foreclosure wave about to hit — again! — and with a thunderous roar no less (per TG’s ladyfriend)

[temeculaguy]

[quote=Huckleberry]It appears Diana is backing up yesterdays article with another one today…

http://www.cnbc.com/id/36195838

She must be tapping into new sources of insider banking info. It sounds like she is fairly confident in her new predictions.[/quote]

She’s got a number of inside sources and based on her comments and confidence, something is about to happen. I personally think that they are going to make an effort to clear the backlog this year, while inventories and interest rates are low. The guy she interviewed did pretty well, even with the pressure she was putting on him. She looked confident. Not her best look, she looks better when she’s outside and the hair is not so poofy but that confidence is just plain sexy. GGGrrrrr!

[SD Realtor]

CAR you and I are so much on the same page on that issue.

[SD Realtor]

CAR you and I are so much on the same page on that issue.

[SD Realtor]

CAR you and I are so much on the same page on that issue.

[SD Realtor]

CAR you and I are so much on the same page on that issue.

[SD Realtor]

CAR you and I are so much on the same page on that issue.

[jpinpb]

CAR – Thanks for posting all that. That really explains a lot and makes sense. I was trying to figure out WTH was going on w/ TPTB.

[jpinpb]

CAR – Thanks for posting all that. That really explains a lot and makes sense. I was trying to figure out WTH was going on w/ TPTB.

[jpinpb]

CAR – Thanks for posting all that. That really explains a lot and makes sense. I was trying to figure out WTH was going on w/ TPTB.

[jpinpb]

CAR – Thanks for posting all that. That really explains a lot and makes sense. I was trying to figure out WTH was going on w/ TPTB.

[jpinpb]

CAR – Thanks for posting all that. That really explains a lot and makes sense. I was trying to figure out WTH was going on w/ TPTB.

[CA renter]

Thanks, JP.

So far, it’s just a theory (obviously), but I suspected they were going to do this years ago when they started forcing the GSEs to reduce their capital ratios and take on riskier debt. This, after they were trying to tighten things up after the shake-ups at both Freddie and Fannie in 2003 and 2004.

Contrary to what many people think, the GSEs were NOT originally part of the problem. They had their own problems, which is why they got into trouble earlier, but they did not originally get involved in the riskiest types of mortgages until much later — after the private sector had done most of the damage.

After the disruptions in 2003/2004, they were being reined in during the 2005-2006 period. When the PTB saw what was going to happen in the private market (the crisis was NOT a surprise to the PTB, no matter what they tell the public), they forced the GSEs to take on toxic loans and enticed people to refi into conforming loans (this is also why they raised the price limits during this time — to cover the states where the riskiest lending was going on, like California). IMHO, they were trying to clear the private lenders’ books already, but the private sector kept running ahead of the PTB, and were issuing increasingly bad paper as the derivatives market took off and provided a false sense of security.

We’ll see if this is their plan, but it makes sense if you consider their actions over many years, IMHO. It might actually work out okay, though the buyers in 2008-early 2010 will become “collateral damage.” Even they might get their mortgages reduced, though, because almost all of those mortgages are already owned by the govt.

Of course, we will still have to pay in other ways, unfortunately.

[CA renter]

Thanks, JP.

So far, it’s just a theory (obviously), but I suspected they were going to do this years ago when they started forcing the GSEs to reduce their capital ratios and take on riskier debt. This, after they were trying to tighten things up after the shake-ups at both Freddie and Fannie in 2003 and 2004.

Contrary to what many people think, the GSEs were NOT originally part of the problem. They had their own problems, which is why they got into trouble earlier, but they did not originally get involved in the riskiest types of mortgages until much later — after the private sector had done most of the damage.

After the disruptions in 2003/2004, they were being reined in during the 2005-2006 period. When the PTB saw what was going to happen in the private market (the crisis was NOT a surprise to the PTB, no matter what they tell the public), they forced the GSEs to take on toxic loans and enticed people to refi into conforming loans (this is also why they raised the price limits during this time — to cover the states where the riskiest lending was going on, like California). IMHO, they were trying to clear the private lenders’ books already, but the private sector kept running ahead of the PTB, and were issuing increasingly bad paper as the derivatives market took off and provided a false sense of security.

We’ll see if this is their plan, but it makes sense if you consider their actions over many years, IMHO. It might actually work out okay, though the buyers in 2008-early 2010 will become “collateral damage.” Even they might get their mortgages reduced, though, because almost all of those mortgages are already owned by the govt.

Of course, we will still have to pay in other ways, unfortunately.

[CA renter]

Thanks, JP.

So far, it’s just a theory (obviously), but I suspected they were going to do this years ago when they started forcing the GSEs to reduce their capital ratios and take on riskier debt. This, after they were trying to tighten things up after the shake-ups at both Freddie and Fannie in 2003 and 2004.

Contrary to what many people think, the GSEs were NOT originally part of the problem. They had their own problems, which is why they got into trouble earlier, but they did not originally get involved in the riskiest types of mortgages until much later — after the private sector had done most of the damage.

After the disruptions in 2003/2004, they were being reined in during the 2005-2006 period. When the PTB saw what was going to happen in the private market (the crisis was NOT a surprise to the PTB, no matter what they tell the public), they forced the GSEs to take on toxic loans and enticed people to refi into conforming loans (this is also why they raised the price limits during this time — to cover the states where the riskiest lending was going on, like California). IMHO, they were trying to clear the private lenders’ books already, but the private sector kept running ahead of the PTB, and were issuing increasingly bad paper as the derivatives market took off and provided a false sense of security.

We’ll see if this is their plan, but it makes sense if you consider their actions over many years, IMHO. It might actually work out okay, though the buyers in 2008-early 2010 will become “collateral damage.” Even they might get their mortgages reduced, though, because almost all of those mortgages are already owned by the govt.

Of course, we will still have to pay in other ways, unfortunately.

[CA renter]

Thanks, JP.

So far, it’s just a theory (obviously), but I suspected they were going to do this years ago when they started forcing the GSEs to reduce their capital ratios and take on riskier debt. This, after they were trying to tighten things up after the shake-ups at both Freddie and Fannie in 2003 and 2004.

Contrary to what many people think, the GSEs were NOT originally part of the problem. They had their own problems, which is why they got into trouble earlier, but they did not originally get involved in the riskiest types of mortgages until much later — after the private sector had done most of the damage.

After the disruptions in 2003/2004, they were being reined in during the 2005-2006 period. When the PTB saw what was going to happen in the private market (the crisis was NOT a surprise to the PTB, no matter what they tell the public), they forced the GSEs to take on toxic loans and enticed people to refi into conforming loans (this is also why they raised the price limits during this time — to cover the states where the riskiest lending was going on, like California). IMHO, they were trying to clear the private lenders’ books already, but the private sector kept running ahead of the PTB, and were issuing increasingly bad paper as the derivatives market took off and provided a false sense of security.

We’ll see if this is their plan, but it makes sense if you consider their actions over many years, IMHO. It might actually work out okay, though the buyers in 2008-early 2010 will become “collateral damage.” Even they might get their mortgages reduced, though, because almost all of those mortgages are already owned by the govt.

Of course, we will still have to pay in other ways, unfortunately.

[Author]

Posts