- This topic has 35 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 9 months ago by
AK.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 12, 2009 at 10:45 AM #365243March 12, 2009 at 11:10 AM #364675
UCGal
ParticipantFrom a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing?
Of course buyer beware.
March 12, 2009 at 11:10 AM #364961ParticipantFrom a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing?
Of course buyer beware.
March 12, 2009 at 11:10 AM #365119ParticipantFrom a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing?
Of course buyer beware.
March 12, 2009 at 11:10 AM #365156ParticipantFrom a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing?
Of course buyer beware.
March 12, 2009 at 11:10 AM #365268ParticipantFrom a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing?
Of course buyer beware.
March 12, 2009 at 6:09 PM #364918patientrenter
Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
March 12, 2009 at 6:09 PM #365205Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
March 12, 2009 at 6:09 PM #365364Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
March 12, 2009 at 6:09 PM #365403Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
March 12, 2009 at 6:09 PM #365513Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
March 12, 2009 at 7:10 PM #364978Participant[quote=patientrenter][quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
[/quote]I would assume at least some percentage will pay the mortgages. Presumably more than 50% of these sales (very conservative number) will result in mortgages paid. That’s better than ZERO percent.
It’s not ideal… but it’s better than fannie sitting with the houses, not for sale, not for rent, not doing anything.
March 12, 2009 at 7:10 PM #365267Participant[quote=patientrenter][quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
[/quote]I would assume at least some percentage will pay the mortgages. Presumably more than 50% of these sales (very conservative number) will result in mortgages paid. That’s better than ZERO percent.
It’s not ideal… but it’s better than fannie sitting with the houses, not for sale, not for rent, not doing anything.
March 12, 2009 at 7:10 PM #365425Participant[quote=patientrenter][quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
[/quote]I would assume at least some percentage will pay the mortgages. Presumably more than 50% of these sales (very conservative number) will result in mortgages paid. That’s better than ZERO percent.
It’s not ideal… but it’s better than fannie sitting with the houses, not for sale, not for rent, not doing anything.
March 12, 2009 at 7:10 PM #365463Participant[quote=patientrenter][quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
[/quote]I would assume at least some percentage will pay the mortgages. Presumably more than 50% of these sales (very conservative number) will result in mortgages paid. That’s better than ZERO percent.
It’s not ideal… but it’s better than fannie sitting with the houses, not for sale, not for rent, not doing anything.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
