For all you prudent renters

[Multiplepropertyowner]

One thing I see a lot on this site, is the mention of all of the people who “prudently” waited out the housing rise; not wanting to be a part of the madness.

Now they are upset about the bail out, feeling they are missing out again. (I agree that the bail out is not fair, but who said life is fair.)Here are my thoughts on the long list of patient renters and prudent investors:

1. When did the madness start? By my estimation it really got crazy in 2002. 1997-2002, while still a really hot market was not the feeding frenzy we saw from 2003-05. Thus, are not all of the “Prudent/Wise” renters on this site just people who missed out buying a home early in the game?
2. If you had it to do over again, would you not buy as many properties as you could using those crazy loans and then just sell in 2005. I believe you would. Because in the end most of you would throw out all of your concerns voiced on this site if it meant you could net a couple million.

Thus, my point is, while there are some moral people on this site who did not want to partake in the madness. Most of you who don’t own now are just people who missed the boat. Please tell me how I am wrong?

[privatebanker]

To be, or not to be: that is the question:… A little late there buddy. This has been discussed many, many times in the past on this site. Let’s get with the times…

[privatebanker]

To be, or not to be: that is the question:… A little late there buddy. This has been discussed many, many times in the past on this site. Let’s get with the times…

[privatebanker]

To be, or not to be: that is the question:… A little late there buddy. This has been discussed many, many times in the past on this site. Let’s get with the times…

[privatebanker]

To be, or not to be: that is the question:… A little late there buddy. This has been discussed many, many times in the past on this site. Let’s get with the times…

[privatebanker]

To be, or not to be: that is the question:… A little late there buddy. This has been discussed many, many times in the past on this site. Let’s get with the times…

[Multiplepropertyowner]

First of all, that is “Mr. Buddy” to you. Why then is there all the recent talk about how the bailout is hurting all of the prudent people who waited.
Merda taurorum animas conturbit

[Multiplepropertyowner]

First of all, that is “Mr. Buddy” to you. Why then is there all the recent talk about how the bailout is hurting all of the prudent people who waited.
Merda taurorum animas conturbit

[Multiplepropertyowner]

First of all, that is “Mr. Buddy” to you. Why then is there all the recent talk about how the bailout is hurting all of the prudent people who waited.
Merda taurorum animas conturbit

[Multiplepropertyowner]

First of all, that is “Mr. Buddy” to you. Why then is there all the recent talk about how the bailout is hurting all of the prudent people who waited.
Merda taurorum animas conturbit

[Multiplepropertyowner]

First of all, that is “Mr. Buddy” to you. Why then is there all the recent talk about how the bailout is hurting all of the prudent people who waited.
Merda taurorum animas conturbit

[SD Realtor]

I tell myself not to respond to these sorts of posts but I cannot help it.

I think you are missing the point.

Some of us such as myself are concerned that the recent bailouts as well as the future bailouts, lender workouts, as well as possible roll over and belly up behavior of the investors may indeed have a small effect on the depreciation cycle by reducing possible inventory.

That point of view differs between posters.

The ire about the entire situation is simple. Consumers are being rewarded for irresponsible consumption and lenders are being saved for poor if not vaporlike underwriting standards at time of origination. Furthermore not a penny of taxpayer money should be applied to ANY of this.

Do you think any of your taxpayer money should be used to either provide life support for a lender, or to subsidize an investor, or to assist in the workout of some chump making 40k a year living beyond his means?

It is not happening at the moment but is there a possibility it could happen?

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

I tell myself not to respond to these sorts of posts but I cannot help it.

I think you are missing the point.

Some of us such as myself are concerned that the recent bailouts as well as the future bailouts, lender workouts, as well as possible roll over and belly up behavior of the investors may indeed have a small effect on the depreciation cycle by reducing possible inventory.

That point of view differs between posters.

The ire about the entire situation is simple. Consumers are being rewarded for irresponsible consumption and lenders are being saved for poor if not vaporlike underwriting standards at time of origination. Furthermore not a penny of taxpayer money should be applied to ANY of this.

Do you think any of your taxpayer money should be used to either provide life support for a lender, or to subsidize an investor, or to assist in the workout of some chump making 40k a year living beyond his means?

It is not happening at the moment but is there a possibility it could happen?

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

I tell myself not to respond to these sorts of posts but I cannot help it.

I think you are missing the point.

Some of us such as myself are concerned that the recent bailouts as well as the future bailouts, lender workouts, as well as possible roll over and belly up behavior of the investors may indeed have a small effect on the depreciation cycle by reducing possible inventory.

That point of view differs between posters.

The ire about the entire situation is simple. Consumers are being rewarded for irresponsible consumption and lenders are being saved for poor if not vaporlike underwriting standards at time of origination. Furthermore not a penny of taxpayer money should be applied to ANY of this.

Do you think any of your taxpayer money should be used to either provide life support for a lender, or to subsidize an investor, or to assist in the workout of some chump making 40k a year living beyond his means?

It is not happening at the moment but is there a possibility it could happen?

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

I tell myself not to respond to these sorts of posts but I cannot help it.

I think you are missing the point.

Some of us such as myself are concerned that the recent bailouts as well as the future bailouts, lender workouts, as well as possible roll over and belly up behavior of the investors may indeed have a small effect on the depreciation cycle by reducing possible inventory.

That point of view differs between posters.

The ire about the entire situation is simple. Consumers are being rewarded for irresponsible consumption and lenders are being saved for poor if not vaporlike underwriting standards at time of origination. Furthermore not a penny of taxpayer money should be applied to ANY of this.

Do you think any of your taxpayer money should be used to either provide life support for a lender, or to subsidize an investor, or to assist in the workout of some chump making 40k a year living beyond his means?

It is not happening at the moment but is there a possibility it could happen?

SD Realtor

[Author]

Posts