Planning the Future of NYC

What do you think about the Obama Administrations plans to deal with the mortgage crisis? What would you do differently, if you were in Timothy Geithner’s shoes? Post your comments on or before April 23rd. A minimum word limit, this time - 200 words… no upper limit.

A Reaction to Obama’s Mortgage Restructuring Plan

On February 18, 2009 millions of homeowners waited anxiously to hear news of President Obama’s mortgage crisis plan. The plan was unveiled in a suburb of Phoenix, AZ where the number of mortgage defaults ranks third among cities in the United States. The new plan benefits two specific groups of homeowners. The first group, which includes some 4-5 million families whose home values have dropped in recent years, will be given an opportunity to refinance into new mortgages. The other target group, which covers 3-4 million families with adjustable-rate mortgages, would now be eligible to have their loans modified with lower rates – for at least five years.

The plan, despite its projected $75 billion price-tag, sounds like it will finally help the Obama administration deliver on its promise to remedy this foreclosure debacle. With incentives to induce banks to keep homeowners current on their monthly payments, the plan’s proponents hope that measures will restore a sense on fiscal responsibility on the part of banks and homeowners.

The plan’s benefits seem short sighted; its incentives fail to entice financial executives to restructure mortgages. It is up to the financial institutions to undertake mortgage restructuring. However, the projected losses, as cited by investors, have discouraged financial executives from acting immediately. Unless the government provides additional incentives or regulatory measures to implement the key components of this strategy, it is unlikely that the number of home foreclosures will drop dramatically in the next five years.

Posted by JB Estil (4/23)

Comments on Obama’s Mortgage Plan

President Obama’s recent housing crisis relief plan, announced on February 18, 2009, is an important step in alleviating the country’s overwhelmed financial system, a problem caused, in part, by years of facilitated financial liberties and irresponsible spending behavior. The results are evidenced today in the decaying state of the economy, where 27 % of homeowners owe more on their mortgage than their house is currently worth. It was only a matter of time before the country’s economic policies would become dysfunctional and the time has come to drastically reform this exhausted, impractical system. The plan targets homeowners with mortgages exceeding the value of their homes and could benefit up to 9 million citizens who, for diverse reasons, are facing difficulties with debt.

The first step is to control and avoid worsening the situation by providing government aid in refinancing the mortgages of those threatened by foreclosure. While excessive financial facilities offered to consumers in the past years have contributed to the problem of foreclosure, it should be stressed that unpredictable events caused by the recession are making the problem worse. The lack of financial responsibility is not applicable in every case. Other factors ranging from a loss of employment to family emergencies can drastically alter a family’s financial planning and ultimately affect their mortgage payments. While the plan will cost taxpayers as much as $275 billion, including the ones that have successfully and responsibly managed their mortgage payments throughout the years, it is a necessity given the state of things. Ignoring the needs of those in critical situations will only worsen the problem altogether.

In President Obama’s words, “Foreclosures contribute to sinking home values, decaying local businesses, and lost jobs” and the crisis is “unraveling homeownership, the middle class, and the American Dream itself”. The reality is that while not all citizens have individually contributed to the mortgage crisis, its negative effects affect the entire community. Taxpayers must make a sacrifice to alter, together, the economic problems that are ultimately affecting the entire nation.

Leonardo Freire (Posted 4/20/2009)

Obama’s Mortgage Plan

In February, the Obama administration announced their plan for the housing crisis, hoping to help homeowners keep their homes and prevent the market from hitting rock bottom. Over one fourth of homeowners owe more on their mortgages than what their homes are currently worth. By removing some of the restrictions set on refinancing, the plan gives some homeowners the option to refinance their mortgages with lower interest rates, which would aid in families making payments on time instead of missing payments until forclosure.
The plan would cost taxpayers a whopping $275 billion. $75 billion would go towards alleviating the pressure from some homeowners and $200 billion would go towards buying preferred stock. This would cause taxes to go up even for people that this plan would not be helping, and those who have managed to keep up their mortgage payments successfully. However, in the end, the choice had to be made as to which would be worse, the nation taking on the burden, or millions of families losing their homes.
There is the issue that some of the people that would be allowed to refinance would not be the ones that are really in need, but the ones that are capable but still live in a hard-hit area. This may make other people who do not qualify not content. If I was Geithner, I would make sure that the money goes to whoever really needs it. Now is not the time for unnecessary squandering in the wrong areas. The requirements for who should be aided should be strict and well-enforced. I would not want my tax money to go to someone who does not really need.

