<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Strategic Foreclosure And The Last Man On The Boat</title>
	<atom:link href="http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/</link>
	<description>Real Estate Community</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:41:13 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Peter North</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1697</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter North</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 03:01:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1697</guid>
		<description>I forgot to add another bailout that we (us) did in 2001.

I worked for an airline...my first (and last) day at work at American Airlines was 9/11.

After those devastating attacks, the airlines pleaded for help. But people forget that the internet bubble had popped and business travel had dried up. The airlines were in bad financial shape before the attacks and it was getting worse.

The attacks were a perfect excuse for them to plead for a bailout.

I knew that my job depended on this, but I was adamantly opposed to bailing out the airlines. Why should we the people pay for the bad business practices of the airlines? We bailed them out anyway...and look where it got them. They&#039;re still losing money. 

What about the automakers? Bloated union contracts and poor products that couldn&#039;t compete in the market. Let them fail? Nope, US to the rescue.

But God forbid you make a mistake or fall on bad times. They&#039;ll come down on you like a ton of bricks. Time for us to do simply what&#039;s been done to us forever.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I forgot to add another bailout that we (us) did in 2001.</p>
<p>I worked for an airline&#8230;my first (and last) day at work at American Airlines was 9/11.</p>
<p>After those devastating attacks, the airlines pleaded for help. But people forget that the internet bubble had popped and business travel had dried up. The airlines were in bad financial shape before the attacks and it was getting worse.</p>
<p>The attacks were a perfect excuse for them to plead for a bailout.</p>
<p>I knew that my job depended on this, but I was adamantly opposed to bailing out the airlines. Why should we the people pay for the bad business practices of the airlines? We bailed them out anyway&#8230;and look where it got them. They&#8217;re still losing money. </p>
<p>What about the automakers? Bloated union contracts and poor products that couldn&#8217;t compete in the market. Let them fail? Nope, US to the rescue.</p>
<p>But God forbid you make a mistake or fall on bad times. They&#8217;ll come down on you like a ton of bricks. Time for us to do simply what&#8217;s been done to us forever.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter North</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1696</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter North</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1696</guid>
		<description>Great discussion.

Wall Street banks from Goldman Sachs to the one down the street were bailed out by the U.S. taxpayer when they made bad bets. And guess what? They made record profits with our money, borrowed money. Any of you see any of that back yet? Nope. Just the opposite...you&#039;re going to see your taxes go up while the bankers pay out bonuses more than our mortgages.

For those of you &#039;noble&#039; folks on here, can you tell me what the difference between them walking away from their contractual obligations (AIG for example) and putting it on the government (us) and a homeowner walking away from their obligation and putting it back on the bank?

There is no difference. Actually there is one. We actually feel a tinge of remorse...banks on the other hand jump at the chance to dump their bad decisions on others. 

I work in the financial sector and know this first hand and that&#039;s why I will walk away from my home next month. It was a bad trade. They can have the keys back, I&#039;ve paid rent for the past 4 years. 

I warned anyone who would listen that bailing out the financial sector would create a &quot;moral hazard&quot; but the government did it anyway. There&#039;s a famous saying on Wall Street that says &quot;capitalism without bankruptcy is like Christianity without hell.&quot; The government has made the decision that certain institutions are too big too fail.

Well guess what? I&#039;ve made the decision that my family is too big to fail and I&#039;m not going to throw my money out the window when I could deploy that capital elsewhere. 

You people need to start thinking like a bank and shareholders and not like people. It&#039;ll make your life a lot easier, along with many of your financial decisions.

