Reader comments
More mortgage misery

Who Cares! | 1:10 a.m. June 6, 2008

Ken Baguley says everything will be fine.

What's a few people thrown out of their homes as long as the neocons stay in charge.

Don't worry. Be Happy.

Only | 5:59 a.m. June 6, 2008

Only pediphiles and nutjobs are up at 1:10am scouring the internet for fodder.
Take an econ class.

Kevin | 7:29 a.m. June 6, 2008

It's the second sentence in the fourth paragraph that grabbed me: "Among mortgage holders in Utah, 23 percent are nonprime borrowers with FHA and subprime loans, compared to the national average of 19 percent."

Utah is going to experience the same thing the rest of the country is, only delayed. We're going to look the dumbest, though, because people were still buying in a frenzy when the rest of the country was showing signs of a downturn.

Comments continue below

Cheap guy | 7:30 a.m. June 6, 2008

Things have gotten so bad that the cable/sattelite TV companies are in danger of going out of business, the cell phone companies are also hurting, the NBA is not selling seats and the kids are wearing hand-me-downs and $15 sneakers again. The ecomony isn't bad, peoples priorities are.

Foreclosure Woe | 7:38 a.m. June 6, 2008

I am sorry but this is a problem that people got themselves into. Most people did not know the questions to ask their Mortgage Broker at closing or before closing, they did not understand what they were signing. Or this was an investment property that turned Sour. This is not a bad thing. It is a WAKE UP call to Americans to know what you are signing and to take your contracts seriously. This is going to Humble our Country and FORCE them to Educate themselves as to what they are getting themselves into.
Banks Were greedy but then again were so many Americans who got into House flipping and investment properties. We look at things now and we know that people made a big error with their money and they are now paying for it. I do not feel bad for all those loosing their homes but there is a small percentage that truely fell on hard times that my heart goes out too. But the Greedy ones... I say Too Bad

Self Employed - To Kevin | 8:01 a.m. June 6, 2008

Kevin - It is a well known fact that Utah has a higher percentage of self employed individuals than most states. I am self employed and I make well over 200K per year. I bought a house that I can definitely afford yet I have what is considered a "sub-prime" loan because I had to do a stated income loan (since I'm self employed). Anyway my point is taking one sentence and making some ridiculous generalizations out of it doesn't prove that Utah is in a worse situation than any other part of the country. It proves that you don't have a clue.

Also self employed | 9:01 a.m. June 6, 2008

To: Self-employed: I got a regular mortgage even though I am self employed by putting 20% down and having my CPA draft a letter to prove I have been in business for more than two years. My tax records proved my income. So self employed people can get regular mortgages, contrary to your implication.

SLC | 10:24 a.m. June 6, 2008

Yeah! Self Employed, you should go back to your bank and prove your income, rather than "state" it. You could probably get a better interest rate, and maybe by now you have 20% equity in your home and can refi. I learned something new here.

Either way, Utah's subprime majority is NOT a function of us just having "so many" entrepreneurs. It's because we start families and own homes so young that we've gotten hardly any money management life experience. We go bankrupt more than other states too, probably because when we figure out how much stuff costs, we can't work it around our behemoth mortgage payments and we have to turn to credit cards for any extras. 21-23 year olds are building these brand new houses, but don't have any credit yet, so they have to get subprime.

Too many of them will flounder and foreclose and rent for a few years, which will be humbling but strengthening. I'm 26, I rent, and there's nothing wrong with it. It is natural to be a little nomadic in your 20's and figure out where to settle down later.

Props to those my age who have 5 yrs equity though!

Down we go ... | 10:25 a.m. June 6, 2008

Simple economics: home prices in Utah will go down for several years. Deal with it.

Gotta love it | 10:42 a.m. June 6, 2008

Don't ya just love it when Republicans come on here and post about how well they're doing when the article is about people losing their homes? It just goes to show ya how compassionately conservative they really are.

Anonymous | 10:58 a.m. June 6, 2008

Neocons worship wealth and power - and really nothing else when it comes down to their values.
And the fools like to pretend they are bosom buddies with the mega-wealthy they keep voting into power at the expense of the little guy.
Which group do YOU belong to?
Mega-wealthy or little guy?

Republicans and Democrats? | 11:39 a.m. June 6, 2008

LOL, the Democrats are pushing our country to Socialism ie) Obama and Hillary. The Republicans have done a terrible job over the past few years by overspending. People need to take responsibility for their OWN actions and not depend on the Government (Democrats) to bail them out everytime they make the wrong decision. Obama will push us deeper into recession will all his Tax increases and McCain probably wont make it out of the presidency alive if he makes it. What great choices?

Blame Game | 11:49 a.m. June 6, 2008

Republicans are to blame for everything, huh. This is a sad fact for you "Gotta Love It", but the problem is with the mortgage brokers and borrowers like "Self Employed". Are all of them Republicans? I don't see the connection. I just see someone who tries to leverage every bad thing that happens to promote their political views.

The housing crisis is sad. But at the same time it is a happy time for responsible people like myself who didn't freak out at the price jump and get a loan I couldn't afford. I'm waiting for them to come down because I took economics (it's actually considered a science you know).

If you take big risks in life because you don't collect all the facts, occasionally one is not going to work out. We can try to build a GINORMOUS government all we want, but we can't govern away risk. People occasionally need to make good choices without being governed to do so.

huh? | 12:00 p.m. June 6, 2008

Anonymous 10;58 I am a "little guy" but I generally find your ranting against neocons to be more offensive than their behaviour. And yes - I have values other than wealth worship.

neocons never for the little guy | 12:10 p.m. June 6, 2008

The dying modern American conservative movement has never been, nor never will be, on the side of "the little guy." They choose CEO's over statesmen everytime and that has been their downfall.
This is why millions of young people are registering Democratic in preparation for some ray of hope from a liberal black guy named Obama whose been there, can identify with them and speaks their language.

Demopublican | 12:54 p.m. June 6, 2008

Hey, I'm as rabid an anti-neocon as there is fully realizing that they're a canker on the arse and cancer to the body politic of this country. But don't blame the neocon alone for the mortgage crisis... this one extends across the political spectrum.

Liberals/conservatives, left/right, all got caught in the roller coaster ride.

If the neocons are responsible for a part of this tragedy, it is their Bushy attitude that 'everything's fine, we're not in a recession...' mentality.

The real cause is Corporate Socialism/Welfare that are all driven by rich, privileged greedy individuals and corporate executives. A thorough investigation of the mortgage crisis will uncover that the root of the problem is the HEDGE FUNDS! These are unregulated investment speculators who have put this nation at risk not seen since President Hoover. Like then, with its disasterous consequences, has a small number of super rich held the nation hostage to unregulated profit taking at the expense of the other 99% of the American population.

Time for an FDR type of bringing markets and commodity trading back to needed government regulation and oversight. 30 years of free-market (actually free-wheeling) economy run amok has been disasterous, time to pull back.

mad as (blank)! | 1:05 p.m. June 6, 2008

When you go from a liberal administration (Clinton)that left this great country with a healthy surplus and then have a conservative administration (Bush/Cheney) that is running the country into the ground with massive debt, unemployment and a totally insecure future, while their pals become richer by the day ...
you bet your (blank) I'm upset with the neocons.

Thomas | 1:30 p.m. June 6, 2008

A question:

Assuming Barack Obama wins the Presidency in November (which I'd put good money on), what will his devotees' response be when, in 2012, the glittering future he's promising has failed to arrive -- and not only that, we're still mired in recession?

(Which we will be -- we've put off the day of reckoning for so many economic loose ends for too long -- like about twenty years, by my reckoning.)

re-education process | 1:59 p.m. June 6, 2008

It seems to me the United States can never be the economic power it used to be.
Countries come into power and each and every one eventually gives way to another.
It may be difficult for the champions of capitalism to initiate a re-education process (some say it is already being done) commencing with telling our children: "You really don't need that BMW."
Or even: "You know ... the best things in life are free."
But what is really the alternative?

To: Republicans and Democrats? | 2:52 p.m. June 6, 2008

You are so off based both as to your premise and lack of historical context.

Historically speaking... Republicans love the rich, privileged and corporations... Democrats love the laborers, common guys and small business owners.

Historically speaking... both parties love their own type of socialism/welfare schemes... Republicans - Corporate Socialism & Welfare, Democrats - Public Socialism & Welfare... but BOTH ARE SOCIALISM & WELFARE all the same!

Historically speaking... Republicans grind the overall American economy into depressions with their out of control free-market (actually free-wheeling) economics that makes wealth flow to the upper 1% at the expense of the 99%... Democrats could (because it never happened) grind an American economy into depression with out of control over-government regulation economics that makes wealth flow to the lower 1% at the expense of the 99%.

Solution: Both political parties need to dispense with religious and elitists ideologies and incorporate ALL of the capitalist economics of Smith and Locke, which requires a balance of "the hidden hand of free markets" being accountable to "the role of government to regulate commerce and assure the safety and welfare of its citizens against both foreign and domestic incursions that put the public at risk."

Pretty Simple!

To "Only" | 4:10 p.m. June 6, 2008

Only,

I live in England. Are you saying that all Brits are nutjobs and pedophiles? You seem to have great familiarity with the genre.