Dalya Abdel-Atti

Obama’s Mortgage Plan

The Obama Administration’s new mortgage crisis plan alleviates mortgage-based financial pressures of homeowners who may want to refinance at lower interest rates or homeowners who are in “imminent danger” of foreclosure. The plan mainly targets the latter class of homeowners. 75 billion dollars would be used to cut home payments of some homeowners and the Treasury Department would purchase 200 billion dollars worth of preferred stock in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This investment would allow the federal government, in association with the lender, to bring down the mortgage payment from 38 percent to 31 percent gross income. This plan seems to be a direct solution to the mortgage crisis but will it be effective?

If homeowners who have been struggling to pay their mortgages are suddenly financially unburdened by a decrease in rate, then both the debtor and the creditor are content. The creditor will receive the payments and the debtor will pay affordable installments. Also, the recent and economically unhealthy increase in foreclosures would eventually equilibrate. In the long run, this plan would help stabilize the mortgage sector of the economy.

However, there seems to be one problem associated with this plan. Homeowners who are not burdened by their mortgages might also be eligible to refinance. This would mean that they would be paying a lower rate and enjoy more of their salaries. But, at the same time, homeowners struggling to just pay their mortgages would be significantly aided. Of course, this would only apply to areas hard-hit by the crisis. Still, taxpayers in areas unable to reap these benefits would be discontent because a portion of their taxes would be directed at areas affected by the mortgage crisis; this includes towards the fortunate few who benefit from this plan when they shouldn’t. Therefore, if I was Timothy Geithner, to make these taxpayers a bit more supportive of the plan, I would make it a requirement that only homeowners desperately trying to pay off their mortgages would be aided.

Raj Mathew (Posted 4/22/2009)

Mortgage Crisis

The current state of our economy can be kindly referred to as dismal. All sectors of our economy have been hit. Numerous businesses are shutting down or cutting hours of operation to minimize profit loss. Arguably, the hardest hit by the failing economy are the homeowners. Many are struggling to make ends meet and keep their homes. The risk of foreclosures is at its worst in quiet some time as is demonstrated by the following graph:

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w109/illusion766/Academic%20material/GraphofForeclosures.jpg

Some of the greatest affected areas are metro areas in California, Florida, Arizona, and Nevada with Las Vegas toping the list of highest foreclosure rates.
The White House outlines several reasons driving this mortgage crisis. Falling property values keep owners from being able to refinance, which would allow them to lower their monthly payments or get a fixed interest rate. Millions of workers have lost their jobs or had their hours reduced. With these cutbacks they are not able to pay their mortgage payments and now six million people are facing foreclosures. This in turn leads to struggling neighborhoods because with every foreclosed home in the neighborhood the nearby property values fall thus lowering equity.
To deal with this issue the White House is doing several things. One is that they are doing doing away with the equity requirement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to refinance. This will help homeowners, whose homes have fallen in price through no fault of their own, to refinance. This seems to be a reasonable approach in the financial crisis we are facing now. The reason I support it is that it helps out people who are in trouble because of the forces that affect the property values and not necessarily through a fault of their own. I think that once refinancing takes place, it will ease the burden for many families and it will help them keep their homes despite the transitory property values.
The government is also helping stabilize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by giving the companies generous funding. This is done to ensure mortgage affordability for homeowners. The mentality of rescuing financial firms has been present from the inception of the current administration. I think that while right now this may be necessary this can’t be a long-term solution.
Another aspect of the plan is that people who pay for mortgage with at least 38% of their gross income will be helped by federal government. The government is trying to lower that number to 31%. It will do so by providing subsidies to the people in need. While the plan has flaws and draws criticism from people who claim that the government is doing too much and those who claim it’s doing too little, this plan has some solid points as outlined here. In Timothy Geithner’s shoes one of the things I would do differently is make the plan more specific in helping responsible homeowners who planed ahead and didn’t just buy a home without a plan to pay for it. This can be done by drawing up more specific requirements for government aid. However, one thing that can be said for sure is that any solution will have its critics.