Cheers,

Whiz</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great discussion.</p>
<p>Wall Street banks from Goldman Sachs to the one down the street were bailed out by the U.S. taxpayer when they made bad bets. And guess what? They made record profits with our money, borrowed money. Any of you see any of that back yet? Nope. Just the opposite&#8230;you&#8217;re going to see your taxes go up while the bankers pay out bonuses more than our mortgages.</p>
<p>For those of you &#8216;noble&#8217; folks on here, can you tell me what the difference between them walking away from their contractual obligations (AIG for example) and putting it on the government (us) and a homeowner walking away from their obligation and putting it back on the bank?</p>
<p>There is no difference. Actually there is one. We actually feel a tinge of remorse&#8230;banks on the other hand jump at the chance to dump their bad decisions on others. </p>
<p>I work in the financial sector and know this first hand and that&#8217;s why I will walk away from my home next month. It was a bad trade. They can have the keys back, I&#8217;ve paid rent for the past 4 years. </p>
<p>I warned anyone who would listen that bailing out the financial sector would create a &#8220;moral hazard&#8221; but the government did it anyway. There&#8217;s a famous saying on Wall Street that says &#8220;capitalism without bankruptcy is like Christianity without hell.&#8221; The government has made the decision that certain institutions are too big too fail.</p>
<p>Well guess what? I&#8217;ve made the decision that my family is too big to fail and I&#8217;m not going to throw my money out the window when I could deploy that capital elsewhere. </p>
<p>You people need to start thinking like a bank and shareholders and not like people. It&#8217;ll make your life a lot easier, along with many of your financial decisions.</p>
<p>Cheers,</p>
<p>Whiz</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sidney</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1630</link>
		<dc:creator>Sidney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:18:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1630</guid>
		<description>My fellow Americans: With all due respect and with no interntion to offend anyone, I have to say that this (latest) trick (bursting bubble of credit on steroids, built over the years by Mr. Geenspan&#039;s Fed printing $$$ with no regard to macroeconomic basics, keeping interest rates INFLATIONARY &amp; intentionally at historic lows and for historically long time) fits a predictable pattern: Suck as many into the trap as much as possible, then switch the scenario and suck $$$ from them while also getting rich by buying abandoned stuff (stock or houses) at rock bottom prices. Blaming (most) of those who got mortgages on houses which - thanks to UNSUSTAINIBILITY of housing prices via interest rates which needed to be increased as Chinese + others realized that buyng US T bills + bonds, Fannie Mae etc stock became less attractive (riskier) - subsequently dropped in value thus getting them &quot;under the water&quot; that they were irresponsible is completely missing the point, conveniently (in the ruling class interest)blaming the little man (woman), while the big thieves are getting no punishment (but taxpayers paid bailouts and bonuses instead). .... Big thieves and those who have job description to know (Fed, Congress, SEC, bank chieftains, Wall Street, etc.) NEVER have problems with moral dilemas (and markets + their bosses do not pay them or keep them for doing so). Yet the propaganda and tales abound for holding the little man, victims of grand schemes of ripoffs, hostages by playing on their gulibility and sensitivity to moral appeal. Walk away. It is just like any other contract. With specific penalties involved. Cost versus benefits. Throwing (still relatively) good $$$ into a sinkhole is not smart, loving behavior. Prospect for any overall increase of US housing stock are close to zero as 1) interst rates are at historic lows already and for quite a long time 2) employment picture will not improve any time soon and - more importantly - not enough to drive housing prices up. 3) US trade and budget deficits will INCREASE pressures on flight from dollar and as dollar will continue to weaken, imports (starting with gasoline) will increase in price - therefore also FORGET about any price appreciation in far away suburbs and developments: people will not be able to afford such daily commute even when they will hold a job and have Prius or other high mpg car. ... Personally: We filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in summer of 2004 clearing $145K, mostly credit cards debts, everything except $10K in SallieMae loans. VERY, very glad we have done so, as new bankruptcy law was just about to come (greatly favoring banks). We - FORTUNATELY - didn&#039;t want (or could get if we have wanted) mortgage, thus saving many tens of thousands on mortgage interest + real estate taxes + commission payments (on a top of tens of thousands saved on pseudoheroic effort to pay of those credit card loans). BTW: Those credit card debts were there as one of us was to finish physician&#039;s residency, expecting $200K+ annual income, therefore that debt. We feel VERY GOOD about our Chapter 7 and if we would have gotten stuck in this credit on steroid/financial engineering/default swap/irresponsible Fed policies mess we would do what makes BUSINESS sense when one gets really deep under the water with a mortgaged house: give the keys back to the bank. They too bet that it is a GOOD collateral and they are professionals.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My fellow Americans: With all due respect and with no interntion to offend anyone, I have to say that this (latest) trick (bursting bubble of credit on steroids, built over the years by Mr. Geenspan&#8217;s Fed printing $$$ with no regard to macroeconomic basics, keeping interest rates INFLATIONARY &amp; intentionally at historic lows and for historically long time) fits a predictable pattern: Suck as many into the trap as much as possible, then switch the scenario and suck $$$ from them while also getting rich by buying abandoned stuff (stock or houses) at rock bottom prices. Blaming (most) of those who got mortgages on houses which &#8211; thanks to UNSUSTAINIBILITY of housing prices via interest rates which needed to be increased as Chinese + others realized that buyng US T bills + bonds, Fannie Mae etc stock became less attractive (riskier) &#8211; subsequently dropped in value thus getting them &#8220;under the water&#8221; that they were irresponsible is completely missing the point, conveniently (in the ruling class interest)blaming the little man (woman), while the big thieves are getting no punishment (but taxpayers paid bailouts and bonuses instead). &#8230;. Big thieves and those who have job description to know (Fed, Congress, SEC, bank chieftains, Wall Street, etc.) NEVER have problems with moral dilemas (and markets + their bosses do not pay them or keep them for doing so). Yet the propaganda and tales abound for holding the little man, victims of grand schemes of ripoffs, hostages by playing on their gulibility and sensitivity to moral appeal. Walk away. It is just like any other contract. With specific penalties involved. Cost versus benefits. Throwing (still relatively) good $$$ into a sinkhole is not smart, loving behavior. Prospect for any overall increase of US housing stock are close to zero as 1) interst rates are at historic lows already and for quite a long time 2) employment picture will not improve any time soon and &#8211; more importantly &#8211; not enough to drive housing prices up. 3) US trade and budget deficits will INCREASE pressures on flight from dollar and as dollar will continue to weaken, imports (starting with gasoline) will increase in price &#8211; therefore also FORGET about any price appreciation in far away suburbs and developments: people will not be able to afford such daily commute even when they will hold a job and have Prius or other high mpg car. &#8230; Personally: We filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in summer of 2004 clearing $145K, mostly credit cards debts, everything except $10K in SallieMae loans. VERY, very glad we have done so, as new bankruptcy law was just about to come (greatly favoring banks). We &#8211; FORTUNATELY &#8211; didn&#8217;t want (or could get if we have wanted) mortgage, thus saving many tens of thousands on mortgage interest + real estate taxes + commission payments (on a top of tens of thousands saved on pseudoheroic effort to pay of those credit card loans). BTW: Those credit card debts were there as one of us was to finish physician&#8217;s residency, expecting $200K+ annual income, therefore that debt. We feel VERY GOOD about our Chapter 7 and if we would have gotten stuck in this credit on steroid/financial engineering/default swap/irresponsible Fed policies mess we would do what makes BUSINESS sense when one gets really deep under the water with a mortgaged house: give the keys back to the bank. They too bet that it is a GOOD collateral and they are professionals.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Landlord</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1576</link>
		<dc:creator>Landlord</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 22:45:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1576</guid>
		<description>I learned the hard way about how banks do business last year.  My wife and I have great credit, actually we just bought a home it was a foreclosure and provided us with a tremendous opportunity.  

