Gee, I guess those new conforming limits haven’t really helped much….

[SD Realtor]

Yes JWM I am not backing off my claim. There is alot of money out there.

Show me a post where I said anything about changing any DTI figures at all. Also show me any post I made where I said that the amount of money people have would change the secular direction of the market.

You see, what you seem to do is pick up something I said, or pick up the tenor of a post I may have made and then take it into a different context. Please go ahead and find the contexts as to where I posted about the amount of money and downpayments that people had. If I do recall, I also posted factual downpayments straight from tax rolls. Similarly I also posted alot of the discussion about the money that people had in RESPONSE to posts and threads where other posters OPENLY wondered “How can anyone come up with x$ for a downpayment?” Finally if I also recall, my posts on this subject were much more on the topic about warning people not to gauge what others can make, or can afford based on your own world.

SD Realtor

[cowboy]

On a bit of a different topic. From what I hear, the typical 90% first loan and 10% second loan to get around paying PMI is no longer available for people with a LTV higher than 75%. This is yet another example of how things are tightening up in the credit world for potential home borrowers.

Right now it’s all about bringing some money to the table and proving you can afford the payments.

I remember reading an article during the bubble peak about how many people could afford homes using the traditional 30 year fixed loan in SoCal. It was something ridiculously low (below 10% if I recall correctly)

[cowboy]

On a bit of a different topic. From what I hear, the typical 90% first loan and 10% second loan to get around paying PMI is no longer available for people with a LTV higher than 75%. This is yet another example of how things are tightening up in the credit world for potential home borrowers.

Right now it’s all about bringing some money to the table and proving you can afford the payments.

I remember reading an article during the bubble peak about how many people could afford homes using the traditional 30 year fixed loan in SoCal. It was something ridiculously low (below 10% if I recall correctly)

[cowboy]

On a bit of a different topic. From what I hear, the typical 90% first loan and 10% second loan to get around paying PMI is no longer available for people with a LTV higher than 75%. This is yet another example of how things are tightening up in the credit world for potential home borrowers.

Right now it’s all about bringing some money to the table and proving you can afford the payments.

I remember reading an article during the bubble peak about how many people could afford homes using the traditional 30 year fixed loan in SoCal. It was something ridiculously low (below 10% if I recall correctly)

[cowboy]

On a bit of a different topic. From what I hear, the typical 90% first loan and 10% second loan to get around paying PMI is no longer available for people with a LTV higher than 75%. This is yet another example of how things are tightening up in the credit world for potential home borrowers.

Right now it’s all about bringing some money to the table and proving you can afford the payments.

I remember reading an article during the bubble peak about how many people could afford homes using the traditional 30 year fixed loan in SoCal. It was something ridiculously low (below 10% if I recall correctly)

[cowboy]

On a bit of a different topic. From what I hear, the typical 90% first loan and 10% second loan to get around paying PMI is no longer available for people with a LTV higher than 75%. This is yet another example of how things are tightening up in the credit world for potential home borrowers.

Right now it’s all about bringing some money to the table and proving you can afford the payments.

I remember reading an article during the bubble peak about how many people could afford homes using the traditional 30 year fixed loan in SoCal. It was something ridiculously low (below 10% if I recall correctly)

[sdrealtor]

As one of the Realtor Triad, show me one time I claimed the new loan limits were going to make a big difference. Will they help some folks, sure. Will they help the masses or turn around the ship absolutely not. Suffice to say I cant remember a single time where myself, Adam or Rus made such a claim.

[sdrealtor]

As one of the Realtor Triad, show me one time I claimed the new loan limits were going to make a big difference. Will they help some folks, sure. Will they help the masses or turn around the ship absolutely not. Suffice to say I cant remember a single time where myself, Adam or Rus made such a claim.

[sdrealtor]

As one of the Realtor Triad, show me one time I claimed the new loan limits were going to make a big difference. Will they help some folks, sure. Will they help the masses or turn around the ship absolutely not. Suffice to say I cant remember a single time where myself, Adam or Rus made such a claim.

[sdrealtor]

As one of the Realtor Triad, show me one time I claimed the new loan limits were going to make a big difference. Will they help some folks, sure. Will they help the masses or turn around the ship absolutely not. Suffice to say I cant remember a single time where myself, Adam or Rus made such a claim.

[sdrealtor]

As one of the Realtor Triad, show me one time I claimed the new loan limits were going to make a big difference. Will they help some folks, sure. Will they help the masses or turn around the ship absolutely not. Suffice to say I cant remember a single time where myself, Adam or Rus made such a claim.

[NotCranky]

JWM This is a pretty much all I have said on the topic.In the third paragraph I stated directly that the limit increases won’t have much effect.

Submitted by Rustico on January 29, 2008 – 12:42am.

You can make a quantitative argument for the limit increase that make sense either way. I could say for instance 417k is enough for California and is superfluous to the rest of the nation with regards to the intent of these programs especially FHA.

