I agree that something needs to be done to prevent massive foreclosures and to stop the market collaspe, but I'm not sure if this plan is it. I don't see the point in rewarding bad behaviour either by borrowers or lenders. How about some of these ideas, which have already been floated in these forums.

Allowing home owners who are forced into a short sale to write that off as a capital loss on their taxes (instead of paying income taxes on the difference).

Restructure mortgages by increasing the term from 15 to 30 or 30 to 50 instead of principle cramdowns.

Require homeowner who benefit under the bailout to either pay back part of the gov't subsidy when they sell their house or over time via taxes.

Stabilize the job market (easier said than done) and wages so that people who were responsible borrowers don't end up in jeopardy of foreclosure because of a job loss or wage cut.

Allow borrowers with good credit and payment histories to use a "hardship" time period in which their payments or rates are reduced if they are hit with a job loss or medical crisis. This would be for a limited time and would not impact the owed principle.

Reward responsible borrowers who have good credit and payment histories with some incentive (these are people could stimulate the economy by spending that extra money, investing it or putting it in a bank account so the bank could in turn lend that money).

Let borrowers who had 20%+ equity in their houses, have good credit and payment histories refi to lower interest rates (not lower principle) without incurring PMI penalties if their house value has declined such that they are under 20%. They now pay less each month and can help stimulate the economy.

Greater regulation of mortgage brokers and banks. Shut down the mortgage brokers that committed fraud, penalize the brokers that put borrowers into homes and mortgages that they shouldn't have.

There are definitely some borrowers that should not be bailed out, they are just in houses that they cannot afford nor could they ever afford. We could end up bailing them out over and over again and that is just stupid. There are also some banks and brokers out there that should not be bailed out either. Let them fail.

It is horrible that this happens, but instead of placing blame, shouldn't we look into ways to make sure it doesn't happen as often? How about "intelligent" car seats that can send a message to parents or some sort of monitoring station if there is a child in the carseat and the temp goes out of some range? I'm sure that someone can come up with a solution here, this is not rock science.

I'm expecting my first child in May and am going to look into getting one of these alarm devices. New parents are so tired from being up all night and with a sleeping baby in rear-facing seat it's pretty easy to see how this could happen. The idea of putting your bag in the back is a good idea also. As far as marketing there should be a national campaign, like the "Tummy to play, Back to Sleep" one for SIDS. Look at all of the sleep positioners, sleep sacks, special swaddlers, etc out there for sleeping babies. Of course it did take years for SIDS to be acknowledged as a real medical issue as opposed to bad parenting.

Really, having a home plot is a great way to supplement your food supply and reduce food costs, but it not an answer those who may be going hungry in the next weeks and months. Food takes time to grow and it takes free time to grow it. It takes an investment in cash. It requires access to land, sunshine and rain (or water). It requires knowledge and some skill. All of these are may be in short supply for the struggling hungry. It won't fully feed a family year round either. It won't help the elderly, handicapped or homeless. Home plots should be part of an arsenal of solutions, like food banks, food stamps, "home ec" education, reduced price school lunches, meals on wheels, etc. Of course available jobs with decent wages would probably be the best solution for the "nouveau needy".

Condoms obviously can save lives in that case without the "moral transgression" of sex outside marriage.

Uh, let's see, they start out as children and they are RAISED by parents. Laboring adults aren't just hatched fully grown.

Re the "paid" maternity leave that someone mentioned. If you are referring to short term disability. This is leave earned by workers from their company. It is not gov't FMLA(all unpaid). It is only to be used by post-partum women while they are under the care of a doctor and recovering from delivery (typically 6 weeks after vaginal delivery and 8 weeks after a c-section). In my company, this is the same leave earned by men and non-pregnant women and workers have the right to use that leave when they are under the care of a doctor be it for elective surgery, a skiing accident or recovering from a stroke. Only a certain amount of weeks are at 100% pay, the rest at 60%, all based on service years. Other than this recovery period, IMO, parental leave should be equally given to men and women.

FMLA leave for me is going to be very limited. I'm in my 3rd trimester and my husband lost his job 3 months ago. The two weeks of FMLA that I'll be using will be funded by my EARNED vacation days. I know all of you non-parents are so jealous that instead of jetting off to the beach for spring break like you do for your vacation, I'll be changing diapers and figuring out how to use a breast pump.