The top right-hand corner of Monday's Washington Post sounds like the return of Hurricane Katrina. "Foreclosure Wave Bears Down on Immigrants" is the headline. Reporter Kirstin Downey begins: "Immigrants are emerging as among the first victims of a growing wave of home foreclosures in the Washington area as mortgage lending problems multiply locally and across the country."
But the "victims of a wave" line fails to ask the question: at what point are people who make bad financial decisions responsible for their own fate? The heart-breaking individual stories Downey tells could have been avoided if the struggling homeowners had stared harder at the numbers.
Nahid Azimi, a supermarket cashier making $2,400 a month "found herself strapped into a no-down-payment loan with payments of $3,800 a month." That's a bad situation. But Downey's language (she "found herself" in a bad loan, as if she was blindfolded and walked through a maze) doesn't suggest she has any personal responsibility, even though Azimi's quotes show that clearly she wants to do the right thing.
Another sad story of the Santos family getting stuck with trying to pay for two houses on a $60,000 income shows out the Washington-area real-estate market has flattened. They could have waited until one house was sold before buying a second, but to the Post, they're still "victims" of an impersonal "wave." The headline inside the paper as the story continued was "With Low Pay and Job Losses, Immigrants Among First Foreclosure Victims."
These stories were used to illustrate a liberal point, that "laissez-faire regulatory policies" are the cause. Allen Fishbein, a spokesman for the Consumer Federation of America, is brought in to declare "The regulators should have been more concerned about protecting consumers than about protecting financial institutions." But at what point is the consumer responsible for stepping into water over their head?
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I do have to wonder how tha
March 26, 2007 - 06:57 ET by motherbeltI do have to wonder how that woman was approved for that loan where the payments were well above her monthly income. Mortgage companies are greedy, but it's hard to believe they would approve a loan like that.
I agree.. doesn't make an
March 26, 2007 - 07:08 ET by rimskyI agree.. doesn't make any sense. Mortgage companies being greedy is one thing, but this would be just stupid.
That's easy
March 26, 2007 - 12:31 ET by Evil CapitalistMost likely she simply lied on her paperwork.
$560 bucks a week for running a cash register ?
March 26, 2007 - 07:05 ET by SportPolitics$560 bucks a week for running a cash register ?
That's a person who has the right to whine, and have an appointed whiner ?
Exactly! My wife brings ho
March 26, 2007 - 09:14 ET by tnculpExactly! My wife brings home less than $400 a week as a professional graphic designer with 3 years experience and a degree. I think she has bigger whining rights. No?
tnculp --don't know
March 26, 2007 - 09:47 ET by misterbillDon't know where you live. In a suburb of Atlanta, I was doing better as a second tier PC repair person. (Retired now.) Most grafs jobs here pay a lot more than that.
Bad Decisions
March 26, 2007 - 07:09 ET by Ole_Sarge"The regulators should have been more concerned about protecting consumers than about protecting financial institutions."
Ah, that's what they are supposed to do, protect ALL the consumers that INVESTED in the financial institutions, and the others that have mortgages and ARE paying them... You start having the lenders "eat" the bad mortgages everything, and everyone will be affected.
Does no one but I remember the Savings and Loan crash???
There is a place for the "sub-prime" lending market. And many folks that otherwise would have "no chance" get a chance. But -- there are risks and personally I think some were a bit "too greedy" during the last "boom."
I have some sympathy for the families that were highlighted, but in nearly every case, they borrowed to the LIMITS of their capability. And had NO "reserves" and no cushion if their income slipped, or they faced a major expense. Then there are the few that have been unable (or unwilling) to pay back the loans. Why should they? Yea, some of them have a entitlement" mentality -- everything else has been given to them, why not a $450,000 house too?
The biggest problem GWB's Administration has had
March 26, 2007 - 07:11 ET by whodatis that they have failed to entertain a courtship of the media and give them stories that sell...So they turned on them and hoped to replace them with an administration that will...or is it just that the mainstream media is weakened by the other news outlets and is out for blood any blood?
Huh????
March 26, 2007 - 07:29 ET by motherbeltHuh????
Don't blame the mortgage inst
March 26, 2007 - 07:12 ET by GalvanicDon't blame the mortgage institutions. These so-called "victims" took risks they couldn't afford to take. It has nothing to do with victimization, and everything to do with common sense and self-responsibility.
Extending the WashPost's hyperbole, let's label everyone who pays their mortgage on time a "hero."
This is the defining differen
March 26, 2007 - 07:21 ET by EdhenryThis is the defining difference between the codependent/weak/liberal/left/democrat/journalist and those that understand why this country has been so successful.
Individual responsibility is directly proportional to individual responsibility.
There's plenty of blame to go
March 26, 2007 - 07:25 ET by rimskyThere's plenty of blame to go around here. I just can't figure out why a mortgage company is going to lend money for a house that results in monthly payments that are more than the borrowers salary? Something's missing.
I agree. There's no way a
March 26, 2007 - 08:04 ET by motherbeltI agree. There's no way a mortgage company would OK a loan of that kind. Even if the rest of the article is accurate, there is something wrong with that case.
"I just can't figure o
March 26, 2007 - 12:23 ET by ckc1227"I just can't figure out why a mortgage company is going to lend money for a house that results in monthly payments that are more than the borrowers salary? Something's missing."
