Should taxpayers who are behind on their mortgages get at least the same breaks as the banks that hold those mortgages?

mortgage can be kind of tricky and it doesn't help that there are so many things with mortgages going on in the government right now. I think that if we all just worry about what's going on one step at a time, we'll be alright.

The banks should never have been bailed out. As for the taxpayers behind in their mortgage, that should be addressed on an individual basis. Unfortunately many got in over their head, buying houses that were basically above what they could really afford. I blame the buyer and the banks for that! Many are 'under water' because of the drastic drop in housing costs and financing 100% of the purchase. And then there are those who are behind in their mortgage because they lost their job and can't find another one in the area where they live. Those are the people who need help.

The banks should have never been bailed out in the first place. The term of to big to fail is nothing more than a red herring used to fool the people into allowing the greatest con job of all time to be enacted upon the American people, and the greatest theft of real wealth in the worlds history. the facts of this is to long to go into at this time, however to keep rewarding one failure after another is tantamount to insanity, and serves no real purpose other than to keep the economy going downward. { This is what both communism and Marxism results into, the constant shoring up of failure after failure until the nation is so broke and dysfunctional that a revaluation ensues. }
I have said this in other post, but people are going to have to come to grips with the fact that ALL of us in this country are going to have to make some very unpleasant and hard choices if we want to retain not only our freedom, our dignity but also get ourselves back onto the right track, not just for our current generation but those yet to come..
So NO these people should NOT be bailed out..

I wasn't asking if people should be bailed out, I'm saying that if the banks get a break, shouldn't the taxpayers who bailed the banks out get the same break?

Think about it. If the bank had failed and gone under and the bank is unable to sell the mortgage to another investor during bankruptcy, the debtor would be free and clear anyway. No bank means no mortgage.

Ok, but only in the case where the bank actually went under and could not sell the exziting mortage..like you said no bank then no mortage.

But obviously according to the views of the government, any and all corporations and their well being is far more important than the average citizen's well being.They say it's the opposite, naturally, but their actions speak volumes about their hypocrisy.

yes