This is how I feel, and I realize there are exceptions, I would never have taken on the responsibility of a mortgage that didn't leave any wiggle room in our budget. I think the majority of homes that are being foreclosed on are huge luxuriously outrageous expenditures that people could not and should not have taken on in the first place.

I watched a news show once that interviewed a family whose home was in foreclosure, it was a single mother with four children with an enormous magazine worthy house that had a monthly mortgage payment of over $2000 and the mother's income was $60000 a year. The house was picture perfect and gleaming with the best of everything from marble kitchen counter tops to stainless steel appliances and so on. I sat watching this homeowner complain about the fact that she struggled to pay her mortgage and how unfair it was that her house was in foreclosure and that the government had an obligation to step in and help her retain her house.

Sorry, I don't agree.

People are not entitled to whatever they want, they are responsible for their own actions and there is no reason why the government, and the rest of us, via taxes, should be responsible for someone else's dream home.

I would rather see them walk away and leave the key and break the mortgage than to have to know that there are people living in the best of the best that they cannot afford just because they want to. I don't think that the government is responsible. I don't even think that the bank that approved the mortgage is responsible. I think the person who took the mortgage and signed that paper was irresponsible and does not know the meaning of financial responsibility and living within their means. No one forced them to buy the best house money can buy when their income could not support it.

The solution? I don't know, it's a catch 22 now, the damage is done and it will take a long time to repair itself. I just know that it's not right that some people live modestly and within their means and show great financial responsibility while others didn't and are now crying and blaming everyone but themselves.

Again, I realize that there are exceptions and I am not referring to those people who lose their jobs or due to health reasons are unable to make their mortgage payments, I'm referring to those who chose to live unrealistically.

Good answer.

For about 50% of foreclosed homes, the borrower put down 0%. Typical requirements used to be at least 5% to 20%, and it is running about 20$ these days.

In Minneapolis about half the defaulted mortgages don't have kids in the local school district (and half do).

There are always exceptions and I do not intend to offend those that are part of the exception. That said, I think that a very good portion of these foreclosures have occured due to people living above their means in the first place. Some feel thu are entitled to whatever their hearts desire, and others trying to keep up with the Neighnors next door.

The banks encouraged this by lending more than the person could afford, but you can't blame them totally because grown people don't have enough sense to manage their finances. How does someone making $50k a year think they can afford a $200k + house and a $50k car or two. Then you have the credit cards maxed out and all it takes is one bad situation and the whole thing comes tumbling down.

In my opinion his is happening to many people and the government at the same time. To make matters worse, instead of admitting the mistakes, learning from them, and moving on, many feel that they are entitled to get help. Entitlement thinking is draining this country. Why should my and your taxes go to pay for someone else's mistakes?

It's time people wake up and change their ways. It's time for people to accept responsibility for themselves and their actions. Stop depending on others and support yourselves. If this happens in the lives of our people and in the government then we can turn this whole thing around. If not, then the foreclosures, stock crashes, and unemployment are just getting warmed up.

I don't think you should apologize for having your opinion, based on rational thought. Remember that there is insurance available to any homeowner to protect their investment from such things as medical calamities and death. Don't you think the bank screening to see if a person is qualified and able to carry a mortgage was inadequate? Isn't that a failure of proper banking procedure?

If some of the plans for refinancing call for the principal owed to be dropped, as well as the interest rate, isn't this like buying suit, wearing it for a year, and then saying it costs too much and I want a discount? If the principal is not reduced, who would agree to owning a house which is worth less than they are agreeing to pay for it? Would someone agreeing to this be a chump?

The government doesn't want to crush the financial infrastructure of our country, built so much as it is on long-range expectations from 30-year home mortgages.

For a direct government bailout, similar to welfare, would be futile, especially with powerful Republicans in Congress now.

The Jobs Bill approach is a little better, perhaps with a rider attached to the bill giving homeowners who've lost jobs and are in danger of foreclosure, first priority on some new jobs. There are a lot of billions going into that bill, and it could help stem the tide of foreclosures.

There should no be a "government plan" to do anything. It is NOT the job of the government to help people who spent more on a house than they knew they could afford.

All of the blame cannot be placed on the mortgage companies. There are countless rules and regulations in place stating that they cannot discriminate based on neighborhood location/race/gender/ etc. Unfortunately, many of those affected by the crisis are minorities. If they had not been given the loans to begin with, we would have cries of racism.

We have to hit bottom before the market starts to stabilize. In order to hit bottom, we need to let all these foreclosures happen, so we can start to "rebuild"

I believe those in the government are afraid that the economy will not recover unless some action is taken. The estimate that it will take at least 4-5 years for the housing market to stabilize is a very long time. In all prior recessions the housing market led the way out, but now it is not going anywhere. Are you worried about that?

