Bush To Announce 5 Year Rate Freeze For Mortgages

Tomorrow, President Bush will outline a plan to freeze rates for 5 years for subprime mortgage loans that “originated between January 1, 2005, and July 31, 2007, with rates that are due to reset between January 1 of next year and June or July of 2010,” reports Reuters.

There’s not a lot of information about the plan yet—we’ll have to wait until the President’s announcement tomorrow—but according to Reuters,

The plan is aimed at borrowers who can afford their existing rates and who are current on their payments, but who would face default when the rate resets higher.

“Bush to outline mortgage plan on Thursday: source” [Reuters]
(Photo: Getty)

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Franklin Comes Alive! says:

    100% BS. This plan (and everything like it) just shits on those of us who were smart enough to take fixed-rate mortgages. The lesson from this is: just do whatever you want, if it bites you in the ass you’ll get bailed out.

  2. darkened says:

    And this helps people that got mortgages that were not 2/28 and were 3, or 5 year arms that are most likely half of all the arms anyway?

  3. chrisgoh says:

    Totally unfair to those of us who live within our means. I was unwilling to take the risk of a rate jump so have a fixed mortgage which was as a higher rate than a variable.

    Now the buyers in default got to benefit from the low variable rate and now that it has gone up, they get bailed out.

    Who pays for this bailout, all taxpayers, even those who were responsible with their mortgages in the first place. Who profits, the greedy lenders who never should have approved these mortgages and the irresponsible borrower who are getting bailed out.

  4. darkened says:

    Just to point out theres a big reason to help these people out as this could completely wreck the entire economy of our country and then the worlds next.

  5. hypnotik_jello says:

    @darkened: Maybe that’s why we humans need though? A wrecking of economies so we don’t keep making the same mistakes.

  6. Bad bad bad idea, govt messing with the market that is trying to correct itself is never good. I will admit I was able to get a loan in 2006 that I might never have gotten today due to me being self employed and trying to prove every dime I make. I got a fixed rate loan though and am well within my means, but even I have friends who played the ARM game and did interest only! They told me I was stupid to go the old way and many of them have had to sell off their houses and slide back into apartments.

  7. balthisar says:

    How does he propose to do this? Just a law?? Won’t this be challenged and WON in federal court?

  8. cashmerewhore says:

    @chrisgoh:

    I want an interest rate reduction on my fixed rate mortgage! Without a refi….

  9. Nice idea in theory, but there would have to be *serious* resources dedicated to the tremendous economic impact of establishing such a freeze. Considering how many lenders, funds, investors and others have planned and acted based on the schedule of mortgage rate increases, as well as the many loans that were made by the lenders on the understanding that they would get more money later on, the repercussions throughout the economy may be disastrous, even more than allowing the defaults to occur.

    I have little faith that this administration, if the story is correct, can pull this off. It’s much more of a PR effort than sound fiscal policy.

  10. savvy999 says:

    @Franklin Comes Alive!: I’m with you. THIS IS TOTAL BS. Couple of years ago I took a 30 year @ 5.63% because I knew the ARMs @ 4.75% would be a bad bet. Now they’re locked in at that awesome rate?

    Fine, give them that rate… for a f’in 60 year term, and absolutely no refi options EVER.

  11. chrisgoh says:

    @darkened: I understand the reason. But that does not make it fair. A fairer way to do it would be to offer some kind of additional tax deduction for mortgage interest, perhaps even a proactive credit. This would help the people who are over their heads as well as reward those who made better choices. This would help save peoples houses and stimulate the economy with the resulting purchases by those who were responsible and received free money. Lenders should foot the bill.

  12. punkrawka says:

    What a disaster. Everyone above pretty much captured what a slap in the face this is to those of us who were responsible. My fiance and I had to fight for an 80/20 30-year fixed mortgage last year, the credit union kept trying to push a 40-year 100% ARM on us! Now people who took ridiculous offers like that will end up in a better financial position than us.

  13. ironchef says:

    @Franklin Comes Alive!:

    Except you know the idiots who borrowed subprime will drag the rest of the prime borrowers down with them.

    When everyone defaults in subprime, your home equity will dive right down under too. When that happens, credit all around will be nearly impossible to get. Borrowers with good credit won’t be able to tap into their equities.

    We’ve gone beyond an isolated problem. The stupid roommate set the house you share on fire. Nobody wins.