Boris Fligelman 4/23 12:06 am

Obama’s Mortgage Crisis Plan

With the America’s economic crisis still at the forefront of people’s minds, President Barack Obama is really attempting to make great strides toward returning to a stable economy.  Concerning the economy in general, Obama proposed a $787 billion economic stimulus plan to support 3.5 million jobs and prevent extreme job losses.  He has also created a  plan that focuses exclusively on housing, and this plan could not have come  at a better time, with the number of housing starts, in January, falling by seventeen percent.  In order to prevent nine million people from losing their homes, Obama plans to allow between four and five million ineligible homeowners, who are with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mae, to be able to refinance their homes at a lower rate.  Other parts of the plan involve providing financial incentives to lenders to give support to needy homeowners and the seventy-five billion dollar Homeowner Stability Initiative, which focuses on easing refinancing for homeowners whose houses are worth less than what they owe on their mortgages.  Specifically, the Homeowner Stability Initiative would cut mortgage costs to be no more than thirty-one percent of the home owner’s income.  The Initiative is particularly important, because out of the fifty-two million homeowners in America, twenty-seven percent of them owe mortgages greater in cost than their house.  I completely support the Obama Administration’s actions, because what cannot happen is for this country to continue to drown in economic losses until the situation is back to that of the Great Depression.  The Obama Administration is taking action and making the necessary steps to prevent such a disaster from occurring, which is what is needed at this time.

If I was Timothy Geithner, I would be proud that my government was taking such strong steps in preventing further economic and job loss from occurring and protecting the American people from further hardship.  However, I would keep a sharp eye on Fannie Mae and Frankie Mae in order to make sure they are using the $200 billion that was given to them is being used as beneficially and effectively as possible.  These two companies have been given the responsibility of stabilizing the country’s economic market, and with so much at stake, if I was Geithner, I would make quite sure they were doing just that.

Katie Horner

The Mortgage Crisis

In light of the present economic crisis, I support the Obama Administration’s plans to deal with the mortgage crisis as an important and a good step forward to relieve the current financial situation. There are around 9 million people who would benefit from this plan, for one of the components of the plan calls for the refinancing of mortgage payments by reducing interest costs to the level that mortgage payments would cost around 31% of the individual’s income. This is a positive element of the plan, because by reducing the costs of payment and thereby making these payments more affordable, this can ensure that the affected persons can actually get out of debt. By applying these conditions for a period of five years, this also provides a stable system of payment. Additionally, the Obama Administration’s plan calls for purchasing $200 billion of stock from the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac lending companies, a move that would stabilize these companies and stimulate recovery from the present crisis.

If I was Timothy Geithner, I would re-evaluate who exactly should be benefitting from this plan. As of now, some homeowners that do not need assistance may benefit from this plan, so I would form guidelines that would further discern who is in direr need of this aide to ensure that this plan would not only be criticized but that it would actually accomplish its intended purpose.

- Elias Saber-Khiabani (April 23, 2009)

The Economy

Secretary of State Timothy Geithner has been taking much responsibility in efforts to resolve the current financial crisis. One of his biggest tasks has been to deal with the mortgage crisis so as to make it easier for millions of people to rework or refinance their mortgages in a time of an economic decline. I am a fan of the methodology in which the Obama Administration is approaching this problem because they are working with the two most important components of U.S. mortgages; Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These are two very critical corporations because of the roles they play in the Mortgaging Market. The purpose of the stocker-holder owned Fannie Mae is to purchase and securitize mortgages so that there is always money available for companies that lend money to home buyers. Similarly, the Federal Government owned Freddie Mac buys and sells mortgage-backed securities to investors in the open market also to increase the supply of money available for the purchase of new homes. Since Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac purchase or guarantee about three-quarters of all U.S. mortgages, Geithner has planned to increase the funding of these two corporations in order to ensure that responsible homeowners will have affordable mortgages available to them. Critics argue that this plan will prove costly to the U.S. treasury. It is estimated that such new commitments to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could amount to more than $200 billion. I personally think that though this sounds like a large amount of money, the positive effects that it will have on our currently delicate economy are well worth it. However, I do not like the idea of bailouts and free governmental support. I don’t think these two corporations should just be handed free money without doing any “work” for it. The Obama Administration should outline more specific and stricter guidelines and should make sure that the companies take preventative measures so that such crises are avoided in the future. We wouldn’t want the corporations getting used to being saved by the government’s money. That would lead to people thinking that risk taking is consequence less, which is one of the major reasons that we are in this mortgage mess in the first place.

