Is this fixing the problem?

Reports are showing that they government could spend around 1.5 trillion or about $15,000 per family on their bailout plan, but it is not fixing the problem only the effects of the problem. The problem is that we have a huge surplus of houses and no one is buying them . The reason people are not buying them is concern about the hosuing market and lack of credit or change in requirements for credit (i.e 20% down). Years ago you used to have 20% down to buy a house. Lenders felt that they could get more people into houses and in turn make more money if they let people put less money down. You used to have to save for years to be able to purchase a house and it was then an accomplishment to have a house. People were less willing to walk away from the house and giving up without a fight if they had worked so hard to get it in the first place. Fast forward to about 5 -10 years ago and you could buy a house with little or no money down. So everyone was buying houses, the prices rose dramatically because so many more people could purchase one, now that you didn't need as large of down payments. They didn't have as much invested and had very little equity so it was eaiser to walk away and harder to sell because of little to no wingle room on price. The housing crises we are currently and the change in lending requirements now requiring 10-20% down again in addition to great credit this limits the amount of people who can purchase a house. This also comes when the national savings is $0 if not negative (in some reports). When you currently save zero it sure takes a long time to save 20% on a down payment of a house. This limits the amount of people who can purchase a house at a time where there is too many houses on the market for the demand. We are in a time period were we have the most houses for sale with the smallest amount of people who can purchase them. This is will take years to adjust and correct it self. Some have questioned that if the government gave each family $15,000 they are spending on the bailout that people would have money to pay for down payments on houses (which would help with the hosuing surplus) and spend on other things to help stimulate the economy that this would have a greater impact on the economy than the bailout. Of course this will never happen but it makes you wonder if the money could have been spent in a better way to help the economy. The bailout might be more of a symbolic event showing we are going to do everything in our means to fix the problem. The stock market seemed to react to this idea and you might not be able to put a number of the piece of mind idea.