    I have great credit and a fixed mortgage. It’s not my direct problem. I’m also an economist and I know the ripple effect of a sudden liquidity crisis. Everything goes down the tubes like in Argentina’s financial meltdown in 2000.

  14. chrisgoh says:

    @cashmerewhore: That be even simpler! Freeze the ARMS and knock a half a point off of fixed mortgages. I’ve currently got a 15 year fixed at 4.375, so 3.875 would be even sweeter.

  15. holocron says:

    Yeah, I understand why there may be an effort to protect these people and to “save” the economy from collapsing for a few more years. (or at least until they can blame a Dem President)

    But the fact is that these people made a choice to get into these loans. And the lenders made a choice to offer loans to these people. So I say, let them eat cake.

  16. HRHKingFriday says:

    Who says people will be able to afford the through-the-roof rates in 5 years? Or even in the mean time as oil and food prices go sky high? He’s just sticking his finger in a house-sized hole in the hoover dam.

  17. CarlR says:

    Based on the few details that I’ve heard, the govt is not putting any tax dollars into this plan – they just got the lenders together and convinced them that it was in their own best interest to work together and agree on a plan. Also, the interest rates on the loans covered by this plan are not the really low ARMs, but are the subprime loans with rates that are already around 8% – 10% (before any adjustment). We’ll have to wait for the formal announcement to be sure.

    So while I agree that it sucks that these people are getting bailed out, and I’m getting squat, at least I’m not paying for it. And it helps to keep my property values from dropping as much.

    As I understand it, the people paying for this are going to be the investors who bought these mortgages, who aren’t going to get the return they thought they were going to get. Which is as it should be.

  18. webwbr says:

    I cannot believe the government would do this. Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves with shame…

    This, then next Hillary will become president… I feel like a man without a country.

  19. JustRunTheDamnBallBillick. says:

    Rumor from a reliable source. The rates will be fixed for 5 years, BUT the difference will be added to the remaining principle, and dragged out over an extended period. They will get a break now, but over the long term will still pay much more then those who took a fixed rate. This should slow, but not stop the housing value reductions, which will allow those who are going to get out of the houses do so over a longer period of time.

  20. Geekybiker says:

    I understand that letting that many houses forclose is bad. However I can’t help but be pissed that I am going to be the one footing the bill for their idiocy yet again. I’m just frustrated with the increasing socialist tendancies of our government.

  21. chrisgoh says:

    @CarlR: I hope your right. At least under that scenario while I might not be getting anything, at least I’m not paying to bail these people out. Of course indirectly I still am because I’m sure most anyone in a mutual fund has at least some exposure to the paper backing these mortgages.

  22. daub815 says:

    Lesson Learned – Spend beyond your means and the government will bail you out. Ridiculous!

  23. Benstein says:

    Why not go all out and just have the government pay off the mortgage for you?

  24. catnapped says:

    @HRHKingFriday: He’s just concerned with dumping a recession on the next president (while avoiding it himself). Anyone who really thinks he’s doing this to actually fix anything needs their head examined.

  25. Alexander says:

    So what will this do to home prices? Up, down, plateau?

  26. weave says:

    Maybe he can also implement a 90 day wage/prize freeze to combat inflation plus institute price controls on retail gasoline prices, like Nixon did in the early 70s too.

  27. mmcnary says:

    I fully expect to profit from this plan. By reducing the number of forclosures, the market will have a chance of stabilizing, thereby making it very likely that I will be able to sell my house for something over the fire-sale price.

    People who bought mortgage-backed securities will see lower returns, but the effect will be diluted since very few people invest their whole portfolio in a single type of security.

  28. sibertater says:

    @Franklin Comes Alive!: RUDE! How many of these people are first time buyers, or upgrade buyers with good credit that didn’t know what they were doing.

    I don’t think it has anything to do with SMART ENOUGH, but more on propaganda. These loans were pushed, pulled and dragged out touting the LOW LOW LOW rate and that’s what people see.

    I would hope that I wouldn’t have been fooled by this “scam” but, c’mon. Why do you care if it doesn’t effect you at all? Plus? how does it fix the issue if your ARM loan is HUGE…or is it freezing them BACK to the origination rate? I’ll have to read more.

  29. cashmerewhore says:

    @chrisgoh:

    Guess the smart ones (without ARMs) won’t benefit from this.