- Saira Hafeez 4/23/09

Obama’s New Mortgage Plan

President Obama’s mortgage plan has two components, each of which is designed to bring relief to a distinct group of mortgage holders. The first component allows those who are current with their payments, but who lack home equity due to plunging housing prices, to refinance their mortgages at lower interest rates. Fannie and Freddie do not allow mortgage holders to refinance mortgages with unpaid balances “valued at over 80% of a home’s worth” (NPR, Feb .18), but Obama’s plan does away with these restrictions and now allows mortgage holders with unpaid balances of up to 105% of the market value of the home to refinance and obtain lower interest rates.
The second component of the plan is meant for people who cannot keep up with housing payments that are over 38% of their monthly income. It comes in the form of financial incentives and subsidies to reduce the costs of these mortgages to 31% of the mortgage holder’s income, but only for five years, at which time the interest rates will return to normal. I’m not sure how effective this time limit will be at stopping foreclosures in the long term, but guaranteeing low interest rates for significantly longer than the 5 years proposed would be prohibitively expensive, and so options are limited.
For both plans, mortgage holders must meet certain criteria to qualify for assistance. For the first component, holders need to have a steady income, and for the second, holders must have demonstrate a loss of a job or other loss of income that has put the payments out of reach. These criteria are designed to direct the relief funds to those mortgage holders who are closest to meeting their payment obligations. Mortgage holders who owe more than 105% of the values of their homes are not eligible for assistance.
For both parts of the plan, though, not enough is being done to prevent fraud – the very problem that led to the current housing crisis. According to the Wall Street Journal, “In either case, no effort will be made to verify that recipients of aid were truthful on their original mortgage applications.” After the plan was announced,

“House Republican leadership and Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA), ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee sent letters to administration officials asking for assurances that anti-fraud measures will be put in place to guarantee that taxpayer dollars are not used to re-do mortgages that were originally based on fraudulent documentation… notes that experts in mortgage lending say that anywhere from 30-70% of all mortgages inked in the last few years were based on fraudulent claims of assets or income..” (CBS News, Feb. 18).

However, in order to modify the staggering amount of loans that qualify for relief funds, the treasury department will likely use an automated program that will not “determine the homeowners true income or credit history” (CBS News, Feb. 18).
While Obama’s plan is a step in the right direction, and seems designed to provide aid to those to whom it will make the most difference, preventing fraud should be the administration’s top priority in this matter. Without fraud prevention, people will continue to take out mortgages that they cannot afford to pay, foreclosures will continue, and the problem will remain unsolved.

- Thomas Held (totally on time)

The Mortgage Crisis and Plan of Action

One of major problems of the economic crisis involves the complications with the housing market. As someone whose family that is currently dealing with housing market issues, I feel very appreciative that this matter is being addressed. The Obama Administration is taking serious action in this matter with a goal of assisting about 7 to 9 million homeowners.

The 9% increase in foreclosures is a disheartening statistic. Although there haven’t been even more foreclosures, the layoffs at jobs are definitely contributing to the problems of current homeowners. Now, a few homeowners that have normally been on top of their payments are struggling to keep their home for their family. Although some families are not current homeowners, the need for a living space is a thoroughly relatable topic. It is necessary for the taxpayers’ advocacy of the $200 Billion Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac plan and the efforts made by the Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan. It is the country’s duty to help out those who are in need of help and this plan would contribute greatly to the steps necessary to stabilizing the economy. When homeowners are allowed to keep up with their mortgage payments, they will no longer have to worry about whether or not they will have a home the next month. This can, also, further stabilize the current state of the country by allowing families to have more money to stimulate the economy. It may even then increase the availability of jobs. The plan can be one of the vital steps in reviving the economy to its more suitable state.

Ignoring the millions of people dealing with these housing issues can even exacerbate the problems that the majority of Americans are dealing with. As Timothy Geithner, I would emphasize the effect this issue has on everyone and make sure that those truly in need are receiving the benefits of the plan. The guidelines from the Stability Plan should be strictly enforced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. There should be an evaluation of the way in which funds will be used and the homeowners receiving the benefits. The homeowners that are most responsible should be relied on to help make this plan effective. I would have to be certain if this is a viable plan that will keep the housing market consistent in the long run.

