Quote:
Originally Posted by mlurp
But they bail out the cause of this problem and the builders who have plenty of debt because the houses they built are unsold. So why not keep a person in their home it would mean a lot for the cities that have to bear the blunt of this crises and balance the city budget. Empty homes also mean people in the shadows and new crime areas, that results in the cities enforcing laws where they once had not to. And if we ever get ou of Iraq the govt. will have more money to solve a lot more problems.
|
Yes, but why should the taxpayer have to pay for it? What about credit cards with dubious lending practices? There are those that charge up to 24% interest rates. But if you signed up for the debt (without reading the fine print, or knowing beforehand that you couldn't afford it), you should be responsible for that.
That said, I still feel it should be a 'greater good' decision. Wait as long as possible to see if the market can correct itself, and intervene only if absolutely necessary (i.e. in order to avoid catastrophic consequences to the economy).