The answer to regulation would be to bring back the publics ability to sue corporations which was rescinded in the recent past. Another would be to give more power to the actual owners of the company - stockholders. Right now managers can water just about everything they want down so they are powerless. Another solution would be to treat them like drug dealers and allow the government to confiscate everything even remotely tied to the crime like their personal property, kid's trust funds, offshore accounts.

If we're still on the topic of this article...
don't waste your time if you've had a bankruptcy discharged within the last 4 years.

and I noticed that you rely a bit too much on historical trends. The economic highway is fluid - ever changing. Most answers do not lie along the roadside 30 miles back.

kiowamohican - The large financial corporations have just completed a 15 year project to see what happens when they get too greedy. They got the results they wanted - government bailouts, record profits, and a free pass to do it again, anytime.

Sorry janesvillean, but you read too much into historical economic data. We are not simply repeating the past over and over again. The answers to future economic issues will be unique, and won't exactly follow historic trends.

Janesvillian -- Thats possible, but thats probably the best case senario. There's no positive path in the near term is what I was eluding to. The best case is a long drawn out deflationary period.

Inflation? Inflation? You people are still fighting the last war. The Western economies are looking at 5-10 years of deflation. See "Lost Decade, Japan's".
http://www.frbsf.org/publications/econom...
.
Perhaps inflation will return again as a practical issue in the future, but the immediate present calls for a different approach.

Fool and Kio -- I agree with you, that the wave of inflation is near. My fear is that a depression will be inevitable, and worse yet, that the current administration secretly wants it. To justify a shift from a free market system to socialism. They are using the key triggers in the free market system to force the change they really want.

Good overview, Kiowamohican. What I have since learned about the financial crisis of 2008 indicates that there was plenty of misrepresentation, if not fraud, at every level. So, were are the indictments? Let's see some heads roll!

Americans of every political persuasion should be wary of all concentrations of power, whether corporate or government. Our Founding Fathers did their best to limit the power of government; George Washington specifically warned about the danger of extending individual rights to corporations. We as U.S. citizens now need to set aside our petty group loyalties long enough to come together to roll back the power grabbed by the elite few and put it back into the hands of each and every individual American.

[If you think the Federal Government still isn't big enough, then check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Uni... As you scroll the seemingly endless of list agencies, notice how each of the biggest and most familiar ones (e.g. NASA, USPS, FBI, CIA, etc.) are only one line in that list.]

There is no doubt you need regulation of some sort, I think all sides pretty much agree to that. The problem is most of these regulatory bodies are just part of the whole inside/political machine. Bernie Madoff was audited 8 times by the great regulatory body at the SEC. If you or I get audited by the SEC, our life and finances can be pretty much ruined. With a big insider like Madoff, the auditors are all good former friends, and the audit consists of go out for dinner, play some golf together, and calling it a day. regulation only does good if you have INTEGRITY, which is lacking at all levels of Government today!

Can we just agree that we need better regulation of the banks so they don't go running around the park biting people when the leash is off like last time?

Moreover, do you suppose the promise of having $4 trillion ready and available for the NEXT screw-up will tend to discourage or encourage even greater risk taking in the future? The latest $2 trillion in fiat currency loaned to the banks at near-zero interest rate was then loaned to taxpayers at 20-30% credit card interest rate and the profit used to pay back the TARP loans from the taxpayer. Sweet!

(ROTFLMAO re: baseless accusations of "flag flying" coming from Janesville's #1 Democratic Party apologist.)

I don't fly any political flag...How many times have I posted that on these forums? Monetary policy under Obama has in fact not changed one bit from what it was under Bush (you have Bernancki, and the SAME people at the FOMC, and Geithner and Paulson are of the SAME inside banking ilk, at Treasury).

If you seriously think this insane policy isn't going to lead to mass inflation, and or stagflation, you should read up on monetary history better. As the SAME tactics have been tried many times in the past in countless other countries, and civilizations. If anyone honestly believes these demented policies are going to work, I have some shares of underground airlines I'd be happy to sell you! This will be a classic case of when it does happen, everyone will look back and say "how did we miss the obvious". It's much the same as the housing bubble many warned you all about in 07, and everyone said that it was being over blown, and people were just playing on fears, didn't know what they were talking about, blah blah blah.
The next bubble to burst will of course be the US dollar itself. It has all ready lost a great deal of value the past year, but you have really seen anything yet. As I posted earlier, when you get the velocity of all the Fed $$$/liquidity that has been created the past year and a half, pouring out of the woodwork, the fire will never be able to be put out, no matter what dramatic measures they take at that point. Helicopter Ben ( a huge study of the Great depression) will have avoided the deflationary spiral that was the Great Depression, and will have created a monster of run away inflation.