When I purchased my truck a few years ago I financed through the dealership.  I then recieved an offer from one of my credit cards, for 2.99% for the life of the loan.  I thought that was a great opportunity to save some money and still pay off the debt.  What I did not realize is that the credit card companies are virtually free to change terms on you at their whim.  I mistakenly thought that as long as I paid on time every month I would be okay.  Wrong.  The credit card company CHASE, decided they did not like me having such low interest anymore so instead they more than doubled my minimum payement from 2% to 5% (went from $280 a month to $700). Although I had been paying more than the minimum, I could not afford the new minimum.  When I called the company they told me the only options I had was to pay off the 12K left, or to agree to new terms.  Since I could not pay it off, I was basically forced to a new rate of 8.5%. So much for the morals of banks...

I had to relocate about a year ago for work. We tried to sell our home but did not even have anyone look at it.  We have it rented but are losing about $800 a month.  I am going to try one more time to sell it this spring.  If that fails I have no qualms about walking away.  In this situation you have to think about yourself and your family and what is the best decision for you.  It is a business deal, and I learned the hard way that banks don&#039;t care their contracts, if they can break their deals they can and do.  If this was about morals, then the banks would have to have morals too.  They don&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I learned the hard way about how banks do business last year.  My wife and I have great credit, actually we just bought a home it was a foreclosure and provided us with a tremendous opportunity.  </p>
<p>When I purchased my truck a few years ago I financed through the dealership.  I then recieved an offer from one of my credit cards, for 2.99% for the life of the loan.  I thought that was a great opportunity to save some money and still pay off the debt.  What I did not realize is that the credit card companies are virtually free to change terms on you at their whim.  I mistakenly thought that as long as I paid on time every month I would be okay.  Wrong.  The credit card company CHASE, decided they did not like me having such low interest anymore so instead they more than doubled my minimum payement from 2% to 5% (went from $280 a month to $700). Although I had been paying more than the minimum, I could not afford the new minimum.  When I called the company they told me the only options I had was to pay off the 12K left, or to agree to new terms.  Since I could not pay it off, I was basically forced to a new rate of 8.5%. So much for the morals of banks&#8230;</p>
<p>I had to relocate about a year ago for work. We tried to sell our home but did not even have anyone look at it.  We have it rented but are losing about $800 a month.  I am going to try one more time to sell it this spring.  If that fails I have no qualms about walking away.  In this situation you have to think about yourself and your family and what is the best decision for you.  It is a business deal, and I learned the hard way that banks don&#8217;t care their contracts, if they can break their deals they can and do.  If this was about morals, then the banks would have to have morals too.  They don&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Landlord</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1575</link>
		<dc:creator>Landlord</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 22:15:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1575</guid>
		<description>Morals are important, I believe in following the golden rule and being the best neighbor I can be.  That said, paying a mortgage is not a moral issue.  A mortgage is a business deal between the owner and the bank, the banks stands to make an enormous amount of profit over the life of the loan from the interest they charge.  The owner gets a place to live and potentially a investment.

Choosing to strategically foreclose is about doing what is best for the owner and their family.  In my book taking care of your family is the higher moral ground than throwing money in a hole.  But this is business and you know the saying don&#039;t take it personal, its only business.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Morals are important, I believe in following the golden rule and being the best neighbor I can be.  That said, paying a mortgage is not a moral issue.  A mortgage is a business deal between the owner and the bank, the banks stands to make an enormous amount of profit over the life of the loan from the interest they charge.  The owner gets a place to live and potentially a investment.</p>
<p>Choosing to strategically foreclose is about doing what is best for the owner and their family.  In my book taking care of your family is the higher moral ground than throwing money in a hole.  But this is business and you know the saying don&#8217;t take it personal, its only business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: HS</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1526</link>
		<dc:creator>HS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:57:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1526</guid>
		<description>If the bank refuses to work with you, then walking away is definitely something to consider. For the bank, this is all business, and you should treat your decision the same way.

Check out this video: http://immoralhazard.housingstorm.com/2010/02/08/more-reasons-to-walk-away-indymacs-slap-in-our-face/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the bank refuses to work with you, then walking away is definitely something to consider. For the bank, this is all business, and you should treat your decision the same way.</p>
<p>Check out this video: <a href="http://immoralhazard.housingstorm.com/2010/02/08/more-reasons-to-walk-away-indymacs-slap-in-our-face/" rel="nofollow">http://immoralhazard.housingstorm.com/2010/02/08/more-reasons-to-walk-away-indymacs-slap-in-our-face/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ava</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1525</link>
		<dc:creator>Ava</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:51:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1525</guid>
		<description>Steve,
  Both my husband are I are currently serving in the military.  We have engraved the word &quot;integrity&quot; in our hearts and believe deeply in doing the right thing when no one is looking.  Here is our situation.  We became proud home owners in 2005; little did we know what kind of mess we had gotten ourselves into.  Signing over an adjustable-interest-only loan we turned the key to our new home.  Since then, our mortgage has adjusted substantially, and the value of our home has depreciated.  Currently, we are in the hole over 200 K.  My husband and I have made several attempts to improve the financial burden of our home to include: asking the bank to refinance our jumbo loan into a 30 year fixed - paying principle towards our home, attempting the loan modification process, and lastly we requested a short refinance only to be told “NO” every single time because according to the bank we make too much money (the bank has received every payment on time).  In these several attempts we have spent over 5,000 dollars for hired help, to no avail.  The bank simply does not want to work with us, and we refuse to be “the last man on the boat.”  Keeping our home because of PRIDE is simply selfish to our marriage and our child.  To stay in our home is essentially throwing away our hard earned money on a house that we’ll never own.  At this point a strategic foreclosure seems like the only logical option.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve,<br />
  Both my husband are I are currently serving in the military.  We have engraved the word &#8220;integrity&#8221; in our hearts and believe deeply in doing the right thing when no one is looking.  Here is our situation.  We became proud home owners in 2005; little did we know what kind of mess we had gotten ourselves into.  Signing over an adjustable-interest-only loan we turned the key to our new home.  Since then, our mortgage has adjusted substantially, and the value of our home has depreciated.  Currently, we are in the hole over 200 K.  My husband and I have made several attempts to improve the financial burden of our home to include: asking the bank to refinance our jumbo loan into a 30 year fixed &#8211; paying principle towards our home, attempting the loan modification process, and lastly we requested a short refinance only to be told “NO” every single time because according to the bank we make too much money (the bank has received every payment on time).  In these several attempts we have spent over 5,000 dollars for hired help, to no avail.  The bank simply does not want to work with us, and we refuse to be “the last man on the boat.”  Keeping our home because of PRIDE is simply selfish to our marriage and our child.  To stay in our home is essentially throwing away our hard earned money on a house that we’ll never own.  At this point a strategic foreclosure seems like the only logical option.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1453</link>
		<dc:creator>Don</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 01:23:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1453</guid>
		<description>The note is a contract.  It says borrower will pay back lender and if borrower doesn&#039;t then lender will take property.  It&#039;s simple, it&#039;s business.  Some want to make borrowers feel MORALLY obligated to pay - that&#039;s wrong.  It&#039;s a simple business contract.  Guess what, companies do it all the time. Trump does it regularly but there it&#039;s called RESTRUCTURING DEBT or transfering debt.  Make the common sense economic decision that is best for you.  Leave the morals out of it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The note is a contract.  It says borrower will pay back lender and if borrower doesn&#8217;t then lender will take property.  It&#8217;s simple, it&#8217;s business.  Some want to make borrowers feel MORALLY obligated to pay &#8211; that&#8217;s wrong.  It&#8217;s a simple business contract.  Guess what, companies do it all the time. Trump does it regularly but there it&#8217;s called RESTRUCTURING DEBT or transfering debt.  Make the common sense economic decision that is best for you.  Leave the morals out of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Miguel</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1291</link>
		<dc:creator>Miguel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:55:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1291</guid>
		<description>Only SUCKERS let morals guide their business decisions. Steve, please stick to your morals because I would LOVE LOVE LOVE for you to be the last man on the boat. LOL.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Only SUCKERS let morals guide their business decisions. Steve, please stick to your morals because I would LOVE LOVE LOVE for you to be the last man on the boat. LOL.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Miguel</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1290</link>
		<dc:creator>Miguel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:52:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1290</guid>
		<description>Steve: FYI the average home is held for 7 years! 

PS: Get a life. This is not a moral decision it&#039;s a business decision. End of story!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve: FYI the average home is held for 7 years! </p>
<p>PS: Get a life. This is not a moral decision it&#8217;s a business decision. End of story!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rob</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1285</link>
		<dc:creator>rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 03:36:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1285</guid>
		<description>Completely torn on the subject.  I&#039;ve read all the comments and must say that each of you have a extremely valid points.  After losing my job, being out of work for several months I finally found employment....The downside is that I&#039;m dramatically underemployed, making about 60% less than my last job.  I&#039;m not complaining though, because of the grace of God, I&#039;m still able to pay for my home each month and my wife works as well.  But I would be completely dishonest if I didn&#039;t say that I have been combing the internet for the last few weeks looking at options.  I love my home. I love the stability it creates for my family, especially for my kids. But is it worth the anxiety and stress?  I&#039;m torn...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Completely torn on the subject.  I&#8217;ve read all the comments and must say that each of you have a extremely valid points.  After losing my job, being out of work for several months I finally found employment&#8230;.The downside is that I&#8217;m dramatically underemployed, making about 60% less than my last job.  I&#8217;m not complaining though, because of the grace of God, I&#8217;m still able to pay for my home each month and my wife works as well.  But I would be completely dishonest if I didn&#8217;t say that I have been combing the internet for the last few weeks looking at options.  I love my home. I love the stability it creates for my family, especially for my kids. But is it worth the anxiety and stress?  I&#8217;m torn&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Markus</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-1117</link>
		<dc:creator>Markus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 13:22:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-1117</guid>
		<description>I think people are bundling a lot of emotion into what should properly be nothing but a business decision.  Mom, apple pie and Chevrolet, 4th of July, presents under the tree; that kind of baggage.  What they seem to be doing is blurring the boundaries between personal commitment to one another with commercial commitments to a bank that is every bit if not more responsible for the plight we are in.  They are seeing a strategic default as a failure when the REAL failure is to pay and pay and pay for a dwelling that will do nothing but depreciate over the years, because it is a fact that many houses will never ever be worth what was paid for them in real dollar terms.

These people either must become familiar with a basic rule of finance called the sunk cost, or they will truly fail where it matters, by being bled white and saddled with a house that was and will always be worth less than what was paid.  In continuing to pay with hopes of recouping lost equity all you do is rob yourself and your family of the money that could otherwise go to buy a better life, that is, will your kids go to community college and a second rate state university rather than a first rate education because you had to sacrifice their future to keep paying for a house that is not ever going to be anything but an albatross around your neck?  Good luck because you are now gambling that the worst is over when in fact the worst is yet to come, in my opinion, and those kids might not get to go to college at all.  

Even if like me you do not have kids, what about the pure lowering of the stress level in your life?  That is a real quality of life issue.  Longevity depends upon it.  

Sunk costs are unrecoverable past expenditures. These should not normally be taken into account when determining whether to continue a project or abandon it, because they cannot be recovered either way. It is a common instinct to count them, however.

Most people will say to themselves that with luck they will see price appreciate to the value they paid within ten or so years thus making their investment good, but for most who bought in the top of the bubble their houses will never appreciate to that level in their lifetime.  And when you make a $2,300 a month payment or whatever it is, while your new neighbors pay 500, which is happening in my neighborhood today, you also have to count the opportunity cost of the difference and multiply by a time and interest factor which is what we call compounding.  Time value of money is so poorly understood in America today it is no wonder some people simply dispose of all income the moment they get it.  

