- This topic has 294 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 7 months ago by
Anonymous.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 27, 2011 at 1:30 PM #707381June 27, 2011 at 2:20 PM #706181
SD Realtor
ParticipantCome on CAR you cannot be serious. You start sliding down a slippery slope when you start making restrictions like that.
Mojo I guess it depends on the market conditions…
June 27, 2011 at 2:20 PM #706278ParticipantCome on CAR you cannot be serious. You start sliding down a slippery slope when you start making restrictions like that.
Mojo I guess it depends on the market conditions…
June 27, 2011 at 2:20 PM #706877ParticipantCome on CAR you cannot be serious. You start sliding down a slippery slope when you start making restrictions like that.
Mojo I guess it depends on the market conditions…
June 27, 2011 at 2:20 PM #707027ParticipantCome on CAR you cannot be serious. You start sliding down a slippery slope when you start making restrictions like that.
Mojo I guess it depends on the market conditions…
June 27, 2011 at 2:20 PM #707391ParticipantCome on CAR you cannot be serious. You start sliding down a slippery slope when you start making restrictions like that.
Mojo I guess it depends on the market conditions…
June 27, 2011 at 4:51 PM #706216ucodegen
ParticipantDid anyone ask:
Who is financing these Canadian purchases? Canadian banks restrict the amount of leverage, but US banks are more ‘generous’ on their leverage.If the properties are being purchased by Canadians, using US Banks, we could be looking at R.E. collapse #2. Foreigners have a greater incentive to just walk away if the deal goes bad, particularly if they are highly leveraged. Now who makes the US Banks whole? Will they be expecting bailout #n+1?
June 27, 2011 at 4:51 PM #706313ParticipantDid anyone ask:
Who is financing these Canadian purchases? Canadian banks restrict the amount of leverage, but US banks are more ‘generous’ on their leverage.If the properties are being purchased by Canadians, using US Banks, we could be looking at R.E. collapse #2. Foreigners have a greater incentive to just walk away if the deal goes bad, particularly if they are highly leveraged. Now who makes the US Banks whole? Will they be expecting bailout #n+1?
June 27, 2011 at 4:51 PM #706913ParticipantDid anyone ask:
Who is financing these Canadian purchases? Canadian banks restrict the amount of leverage, but US banks are more ‘generous’ on their leverage.If the properties are being purchased by Canadians, using US Banks, we could be looking at R.E. collapse #2. Foreigners have a greater incentive to just walk away if the deal goes bad, particularly if they are highly leveraged. Now who makes the US Banks whole? Will they be expecting bailout #n+1?
June 27, 2011 at 4:51 PM #707062ParticipantDid anyone ask:
Who is financing these Canadian purchases? Canadian banks restrict the amount of leverage, but US banks are more ‘generous’ on their leverage.If the properties are being purchased by Canadians, using US Banks, we could be looking at R.E. collapse #2. Foreigners have a greater incentive to just walk away if the deal goes bad, particularly if they are highly leveraged. Now who makes the US Banks whole? Will they be expecting bailout #n+1?
June 27, 2011 at 4:51 PM #707426ParticipantDid anyone ask:
Who is financing these Canadian purchases? Canadian banks restrict the amount of leverage, but US banks are more ‘generous’ on their leverage.If the properties are being purchased by Canadians, using US Banks, we could be looking at R.E. collapse #2. Foreigners have a greater incentive to just walk away if the deal goes bad, particularly if they are highly leveraged. Now who makes the US Banks whole? Will they be expecting bailout #n+1?
June 28, 2011 at 1:35 AM #706274CA renter
Participant[quote=outtamojo][quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]Oh those evil foreigners. How dare they take advantage of our depleted currency. What should we do, bar foreigners from purchasing real estate? Should we blame them because our govt, fed and treasury have are inept?
Really?[/quote]
Though it’s controversial, I think that the rights of citizens should come before the rights of foreigners. We should not lock locals out of the housing market because foreigners want to buy vacation homes here (and I would argue that other countries have this obligation to their people as well).[/quote]
Did I read right, homeownership is a right?[/quote]
I think we need to determine what our priorities are. Though I’ve never liked the “Ownership Society” that was built on loose credit, I DO agree that most people are better off owning their own homes (affordably-priced homes, not “affordable” credit), largely because they can control their own housing costs, and because they can have a paid-off house when they need it most — in retirement.
I want to avoid a return to the days when a privileged few owned all the assets and had all the power, while the lowly plebeians labored to give all their money to the wealthiest people in the world. We are already headed quickly in that direction, unfortunately, but I think we can reverse this trend.