    But isn’t it just delaying the inevitable? Who’s to say they won’t default when the freeze is up? Wouldn’t it just create another housing slump with them all entering forclosure later?

  30. ironchef says:

    @cashmerewhore:

    This is to buy time. The economy was too fast and loose the past 5 years with sloppy lending practices and a government asleep at the wheel.

  31. Canadian Impostor says:

    @sibertater: Who cares if they didn’t know what they were doing?

    When did ignorance become acceptable?

  32. gingerCE says:

    Wait–I took out my ARM late 2004–does that mean I don’t qualify? I’m not even sure I’d qualify either way but hey, if others can get this–then I want it too!!! And what exactly is a subprime mortgage? I have a mortgage, 4.75% for 5 years so it’s an ARM but is a subprime? I could afford a higher payment BUT I’d much rather get the 4.75% for another 5 years.

    If I miss out on this deal by 2 months, I’m gonna protest.

  33. econobiker says:

    This should be paid by a tax on mortgage brokers and companies. That way the guilty parties pay up…

  34. saltmine says:

    @Geekybiker: You mean fascist tendencies. This is a bailout for the corporate banks.

  35. Franklin Comes Alive! says:

    @sibertater: Not to say there aren’t a few legitimate sob stories out there, but my overall opinion of the situation tends towards a Darwin-like theory where ignorance is not an excuse. I’m a first-time buyer, and I sat down, did the research, did the math, and went with the responsible mortgage.

  36. AD8BC says:

    It’s time to let people and companies fail for the decisions that they made. Then, and only then, do you have reason to believe it won’t happen again (for a while).

    No more government buyouts. No more federal involvement.

    This goes for airlines and Amtrak as well.

  37. chrisgoh says:

    @sibertater: “RUDE! How many of these people are first time buyers, or upgrade buyers with good credit that didn’t know what they were doing.”

    Why should we be responsible for their not knowing what they are doing? A home is probably the biggest purchase of your life. If you don’t know what you are doing, you should find out. They signed the documents, if they did not read/understand them, again, that is their own fault.

  38. Landru says:

    @webwbr: Now you know how the rest of us feel.

  39. backbroken says:

    Damn, I was looking forward to some terrific real estate investment opportunities as prices fell.

  40. Me - now with more humidity says:

    Chill, people. This is NOT coming out of your tax dollars. It’s coming out of the pockets of the lenders and mortgage pool holders themselves — they won’t be getting higher interest.

    What it will do is settle things down for a bit and spread the pain over a few years, instead of snuffing out the economy with the current pillow over the face.

    For those of you who think anyone who got an ARM, subprime or not, should die a slow and painful death while you watch and cheer, you’ll still get to laugh at plenty of borrowers whose loans don’t fit the time period or underwriting requirements of this proposal.

    You still get to do plenty of hatin’, but this will mitigate the effect a tiny bit on the economy as a whole and on your own property values.

  41. Pylon83 says:

    I’m so torn on this. I HATE the idea of the government meddling in the private market and telling a lender that they cannot raise a rate that was contractually agreed on. However, I also understand why this needs to be done. It involves no tax dollars, because they are simply telling the lenders they can’t raise the rates. But it will still have financial implications for everyone as the lenders/banks/market tries to recoup the lost profits. Ultimately, I probably fall on the side of some action being necessary, but I just can’t bring myself to agree that this is the way to do it. I would almost rather see the government provide some other bailout, via taxes or whatever, even if it means spending money than to see them meddle in the private sector. I think it really damages the way our system works, and effects the integrity of the private mortgage market. I think maintaining the integrity of the system would be worth the government throwing in a few bucks.

  42. pkrieger says:

    @ironchef: the government asleep at the wheel? I want them no where near the wheel of the economy. When the gov’t meddles, like they are doing right now, then everyone loses.
    I think there was the potential for a great lesson to all Americans about fiscal responsibility that will be wasted if this gets implemented.

  43. tedyc03 says:

    I think the naysayers are missing the point. The government HAS to do something. Shady lenders let too many people get loans that they couldn’t afford. Either the government acts, or the loans go bad. If the government acts, we get screwed. If the loans go bad, we get screwed harder. It just depends on how hard you like getting screwed.

    But unless this package includes a nice hard slap in the face for the lenders, it’s pointless anyway. The government’s willingness to bail them out without imposing sanctions or new rules is like a parent who buys a kid a new car every time he wrecks it – there’s no learned cause and effect, but a whole lot of needlessly wasted money.

  44. CaptainConsumer says:

    This is COMPLETE and UTTER garbage. Look NOBODY ever signed one of these bad loans with a gun to their heads. This is ridiculous. What ever happened to CONSEQUENCES for one’s actions? This INCLUDES mortgage houses and banks (who are the REAL reason Bush is doing this, he simply can’t have people not paying their GOP donor bankers). I hope anybody associated with a ballooning loan they can’t afford loses their houses. I hope any company who made millions and millions and is now stuck goes belly up.

    You pays your money and you takes your chances.

    Also, what the Hell kind of Republican IS GWB? This goes against every conservative principle known to man.

  45. sleze69 says:

    This would be fair: Adjust ALL existing mortgages down to 4.5% and be done with it.

  46. Amelie says:

    Some people are so busy in their grade-school rants about, “This isn’t fair that those stupid homeowners are getting a break,” are missing the point. Bush couldn’t care less about the hapless people who were encouraged and/or deceived into taking out mortgages they can’t afford. He’s bailing out the banks, and rich investors – including his many friends. And forestalling a recession until it can be blamed on the Democrats, is probably another factor.

    Interesting, how Joe Schmoe – who can’t pay his mortgage and is getting bailed out – is more hated than the banks that made the wrongful loan.

  47. savdavid says:

    I do not trust Bush on anything. He has never cared about the middle-class. He has lied over and over to us . Everything he supports is always to help the corporations and rich. Besides, he is an idiot and wouldn’t know a good idea if one popped into his alcoholic, cocaine damaged monkey brain.

  48. sleze69 says:

    @zouxou: How does this save them? The mortgage companies could do this themselves if they wanted? This will keep the housing market inflated and will prevent people from entering the market.

  49. ironchef says:

    @pkrieger:

    The Government was asleep at the wheel in the late 80′s where they allowed S&L’s with sloppy balance sheets and loose lending requirements nearly wiped out savings accounts of depositors.

    You forget its not just the lenders that will be screwed. The people who bank at those lenders with good credit will pay too.

    Look at Etrade’s meltdown. All those depositors will be screwed just because all the sub primes are dumping their property on the market in a panic.

    The private market is more than capable of screwing things up nicely. thank you. It’s up to banking regulators to clamp down on sloppy private banking practices.

  50. headon says:

    Ha Ha I have an arm and a low rate due to adjust next year. I win. too bad fixed rate sucka’s

  51. waydownriver says:

    This is the most cliché-ridden stream of comments I’ve ever read on Consumerist, and that’s saying something.

    It appears very few commenters know anything about this plan, so using the words bail out seems sort of ignorant. All those who have used those words, please let me know how your tax dollars are being used in this plan. (Because maybe I’m ignorant and missed that fact.)

    To you fixed-rate mortgage holders hating on the ARM mortgage holders, claiming, “You knew what you were doing,” I can only say most of them didn’t, just like most of you didn’t either.

    If you have a good loan, it’s because you trusted a loan officer/mortgage broker/real estate lawyer/whatever who deserved to be trusted. You yourself (or 95% of you) technically didn’t know what you were doing because you don’t understand your loan documents. Admit it: You don’t. You trusted.

    How does that make you superior to those who also trusted and were misled?

    Most people with subprime loans were just regular schmoes who wanted a home. They weren’t investors, they weren’t flippers, they weren’t criminals. Why is there all this pleasure in the trouble they got themselves into?

  52. kimsama says:

    @JustRunTheDamnBallBillick.: Hope the little bird that told you that is right!

    @zouxou: I tend to be cynical enough to believe just that. Isn’t the current administration just artful in how they perform their legerdemain? Distracting us from real issues with juicy targets to hate instead of them.

  53. holocron says:

    @zouxou: While I might be guilty of a grade-school rant…to you I say

    Touche!

  54. The_Truth says:

    What happens in 5 years time, when these all reset with the massive negative amortization?

    Ahh let someone else worry about the consequences, sounds about par for course for Bush.

  55. humphrmi says:

    @JustRunTheDamnBallBillick.: I hope you’re right. If so, thanks, makes me feel better that I took my fixed rate loan.

  56. gingerCE says:

    Well, I have an ARM and I dislike those who bought homes they couldn’t afford.