I am paying $1,000 per month to live in a house that is identical to the one next door, the lady that bought that place got it for $40,000 less and 2 points lower in interest, she bought only 7 months after I did.  Her payments are half mine, and I know people who bought here in 2006 paying well over two grand a month.  That particular family has two little girls and their college fund has now been spent and the family is still going to lose the house in foreclosure, if you ask me that is the immoral position to take, to rob those kids of their future in order to grease the palms of some greedy bankers who depend on your gullibility.  

My decision as of June is to walk away, I have a degree in finance (retired now) and so it is hard for me to admit that I made a mistake, I thought I was buying at the right time, that prices once halved could go little or no lower, I was wrong.  At least my decision making process is based in thought and knowledge, not emotion and fear, if I can be wrong then anyone can be and so you should let it go and not be so hard on yourself, regrets are counter productive in this discussion, they prevent you from facing the real decisions.  But this is way too important to leave to financially illiterate guesswork and plain old luck because housing is a huge expense.  

For the foreseeable future housing is not a way to &quot;make money,&quot; or even a way to save, but more like a gigantic tax, you pay it voluntarily or you walk away and try again later when the markets stabilize at a much lower price level.  

How much lower?  Nobody knows for sure, but I had waited many years to buy in part because given an average household income in the USA of about $43,000 per year, even if you almost double that for a couple with two such incomes, this means the average house payment should be around $1,200.  At 5% for 30 years we are talking about at most a $140,000 house, yet America in most major metro areas had gotten to the point where people with that kind of income were spending between half a million and a million bucks for their houses, and that all has to be unwound, it will take a long time.  I waited because either incomes had to radically go up to justify such prices, or prices had to radically drop.  There was no in between.  Still is not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think people are bundling a lot of emotion into what should properly be nothing but a business decision.  Mom, apple pie and Chevrolet, 4th of July, presents under the tree; that kind of baggage.  What they seem to be doing is blurring the boundaries between personal commitment to one another with commercial commitments to a bank that is every bit if not more responsible for the plight we are in.  They are seeing a strategic default as a failure when the REAL failure is to pay and pay and pay for a dwelling that will do nothing but depreciate over the years, because it is a fact that many houses will never ever be worth what was paid for them in real dollar terms.</p>
<p>These people either must become familiar with a basic rule of finance called the sunk cost, or they will truly fail where it matters, by being bled white and saddled with a house that was and will always be worth less than what was paid.  In continuing to pay with hopes of recouping lost equity all you do is rob yourself and your family of the money that could otherwise go to buy a better life, that is, will your kids go to community college and a second rate state university rather than a first rate education because you had to sacrifice their future to keep paying for a house that is not ever going to be anything but an albatross around your neck?  Good luck because you are now gambling that the worst is over when in fact the worst is yet to come, in my opinion, and those kids might not get to go to college at all.  </p>
<p>Even if like me you do not have kids, what about the pure lowering of the stress level in your life?  That is a real quality of life issue.  Longevity depends upon it.  </p>
<p>Sunk costs are unrecoverable past expenditures. These should not normally be taken into account when determining whether to continue a project or abandon it, because they cannot be recovered either way. It is a common instinct to count them, however.</p>
<p>Most people will say to themselves that with luck they will see price appreciate to the value they paid within ten or so years thus making their investment good, but for most who bought in the top of the bubble their houses will never appreciate to that level in their lifetime.  And when you make a $2,300 a month payment or whatever it is, while your new neighbors pay 500, which is happening in my neighborhood today, you also have to count the opportunity cost of the difference and multiply by a time and interest factor which is what we call compounding.  Time value of money is so poorly understood in America today it is no wonder some people simply dispose of all income the moment they get it.  </p>
<p>I am paying $1,000 per month to live in a house that is identical to the one next door, the lady that bought that place got it for $40,000 less and 2 points lower in interest, she bought only 7 months after I did.  Her payments are half mine, and I know people who bought here in 2006 paying well over two grand a month.  That particular family has two little girls and their college fund has now been spent and the family is still going to lose the house in foreclosure, if you ask me that is the immoral position to take, to rob those kids of their future in order to grease the palms of some greedy bankers who depend on your gullibility.  </p>
<p>My decision as of June is to walk away, I have a degree in finance (retired now) and so it is hard for me to admit that I made a mistake, I thought I was buying at the right time, that prices once halved could go little or no lower, I was wrong.  At least my decision making process is based in thought and knowledge, not emotion and fear, if I can be wrong then anyone can be and so you should let it go and not be so hard on yourself, regrets are counter productive in this discussion, they prevent you from facing the real decisions.  But this is way too important to leave to financially illiterate guesswork and plain old luck because housing is a huge expense.  </p>
<p>For the foreseeable future housing is not a way to &#8220;make money,&#8221; or even a way to save, but more like a gigantic tax, you pay it voluntarily or you walk away and try again later when the markets stabilize at a much lower price level.  </p>
<p>How much lower?  Nobody knows for sure, but I had waited many years to buy in part because given an average household income in the USA of about $43,000 per year, even if you almost double that for a couple with two such incomes, this means the average house payment should be around $1,200.  At 5% for 30 years we are talking about at most a $140,000 house, yet America in most major metro areas had gotten to the point where people with that kind of income were spending between half a million and a million bucks for their houses, and that all has to be unwound, it will take a long time.  I waited because either incomes had to radically go up to justify such prices, or prices had to radically drop.  There was no in between.  Still is not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-854</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:58:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-854</guid>
		<description>Where were the lending institutions&#039; morals when they dangled
the dream of homeownership and qualified people who had no business buying homes?? All this led to the housing bubble which now bears their own fruit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Where were the lending institutions&#8217; morals when they dangled<br />
the dream of homeownership and qualified people who had no business buying homes?? All this led to the housing bubble which now bears their own fruit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AJ</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-832</link>
		<dc:creator>AJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:39:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-832</guid>
		<description>I tried to negociate a new loan starting in Feb. 09. All I wanted to do was go from interest only to straight 30 year fixed. Colonial savings has been screwing me over ever since. Said they would do itthen appraisal came back $80,000 short! Asked for short sale and they kept jacking me around. Finally told them to take the house in Oct. and stopped payments. Had a 740 FICO and today it has dropped to 630!! hehehe. They really do have us by the balls. As a long time American Express user I called to tell them ahead of time what I was doing. They said my history with them doesn&#039;t matter a bit! FICO is all they care about!!
Check this out....

