"understandably reluctant?"

Editor,

According to "Silence of the Lenders: Is Anyone Listening?" (7/13/2008), "almost everyone agrees that speculators, who bought houses on the gambit that they could flip them to a higher bidder, deserve no special assistance." But, your article continues, "because working out a loan can mean less income or outright losses for investors, servicers have been understandably reluctant to modify mortgages en masse."

According to what logic should profit for an "investor" speculating in an inflated market be guaranteed? And if that "investor" was lied to by a financial institution that preyed on unqualified buyers to turn a fast buck on fees, why should borrowers victimized by that financial institution, not the principals and stockholders who profited, suffer the consequences of those crimes?