The next time the roof caves in, the taxpayer money will be available even quicker with TARP-like funds for the banks - for stability. The bailout of corporations was a political/criminal act - but wallstreet will slay the bloated corporations again. Hopefully the govt will allow them go-under next time.

Uh, we're not talking about NOW, kiowamohican and others. We're talking about the next time the roof caves in, which is hopefully never. The point is to avoid the TARP and other bailout measures of 2008. Also, your despised Fed will be stripped of key parts of its authority under this legislation. Not that anyone really cares what it does; apparently it's just taking sides based on what flag someone's flying. Carry on.
.
RetiredAirForce, I love how you characterize an argument as "emotion based logic" without actually engaging a single point within the argument. Classy debating tactic, that.

Fun to read how emotion based logic and well-managed government program admirers scorn logic based approaches to responsibility...them dastardly republicans.

If only there was some statistic to show how doyle has helped this states economy...

Yes, and the money supply has went through the roof..Look at a chart, and it will make your jaw drop. It has expanded by nearly 4 fold since the Fed stepped in after the market crash. The reason it has not yet become inflationary is because the money supply has no velocity behind it. As soon as the coming up tick in the economy takes hold, all the billions the fed created in money supply will come out of the woodwork it has been hiding in. Once this insane excess $$$ supply gets velocity behind it, you will be hit with inflation unlike anything this (yet MANY others who have done the same thing have) country has ever seen, and you will NOT be able to control it once it hits, no matter what the Gods at FOMC preach to you. After all they are always right...
A few of their famous quotes:
"The Sub prime market is NOT a concern, and any melt down has been contained".
"Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are perfectly stable, and capitalized".

Janesvillean....I agree in attempting to help people that are going through the foreclosure process, but I don't think they should benefit from it in a way that someone who was current on their mortgage wouldn't. Extend the length to 40 or 50 years with an option to refinance into a 15 or 30 conventional after 10 years. The democrats proposed principal reductions and then to give troubled/irresponsible homeowners cash back incentives(paid for by the taxpayers) to remain current on their loans. Imagine that--they wanted to pay irresponsible people just to be responsible. All the while, doing what to help those that bought within their means and stayed current on their obligations--let me answer that for you--they proposed nothing to help the responsible homeowners.......Thank God the Republicans still have some concept of personal responsibility:)

Yes, the Fed creates money out of thin air. This is called the money supply and it's usually a big deal because unduly expanding the money supply could be inflationary if it gets ahead of economic growth. This is barely a concern now that we are experiencing very low inflation or even deflation, depending on who you ask. Effectively the economy is begging for expansion, and because of the lack of liquidity, it can't get there, stifling job creation. Yes, this is a change from what we have been primarily concerned with over the last 50 years, so people need to get used to it -- the rules are flipped.
.
As for programs to help people keep their foreclosed homes, I support them. The various loan modification schemes have been widely derided as failures. They haven't offset the desire of banks to write off losses through the foreclosure process (they would rather get the bad loans off their books). In macro long-run terms keeping people in their homes is equally important, but for some reason attempts [uh, by Democrats] to expand these efforts have been blocked [uh, by Republicans]. None of this, however, is an argument AGAINST the program that helped Kasper. If anything, it shows how a well-managed government program can succeed.

Oldtimer....they didn't offer this to the poor family that lost their home because then you would have 90% of the people that are current on their mortgages intentionally defaulting, so they could get the benefit of a 25 to 50 percent reduction in the amount owed. When I bought my house, I ignored the agents and the loan officer who were pushing "spend more" and bought well within my means. If a situation came up whereby the state was rewarding people for not making their payments, and by defaulting I could wash away half of what I owed, I know I would in a heartbeat:)

"Moreover, the best way to break up bloated corporations is to allow them to fail when they screw up."

I hope that's sarcasm. Waiting for them to fail isn't the BEST way to break them up. Of course, the laissez-faire capitalists will disagree that corporations should be broken up at all. Companies as big as AIG should simply not exist.