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1494467

Good luck all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tried to negociate a new loan starting in Feb. 09. All I wanted to do was go from interest only to straight 30 year fixed. Colonial savings has been screwing me over ever since. Said they would do itthen appraisal came back $80,000 short! Asked for short sale and they kept jacking me around. Finally told them to take the house in Oct. and stopped payments. Had a 740 FICO and today it has dropped to 630!! hehehe. They really do have us by the balls. As a long time American Express user I called to tell them ahead of time what I was doing. They said my history with them doesn&#8217;t matter a bit! FICO is all they care about!!<br />
Check this out&#8230;.</p>
<p><a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1494467" rel="nofollow">http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1494467</a></p>
<p>Good luck all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-520</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:29:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-520</guid>
		<description>The only contract I have is with God, everything else is subject to interpretation.

&quot;Sixteen tons, and whaddya get, another day older and deeper in debt.  Saint Peter dontcha call me because I can&#039;t go, I owe my soul to the company store&quot;--Tennessee Ernie Ford</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The only contract I have is with God, everything else is subject to interpretation.</p>
<p>&#8220;Sixteen tons, and whaddya get, another day older and deeper in debt.  Saint Peter dontcha call me because I can&#8217;t go, I owe my soul to the company store&#8221;&#8211;Tennessee Ernie Ford</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heather</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-439</link>
		<dc:creator>Heather</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:11:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-439</guid>
		<description>Why isn&#039;t giving up your home and damaging your credit punishment enough?    And why are we so concerned with punishing borrowers?  Obviously, no one bought their home with the intention of foreclosing.  Equity was rising and people were making money off their property. Everyone was telling us to buy homes.  &quot;It&#039;s a tax write off.  Don&#039;t waste money renting when you can gain equity!&quot; The propaganda was everywhere.  The banks were the ones trying to get rich.  Oh wait they did!  And the CEO&#039;s continue to take millions of dollars in bailout money for their expenses and salaries.  All the while, we simply made made a business deal that we are following through with.  We cant pay, the bank takes the house back. Simple as that. No one ever asked what would happen if we exercised our rights???  Don&#039;t be angry at your neighbor for foreclosing.  The poop hit the fan and it won&#039;t get better until it makes sense for people to keep their homes.  No one wants to be the last man on the boat...or block.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why isn&#8217;t giving up your home and damaging your credit punishment enough?    And why are we so concerned with punishing borrowers?  Obviously, no one bought their home with the intention of foreclosing.  Equity was rising and people were making money off their property. Everyone was telling us to buy homes.  &#8220;It&#8217;s a tax write off.  Don&#8217;t waste money renting when you can gain equity!&#8221; The propaganda was everywhere.  The banks were the ones trying to get rich.  Oh wait they did!  And the CEO&#8217;s continue to take millions of dollars in bailout money for their expenses and salaries.  All the while, we simply made made a business deal that we are following through with.  We cant pay, the bank takes the house back. Simple as that. No one ever asked what would happen if we exercised our rights???  Don&#8217;t be angry at your neighbor for foreclosing.  The poop hit the fan and it won&#8217;t get better until it makes sense for people to keep their homes.  No one wants to be the last man on the boat&#8230;or block.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg Fielding</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-429</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg Fielding</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 03:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-429</guid>
		<description>Agreed...it will be interesting.