Grrr..... | 5:06 p.m. June 6, 2008

To Anonymous....Jumping on here and spewing a bunch of hate does nothing to validate your argument nor make me any more likely to want to take your side. Bottom line is we've been living in a manufactured economy for over 20 years and the dam is about to break. We have to have a major correction in this country at some point. It's going to happen whether you're Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Independant or whatever and it's everyone's fault. If you cashed your stimulous check it's your fault. If you take social security and welfare it's your fault. If you fly around the country in a private jet telling everyone else they're creating global warming it's your fault. If you drive a $75,000 dollar SUV and complain about gas prices it's your fault. We have too many people with their hands out expecting the government to bail them out or provide them a retirement and a living. Entitlement has ruined this country. Until we get rid of professional poloticians and until people take responsability for their own actions we are in trouble. Now I feel better.

Gus | 5:07 p.m. June 6, 2008

"Utah ranked 41st in the nation for delinquencies and 45th in foreclosure inventory."

This statement is misleading because delinquencies and foreclosures are not positive scenarios. For example, does the rank #1 state in foreclosure inventory have a lot of foreclosure inventory of very little inventory? Does this statement mean that Utah has a lot of delinquencies and foreclosure inventory compared to other states, or are we doing better than the other states?

Anybody know?

Anonymous | 5:19 p.m. June 6, 2008

No problems.
No problems at all.
All is fine in Pleasantville.

Anonymous | 5:39 p.m. June 6, 2008

What about that radio talk show person who set up a company to bilk people out of their money by convincing them to take out second mortgages on their houses, turning the money over to the "company", then absconding with the money and closing down the company, leaving widows, young couples, older couples high and dry losing their houses and stuck with these mortgages while he is living high off the hog? Why isn't anyone talking about this?

Ken Goddard | 6:16 p.m. June 6, 2008

To get the true picture one needs to know how people are handling their credit card debt. Shifting living expenses to the credit card may be how people are making the mortgage payment and paying for food and gas. At any rate those young families with lots of kids have their hands full.

Why??? | 6:47 p.m. June 6, 2008

Greed!!

Earl | 7:22 p.m. June 6, 2008

Is anyone else as weary from hearing the real estate problem being blamed on greed as I am? Of course greed is a problem! But how are you going to outlaw greed? I'd love to read the legislation. Good luck with that. Did you ever think that it might be possible to eliminate such things as real estate bubbles or commodity bubbles, or dot-com bubbles in a much easier way than by trying to outlaw greed? Why not outlaw what causes the bubbles in the first place? And it's NOT greed! Anyone? Anyone?

Gus | 7:38 p.m. June 6, 2008

to "Earl"

There is a fine line between eliminating the causes of bubbles and taking away the right of americans to make a living. In addition, the more regulations you force upon an industry, the more costs you incur and the less the free market is allowed to operate.

I'm not condoning what anyone has/hasn't done, but my point is that increased regulation is not the solution.

Earl | 8:34 p.m. June 6, 2008

@Gus: I concur whole-heartedly. The problem is that regulations are in place that need to be eliminated. I'm not sure what you're thinking is the cause of the bubbles, but eliminating the cause would actually free up the economy to do what it was designed to do. The blame for the bubbles can be laid at the feet of the Federal Reserve and their ability to create money out of thin air. Eliminating the Federal Reserve and the system of fractional banking would restore the balance that has been missing for so long in our economic system.

Re: Cheap | 9:03 p.m. June 6, 2008

I loved my $15 McGregor sneakers growing up! I would take a pair of those over NIKE or anything else (except maybe my 4203 Pumas!) ;) Why can't we just be happy with what we have instead of what the Jones's say we need?

However, when a home buyer buys a house thinking they are getting a "fair" deal from a developer and then a year later the value on their purchase goes down 15% there is a problem. Especially when the home buyer is stuck with the bill and is told they made a "bad" decision by those who have the benefit of retrospect and then the Gov only bails out the big time corporation financers. Not to mention you need a graduate degree in real estate to understand what you are getting into these days when purchasing a home. Anyone who says otherwise is not being honest with himself or herself.

Clare | 9:55 p.m. June 6, 2008

Buy yourself a humble hovel (a modest home), stay in it, and pay it off. I've seen a lot of people who buy big homes that they don't need. I would love a bigger house, but I want security. Good luck to those who have made some poor decisions. Sometimes we have to learn things the hard way.

Gus again | 10:41 p.m. June 6, 2008

to "Earl"

I agree with you. I probably didn't word my answer exactly as I wanted to because my wife was yelling at me and I couldn't concentrate. But I deserved it, so my bad.