Why didnt they offer this to the poor family that loses their home?

Oligarchy, indeed. It is now blatant to the point of being flaunted, yet relatively few people seem to acknowledge it. Why?

Janevillean, the global effect of that $4 trillion on dollar devaluation is exactly the same as if those bank recipients had counterfeited it all on their own. You know this. Moreover, the best way to break up bloated corporations is to allow them to fail when they screw up. Most of us know that one.

Fool-on-the-hill:
Yes; this is just ANOTHER case of legislation to help the corporate giants (aka corporate welfare) who are funding most all of the prominent politicians (like most all on the banking committee). It's one giant country club of the government merging with the corporate giants, and creating an Oligarchy of power.

j-villiean:
The banks are SUPPOSE to fund the federal reserve. That is the key word, and I'm sure that is what they tell you on any governmnet propaganda web site. The Federal reserve is now creating money out of thin air, and is holding God knows how much in worthless paper. Of course; their books can not be audited, so no one can see the Enron accounting tactics they are using.

JustaskMe:
I'm not an "insider". I'm just a trader, and have quite a few contacts in the financial circles. If we actually recover from this thing just fine, some of the best traders and financial minds out there, who are betting billions, if not trillions, on another collapse will be proven wrong. Not that isn't possible, I just would put the chances at about 1 in 100. When it does in fact all collapse, most on my side will be saying we told you so, just like we were when the real estate collapse happened, and the dot com collapse happened. All which we called well before it actually occurred.

> Maybe we'll be able to see that one coming.

lol

It was well-known as early as 2001 that home prices were too inflated... greedy banks and buyers led all of us over a cliff.

I am glad that this program is out there. It sure beats the house sitting empty, or worse yet rented out on the cheep with a bunch of "trash" living in it.

I can and will use Federal Reserve data as it is authoritative, JustAskMe, certainly compared to anything you have offered in this thread.
.
Note that the $4 trillion is NOT TAXPAYER MONEY. The banks fund the Federal Reserve system, not the taxpayer. In exchange for this stopgap, the banks will return to a regulatory scheme closer to when Glass-Steagall was operative. Personally, I would prefer that the big banks be entirely broken up, which is what Britain is doing. Don't let anything grow "too big to fail" again.
.
What this has to do with an existing government program of long standing, I do not know, but people seem to think there's some relevance.

Kiowamohican: H.R. 4137 is the alleged financial-reform bill passed by the house. David Reilly highlights a few gems in the 1,279 page abomination: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=2...

"...it supports the biggest banks. It authorizes Federal Reserve banks to provide as much as $4 trillion in emergency funding the next time Wall Street crashes. So much for “no-more-bailouts” talk. That is more than twice what the Fed pumped into markets this time around. The size of the fund makes the bribes in the Senate’s health-care bill look minuscule."

"Best of all, the bill contains a provision that, in the event of another government request for emergency aid to prop up the financial system, debate in Congress be limited to just 10 hours."

Sure... what's to debate? It's ONLY four trillion dollars. The situation in Washington has officially moved far beyond the absurd.

It sounds like kiowamohican tells it like it is. You on the inside kio? I see a different ending though - one where we recover just fine - until the next finacial crisis. Maybe we'll be able to see that one coming.

Just make sure there are no prepayment penalty clauses on the loan.

However, there's one thing to be said regarding the 30-year loan. It's better to do that and then also pay an additional 2-3 full payments per year towards the principal, than to get a shorter loan and not have enough of a cushion. My banker told me that paying an extra 2-3 payments (per year, or more if you can swing it) towards the principal can easily take 8 years or so off your loan.

So now my tax dollars are being spent to help someone buy a house that they can't afford because someone else bought a house they couldn't afford. Great program! Throw these bums out of office!!

From what I've read, mortgage rates will rise to about 6% after the first quarter, and stabalize there for awhile. 8% mortgage rates are not in the near term. Also, bankers in Janesville are more than ready to lend for home purchases, and have been for some time. Kio is off on a tangent.

You don't have to take a 30-year mortgage, there are shorter term ones. Most people just take the 30-year because of the lower payments. They pay a ton more interest, but that's just the way the math works. The only think you may be able to fault the banks for is maybe not explaining how much money can be saved over the long term by taking out a shorter term mortgage .

Yes; the banks charge YOU 5%, yet they are now borrowing the money for free from the Fed...Hence the problem...
Not to mention the banks don't even need to loan it out at that 5% (many banks are making hardly any loans at all, not wanting to take the risk of being defaulted on). They can simply borrow it for free, and put it in short term bonds and make a few % profit, for doing NOTHING (known as a carry trade). So you have mass billions of "profit" being made by bankers hitting a few key strokes at their computer. Yeah; that sort of "profit" is REAL economic growth, and is going to produce LOTS of prosperity for us (haha). The only thing it has produced is making their balance sheets go from near bankruptcy and needing a TRAP bailout, to now showing record profits! Of course, this is no problem, according to many..Everything is on the turn around, and going to be just fine.....Riiiiiiiiiiight

Where else can you take out a loan for $50,000 and the bank allows you to take 30 years to pay for it? In a conventional loan (e.g. automobile), 5-6 years would be a reasonable term, with a reasonable payment. A mortgage, it takes 30 years, mass amounts of interest, and a large payment. These bankers are crooks.

Most big banks interest rates are still at 5% for a 30 year mortgage and have been.

Predictions of 8% interest rates?? HAHAH...If you want to book action on that one, I will gladly lay a few dimes. Like Helicopter Ben (Bernancki) will ever move rates past 1%, let alone 0%!This is pretty much a permanent zero interest rate climate now, with no exit strategy in place, short of maybe bumping them up to 1% in the 3rd or 4th quarter of 2010. A policy that will have disastrous, if not catastrophic, effects down the road. The "recovery" will look great in the short term, just like it did when Greenspan dropped them to near zero in 2002. Then you will have another whole series of speculative bubbles formed in equities and assets, and then they will ultimately bust. Except the next "bust" is going to be far worse then the one we just had; as this Fed recklessness far and away takes the cake over past ones.

With the Fed hinting at tightening, mortgage rates will soon be rising - now is probably a good time to lock-in on a rate. I would expect there to be an abundance of commercial foreclosures on the horizon also.

Also be aware that there will be more foreclosures coming into the market place over the next year. The banks have not released all their inventory as not to flood the market place. That being said, this would be a good sign. It would mean the initial inventory is being reduced and there is confidence in the market. There are still going to be new foreclosures, there always has been. The pace should hopefully be slowing. Only time will tell and heals all. Predictions for interest rates are as described going to be "North of 8%" to pay back the bill for the increase spending to get the country out of this recession.

A good way to severely reduce the number of foreclosed houses is to, at least temporarily, let ALL Wisconsin residents participate in the Neighborhood Advantage program - no income limits. These properties would be sold in short order.

I still got caught up in this. All I tried to do was help people understand the real estate benefits of a long needed program. I must admit, when I saw some nasty connotations, I too took a bit of a swipe at those who seemed agitated. The article was meant to be long over due positive news I am sure. Highlighting a success story. Here we are with personal attacks. I am grateful for the income I am earning. Many are not as fortunate in todays world. Pettiness aside, people need to help one another which means accepting the faults of others. Happy New Year and good luck to all who a struggling.

Thats' obvious in you queenb.

As I said earlier. I am in the real estate industry. The closing on Wednesday is an out of town buyer. More revenue for Wisconsin.

selfemploy, goes to show money does not make a happy person.

Good luck in your new home selfempl - with the low mortgage rates and the residential real estate market beginning to stabilize, this is an ideal time to purchase.

Goes to show you, not all properties selling are foreclosures.

I'll remember JUSTASK that when I go to the bank after my $400,000 closing on Wednesday.

I am not on here bashing everyone else, just because I don't agree with them. It's clear by your attitude why you are self employed...

Having a bad day selfempl? zoom? We all have them. Things will get better and work will find you selfempl.

Thanks for the clarification Stacey.

Nice QueenB. Think about it. Un-Believable! What's your excuse?

JustAskMe, the "loan" is not the mortgage. I suppose the article could have been written better for the simpletons.

selfemploy is obviously lacking work.

Well folks, good luck in this blog's venture. It is time to move on as the direction it is going is of slanderous slaps rather than informative and helpful. Anyone considering purchasing a property with a Wheda loan should call Tim Shortreed at Johnson Bank, or Matt Prestil at Anchor bank if you really want to know about the legistics of the program and if you qualify. Keep in mind, the property also needs to qualify. These two lenders currently are the only ones handling this program. More will be coming on board.

Only the separate loan of up to 25 percent of the purchase price (50 percent for low-income buyers) is forgiven at a rate of 10 percent per year in the home. The mortgage loan is not forgivable.
-Stacy Vogel, reporter

Hey JUSTASKME, the only joke is your condescending comments like those. I am in the real estate industry, so I guess I am more of an expert than you. However, I do know when it is time to ignore simple mindedness like yours. I merely referred to the referencing of low income in comments made. Once again, an incorrect analytical statement. Oh, and no one wants to ask you as your screen name implies.

zoom - the article says 'For those who live in the house 10 years, the entire loan is forgiven.' Why do I need to read this to you - are you reading impaired?

Thank you Zoom. I was wondering why these people thought the entire mortgage gets forgiven. Only the $20k that is loaned as a downpayment gets forgiven, the article says nothing about the mortgage.

Janesvillean - "if I had to give it up to the bank I would be more than thrilled if a hardworking single mother was able to own my home"
.
Wouldn't you rather have been given the same deal (Neighborhood Stabilization Program) to KEEP your home? I wonder how many people currently in foreclosure in Janesville have recently found work and would be able to make monthly payments, but can't afford to "catch up"? That would be a shame if these people are ousted from their home only to have the government help others INTO it.

janesvillean - you can't seriously use Fed Reserve study data as a credible source - I mean 'really'.

I see selfemp is the self-appointed expert on this topic. No one yet has said this program is only for low-income - yet you seem to think someone has - what a joke.

"Most of these 30-yr fixed loans are forgiven after 10 years. The banks make out like bandits here - since they get to sell foreclosed property at today's higher prices."

"how do you get a bank to forgive a mortgage loan, please tell. I want one of those."

Some of you folks have reading comprehension problems. Only the Neighborhood Advantage loan is forgiven over 10 years (in this case, about $20k, if she lives there that long), NOT the entire mortgage. Think of this as a maximum $20k tax credit (over 10 years) to buy a run down, foreclosed home.

Without information, PBRMan, it seems pretty irresponsible to assume the worst. As far as sympathy for the family that lost the house, we just don't know, but I can say that I own property and if I had to give it up to the bank I would be more than thrilled if a hardworking single mother was able to own my home versus a slumlord who rents to drug dealers (which we have on my block, so I'm not speaking hypothetically). The fact is that many, many people are losing their homes due to the housing crisis and more will yet, but it's simply bizarre to pose as if those homes still morally belong to the people who were -- for whatever reason -- unable to make the payments. There are many ways to prevent or delay a final sale, but once it happens it does not belong to them any longer.
.
JustAskMe, the Federal Reserve has studied the matter and found that the Community Reinvestment Act loan program had very little to do with the housing bubble. The subprime bubble primarily affected high-income (average and up) areas, not low-income areas, which appreciated very little during the boom (by the way, Janesville is not one of those places). This is a myth that has been propagated by the right wing, but there is no evidence to back it up.
http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/a_community...
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents...
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents...

If you are currently renting and not taking advantage of what's being offered to you to purchase a new home, you are making a huge mistake. Someone's loss is your gain when it comes to this. It's 100% a buyers market.

Absolutely PERMAN! Not all foreclosures are a result of job losses. The problem with this blog, is everyone seems to read into each comment, or scrutinizes the article without knowing all the facts which is exactly my point. I know a considerable amount about the Wheda program, but would still send the interested parties to the experts who offer it and not make presumtions. Every persons situation is different.

riverrat - you don't know the situation of the previous owner. What if they were just irresponsible and failed to make payments in leiu of drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, etc? You don't know if they were divorced and just gave the house up. Not every foreclosure is the result of job loss, and not every job loss results in a foreclosure.

Oh, one more thing. I agree that a program like this may or may not have helped the previous owners. But to assume a owner was irresponsible is outrageous. Hard times have befallen a lot of people, and not just GM. Have some compassion rather than criticizing something you have no first hand knowledge of.

