So what Bush heralded as “low income buyers with bad credit” weren't given loans by Congress, nor did they march into the bank and demand them. Massive marketing campaigns seduced buyers, some of whom were stupid, others probably creditworthy til their jobs got sent to China or their companies crashed in the falling economy.

Now let's get practical. It costs the community more to have unoccupied houses. Lowers home values, increases risk of break-in, vandalism, theft and fire. Hence it costs communities, in police and fire protection too. (Indeed, many have been stripped even of the copper wiring.)

Another practical note. These homes are not worth what the mortgage value says–that's the whole problem. So foreclosing gives the bank a home they can't sell even at a price for which the current homeowner might well be able to afford.

So your suggestion, Guest Voice, is that we increase homelessness, increase community costs and saddle banks with properties they can't sell.

What if communities start charging banks for unoccupied houses, say $300 / month each for the extra costs to the community? Maybe banks and their borrowers might come to an accommodation after all.