkafatty said...

OT:

Did anyone see those LIBOR Rates....Youch!!!

Anonymous said...

Yep. It is WRONG to subsidize irresponsibility.

They want a house. Fine. They rent until they save up the 20% down like EVERYONE ELSE.

Anonymous said...

WASHINGTON -- Federal and state banking regulators urged lenders and investors to restructure the loans of millions of borrowers at risk of losing their homes as their adjustable-rate mortgages reset to a higher rate.

Lenders should "review to determine the full extent of their authority to identify borrowers at risk of default" and find a way to keep the borrower in a home, the regulatory bodies said in a joint statement.

pwnd

Anonymous said...

politicians don't care what anyone on this or any blog thinks. they care about what theie donors think. anyone who thinks otherwise is naive.

Anonymous said...

My My, a lot of drama this morning in the comment section. It appears that many have different opinions of the definition of "bailout". Chrysler was a bailout in the sense that the goverment guaranteed their debt. We didn't lose a dime and in fact made about $30 million off the deal. The Mexican debt crisis was the same. We converted thier debt to US backed securities. Again we made $$. The S&L debacle was not really a bailout. No one but the depositors got saved. The USG backed deposits with the full faith and credit of us the taxpayer (as it should have). We bought the bad debt of failing S&Ls and ended up losing about $130 billion (not the original $500 billion estimate still quoted today).

So then, what constitutes a bailout for homedebtors? Are we going to give them money. In my own opinion this is not likely. Are we going to provide liquidity and expanded loan programs through FHA to help those to refinance that can be helped? Probably. There will be means testing. Investors, flippers...forget it. Borrowers who have been making payments and can continue to make payments will probably be helped. Most estimates place this number at 8 to 15%. Not many.

PS FNMA/FHLMC/FHA do not buy CDOs.

Anonymous said...

Face it renters, you fucked up. You thought you were smarter than everyone else bynot buying during the boom. You were sure this massive crash would come. Except you forgot something. The US of A is now a quasi-communist country. Capitalism no longer exists. The all powerfull federal government dictates what happens economically speaking. And your fearless leader, the so-called-conservative Jorge Arbusto has decided there will be no crash. He will save the unwashed masses. Maybe we'll start building statues of him and singing songs about him like they do in North Korea.

Too bad, so sad. Better luck next bubble boys and girls.

Anonymous said...

Nation and sheeple alike, the REAL and much more expensive bailout has been happening already:

"(Fortune) -- Wall Street loves to talk about letting financial markets weed out the weak. But when the Street itself gets in trouble, it sticks out its little tin cup, asking for help. And gets it.

The subprime-mortgage-market meltdown is a classic example of the way small fry get devoured, but the whales of Wall Street get rescued. Here's the deal: People with crummy credit who took out mortgages are being allowed to fail in record numbers. The mortgage companies that made those loans are being allowed to fail.

The Street itself? It's bailout city. Even before the Fed made a symbolic half-point cut in the discount rate, it and other central banks from Switzerland to Singapore were trying to rescue the Street by injecting hundreds of billions of dollars into the financial markets and announcing they will put up more, if needed.

Hello? If you believe in markets - which I do - this rescue is especially galling, because Wall Street enabled this mess in the first place. How so? By happily sucking up hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of suspect mortgages from marginal U.S. borrowers-and begging mortgage makers to create more of them. The Street sliced and diced this financial toxic waste into a variety of esoteric securities, making a nice markup when it sold them and generating a continuing stream of profits when it made markets in them.

But the world's central banks aren't letting the big guys fail. Think of it as the Escape of the Enablers. The reason this is happening, of course, is the same reason that the Fed orchestrated a bailout of the infamous Long-Term Capital Management hedge fund a decade ago-and about 20 years ago didn't close some of the nation's biggest banks, even though they were effectively insolvent because unrealized losses had wiped out their capital."

Ron said...

Let us only hope that this will be as well executed as the Katrina bail out. I hope that this is the deal and we can sleep well knowing the worst administration in American history is on the job.

Diana Olick's Love Child said...

HPers,

Don't miss a visit to CaseyPedia before all this becomes yesterday's story in, oh, about twenty years.

Anonymous said...

Marky Mark must be a Republican parasite of taxpayer money. You go ahead Mark, fight for your pathetic Republican job of screwing people over.

depresso said...

The alternative is something like 50%+ unemployment, food shortages, and total anarchy.

