Now, I'm not against this idea, so long as it applies to both renters and owners. That said, the math doesn't make sense.
It would cost $62 billion if aid is given to all the jobless, including renters, and $13 billion if given only to homeowners. The initiative would save 885,000 homes from going into foreclosure
How can this be possible? At first glance, these numbers intuitively do not make sense. How can expanding the program from homeowners to all jobless cos the cost to rise by over 375%? Also the 885,000 homes is almost certainly based on the $13 billion, rather than the $62 billion. However if they were to expand the proposed program to cover renters, certainly more homes will be saved, since when people can't afford their rent, the owner risks defaulting on any mortgage held against the property.
by paying for their housing cost if they loose thier jobs.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/24/news/economy/unemployed_foreclosure/index.htm?postversion=2009072417
Now, I'm not against this idea, so long as it applies to both renters and owners. That said, the math doesn't make sense.
How can this be possible? At first glance, these numbers intuitively do not make sense. How can expanding the program from homeowners to all jobless cos the cost to rise by over 375%? Also the 885,000 homes is almost certainly based on the $13 billion, rather than the $62 billion. However if they were to expand the proposed program to cover renters, certainly more homes will be saved, since when people can't afford their rent, the owner risks defaulting on any mortgage held against the property.
#housing