-Shaziya Ali

Mortgage Crisis Relief

Given the current mortgage crisis, I think the Obama’s Administration’s plan takes good steps to alleviate those in need and to protect potential victims of mortgage fraud. The first part of the plan, providing tax credit to 10 million homeowners, is a good start to relieving some of the mortgage burden off of homeowners as long as the administration makes sure that people most in need receive the credit. Also, I think that if the Administration really wants to achieve long term stability, it should encourage homeowners to itemize their taxes. According to about.com, most mortgages, even modest ones, provide a large enough tax deduction to make it more beneficial to itemize than to take the standard tax deduction. The Administration should encourage itemizing and explain the benefits that homeowners could obtain from itemizing.

I particularly support the Administration’s plans to provide accurate and complete information about their mortgages to homeowners. With the proper information, homeowners will be less likely taken advantage of because they understand their mortgage situation. This could help prevent future problems. I also support the Administration’s plans to repeal the 2005 bankruptcy bill. Middle and lower class borrowers with only one home deserve the same mortgage protection that borrowers with multiple homes have. Actually, I think it is more important for the middle and lower class families to have that protection, because if they lose the one house they have, they are losing their home, not a vacation house or something of that sort. I definitely agree that they should be able to renegotiate their mortgages in bankruptcy and should always be allowed to renegotiate if the loan was predatory or unfair.

While I think the Obama Administration’s plan takes important steps to prevent mortgage fraud and foreclosures, I don’t think it focuses enough on the individuals and families who have already suffered from foreclosure. A tax credit will be provided to homeowners, but what about the people who have already lost their homes to foreclosure? The Administration plans to create new criminal penalties for mortgage professionals found guilty of fraud. I think that part of the penalty should be a fine that then goes directly to victims of the fraud and that the government should also provide a tax credit for former homeowners who lost their homes due to the fraud.

-Kristan Melo (4/23/09)

Obama’s Mortgage Plan.

Rather than being geared toward the illusion of an immediate panacea, President Barack Obama’s Mortgage plan seeks to provide long-term improvements and stability for American homeowners. Obama’s intends to remove certain restrictions on refinancing, in order to allow more Americans the opportunity to refinance their mortgages. Such an option would present people who were previously barred from refinancing, with the opportunity to benefit today’s lower interest rates. Lower interest rates, for many families, could signify the difference between the ability to pay off loans and the obligation to foreclose. On the reverse side of the mortgage market, however, are the lenders who will be facing repayment of funds at interest rates that are lower than what was expected. Obama notes however, that in order to reap long terms benefits and avoid future distresses, minor costs such as these will have to be endured in the present day.
In addition to federal action regarding the mortgage crisis, Obama marks his support for community-based action aimed at relieving this problem. The president proposes to allot $2 million to communities in order to aid these communities in their efforts directed toward fighting foreclosure. Obama notes that improvement rests not only within the hands of the federal government, and plans bred in Washington. He states “Our housing crisis was born of eroding home values, but also of the erosion of our common values…solving this crisis will require more than resources — it will require all of us to take responsibility.” Although The President’s outlined plan for a resuscitation of the housing market offers proposed means by which the crisis should be eased, he remarks as well upon the necessity of all citizens to participate in the bid for economic recovery. While Obama’s mortgage plan provides a government-based map toward improvement, he is mindful as well of the importance of public support and communal efforts to rebuild the economy.
–Anna J Fitting. 04/23/09.

Mostly Support, but Some Doubt…

If I was the U.S. Secretary of Treasury, I would support the Administration’s plans in almost every aspect. For instance, I think it’s a smart idea to provide incentives for lenders to reduce the mortgage rates/payments so that millions of people do not lose their homes. A team effort seems like the best strategy. The people are not simply being paid off to lower costs; the government is taking responsibility as well so the lender is not overburdened as he/she assists those struggling a great deal financially. For instance, the government will pay loan providers $1,000 for each mortgage they amend and share the cost of lowering the monthly mortgage payments. It will also pay lenders and borrowers other subsidies, 75 billion tax dollars in total.

