Which would you believe? Record-high foreclosure numbers or BostonNow?
By adamg - Wed, 01/23/2008 - 2:36pm.
Amy Derjue poses the question after reading a report on a 600% (!) increase in Massachusetts since 2005 and then following that up with a BostonNow report that the Massachusetts economy is doing just fine.
| 
| 
Increased forclosures since 2005 in Bay State no surprise,
especially since it's been happening all over the country.
148% increase in foreclosures here in the Bay State alone?!? That's shocking...and inexcusable. People should be able to stay in their homes and not forced to live under totally degrading third-world-like conditions.
Renting
Are you suggesting that renting is a "degrading third-world-like condition"?
I'm not saying that at all, Bostonian.
What I'm saying is that nore people, including renters, will either be out in the street, or they'll be forced to live in really, really substandard housing because they can't afford a decent place. That, indeed, is quite sad.
Maybe Independentminded can
Maybe Independentminded can put his money where his mouth is and sponsor some family's mortgage so they don't end up in foreclosure.
Anon-o-mous!!
First of all, I happen to be a woman.
Secondly, your stupid, insulting attitude and stupid suggestion(s) are/ is uncalled for.
Thirdly, it seems that you're always right there to make a dig.
WHOA!
Get a grip!
Ahem!! Are you talking to me?
Why not tell that to Anon-o-mous?
Because every anonymous
Because every anonymous poster is TOTALLY the same person.
Waiting for the follow-up even-more-insulting post to this anon to make it a full CM rebuttal.
At least one foreclosure in Dorchester forestalled
WBZ reports:
Both are true ...
Foreclosures up, still below 1990-1992 levels, far below 1990-1992 levels.
Massachusetts economy is doing quite well.
Why is it so hard for someone to comprehend both can happen at the same time?
Re: Dorchester woman - you don't pay your mortgage (or rent)? You have to move out.
What part of all this don't people seem to understand?
One has to ask why, however,
people aren't paying their mortgages. There are people who've lost their jobs, or who end up in some other crisis situation that's not of their making.
A lot of the people getting
A lot of the people getting foreclosed on probably shouldn't have gotten loans to begin with. Economic bubbles in general are simply a matter of irrational expectations.
A lot of these same people
fell victim to and were taken advantage of horribly, by unscrupulous lenders who engaged in really abusive and predatory lending practices, which contritubed a great deal to the increase in foreclosures, imo.
Not a black and white issue
I don't think the foreclosure thing is a really black and white issue. On the one hand, you're right, some predatory lending appears to have gone on, and some people were tricked into getting mortgages that they didn't understand. On the other hand, some people got these mortgages because they made a poor decision. Its not an easy thing to weed out who is who and, as I assume you are inclined, to prevent foreclosure from occuring. On top of all of this, preventing foreclosure isn't as easy, or inconsequential, as telling a lender that they aren't allowed to foreclose and/or that they are required to restructure the loan. Unlike in the 1990s (and before) banks don't keep ownership of the loans they make. Mortgage loans are now typically bundled and put into securitized trusts where they are essentially turned into bonds that other investors then purchase based on the terms of the bond. This was done for good reason: to spread the risk of loans accross many investors and thereby prevent the kind of real estate mortgage crisis that brought down so many banks in the 1990s crash. Furthermore, the investors in these bonds are necessarily "bad guys" - many municipal and other pension funds invested heavily in these. Getting the now securitized mortgages un-bundled, or requiring the terms of the individual loans to be re-written, is not easy or, in some cases, possible. Its a tough issue.