Certainly agents, mortgage brokers, homebuilders, and all of their associations will be in favor of anything to boost transactions, regardless of whether or not the idea is economically or morally sound. (tax credits anyone?)

&quot;...money you won&#039;t repay&quot; is a bit harsh.

I doubt that a pool of these borrowers would be more likely to default on a new loan than the rest of the public. Especially FHA borrowers.

The real issue isn&#039;t whether they should be punished: they should. The question is how. Blacklisting? Charge them higher rates? Throw rocks at them?

If we had a functioning market, some lender would step in and find ways to work with the &quot;better&quot; defaulters. Because we only have one lender - Uncle Sam - they make all the rules.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed&#8230;it will be interesting.</p>
<p>Certainly agents, mortgage brokers, homebuilders, and all of their associations will be in favor of anything to boost transactions, regardless of whether or not the idea is economically or morally sound. (tax credits anyone?)</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230;money you won&#8217;t repay&#8221; is a bit harsh.</p>
<p>I doubt that a pool of these borrowers would be more likely to default on a new loan than the rest of the public. Especially FHA borrowers.</p>
<p>The real issue isn&#8217;t whether they should be punished: they should. The question is how. Blacklisting? Charge them higher rates? Throw rocks at them?</p>
<p>If we had a functioning market, some lender would step in and find ways to work with the &#8220;better&#8221; defaulters. Because we only have one lender &#8211; Uncle Sam &#8211; they make all the rules.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-428</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:31:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-428</guid>
		<description>I am upset with the banks as I stated.  I will focus on both parties thank you.  Many of the borrowers don&#039;t seem to be punished at all.  Not being able to borrow more money you won&#039;t repay isn&#039;t really losing something.  Also, real estate agents the country over are already looking for ways to get the &quot;strategic foreclosers&quot; into new homes and loans as we speak.  It may be cynical, but I think some are encouraging this behavior to increase housing transactions.  There are many attempts already underway to lower lending standards because the banks won&#039;t lend to people right now.  They have good reason not to - the people cannot repay.  It will be interesting to see how this all turns out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am upset with the banks as I stated.  I will focus on both parties thank you.  Many of the borrowers don&#8217;t seem to be punished at all.  Not being able to borrow more money you won&#8217;t repay isn&#8217;t really losing something.  Also, real estate agents the country over are already looking for ways to get the &#8220;strategic foreclosers&#8221; into new homes and loans as we speak.  It may be cynical, but I think some are encouraging this behavior to increase housing transactions.  There are many attempts already underway to lower lending standards because the banks won&#8217;t lend to people right now.  They have good reason not to &#8211; the people cannot repay.  It will be interesting to see how this all turns out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg Fielding</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-427</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg Fielding</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:02:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-427</guid>
		<description>Steve, the moral hazard runs both ways.
There are two parties to the contract: the borrower and the lender. Both parties were irresponsible and reckless with other-people&#039;s money.

Borrowers who default face consequences: they can&#039;t borrow money again at attractive rates for a long time.

Banks get billions of taxpayer-dollars handed to them by our Government.

If we are going to be upset about ignoring moral hazard, let&#039;s focus our anger towards the banks. The borrowers get punished enough.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve, the moral hazard runs both ways.<br />
There are two parties to the contract: the borrower and the lender. Both parties were irresponsible and reckless with other-people&#8217;s money.</p>
<p>Borrowers who default face consequences: they can&#8217;t borrow money again at attractive rates for a long time.</p>
<p>Banks get billions of taxpayer-dollars handed to them by our Government.</p>
<p>If we are going to be upset about ignoring moral hazard, let&#8217;s focus our anger towards the banks. The borrowers get punished enough.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://housingstorm.com/2009/10/strategic-foreclosure-and-the-last-man-on-the-boat/comment-page-1/#comment-412</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 05:31:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://housingstorm.com/?p=877#comment-412</guid>
		<description>Obviously I agree with you.  We seem to be fostering a no consequences culture where get rich schemes and new bubbles may propagate and deflate with even greater negative results.  Moral Hazard seems to be totally forgotten.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obviously I agree with you.  We seem to be fostering a no consequences culture where get rich schemes and new bubbles may propagate and deflate with even greater negative results.  Moral Hazard seems to be totally forgotten.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