I smell bullshit!

brokersleaveyoubroke said...

I am actually in favor of a bailout, as long as the money all comes from Wall Street and all the other people who made money when they helped inflate the bubble.

brokersleaveyoubroke said...

I agree with Keith in that there was a rush of politicians to grab onto an issue they thought would be very popular. I think they are quickly finding out that a bailout will not win them any votes. And no amount of PAC money can win an election for you if %70 of the voters are opposed to a bailout you propose.
In an unrelated piece of news, Novastar dropped plans to raise a much needed 100 million in a stock sale because their auditor said they would have to add words to their prospectus to the effect that they may not be a "Going Concern". That means, in english, that they may go bankrupt.

Anonymous said...

Every time a law against illegals is enacted the ACLU steps in and files a lawsuit to quash the law. Why can't we do that with the bailout?

Anonymous said...

There will be no bailout of individual mortgage debtors. It was clearly stated by both the Fed and Bush that "it is not the responsibility of the government to bail out individuals from their poor financial decisions".

Any bailout will be for the banks. The primary purpose of the Federal Reserve is to maintain the integrity of the banking system. That is their mandate. The Great Depression's primary cause was the failure of the banks and evaporation of liquidity. The government and the fed want to avoid that and will take any and all steps to ensure a repeat of that does not occur.

Will this help home prices? Absolutely not. Because the lending standards themselves are changing. Furthermore, the entire derivatives market will go through a massive change since no one in their right mind will want to buy mortgage backed securities anymore. So we will go back to the old ways whereby the banking institutions themselves will hold the majority of the debt against their balance sheets. Once that happens, they will take steps to protect their portolios by being far stricter on their loan assignments.

The mortgage spigot is rapidly closing. Those that bought in some of the overpriced areas are likely to see home values correct by as much as 50%. Perhaps more. But like any bubble, we will eventually revert back to the mean where P/E ratio of homes if back to historical levels.

k.w. - southern ca. said...

Well, I don't think there's any guarantee there *won't* be a bail-out, but it's pretty much guaranteed that many tax paying Americans who didn't over-extend themselves on overpriced housing *will not* be voting for candidates of either major political party.

Anonymous said...

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Oh man you numbnuts are funny as usual.

Listen people, the bailout is here. You can sit in your apartments and hope it won't help all you want. We are less than 5 months from the start of the primaries. Hitlery and Osamabama are both Senators. Both Dems. Hmmm which party controls Congress? Why the Dems.

If you really think that the Dems will let millions of people go homeless during an election year you are seriously fucked up.

Bush's speech on Friday was just the start. Just you wait until Osamabama and Hitlery lay out their plans.

Happy homedebtor said...

Re: 50% or more fall in values.

Essentially, everyone would contract to buy a repo/bank foreclosure/REO for the 50% off and default on their property, perpetuating the cycle and destroying our banking system.

If - by some bizarre turn of events - your apocalypse happened, the US economy and potentially the world's would collapse. This will not be allowed to happen. More realistically, the gov't would subsidize or renegotiate all mortgages to the market value of the homes.

So, ultimately, people who paid off their homes get screwed. Renters get nothing since they don't "ow(e/n)" anything. And people who have mortgages and enjoyed their overpriced homes for the last X years get a mortgage just like yours...except they don't have to put 20% down. ;) I wouldn't argue with having my love home and an extra $1800/mo...well, 1300 after the lost tax deduction. :P

So hey, now that you mention it - GO GO 50% plummet! :D

(Think about it and you'll realize my point is far more plausible as a response to your scenario than your scenario in the real world. In the ideal world, where everything is perfect...wait, noone lives there so who cares?)

Anonymous said...

Looks like the credit card issuers are here to the rescue.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/05/business/card.php

DaveO said...

Anonymous 9/5/07 18:48 said:
"If you really think that the Dems will let millions of people go homeless during an election year you are seriously fucked up."

I see, since these people will no longer "own" their houses, they will automatically be in the streets. Homeownership is not a right. These people that got in over their head would generally, in pre-bubble times, be renters.

Anonymous said...

daveo,

You are playing semantics games. When people lose their homes they become homeless. Yes you are right, they will not be sleeping in a gutter. But that doesn't matter. In the lexicon of the MSM and politicians not owning a home = homeless.

It's amazing how so many of you can't see the obvious.

