Stimulus for the Rest of Us
You may have seen clip of Rick Santelli raging on CNBC about the stimulus bill and how it rewards people who have been irresponsible and doesn't offer anything for the majority of us folks that buy homes within our means and pay our mortgages on time. His rants are annoying and overdone, but he voices an opinion that lots of people have right now. Most of us recognize that this money needs to be spent and will benefit the majority of people in the long run but some are leery of paying to keep people in homes they can't really afford while they themselves may see only a small tax break incentive. What about the rest of us? How about some stimulus in the form of low interest rate incentives so we can refinance our mortgages and spend the savings? We could use that stimulus money to subsidize very low fixed rate loans (under 4.5%) available to all of us for our primary residences.
If the money for the housing sector went to subsidize lower interest rates on mortgages for the general public there would be savings to those who are struggling to keep their homes, for some of these folks a reduction in principal might be added if they owe more than their home is worth. Many fewer of these homes would be foreclosed on. People who aren't headed for foreclosure could refinance their mortgages and have extra money to spend. Most people use refinance induced savings to spend on home repairs, autos and other things that put people to work. Perhaps an extra bonus could be thrown in for those who buy an American made car. And for the people who do not yet own a home a very low interest rate (fixed of course) will bring many into the home market. They will be able to purchase homes for the first time and further boost the housing sector. It's a win-win-win. And for the nay sayers and stimulus haters they can simply turn their nose up and continue to complain. Or they could embrace the plan, take advantage of it and shut the heck up.
















Brilliant!
February 20, 2009 8:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bravo - lets not forget the prudent people that have been renting for the last 5-10 years because they saw the housing market in a bubble.
February 20, 2009 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
...or because they move every 3-6 months and their fear of commitment extends to real estate.
February 20, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought I'd add that a plan such as this would have to have limits and would not subsidize interest on high end homes. Someone who currently has an $800,000 mortgage on a $1,000,000 home would not receive help. But it would apply to those purchasing/refinancing mortgage sizes that are reasonable for a home value that is no more than a pre-determined percentage over the median price for that real estate market. In other words homes that range in value from modest to a bit above the median for their region would qualify for the subsidized interest rate.
February 20, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be nice to see a real usury law enacted, too. I would venture to guess that there are quite a few more people trapped in credit card debt than there are trapped in bad mortgages. Also, let's allow bankruptcy judges to cram down the terms on those upside-down mortgages. They can do it for mortgages on second homes (and third, fourth, even eighth homes, if you're John McCain), but not on primary residences. That's pretty bass ackwards, IMHO.
February 20, 2009 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
We have a winner! Want to really attack consumer debt? Go after credit cards. Excellent comment.
February 20, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely. Didn't we once have a usery law? Refinance money is also commonly used to pay of consumer debt and consolidate it under a smaller interest rate. So my stimulus for the rest of us would help there also.
February 20, 2009 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've suggested temporary caps on credit card rates, one for older balances (suggested 5%), another for new spending (12%), along with certain conditions (borrower must stay current and pay off more than the minimum requirement, etc).
February 20, 2009 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Most of us recognize that this money needs to be spent and will benefit the majority of people in the long run"
I must be on the outside. I don't see that this money needs to be spent.
First Time Homebuyer programs have existed in some areas for quite some time. But those are not gifts to individuals, rather the angel investor (city, typically) gets a proportional equity in the house along with some very simply strings attached. If homeowners who get bailed out under Obama's plan have to lose equity (current or future) to the government, I might be for it.
The economy is not a sacred cow. Ditto the housing market.
February 20, 2009 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Four and half isn't low enough. It needs to be 2-3 percent to make the big difference that needs to be made.
It doesn't have to be subsidized. Just let the fed do it, or create an agency. Have the government go into the mortgage industry for a while. Make the loans available to everyone, on a funds-available basis (if you want one, be there at the first of the month). It solidifies values, which is the first step in confidence. It gets homebuying going again, and when homebuying starts to work, the rest of the economy will follow.
February 21, 2009 12:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Negative Fed funds rate would do that.
See Borrowing Trouble in my blog...
February 21, 2009 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink