- This topic has 17 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 6 months ago by SD Realtor.
September 21, 2007 at 10:46 AM #10366
September 21, 2007 at 10:48 AM #85452(former)FormerSanDieganParticipant
My favorite (NOT) proposal …
“Form a regional land bank to buy foreclosed properties to create affordable buying opportunities while guarding against neighborhood blight. Purchased homes could be rented at affordable rates and later sold at affordable prices.”
Who wants to compete with shady City Hall or the County-appointed bureaucrats on discount property ?
Brought to you from the same guys who brought you the pension scandal/mess.
September 21, 2007 at 10:49 AM #85453JWM in SDParticipant
“Adelizzi said his concern was not for the health of the mortgage market, but for the people who have gotten caught up in foreclosures. The market eventually will correct itself, he said, “but we want to see it happen in a way that causes the least amount of pain.””
Ah yes, well why don’t you fund that yourself Adelizzi??? Or maybe the SD Pension Fund can buy those foreclosures as an investment in the city itself right?? Oh yeah, forgot about Ameranth.
These people are mental midgets….
September 21, 2007 at 11:09 AM #85457asragovParticipant
The problem is too big, and the wheels that are in motion cannot be reversed. Governments will not be able to prevent the inevitable.
San Diego’s government probably doesn’t even have the money to put the telephone lines underground – they will not have any meaningful money for this.
San Diego homes will not be worth what they were during the bubble times for a long, long, long time, and there is nothing a government, local or federal, can do about it.
Government is too inefficient (i.e. they will recognize and act on problems too slowly). Even when they begin to act, it is unlikely to have much of an effect on prices.
September 21, 2007 at 11:12 AM #85458(former)FormerSanDieganParticipant
Just another rat hole for the City Council to stuff money down. If any action in this direction is taken it will end up putting Gov’t money into the hands of city council buddies.
September 21, 2007 at 11:26 AM #85460NotCrankyParticipant
They will probably buy up all Nick Inzunza’s slumlord units at “market price” as a concession for the fact that National City doesn’t have a NFL team.
Where is Drunkle when you need him anyway? Sometimes I think we are the only ones that understand eachother.LOL
September 21, 2007 at 11:26 AM #85459
Asragov I respectfully disagree and believe you are missing the point. It is well understood that the bailouts will not stop the depreciation trend. However to simply handwave it away is not appropriate. It is one thing for people on the website to express bitterness for not being able to buy a home. To berate foolish buyers over the past many years for buying something they could not afford. Similarly I would guess the prevailing (and incorrect) belief by everyone who has been prudent was –
– It will not affect me because I have been prudent.
– I will not have to bailout these people.
Well what we are seeing is that these two assumptions have been dead wrong. You and I and everyone else from hardcore bears like JWM to others like Alex Angel and temecula guy and all the other players here will donate some of our tax money be it local, state, federal, whatever… in some way shape or form some of it will wind its way to the FHA or some other platform that in the long run will either bailout someone who f**d up or purchase a new jumbo loan on the secondary market or something like that.
To say, “oh don’t worry it will never stop the depreciation” is an improper response. Especially because there will be more programs like this. Our government is hell bent on continuing to promote spending and they will back that policy up come hell or high water. These programs will be rolled out at potentially federal, state and local levels. So I would kind of hold my breathe for awhile.
September 21, 2007 at 11:46 AM #85461JWM in SDParticipant
My definition Moral Hazard:
When some poor J6P in flyover country making 40 or 50K a year, and who will never ever step foot into a 700k home much less own one, gets a huge tax increase to bailout some SoCal DBag who overleveraged on a 700k house. Will there be political ramifications at that point? Is that when a Ron Paul figure comes into prominence? Or do my kids get to pay this off?
This may sound extreme to some but that’s what it boils down to.
September 21, 2007 at 11:53 AM #85462PadreBrianParticipant
Yeah this plan would never work. What’s the # of foreclosures in SD county? 30,000?
