<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hank Paulson&#8217;s Remarks Regarding the Mortgage Markets</title>
	<atom:link href="http://allfinancialmatters.com/2007/12/03/hank-paulsons-remarks-regarding-the-mortgage-markets/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2007/12/03/hank-paulsons-remarks-regarding-the-mortgage-markets/</link>
	<description>A personal finance blog dedicated to discussing such topics as budgeting, asset allocation, 401K, IRA, cash flow, insurance, financial planning, portfolio management, and other areas in personal finance.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 02:50:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Swim Upstream to Wealth</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2007/12/03/hank-paulsons-remarks-regarding-the-mortgage-markets/comment-page-1/#comment-183911</link>
		<dc:creator>Swim Upstream to Wealth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 04:25:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/?p=2170#comment-183911</guid>
		<description>The taxpayer will end up footing the bill one way or another, I fear. 

When someone loans money, they expect to be repaid. Usually, if the borrower can&#039;t repay, he loses the house. Paulson is trying to change this rule...at least temporarily. This means the loaner will take a hit. I expect the guv to help out the lenders, meaning the banks, somewhere down the line. They are already creating liquidity with the Fed, which hurts taxpayers in the form of inflation. 

This fix only delays the inevitable anyway. Most of these subprime borrowers could barely afford the teaser payments. They won&#039;t be able to afford the full payment even if this is delayed a couple years or so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The taxpayer will end up footing the bill one way or another, I fear. </p>
<p>When someone loans money, they expect to be repaid. Usually, if the borrower can&#8217;t repay, he loses the house. Paulson is trying to change this rule&#8230;at least temporarily. This means the loaner will take a hit. I expect the guv to help out the lenders, meaning the banks, somewhere down the line. They are already creating liquidity with the Fed, which hurts taxpayers in the form of inflation. </p>
<p>This fix only delays the inevitable anyway. Most of these subprime borrowers could barely afford the teaser payments. They won&#8217;t be able to afford the full payment even if this is delayed a couple years or so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Swim Upstream to Wealth</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2007/12/03/hank-paulsons-remarks-regarding-the-mortgage-markets/comment-page-1/#comment-183910</link>
		<dc:creator>Swim Upstream to Wealth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 04:19:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/?p=2170#comment-183910</guid>
		<description>The taxpayer will still take a hit. This isn&#039;t over. 

All this will do is delay the inevitable. The people who got these exploding subprime ARMs bought too much house. They could barely afford the teaser payments. Their income is not going to go up enough to afford these mortgages even with a couple extra years of the teaser rate.

Someone has to take a loss here. When someone loans money, they expect to get repaid. So either the borrower takes a hit and loses his home, or the investor gets hurt with lower payments. Somewhere the taxpayer will end up paying whether it is bailing out the mortgages or the banks who own/created the CDOs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The taxpayer will still take a hit. This isn&#8217;t over. </p>
<p>All this will do is delay the inevitable. The people who got these exploding subprime ARMs bought too much house. They could barely afford the teaser payments. Their income is not going to go up enough to afford these mortgages even with a couple extra years of the teaser rate.</p>
<p>Someone has to take a loss here. When someone loans money, they expect to get repaid. So either the borrower takes a hit and loses his home, or the investor gets hurt with lower payments. Somewhere the taxpayer will end up paying whether it is bailing out the mortgages or the banks who own/created the CDOs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jemifus</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2007/12/03/hank-paulsons-remarks-regarding-the-mortgage-markets/comment-page-1/#comment-183874</link>
		<dc:creator>Jemifus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:16:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/?p=2170#comment-183874</guid>
		<description>I was really prepared to hate this.  I was.  But the taxpayer portion of the &quot;bailout&quot; is largely just increased funding of non-profit mortgage counselors? It could have been a lot worse.  Essentially, the mortgage companies are being left to clean their own mess, at their own expense and at the expense of investors in mortgage-backed securities who miscalculated risk.  That&#039;s exactly the kind of deterrent that should come from this whole thing.

Sure, I wish I&#039;d had the foresight to buy a home I couldn&#039;t afford so that I could take advantage of this, but I&#039;m pretty sure my risk assessment is better than that of the people who will benefit from this, and I&#039;ll come out ahead in the end.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was really prepared to hate this.  I was.  But the taxpayer portion of the &#8220;bailout&#8221; is largely just increased funding of non-profit mortgage counselors? It could have been a lot worse.  Essentially, the mortgage companies are being left to clean their own mess, at their own expense and at the expense of investors in mortgage-backed securities who miscalculated risk.  That&#8217;s exactly the kind of deterrent that should come from this whole thing.</p>
<p>Sure, I wish I&#8217;d had the foresight to buy a home I couldn&#8217;t afford so that I could take advantage of this, but I&#8217;m pretty sure my risk assessment is better than that of the people who will benefit from this, and I&#8217;ll come out ahead in the end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