    And I am really gonna Hate those who get to lock in the low rates vs. those of us with ARMS who, because we have the means to actually pay for our “real” mortgage, are not going to get this special deal.

  57. sethom says:

    Still absolute BS…screw the people waiting for the bottom to drop to buy…just prolongs the inevitable…people still can’t afford their mortgages.

  58. sethom says:

    The flippers and people who can’t afford will still walk away with or without rate freezes. 20% under on a house? why keep it?

  59. Munsoned says:

    I’m amazed at the number of commenters that appear to have taken fixed rate mortgages during the real-estate runup heyday when ARMs were being shoved in our faces. I thought I was the only one!!!

    This probably says something about the type of people that are on this blog. How many of you took ARMs? How many took fixed? Anyone want to start a poll?

    I distinctly remember meeting with a Countrywide rep who’s parting words (after our meeting) to me were: “even if you go with another lender, don’t be stupid and take a fixed rate.” That statement cemented my decision to go with another lender for a fixed rate (5.45%). I sleep well at night.

  60. phrygian says:

    My husband and I took an ARM in 1999 — but it was an FHA which had a restriction that the lock-in rate could only be 2% above the starting percentage. Even then, we refinanced a couple years later to lock in a better rate once we saw the rates trending upwards.

  61. Ailu says:

    This is an extremely drastic measure, and I think it means that the American economy is in serious trouble – way more than the government is letting on.

  62. Mayor McRib says:

    @waydownriver:
    I will reserve judgment on the plan. I want to know the facts, which nobody knows about yet.

    I got my fixed rate 30yr mortgage 3.5 years ago when people were falling all over themselves to get ARM’s. I trusted my loan officer because I was informed and he agreed with the way I felt. Fixed rates were rock bottom and ARM’s were crazy low. Any idiot should have assumed that rates were going to be higher in 5 years. Unless you were selling your home before the ARM ended you were not making the right decision. Chances are you were not taking the fixed rate because you would not have been able to afford it. Well, you were setting yourself up for disaster if the rates were going to inevitably go up. I am not a financial genius but I was able to figure that out with some research and common sense. So stop saying that most people don’t know what they are doing.

  63. savvy999 says:

    @waydownriver: Fine rant, but the insinuation that only 5% of all recent mortgage holders–including myself– were soooo lucky to simply trust the right person to steer us dolts down the prudent financial path is gravely insulting.

    This is not some sort of Katrina-like disaster, where whether you be big or small the shit indiscriminately hit everyone’s fan. This ‘crisis’ solely infects the stupid and/or the greedy, none of whom deserve support or compassion.

    The truly defrauded already have legal recourse for relief, the rest can go back to renting.

  64. calvinneal says:

    What some of you guys fails to mention is that all the defaulted loans have killed the housing market. Housing price drops of 10 to 20% in 12 months/ So basically we are just going to watch a depression wipe out our entire economy. This meltdown was caused by lack of regulation, not too much.Ponzi schemes alwasy blow up.

  65. dazette says:

    There are some of the most cruel and heartless comments posted here I have ever seen on Consumerist. No matter the stupidity of some of the ARM borrowers and the criminality of some of the sub-prime lenders, gov’t action (but not gov’t money)to keep a few more American families in their homes, and a few more homes off the market, even temporarily, certainly seems prudent to me.

  66. Me - now with more humidity says:

    Amen, Dazette. And it’s not just here. Housing blogs have attracted even more of the angry crazies, it seems. Perhaps someday they will need help to resolve a situation in their lives. But, wait, no…they’re perfect!

  67. Ass_Cobra says:

    J@sethom:

    Amen, Amen. I have held out during the real estate boom and was accused of:

    1) Not understanding real estate markets (I trade commercial real estate debt for a living).

    2) Not understanding how mortgages work (see above)

    3) Throwing away money by renting (yeah, okay, the house I can afford 3 years ago is not the one I’d like to be in today, so add in transaction cost, etc. I’m back to close to even).

    4) Hating the ownership culture of America (simply because I thought and continue to think the mortgage interest tax deduction is the biggest load of crap reason to buy).

    I had been looking at the rate reset charts and thinking about how much is going on in the beginning half of ’08 salivating. Now I guess I’m just going to have to wait for the people that tapped their “equity” to pay the mortgage until they could refi out higher and cheaper to fall down and swoop in there. Thanks GOP!