So the county buys: 30000 homes*450000(average home price)=$13,500,000,000
13 Trillion dollars. Yeah, that will work. hahahahah
September 21, 2007 at 12:04 PM #85464Sandi EganParticipant
September 21, 2007 at 1:32 PM #85476sdrealtorParticipant
You are right on target and these folks just dont want to believe it. Piggingtons are the minority by far. The vast majority of Americans are invested in homes retaining value and want to see government/industry intervention in times of economic distress. There will be numerous efforts from every level of government and industry to deal with the problems whether we like it or not. While no amount of intervention will likely solve all of the problems or keep prices elevated at these levels, the invisible hand will not be left to take care of the market on its own. Anyone that completely discounts the collective impact of all that is coming is a bit naive imo.
September 21, 2007 at 1:38 PM #85477
It is scary… we have agreed on to many things lately.
September 21, 2007 at 1:39 PM #85478lendingbubblecontinuesParticipant
I am sure you are right with regard to efforts from government and industry. There are, however, more holes in the dike than there are thumbs to plug them, I believe.
Sadly, the days of the U.S. enjoying higher living standards than the majority of the rest of the world are numbered.
September 21, 2007 at 1:43 PM #85480sdrealtorParticipant
I agree with you about there being too many holes to plug. But plugging half of them (or any % of them for that matter) slows down the deluge. The longer it goes on, the longer the market has to inflate itself out of some of this not to mention the addition of cockamamey creative solutions you or I would never even dream of.
September 21, 2007 at 1:48 PM #85481lendingbubblecontinuesParticipant
who knows? perhaps we are already a province of China and don’t know it yet?
September 21, 2007 at 2:33 PM #85485PadreBrianParticipant
oops. But, yeah, 13 Billion, put that on SD’s tab. lol!
September 21, 2007 at 3:15 PM #85491asragovParticipant
“It will not affect prices” is not the “wrong response”.
The basic point is that our government is not effective enough to even marshal a token response, much less one that will cost us much money or affect prices. It is able to divert our resources to stay in a state of perpetual war, sell public lands and property cheaply, and to inflate the currency, but the mortgage mess is a much more difficult issue.
At the local San Diego government level, there is simply gargantuan incompetence. At the federal level, there will be far less money spent than on Iraq, interest on the debt, or is lost through inflation.
It is very hard to figure out who exactly needs to be bailed out – homeowners are certainly unlikely beneficiaries. I do believe that the risk is much more diffuse this time around, vs. the RTC days (to include European investors, Asian sovereign funds, etc. etc.), so a concentrated bailout is hard to picture.
The bulk of the losses I believe will be sustained by individual homeowners, banks, and investors. Taxpayers after that, because the problem is too complex and difficult for government to deal with:
September 21, 2007 at 4:12 PM #85501
asragov… still not there yet. It doesn’t matter to me who sustains the bulk of the losses. Nor does it matter to me about the incompetence of all levels of government. A house is a house is a house…. of course. It is an asset. If it had wheels it would be a motorhome. If it had wheels but you couldn’t sleep in it then it would be a car. Less money then Iraq at the federal level, and local incompetence at the city council level has no bearing on the topic at hand.
We can handwave it all we want but when all these programs are aggregated together, and believe me brother just as there is a tidal wave of foreclosures coming, there WILL be more programs… if people like Hillary’s health care program they will throw a freeking ticker tape parade when she comes up with a cure for housing. Watching Bush backtrack on his stance is more of the same. What about pushing FHA insurance up on jumbo loans in the future? That has nothing to do with a bailout but don’t you think that would help tilt the scales on someome who is on the fence?
Again, it is not the point of whether alone or even together these programs will make a difference. The FHA currently has 700 BILLION of insured loans. My friend that 700 billion is insured by YOU and by ME. That will go up and under current legislation it will include higher limits. Guess who will oversee that, who will regulate that? Yes those same idiots that you refer to above. It doesn’t matter if 1 person is bailed out or if 100000 is bailed out… it is not just the bail out, it is also future policy.
To not recognize how ultimately bad this is and will get is well… kind of unfortunate…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.