A: Casinos giving back all the money that people lost gambling.
B: Oil companies giving back the money that people with 15 MPG SUVs spent on gas.
C: Cruise lines giving back all the money people spent on cruises because the passengers didn't meet the man/woman of their dreams on board.
D: Stockbrokers giving customers back the money they invested in stocks that didn't pan out.
E: All of the above
2007-12-06 11:53:33 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance ➔ Personal Finance
In my opinion the people who took out loans they could not afford should loose there homes. Any creditor who borrowed money to someone that they shouldn't have has to deal with those consequences. It may not be nice for the people involved or the creditor but it is a legal and binding contract. If the mortgage company wishes to do this on its own then it can, but the government should not intervene on a contract, in fact I’m not even sure it is legal for them to do so.
2007-12-06 14:44:24 · answer #1 · answered by joel d 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I understand that you feel that people are being bailed out for being stupid and taking a risk that ended up going bad. However, you have to understand that this isn't something that the government or anyone else is forcing the lenders to do. To the contrary, the lenders and doing this voluntarily because they understand that it is actually in their best interest to do so. In all of the choices to your multiple choice question, someone was giving people back their money and not benefiting from it. In the long run, the lenders understand that it is in their best interest to have these people remain in their homes and make payments rather than have a bunch of residential property that they don't want.
2007-12-06 22:34:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
F none. The freezing of rates will allow some borrowers to keep paying their mortgages and not leave lenders with propertys they don't want. That is what this will do. Keeping people in their homes and paying taxes is much preferred to an empty house that brings the lender and government nothing.
2007-12-06 20:08:38 · answer #3 · answered by redd headd 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It's just delaying the inevitable. Unfortunately most of these laons will still be defaulted on, but it seems like they won't be defaulted on for another few years.
2007-12-06 21:43:56 · answer #4 · answered by voluntarheel 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