Yes, I believe society is better served if we eliminate any perks for owning income, second, or vacation homes. No mortgage interest deductions, no government-backed loans of any sort, no Prop 13 protection, etc. for second/investment homes. The rights of U.S. workers to own their own home trumps the rights of speculators/investors to make money from housing, which I consider to be a basic need.
June 28, 2011 at 1:35 AM #706373Participant[quote=outtamojo][quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]Oh those evil foreigners. How dare they take advantage of our depleted currency. What should we do, bar foreigners from purchasing real estate? Should we blame them because our govt, fed and treasury have are inept?
Really?[/quote]
Though it’s controversial, I think that the rights of citizens should come before the rights of foreigners. We should not lock locals out of the housing market because foreigners want to buy vacation homes here (and I would argue that other countries have this obligation to their people as well).[/quote]
Did I read right, homeownership is a right?[/quote]
I think we need to determine what our priorities are. Though I’ve never liked the “Ownership Society” that was built on loose credit, I DO agree that most people are better off owning their own homes (affordably-priced homes, not “affordable” credit), largely because they can control their own housing costs, and because they can have a paid-off house when they need it most — in retirement.
I want to avoid a return to the days when a privileged few owned all the assets and had all the power, while the lowly plebeians labored to give all their money to the wealthiest people in the world. We are already headed quickly in that direction, unfortunately, but I think we can reverse this trend.
Yes, I believe society is better served if we eliminate any perks for owning income, second, or vacation homes. No mortgage interest deductions, no government-backed loans of any sort, no Prop 13 protection, etc. for second/investment homes. The rights of U.S. workers to own their own home trumps the rights of speculators/investors to make money from housing, which I consider to be a basic need.
June 28, 2011 at 1:35 AM #706969Participant[quote=outtamojo][quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]Oh those evil foreigners. How dare they take advantage of our depleted currency. What should we do, bar foreigners from purchasing real estate? Should we blame them because our govt, fed and treasury have are inept?
Really?[/quote]
Though it’s controversial, I think that the rights of citizens should come before the rights of foreigners. We should not lock locals out of the housing market because foreigners want to buy vacation homes here (and I would argue that other countries have this obligation to their people as well).[/quote]
Did I read right, homeownership is a right?[/quote]
I think we need to determine what our priorities are. Though I’ve never liked the “Ownership Society” that was built on loose credit, I DO agree that most people are better off owning their own homes (affordably-priced homes, not “affordable” credit), largely because they can control their own housing costs, and because they can have a paid-off house when they need it most — in retirement.
I want to avoid a return to the days when a privileged few owned all the assets and had all the power, while the lowly plebeians labored to give all their money to the wealthiest people in the world. We are already headed quickly in that direction, unfortunately, but I think we can reverse this trend.
Yes, I believe society is better served if we eliminate any perks for owning income, second, or vacation homes. No mortgage interest deductions, no government-backed loans of any sort, no Prop 13 protection, etc. for second/investment homes. The rights of U.S. workers to own their own home trumps the rights of speculators/investors to make money from housing, which I consider to be a basic need.
June 28, 2011 at 1:35 AM #707120Participant[quote=outtamojo][quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]Oh those evil foreigners. How dare they take advantage of our depleted currency. What should we do, bar foreigners from purchasing real estate? Should we blame them because our govt, fed and treasury have are inept?
Really?[/quote]
Though it’s controversial, I think that the rights of citizens should come before the rights of foreigners. We should not lock locals out of the housing market because foreigners want to buy vacation homes here (and I would argue that other countries have this obligation to their people as well).[/quote]
Did I read right, homeownership is a right?[/quote]
I think we need to determine what our priorities are. Though I’ve never liked the “Ownership Society” that was built on loose credit, I DO agree that most people are better off owning their own homes (affordably-priced homes, not “affordable” credit), largely because they can control their own housing costs, and because they can have a paid-off house when they need it most — in retirement.
I want to avoid a return to the days when a privileged few owned all the assets and had all the power, while the lowly plebeians labored to give all their money to the wealthiest people in the world. We are already headed quickly in that direction, unfortunately, but I think we can reverse this trend.
Yes, I believe society is better served if we eliminate any perks for owning income, second, or vacation homes. No mortgage interest deductions, no government-backed loans of any sort, no Prop 13 protection, etc. for second/investment homes. The rights of U.S. workers to own their own home trumps the rights of speculators/investors to make money from housing, which I consider to be a basic need.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.