If I heard correctly over the weekend, these subprime loans could be acquired with no proof of income. Foolish, I agree. I assume they hoped the higher rates they charged for these risky loans would be enough to cover the risk. Some of them were wrong and are losing millions because of it, and several are on the verge of bankruptcy.
"I just can't figure o
March 26, 2007 - 12:24 ET by ckc1227"I just can't figure out why a mortgage company is going to lend money for a house that results in monthly payments that are more than the borrowers salary? Something's missing."
If I heard correctly over the weekend, these subprime loans could be acquired with no proof of income. Foolish, I agree. I assume they hoped the higher rates they charged for these risky loans would be enough to cover the risk. Some of them were wrong and are losing millions because of it, and several are on the verge of bankruptcy.
Extending the WashPost's hy
March 26, 2007 - 07:58 ET by motherbeltExtending the WashPost's hyperbole, let's label everyone who pays their mortgage on time a "hero." -galvanic
Or how about we call them "those who refuse to be a victim"?
They are achievers. Quickly,
March 26, 2007 - 08:03 ET by EdhenryThey are achievers. Quickly, tax 'em.
mortgage victims
March 26, 2007 - 08:10 ET by seejayYup! While brown-skinned illegal aliens were earning tens of thousands from appreciation on homes they "owned" while working here and sending their earnings back to Mexico the MSM were silent. " Come to America. Earn good money while sending it overseas so that you may claim poverty here and be given free food, clothing medical care and police protection! And as a bonus, when you're finished using America and wish to return to the country that drove you to come here in the first place, America will give you a HUGE cash bonus. One that you'll NEVER be taxed on! And that's in addition to the social security money you'll soon be getting from our taxpayers as well! What a deal!"
But now that the real estate markets have slowed, and these same brown-skinned folks begin to experience the same risks as the rest of us, here come's the ever-so-predictable MSM attackers to blurt out their cries of discrimination and victimhood! These poor immigrants are being taken-advantage of by Evil Americans! It MUST be true! Their skin IS brown!
The Washington Post is just another example of the ENEMEDIA calling real Americans racists. Again! I'm not buying it anymore.
Same old playbook. Same old plays. Enough! The MSM is our enemy!
I hope Tim Graham is reading
March 26, 2007 - 14:03 ET by tumbler_2007Yes, seejay--
If Tim is here to read your post, he'll be wondering why his lead even had to mention immigrants. I can see why the news media slants the story in that direction. It's disingenuous at best. But by bringing in "brown people" it insinuates all brown people are simply foreclosure material; a faceless mob unable to make sound decisions. That isn't true. Many immigrants are on terrific financial ground; and nobody draws attention to them. So, this story isn't about real estate. It's a victimology current. You'd think nobody in the white community ever turned a bad real estate deal. I'm appalled at the insistent ignorance of our people with regard to immigrants.
In this country at least all working people can obtain credit. In many other countries, it's strictly cash to own your own home. And homes are exhorbitantly expensive in many of them compared to America. We should face it; buying a home is VERY tricky, and that's whether you're a citizen or a "brown man" from anyplace else. Every buyer has to remember the caveat.
The Canary's Silent
March 26, 2007 - 09:45 ET by Ten7sCredit abuse by both lenders and borrowers at all levels has been a building problem for at least 15 years running. The canary's silent.
This reminds me of all thos
March 26, 2007 - 09:51 ET by TrueSoldierThis reminds me of all those people in the 80's and 90's who thought they were getting a great deal on a car loan with low payments, until they got to the end of the load and realized they had thousands of dollars to pony up for a end of contract balloon payment. Lots of people lost their cars after they had nearly paid them off. You would think that people would look at their mortgages closer before they agree with them, but then again if they did I guess there would not be a "victim mentality" out there
Protection
March 26, 2007 - 09:51 ET by misterbillAh, but if the Libs were in charge, they would protect these people from making these bad financial choices. It's the bad Republicans that allowed it to happen. Also, they would regulate it. (Such that, many would never get a loan.) Wouldn't it be nice to have the government keep us from making bad financial decisions? What would they try to help us with after that?
Next, it's Healthcare, yawn!
Protection
March 26, 2007 - 09:52 ET by misterbillOOOPS!!! Sorry!!
Not to make light of the fore
March 26, 2007 - 09:56 ET by Tony SNot to make light of the foreclosure situations happening, but last week it was black, not immigrants, suffering the most from foreclosures. Here is the exact Reuters headline, which is too classic not to pass on: "Blacks suffer most in U.S. foreclosure surge." Here is a link to the story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17705393/
This story smell fishy, and I
March 26, 2007 - 09:59 ET by bassndudeThis story smell fishy, and I know fishy. Sounds like one of those put up jobs comming out of the MSM lately. Why would a lender give a borrower a loan with payments higher than the income? No way. Why would said borrower sign, knowing what the bottom line is? After all, it aint goverment, and the borrower is not congress.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
"After all, it aint go
March 26, 2007 - 10:02 ET by MightyMouth"After all, it aint goverment, and the borrower is not congress."
Pure genius bass!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
MM..only ones I know that spe
March 26, 2007 - 10:15 ET by bassndudeMM..only ones I know that spend what they want, not what they have.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!