Journalism won’t die if you donate. Support Voice of San Diego today!
You’ve got a lot to say on the prospect of government money being used to “bail out” homeowners who can’t make their mortgage payments. Here’s a San Francisco Chronicle story on one state Assembly committee’s plan to avail money for refinancing help to distressed homeowners.
The majority of the e-mails you’ve sent me acknowledge the fact that there’s more to blame than the homeowners themselves. But many of you say that by helping people stay in their homes, you expect the market won’t take its “natural course” of foreclosure-led declines in value.
Reader AH responded to my post yesterday sharing another reader’s opinion. Here’s what AH has to say:
One might argue that the very fact that these people bought in actually served to contribute in some measure to the run up in house prices.
As the pool of potential buyers dwindles due to affordability and tightening lending standards, the real test of the stability of the market’s current valuation will become apparent — how many people are relying on continued price appreciation and can they continue to service their loan obligations longer-term in a flatter market environment? A “bail-out” would seem likely to keep prices artificially high and affordability low.
SC says:
It is ridiculous to think that our tax dollars should go to saving individuals who made that choice. If this is the case, why don’t they give tax money to individuals who can’t afford homes too? This way we can all buy and the housing prices will never drop! The rest of us have had to through away money on rent, ….. and there have been no saviors for us.
And reader PS chimed in:
The concept of taking responsibility for one’s self is rapidly disappearing from American culture. How many of us have gone to a car lot and been pressured into buying something we couldn’t quite afford, should the City be helping me out on that car payment I struggle to make each month? Many homeowners who are now struggling were simply greedy people who thought they would over-extend for a while and make a quick profit, but have gotten burned. Why should I bail them out when I chose to live within my means? If it can be shown that certain entities put undue pressure on people to make deals they knew they would not be able to make, then lets [sic] have those corporations take the hit.
SC sums it up with suggested substitutions for the “America’s Finest City” slogan:
Welcome to San Diego “Feel the pinch”
Welcome to San Diego “Sunshine, poverty and pay-check to paycheck”
Besides a bail-out, or maybe in addition to some government money going to help some of these homeowners stay in their homes, what do you think should be the role of government and housing agencies as the region sorts through its homes facing foreclosure? Click my name below to share your thoughts.