DaveO said...

"Looks like the credit card issuers are here to the rescue.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/05/business/card.php"

Does that mean that there will be a government bailout of credit card debt for this next big wave of credit card use that can't be repaid? Scary!

Anonymous said...


In the lexicon of the MSM and politicians not owning a home = homeless.


So 30% of Americans are homeless. That's the same way they come up with the healthcare numbers. If a person doesn't have health insurance, then they have no access to healthcare. It doesn't matter if it's Warren Buffett or Oprah or an illegal immigrant. That person doesn't have access to healthcare and we taxpayers should subsidize them. This country is headed towards socialism and hopefully the socialist militants dismantle Wall Street and lynch the bankers.

DaveO said...

"In the lexicon of the MSM and politicians not owning a home = homeless."

You're right about this. The problem is that much of the masses will immediately assume homeless=living on the street, instead of homeless=not owning. The Dems are trying to exploit this egregious assumption.

They will push for a bailout, but it will not amount to anything significant to prop up the bubble. The bailout will not stop many people who are going to be foreclosed anyway. The ones who get to keep their house because of the bailout will be seen as one of the few lucky ones.

DaveO said...

"And your fearless leader, the so-called-conservative Jorge Arbusto has decided there will be no crash. He will save the unwashed masses."

The only way there can be no crash, in nominal $ terms, is if inflation brings salaries up to be in line with prices while the nominal price of real estate remains constant. In this case, it would still make sense to wait for one's salary to be ample for the mortgage that they need. Buying before then would still mean a greater risk of not being able to afford mortgage payments, and not knowing for sure if one's salary will in fact rise to the point that the payments are affordable.

Anonymous said...

Anons 1:08 and 4:51 and Real Estate 101 correct. Bailout happened a LONG time ago (6 years) for WALL STREET not Main Street or 5th Ave. Everyone who needed to recover their losses did and are now long gone. Those that are left are bagholders. Stop falling into the trap of thinking bagholders caused this.

This blog is not going to control what is going to happen because things now have to run their course. Do not understand why anyone would think it would be different (even Keith.)

Anonymous said...

"The only way out...is through"

Yes, there will be NO easy way around this mess. Housing prices will collapse across the country, over the next year. When 2- income families can once again afford a nice house with a Conventional mortgage, then and only then, will we start to see a bottom to this thing. Fasten your seatbelts and sellers--keep a barf bag close- You will need it.

hendry said...

The bailout is here? I haven't heard of any FB's getting checks yet. In fact, they will have ot mail checks out to everyone because once a bailout is announced, everyone stops paying. Oh well FB's you are screwed unless the lenders gives you a break. Good luck finding a rental with the FB credit score

Yoski said...

"If you really think that the Dems will let millions of people go homeless during an election year you are seriously fucked up."

a. Bush can for once do something good in his career and veto any bailout.
b. Many Democraps will change their mind on a bailout once they read the most recent opinion polls.
c. Republicans are not going to waste billions of taxpayer $$ in an election year.
d. Nobody will be homeless. The number of empty residential dwellings is at an all time high.

Anonymous said...

"Essentially, everyone would contract to buy a repo/bank foreclosure/REO for the 50% off and default on their property, perpetuating the cycle and destroying our banking system.

If - by some bizarre turn of events - your apocalypse happened, the US economy and potentially the world's would collapse. This will not be allowed to happen. More realistically, the gov't would subsidize or renegotiate all mortgages to the market value of the homes. "

Your usual over simplification. Nice try, you troll.

None of us are going to subsidize your mortgage, you stupid dead beat!

Blissex said...

«You can find thousands of similar comments on scores of "housing bubble" blogs. I asked Patrick Killelea, whose blog (patrick.net) has long predicted the current housing crisis, to quantify his readers' feelings about a bailout. "It is easy to quantify," he replied. "100% against."»

Sure, when they speak their minds. But then 70% of USA citizens own real estate, a much higher percentage of voters own real estate, and essentially all campaign donors own it.

When they realize that without a bailout there will be a firesale of properties depressing prices for everybody, they will vote their wallets.

«The only way there can be no crash, in nominal $ terms, is if inflation brings salaries up to be in line with prices while the nominal price of real estate remains constant.»

That is what is likely to happen. When 70% of citizens and so on have most of their wealth in property that appreciates with low interest rates or inflation, the ''inflation party'' is the only party that matters.