I feel that responsibility differs on a case by case basis. Some home owners were irresponsible, taking on much more house than they could afford in the good times. Now that the bad times are here, they are paying the price. There's a definite lack of understanding about personal finance in this country. When the economy was functioning better, many who had the wealth to buy a home should have also established an emergency fund giving them close to a year's worth of expenses.

If people had done this, then they wouldn't be in immediate danger of losing their homes. The situation illustrates why it's a good example to put down at least a 20% payment when you get your mortgage, if not more. All debt is undesirable in the long run, including mortgage debt.

I feel bad for those who are deeply underwater, but believe they should still try to sell the home for a loss or stay put. It seems unethical to walk away and break the contract just because they bought their houses at the height of a bubble that crashed. Few realize the long term damage it can do to their credit. They simply make the decision out of frustration, and end up in an even worse position as a result.

Personally, I don't feel that breaking a contract is either ethical or unethical, and certainly most businesses feel the same. They just go for the solution that costs them less. In any case, for many of those who walk away from a deeply underwater mortgage, the bank sells the house and bills them for the remainder, so they are not actually getting out of debt, just losing the house.

I do agree that many people assumed (at least they did until this recession) that things would always get better, or at least would not get worse, and they could always sell a house that was too much for them to carry. Many of these people were misled by lenders. Many of those who did start out with a backstop have depleted their savings as the recession has continued for so long.

My concern and main question is whether things will get better without government action, and what sort of action would be the most sensible and useful.

Rather than 'what should be done?', possibly the question should be, 'What can be done'?

After questioning many foreclosure victims, all but one explained that Realtors convinced them that they could easily afford the homes they had eventually mortgaged. Though certainly not an excuse for their dilemma, it is somewhat of an eye opener as to what took place during the 90's, and probably even before that.

No one could have predicted the new century would present the entire decade of chaos that many Americans have endured. Most could not have predicted that unemployment rates would soar to the unbelievable levels they did (and still are), nor that poverty levels would rise to more than forty three million people, many who were homeowners at the beginning of the century.

I am sure we all hope that something can, and will be done to rectify this 20th century American Nightmare! In the meantime, those of us who already lived frugally, have simply tightened our belts.

I think that foreclosures should be handled differently in the case of a recession that everyone can truly identify with; in otherwards it should not be applied when persons are loosing their jobs on a large scale. When the government has to provide financial rescue, for large multinational companies and the poor or less fortunate of society is being told to pay-up or give-up.This is most unfortunate but will take a social consenscious undertaking that will have to include Government, the Mortgage institutions, civic society and all the major players in the housing sector. This should be spearheaded by government on the basis that they are in charge of the economy and the country on a whole. In addition to the fact that when persons loose their homes it is the government that is labled a large portion of the burden to facilitate them with even minimal shelter. It is not in anyone's best interest to implement a foreclosure clause in a recession period when most persons are truly finding it difficult to honour their mortgage obligations.So while foreclosure is legally justified; special cases like an intrnational recession should not be cast in the regular mold and I think the lobbying should start now for an exception like this recession.

First of all, banks got so sloppy with giving loans to almost anybody with no guaranties , no credit check and when market collapsed , they were running out of money. Some people made investments just before collapse and I have met a tons of them . Some of them gave up, lost their homes , some of them are fighting or delaying inevitable. If your home is getting foreclosed and you are worried that you will be thrown out to street, get a lawyer and for 500 USD a montg, lawyer is able to keep the bank off your bank for quite some time that you would be surprised.
Cheer up and enjoy sleeping in the night .

It is true that some people are in homes that they cannot afford. The fault for these mortgages falls on all parties involved. The bank probably should not have made the loan and the homeowner probably should have known it was too much home.

What I wish would happen is for some program to be established to help people who are making their payments, but cannot refinance to the low interest rates available because they are underwater. I know a recent program was enacted but it only applies to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae backed loans. Most of these people have good jobs, paid the 20% down on their homes and are current on their payments. The problem is they are now paying for a home that can be worth substantially lower than the loan. They don’t want to walk away from their homes but cannot refinance to the lower rates; this is unacceptable.

We should be making it easy for people to stay in their homes and not just walk away giving up. Right now this is not occurring.

I believe that the foreclosure problem was just caused by the greed and reckless lending habits of various banks and uneducated homebuyers who just wanted a new house. Until the Government created an agency for Consumer Protection banks were pretty much getting away with murder in setting up fraudulent loans to people who had no business getting a house mortgage . They saw this as an opportunity make a fast buck and this caused damage to the entire economy. The Government should buy all of these foreclosures from the banks, and rent them out to the general public. This should be done in a way where monthly rent payments will be affordable to whoever applies and is accepted to the program. This would help the banks clear the housing market and would give many people a decent place to live. And Oh Yes ! tThe Economy should also benefit