There are, however, many concerns which should be addressed. The plans to deal with the mortgage encourage low interest rates and such for five years or so. Therefore, mortgages may be extended from 20 years to 30 years, but what happens after the allotted amount of time has passed? Will these people no longer be in debt? Thus, as Geithner, I may suggest a more long-term approach or a way in which one can ease into the transition instead of having payments return to their original rates after a given time.

Lastly, Obama claims that he intends to help 9 million struggling homeowners, but refuses to aid those who purchased homes they knew they could not afford and “will not rescue the unscrupulous or irresponsible by throwing good taxpayer money after bad loans” (Wall Street Journal, 2009). I believe that this is truly his intention. However, it is very important for borrowers to be honest about their income because the FDIC believes that extensive research is not needed as long as the mortgage-debt-to-income ratio can be altered to 31% of the borrower’s income. So, lies on the part of the borrowers will lead to draining of the government’s resources. If this happens, the administration’s efforts to aid those in debt will be fruitless. Also, it will have to spend ten billion more dollars to compensate lenders if the market continues to decline, which will happen if people are dishonest.

—-> Sapna Kishnani

Too Many Cracks for Borrowers to Fall Into…

It has become apparent that American indebted home-owners need help. Under Obama’s administration, the new measures put into place to modify or refinance loans will help the lives of many Americans. The new morgages and overall expenses of the house will not be able to exceed more than 31% of the borrower’s paycheck under the new plan, which is a very reasonable amount. However, there are several details in the plan that I think could be thought out better.
Almost all government programs to help the public help some, while others do not qualify, though they may need them help. Thus, perhaps my biggest problem with Obama’s plan is that there are many cracks that American’s may find themselves falling into. Unemployed individuals are one group that falls into the cracks. It is highly unlikely to receive a modification of mortgage under Obama’s plan if the home-owner is unemployed. This is because mortgage has to be modified under certain guidelines that the loaners with accept, and the borrower must be ABLE to pay the loan off in its modified form. Thus, if you have no job, there’s no way you’re ever going to pay off either the current mortgage or the new one, and as a result you do not qualify. I understand that a bank will not help someone out if they don’t think they will ever pay it back, but this issue still leaves many borrowers in the dark. This is especially troubling since many people who have worked all their lives have lost their jobs because of the recession. If they could work, they would.
Borrowers who have experienced extreme decreases in the value of their property are another group that falls into the cracks in Obama’s mortgage plan. Many borrowers are paying more on their mortgage than the actual value of their home. If a borrower’s mortgage is more than 105% of the property’s value, they are not eligible for refinancing. The plummeting in property values is in no way the fault of borrowers, and they should not be penalized for this. Areas that have been most affected by these plunging values are Florida, Arizona, or Nevada.

Employment and plummeting property values are two issues that are directly caused by the financial crisis. Individuals are not to blame for these two issues. Consequently, it is unfair to exclude Americans based on these particular criterion.

- Natalia Malone

Inflating Prices, Deflating Accessibility

The underlying reason why homebuyers enter into mortgages they cannot afford is that housing is too expensive. In most regions in the country, the ratio of the median house price to the median salary is still well above historical norms, meaning that the average person cannot afford the average house. The way to achieve ‘home affordability’ is not to prop up house values with taxpayer subsidies, but rather to let them fall until people can afford them. The administrations plan seems to do the exact opposite, by artificially inflating house prices. Although the US economic state is currently in disarray, the market will correct itself as home prices settle back to a more realistic level. Lower prices mean hope for those who never thought they could afford a home.

I am a strong supporter of the economic stimulus plan and other measures to reduce unemployment and improve working class salaries. Such measures will improve home affordability and improve our standard of living by raising our income, while revitalizing our infrastructure. The mortgage subsidy plan, however, will only delay a long overdue reduction in house prices to affordable levels, keeping housing out of reach for average people. This is a shortsighted policy that rewards reckless homeowners and banks at the expense of responsible homeowners and renters, and perpetuates a damaging housing market distortion that resulted from poor lending standards.

Propping up house values is shortsighted, wasteful, unfair, and only delays the inevitable. Let the housing market correct, so that housing becomes affordable again. This money would be better spent putting people back to work

-Christian Ramsay