- This topic has 510 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 11 months ago by
sdrealtor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 11, 2011 at 2:39 PM #695724May 11, 2011 at 2:43 PM #694543
Rich ToscanoKeymasterJim points out that the actual change in monthly payments isn’t all that big:
However, I thought that jumbo loans were more stringent in their underwriting requirements so it still seems like this would have an impact even beyond the 6% increase in payments (per Jim’s calculation).
May 11, 2011 at 2:43 PM #694628Rich ToscanoKeymasterJim points out that the actual change in monthly payments isn’t all that big:
However, I thought that jumbo loans were more stringent in their underwriting requirements so it still seems like this would have an impact even beyond the 6% increase in payments (per Jim’s calculation).
May 11, 2011 at 2:43 PM #695232Rich ToscanoKeymasterJim points out that the actual change in monthly payments isn’t all that big:
However, I thought that jumbo loans were more stringent in their underwriting requirements so it still seems like this would have an impact even beyond the 6% increase in payments (per Jim’s calculation).
May 11, 2011 at 2:43 PM #695381Rich ToscanoKeymasterJim points out that the actual change in monthly payments isn’t all that big:
However, I thought that jumbo loans were more stringent in their underwriting requirements so it still seems like this would have an impact even beyond the 6% increase in payments (per Jim’s calculation).
May 11, 2011 at 2:43 PM #695734Rich ToscanoKeymasterJim points out that the actual change in monthly payments isn’t all that big:
However, I thought that jumbo loans were more stringent in their underwriting requirements so it still seems like this would have an impact even beyond the 6% increase in payments (per Jim’s calculation).
May 11, 2011 at 3:16 PM #694548bearishgurl
ParticipantI just read two pages of the comments on the article. The general consensus seems to be that the higher conforming limits enacted in the last three years have only served to help those purchasing “McMansions” and/or properties in exclusive zip codes that these buyers would otherwise not qualify to purchase. Commenters from coast to coast and all walks of life are not sympathetic to buyers needing government-assisted mortgages to purchase in Monterey, CA. A few made fun of the “flight attendant” who obviously purchased a property in Monterey with a low downpayment for 10-14 times his annual salary. A few made fun of the (quoted) comment, “Why should I be penalized for living in an affluent area?” by stating words to the effect of, “You made that choice. No one forced you to.”
In general, folks from America’s midsection and the south are not amused that many homebuyers in coastal CA have stretched themselves to the brink.
May 11, 2011 at 3:16 PM #694633ParticipantI just read two pages of the comments on the article. The general consensus seems to be that the higher conforming limits enacted in the last three years have only served to help those purchasing “McMansions” and/or properties in exclusive zip codes that these buyers would otherwise not qualify to purchase. Commenters from coast to coast and all walks of life are not sympathetic to buyers needing government-assisted mortgages to purchase in Monterey, CA. A few made fun of the “flight attendant” who obviously purchased a property in Monterey with a low downpayment for 10-14 times his annual salary. A few made fun of the (quoted) comment, “Why should I be penalized for living in an affluent area?” by stating words to the effect of, “You made that choice. No one forced you to.”
In general, folks from America’s midsection and the south are not amused that many homebuyers in coastal CA have stretched themselves to the brink.
May 11, 2011 at 3:16 PM #695237ParticipantI just read two pages of the comments on the article. The general consensus seems to be that the higher conforming limits enacted in the last three years have only served to help those purchasing “McMansions” and/or properties in exclusive zip codes that these buyers would otherwise not qualify to purchase. Commenters from coast to coast and all walks of life are not sympathetic to buyers needing government-assisted mortgages to purchase in Monterey, CA. A few made fun of the “flight attendant” who obviously purchased a property in Monterey with a low downpayment for 10-14 times his annual salary. A few made fun of the (quoted) comment, “Why should I be penalized for living in an affluent area?” by stating words to the effect of, “You made that choice. No one forced you to.”
In general, folks from America’s midsection and the south are not amused that many homebuyers in coastal CA have stretched themselves to the brink.
May 11, 2011 at 3:16 PM #695386ParticipantI just read two pages of the comments on the article. The general consensus seems to be that the higher conforming limits enacted in the last three years have only served to help those purchasing “McMansions” and/or properties in exclusive zip codes that these buyers would otherwise not qualify to purchase. Commenters from coast to coast and all walks of life are not sympathetic to buyers needing government-assisted mortgages to purchase in Monterey, CA. A few made fun of the “flight attendant” who obviously purchased a property in Monterey with a low downpayment for 10-14 times his annual salary. A few made fun of the (quoted) comment, “Why should I be penalized for living in an affluent area?” by stating words to the effect of, “You made that choice. No one forced you to.”
In general, folks from America’s midsection and the south are not amused that many homebuyers in coastal CA have stretched themselves to the brink.
May 11, 2011 at 3:16 PM #695739ParticipantI just read two pages of the comments on the article. The general consensus seems to be that the higher conforming limits enacted in the last three years have only served to help those purchasing “McMansions” and/or properties in exclusive zip codes that these buyers would otherwise not qualify to purchase. Commenters from coast to coast and all walks of life are not sympathetic to buyers needing government-assisted mortgages to purchase in Monterey, CA. A few made fun of the “flight attendant” who obviously purchased a property in Monterey with a low downpayment for 10-14 times his annual salary. A few made fun of the (quoted) comment, “Why should I be penalized for living in an affluent area?” by stating words to the effect of, “You made that choice. No one forced you to.”
In general, folks from America’s midsection and the south are not amused that many homebuyers in coastal CA have stretched themselves to the brink.
May 11, 2011 at 3:31 PM #694568briansd1
Guest[quote=bearishgurl]
In general, folks from America’s midsection and the south are not amused that many homebuyers in coastal CA have stretched themselves to the brink.[/quote]Do they read the NY Times? (just joking)
(I haven’t read the comments myself to see the commenters’ locations).
May 11, 2011 at 3:31 PM #694653Guest[quote=bearishgurl]
In general, folks from America’s midsection and the south are not amused that many homebuyers in coastal CA have stretched themselves to the brink.[/quote]Do they read the NY Times? (just joking)
(I haven’t read the comments myself to see the commenters’ locations).
May 11, 2011 at 3:31 PM #695257Guest[quote=bearishgurl]
In general, folks from America’s midsection and the south are not amused that many homebuyers in coastal CA have stretched themselves to the brink.[/quote]Do they read the NY Times? (just joking)
(I haven’t read the comments myself to see the commenters’ locations).
May 11, 2011 at 3:31 PM #695405Guest[quote=bearishgurl]
In general, folks from America’s midsection and the south are not amused that many homebuyers in coastal CA have stretched themselves to the brink.[/quote]Do they read the NY Times? (just joking)
(I haven’t read the comments myself to see the commenters’ locations).
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.