Edwin Pawlowski > wrote:

><sf> wrote in message ...

>> They did nothing to stop predatory lending practices even though it
>> was obviously a train wreck waiting to happen.

>Nor did they (or should they) stop people from being stoooopid. Perhaps a
>few people were "taken" by the lenders, but most just wanted as much house
>as they could get today and did not worry about escalation clauses three or
>five years later. They should not get taxpayer money to help them, nor
>should the banks dumb enough to lend money to questionable borrowers.

Bailing out defaulting homeowners is beyond stupid. It's simply
wealth transfer from taxpayers who were careful with their money
to taxpayers who were careless. It makes no sense whatsoever.
If the goal is to help people who have become homeless, then
help the homeless. But helping people who are not in any
particular dire straits because of the "predatory" lenders is
nonsense.

Same with bailing out banks. While I would be personally happy
if the small investment I have made in Washington Mutual does
not become worthless, I in no way expect my government to make
good on it. But, ironically, the plan to bail out homeowners
in fact hurts WM since it limits the bank's ability to foreclose
on people. I say let 'em foreclose. (Bailout plans also cost
the FDIC money, which filters back as a cost to any depositor
at any bank.)

Steve