But yes, I agree that the federal reserve is a huge problem, mainly because it is not accountable to anyone (but the corrupt rich families who organized it), it's leaders are not elected by the people, and it obligates tax payers to make huge interest payments on the loans our government takes out. I think we pay around $3,400/person each year in our taxes that goes to directly to make interest payments on the huge loans the our gov has taken out from the federal reserve. Not good, not good at all.

Terri Dance Salisbury Missouri | 10:48 p.m. June 6, 2008

So many off on a tangent comments! To "own a home"--unless and until you paid cash for the entire purchase price or loan balance-- this phrase is a double speak euphemism for the act of becoming an asset on the balance sheet of a financial institution willing to risk enormous sums of money for your desire to shelter yourself from the elements. This risk to any financial institution has risen as we have, as a society, become less truly educated, less trustworthy, less provident living! Some of us KNOW what that means, even if we cannot always be entirely within that happy state of existence. I have "owned" five different homes of various types by way of 8 "loans". 1 posh condo by SD Temple, 1/3 acre w/ BIG pool in silly Carlsbad, CA & 20 acres/brick home in MO since 1998. Worth every hour spent to learn what I must before following GBH's advice by "buying" a financial product offered by a financial institution 1st & then picking a property which met conditions of the privilege of ownership of that financial product i.e. "mortgage". If ye are prepared, ye shall not fear. Learn 1st!

I'm voting for Ralph Nader | 11:06 p.m. June 6, 2008

The only candidate who'd actually do something FOR America.

Terri Dance Salisbury Missouri | 11:11 p.m. June 6, 2008

Part II: Coming from less volatile markets to N. San Diego County required self restraint and study about neighborhood"s all important CA "zip codes" and who the reliable real estate and mortgage brokers were. We could sunk ourselves (like many of our neighbors seemed to have done)if I had been too proud to ask for information, stay up late reading/internet researching and be patient. I lived for 3 months in a really grungy part of Escondido while learning all I could before "buying." I bought my first house at age 23/1993 on a rip off FHA loan because I didn't know any better--read some things that taught me more about PMI and got myself out of that. We hadn't known enough about taxes to understand how to figure our withholding payroll exemptions so we wouldn't be giving the government a 0% loan all year to pay the stupid, vile deficit loans USA takes from our possible enemies. Got that changed to reflect what we would really owe in taxes that year and that alone gave us our itty bitty 3% FHA down payment on the first 1100 sq. ft little old lady bungalow house. REFUNDS;(! Buy now, bargains!

Terri Dance Salisbury Missouri | 11:59 p.m. June 6, 2008

#3 The downstream tragedy of the people unable to honor their financial obligations is that our Congress has interfered with their affairs and the product they bought "loan" from someone else had been counted on by yet another party as a trusted asset to earn their income. Now devalued, debauched, and untrustworthy as an asset. People all over the world hold/held American mortgages as LONG term investments to try to live provident lives themselves and we, as a society through our agent,the Federal Government, have ripped them off by allowing the bailout scheme to go through and be put into effect. Foreign banks holding our American deficit notes is horrendous enough in the power that gives them over us--but then to default on personal debt and our bankrupt government pat people on the head, bind up the wounds with more deficit spending and try to bribe us all back into complaceny with our previously confiscated tax dollars?? Madness!! I read a lot of foreign news online and we have caused immense trouble for a vast number of innocent bystanders who put their trust in the signature of mortgage buyers here. "Safe as houses" USED to be a banker's Proverb.

Terri Dance Salisbury Missouri | 12:30 a.m. June 7, 2008

PART 4 REVISIONIST HISTORY COMMENTS CORRECTED

During the honorable and globally beneficent Herbert Hoover's time as Treasury Secretary before he was President he tireless tried (within the constraints of the Constitution) to persuade Governor Franklin D. Roosevelt and state legislators of the cursed sovereign state of New York to fix their corrupt state financial affairs, truly regulate their regulations and stop stock market abuses. Herbert Hoover called continually for comprehensive cleanup but cried in vain to FDR's dallying deaf ears. Do not ever put the stock market crash and Great Depression blame on that man--"he who loves or makes a lie" doesn't end up living in the same part of the cosmos in which Herbert Hoover may now be dwelling with a clear, mortgage free title.

All the rabid political party comment posters today--take it from good old George Washington's mouth and please BEWARE THE SPIRIT OF PARTY.

The civil service/staffers system so corrupted it hardly matters who wins, they will oppose from within any measure to limit government outrages of waste, growth, redundant staffing/stop sale of buildings and lands.
Watch Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister from BBC on Netflix or buy the DVD sets. Anti-Bureaucracy depression therapy.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.