I'm not suggesting that there is any right to home ownership. I'm merely objecting to the assertion that those with failing mortgages are all irresponsible people seeking a lifestyle of grandeur and luxury, when it is very likely that many of them were relatively responsible people trying to buy a very modest home.
Who cares how they're characterized? They bought houses they can't afford. It doesn't matter if they bought them to provide shelter to starving orphans. Their intentions matter exactly nothing... only their ability to pay.
And further, I understand that in many cases we are talking about people who were defrauded by mortgage brokers who concealed from them the nature of the negative amortization and "teaser" rates of their mortgages.
They were not "defrauded". They may very well have signed paperwork they didn't understand. Doubtless, in many cases, they allowed themselves to be misled. But, seriously, who ever expected that someone making $40K per year could afford a $600K house?
I'm in no way suggesting that we should bail them out. I'm only pointing out that much (not all) of the blame for this situation lays at the feet of the Federal Reserve.
And I would agree with that. But the point remains... they should have rented, not rushed out to buy houses they couldn't afford just because the prices dictated by the market weren't "fair".
I'm not inclined to heap a lot of guilt on those who were indeed victimized by the market created by the Federal Reserve. These people still are responsible for the consequences of their actions, but I don't see that the "blame" for this situation is totally theirs.
Where does "blame" come into this? The owe money they cannot pay. Looking for "reasons" is the first step towards excuses and then "bailouts".
And BTW, renting is getting awfully expensive, too.
That'll happen. What's your point? If rent becomes "too much", like house prices are currently "too much", then the market corrects that situation.