All you experts need to understand something. This program is designed to get buyers buying, stimulate the economy, and get properties back on the tax roles producing revenue. If you think for one minute it is not costing us taxpayers money to have them sit vacant, think again. If nothing was done you'd complain. Something is being done, and you're complaining. Be part of the solution, not the problem. And FYI, the loan program is NOT just for low income or 1st time buyers. Maybe you ill informed people (you know who you are) should call the real experts to get the facts on the program. Kuddo's to anyone smart enough to recognize the opportunity here coupled with tax credits. Grant it the bill has to be paid back and it will like it or not, but how many like seeing decaying real estate in their community. If you have a better solution, I'd like to see it.

We really should try to find out what the previous owners had as a mortgage payment. If they got foreclosed on because they couldn't make $1,200 per month payments, and now someone gets their house for nearly half the monthly cost, this whole thing is shameful!

What about the story on the folks who lost this house to foreclosure? Given the same opportunity they may have been able to keep their home. Sorry Gazette you only reported half the story.

I think it sounds like a great program. It also helps the neighbors directly around her in terms of home values as its once less foreclosed home going into dis repair and bringing down home values in the neighborhood.

For once, this is a program that is helping somebody live the American dream, without giving it to them. Yes, she does get some up front help, but she has to accept a lot of responsibility to receive it. I am happy for her, and wish her best of luck. I would rather my taxes go to this then some lazy mother who sits at home and cranks out kids so she can collect even more to sit home and crank out some more kids....

In all fairness, programs like this should be available to ALL Wisconsin residents.

The borrower is forgiven - the taxpayer foots the bill. The state is being very generous with taxpayer money. At leasy we taxpayers are kept in the loop - instead of the state just giving the money directly to the banks.

how do you get a bank to forgive a mortgage loan, please tell. I want one of those.

I ran the amount she paid , plus taxes, and her monthly payment should be around 670.00, that sure beats paying rent. Good for her. I like seeing woman, especially this lady, she is young, buying homes on their own. Good for her.

Most of these 30-yr fixed loans are forgiven after 10 years. The banks make out like bandits here - since they get to sell foreclosed property at today's higher prices.

and yes I've been to the wheda website many times. The max income for 2 people in Rock co is $25,950 for the max benefit.

curtaincall - you actually typed the words 'Not just low income." yet you argue it's not for low-income? Better drink some coffee and wake-up.

If you look up on the state's website, moderate income is considered 28k-42k . So this program definitely is not just for low income people. Also, many, many, wealthy people have lost their homes to foreclosure. because they live beyond their means. Good luck to this young lady.

just- moderate income.. What part don't you understand? Moderate income. Not just low income. Moderate income. I think its great to get some of these houses off the market. I agree with timewas, this lady did not cause the previous owners to go into foreclosure.

timewas - "... offering loans for home purchase and repair to low- and moderate-income families." Read the article. Is there a part of 'low-income' you don't understand?

Here we go again. Just like 15 years ago. Your intelligent government is assisting low-income individuals into mortgages. I guess it's time to start building the next bubble.

It is fine and good and prudent that someone occupy, pay taxes and have a nice place to live in a house that is otherwise sitting vacant. It is a win, win, win, situation. I don't entirely agree with the taxpayer subsidies (akin to socialism) that are given in this program but the good benefits outweighs the bad (higher taxes).

She's not taking over, the house was sitting empty. It is very good for the house, the neighborhood and the city for someone to buy foreclosures and keep them up, rather than to have them sit there empty. So yes, we should be happy that she bought an empty house, fixed it up and moved in.

Well said Couchsit....it does little good to leave a perfectly good house sitting empty when the former occupants can no longer meet their payments. It is unfortunate if it happened due to job loss, but it doesn't happen overnight and most banks will try and work with people on repayment. On the other hand, the article doesn't give details on the previous owner....who could have been one of those idiots living way beyond their financial means...huge mortgage, charges max'd out. I have no sympathy for them. A co-worker got caught stealing lunches at work. He begged not to be "outed" because in his mind he was a victim. His $2,000 a month house payments had him so strapped he couldn't afford to even bring a brown bag lunch so would steal from the refrigerator.

I'm glad I'm single. I don't want anybody to feel bad for me if the bank forecloses on my house.

The article never said that the home was owned by a family. Single people own homes too. Anyway, what is a bank to do, let people live in a house for free (without the city collecting taxes either)? Or just let the houses rot vacant? I will admit that Janesville has unique circumstances, but both banks and home owners have an equal responsibility for the foreclosure mess, IMO.

Are you kidding me...we are happy that she is taking over for a family that was foreclosed on? SICK