  68. Ass_Cobra says:

    @Me:

    There was a huge sentiment of entitlement in many of these people. It used to be that a home was the largest investment one would ever make and the acquisition of such was the result of years of saving, careful planning and only came about after showing the financial prudence necessary to take on such a large commitment. Sometime in about 2002 that went out the window and if you had an SSN and a pulse (sometimes they waived the last one) you could qualify for financing to buy whatever house you felt entitled to. Yep…the american dream right there.

    @calvinneal:

    The drop in home prices is not caused by defaults. Home price appreciation outstripped wage growth by 4-8X annually for the past 4 years depending on where you lived. That is absolutely not something that is sustainable on a going forward basis. The only think that lowered the intermediate cost of home ownership was historically low interest rates. In those terms (debt service) still outstripped wage growth but by a smaller margin. To bring things back into balance homes need to become cheaper to own either via dropping house prices or drop in interest rates. As rates really don’t have much room to go down the lever that gets pushed is housing price. Also the left hand side of the supply/demand equation is increasing as the right hand side is going down, outcome, new price curve!

  69. gingerCE says:

    @junior: I took an ARM. I readily admit I didn’t know what I was doing but 4.75% for 5 years sounded good so I took it. Looking back I should’ve investigated more but my credit wasn’t the greatest–not the way it is now–and I really thought I had got a good deal. In some ways I still do–I have 2 more years left of the 5 on this low fixed rate. I make more money now than I did 3 years ago so I can easily afford my payment (plus extra) vs. then when I think my income just barely qualified me for my loan.

  70. ikes says:

    i took a 5/1 ARM back in 2005, since my wife will get her PhD before the rates change and we are getting outta dodge. So for us it was a smart choice. Of course, we didn’t forsee all the current problems, and my concern is if we will be able to sell. Considering our house has not depreciated in value, I am confident we will be ok.

  71. lockdog says:

    My wife and I found a loan we were pretty happy with. $0 down, $0PMI, and a fixed rate of 6%. Sure 6 is high compared to those 4.75% ARMS, but it still very low historically speaking (my parent’s first house was 11% I think). Plus, while we had a modest downpayment saved up, it was great not totally blow our savings with a baby on the way.
    Turned out to be a good move. Though insured, the baby needed one more day beyond “usual and customary” in the hospital. Just for observation, no treamtent, mind you. Total cost after insurance paid their part: $13000. One day. But that is a whole other post.

  72. ironchef says:

    @lockdog:
    that good old american health care…completely insane and out of touch with reality.

  73. Mauvaise says:

    @sibertater: “RUDE! How many of these people are first time buyers, or upgrade buyers with good credit that didn’t know what they were doing.”

    Strange – I was a first time buyer with a subprime credit rating around 3 years ago when the whole housing thing was just starting to take off and everyone was pushing ARMS as the only way to go.

    You know what I did? I talked about the options with my father, my uncle, my boss, as well as researching loans online and buying a book about the entire home buying process (start to finish).

    I figured if I was putting myself $100k+ in debt, I was going to be damn sure I knew what I was doing. After all my research, I decided anything more than a fixed mortgage was a gamble I wasn’t willing to take. Even with my subprime credit score, I got a 30yr fixed under 6%.

    If you’re spending the kind of money you do buying a home how can you justify not researching and fully understanding what you’re doing? I’ve seen people put more thought and research into buying a digital camera then they do into their mortgage.

  74. algormortis says:

    Wow…this just pushes the eventual explosion into another administration! Genius!

  75. zolielo says:

    Like many of you, I am a stout believer in market forces and that controls on the scale implied is an error.

  76. CantBuyHouse says:

    @dazette:

    Keeping houses off the market is prudent??? What about us new buyers, who are completely priced out of this market? My wife and I make decent money (by all measures) here in Bay Area, we have almost 100K in savings, and yet we cannot get a 20% down non-jumbo mortgage, unless we’re willing to settle for a shack in an undesirable neighborhood. That’s insane! My only hope is that houses FLOOD the market, bringing these ridiculous prices down. Otherwise, no American dream for us, the younger generation.

  77. Trai_Dep says:

    In other words, “Delay Until George Bush Is Out Of Office, Then Crank Up The Right-Wing Noise Machine Blaming His Successor.”

    Hey, it’ll work great with Iraq, why not everything else?