My problem with the limit increase isn’t mathematical it is philosophical. Raising them at the current time seems intrinsically bad. The motivations are wrong IMHO as was the funny business that apparently created the need. I am also concerned that more allowances will be made, in conjunction with these limit increases, such that the gse’s can pass some of the already bad paper on to tax payers. It is not as if all of this is transparent.

Without more devious plans the limit increases don’t change affordability and therefore demand very much in and of itself so prices must continue to come down. I don’t believe underwriting standards are going to be abused to the extent they were any time soon( I will keep an open mind about that though). Interest rates will affect house prices more so when we near a real floor.

I do agree that there is possibly a convergence of factors that make the market or some segments look a little better in the next few months .Some properties will continue to hit new lows everyday and some might hold ground for a few months.
The market in general has still got a long way down to go if the pols, Fed and mortgage industry don’t come up with something better than what they are throwing at the bust so far. Maybe they will keep juicing the housing market perfectly from here on out while the economy miraculously turns to and holds on to prosperity. I doubt it.

edit | reply

[NotCranky]

JWM This is a pretty much all I have said on the topic.In the third paragraph I stated directly that the limit increases won’t have much effect.

Submitted by Rustico on January 29, 2008 – 12:42am.

You can make a quantitative argument for the limit increase that make sense either way. I could say for instance 417k is enough for California and is superfluous to the rest of the nation with regards to the intent of these programs especially FHA.

My problem with the limit increase isn’t mathematical it is philosophical. Raising them at the current time seems intrinsically bad. The motivations are wrong IMHO as was the funny business that apparently created the need. I am also concerned that more allowances will be made, in conjunction with these limit increases, such that the gse’s can pass some of the already bad paper on to tax payers. It is not as if all of this is transparent.

Without more devious plans the limit increases don’t change affordability and therefore demand very much in and of itself so prices must continue to come down. I don’t believe underwriting standards are going to be abused to the extent they were any time soon( I will keep an open mind about that though). Interest rates will affect house prices more so when we near a real floor.

I do agree that there is possibly a convergence of factors that make the market or some segments look a little better in the next few months .Some properties will continue to hit new lows everyday and some might hold ground for a few months.
The market in general has still got a long way down to go if the pols, Fed and mortgage industry don’t come up with something better than what they are throwing at the bust so far. Maybe they will keep juicing the housing market perfectly from here on out while the economy miraculously turns to and holds on to prosperity. I doubt it.

edit | reply

[NotCranky]

JWM This is a pretty much all I have said on the topic.In the third paragraph I stated directly that the limit increases won’t have much effect.

Submitted by Rustico on January 29, 2008 – 12:42am.

You can make a quantitative argument for the limit increase that make sense either way. I could say for instance 417k is enough for California and is superfluous to the rest of the nation with regards to the intent of these programs especially FHA.

My problem with the limit increase isn’t mathematical it is philosophical. Raising them at the current time seems intrinsically bad. The motivations are wrong IMHO as was the funny business that apparently created the need. I am also concerned that more allowances will be made, in conjunction with these limit increases, such that the gse’s can pass some of the already bad paper on to tax payers. It is not as if all of this is transparent.

Without more devious plans the limit increases don’t change affordability and therefore demand very much in and of itself so prices must continue to come down. I don’t believe underwriting standards are going to be abused to the extent they were any time soon( I will keep an open mind about that though). Interest rates will affect house prices more so when we near a real floor.

I do agree that there is possibly a convergence of factors that make the market or some segments look a little better in the next few months .Some properties will continue to hit new lows everyday and some might hold ground for a few months.
The market in general has still got a long way down to go if the pols, Fed and mortgage industry don’t come up with something better than what they are throwing at the bust so far. Maybe they will keep juicing the housing market perfectly from here on out while the economy miraculously turns to and holds on to prosperity. I doubt it.

edit | reply

[NotCranky]

JWM This is a pretty much all I have said on the topic.In the third paragraph I stated directly that the limit increases won’t have much effect.

Submitted by Rustico on January 29, 2008 – 12:42am.

You can make a quantitative argument for the limit increase that make sense either way. I could say for instance 417k is enough for California and is superfluous to the rest of the nation with regards to the intent of these programs especially FHA.

My problem with the limit increase isn’t mathematical it is philosophical. Raising them at the current time seems intrinsically bad. The motivations are wrong IMHO as was the funny business that apparently created the need. I am also concerned that more allowances will be made, in conjunction with these limit increases, such that the gse’s can pass some of the already bad paper on to tax payers. It is not as if all of this is transparent.

Without more devious plans the limit increases don’t change affordability and therefore demand very much in and of itself so prices must continue to come down. I don’t believe underwriting standards are going to be abused to the extent they were any time soon( I will keep an open mind about that though). Interest rates will affect house prices more so when we near a real floor.

I do agree that there is possibly a convergence of factors that make the market or some segments look a little better in the next few months .Some properties will continue to hit new lows everyday and some might hold ground for a few months.
The market in general has still got a long way down to go if the pols, Fed and mortgage industry don’t come up with something better than what they are throwing at the bust so far. Maybe they will keep juicing the housing market perfectly from here on out while the economy miraculously turns to and holds on to prosperity. I doubt it.

edit | reply

[Author]

Posts