McCain’s new proposal to fix housing market

[yellow8yellowm]

[quote=XBoxBoy] I live in California and California will cast all of its electoral college votes for the Democratic nominee. [/quote]

I agree with you about CA. My argument only works in the states that are close.

[quote=XBoxBoy] And so my question was, and still is to those of you who post on Piggington’s with Pro McCain attitudes, how can you do that with a straight face? [/quote]

I don’t believe anybody has ever been pro-McCain. Everybody knew he is not a conservative. Even McCain in the primaries was a “better of two evils” selection, what do you expect now?

As bad as Obama is going to be, and as long as he doesn’t get to appoint any judges, I think it will help us get a fiscal conservative back in office next time. It might not come from the Republican Party but from a third party. The question remains, though, can a third party candidate win?

[kicksavedave]

Its pretty funny to hear the Republicans consistently accuse the Dems of wanting “big government” as if its the root of all evil, when in fact most of the major crisis this country has faced in the last 40 years have been largely due to insufficient or removed regulations. The housing bubble, which is at the core of this whole mess, was caused entirely by lenders being allowed to do the ridiculous (NINJA loans) in absence of any real form of regulatory oversight.

So the Repubs blame Big Government for everything and charge “tax and spend” a the Dems to strike fear in the voters. When the reality is more regulation was needed to keep us out of this mess. And to top that all off, now the top Repub candidate wants to simply explode the Government and take it places it has no place being, just to desperately win the votes he needs to get elected.

I’ll say this – if McCain does somehow manage to steal this election like W did twice, then the first thing I’m going to do is head down to my local Department of Bailouts office and sell them my house for $300K, then buy it right back from them for $250K, and continue renting it out. I figure that spread will put about $500 a month in my pocket. Over 30 or 40 years, that’s a nice chunk of change. You Go, Mr Maverick!

[kicksavedave]

Its pretty funny to hear the Republicans consistently accuse the Dems of wanting “big government” as if its the root of all evil, when in fact most of the major crisis this country has faced in the last 40 years have been largely due to insufficient or removed regulations. The housing bubble, which is at the core of this whole mess, was caused entirely by lenders being allowed to do the ridiculous (NINJA loans) in absence of any real form of regulatory oversight.

So the Repubs blame Big Government for everything and charge “tax and spend” a the Dems to strike fear in the voters. When the reality is more regulation was needed to keep us out of this mess. And to top that all off, now the top Repub candidate wants to simply explode the Government and take it places it has no place being, just to desperately win the votes he needs to get elected.

I’ll say this – if McCain does somehow manage to steal this election like W did twice, then the first thing I’m going to do is head down to my local Department of Bailouts office and sell them my house for $300K, then buy it right back from them for $250K, and continue renting it out. I figure that spread will put about $500 a month in my pocket. Over 30 or 40 years, that’s a nice chunk of change. You Go, Mr Maverick!

[kicksavedave]

Its pretty funny to hear the Republicans consistently accuse the Dems of wanting “big government” as if its the root of all evil, when in fact most of the major crisis this country has faced in the last 40 years have been largely due to insufficient or removed regulations. The housing bubble, which is at the core of this whole mess, was caused entirely by lenders being allowed to do the ridiculous (NINJA loans) in absence of any real form of regulatory oversight.

So the Repubs blame Big Government for everything and charge “tax and spend” a the Dems to strike fear in the voters. When the reality is more regulation was needed to keep us out of this mess. And to top that all off, now the top Repub candidate wants to simply explode the Government and take it places it has no place being, just to desperately win the votes he needs to get elected.

I’ll say this – if McCain does somehow manage to steal this election like W did twice, then the first thing I’m going to do is head down to my local Department of Bailouts office and sell them my house for $300K, then buy it right back from them for $250K, and continue renting it out. I figure that spread will put about $500 a month in my pocket. Over 30 or 40 years, that’s a nice chunk of change. You Go, Mr Maverick!

[kicksavedave]

Its pretty funny to hear the Republicans consistently accuse the Dems of wanting “big government” as if its the root of all evil, when in fact most of the major crisis this country has faced in the last 40 years have been largely due to insufficient or removed regulations. The housing bubble, which is at the core of this whole mess, was caused entirely by lenders being allowed to do the ridiculous (NINJA loans) in absence of any real form of regulatory oversight.

So the Repubs blame Big Government for everything and charge “tax and spend” a the Dems to strike fear in the voters. When the reality is more regulation was needed to keep us out of this mess. And to top that all off, now the top Repub candidate wants to simply explode the Government and take it places it has no place being, just to desperately win the votes he needs to get elected.

I’ll say this – if McCain does somehow manage to steal this election like W did twice, then the first thing I’m going to do is head down to my local Department of Bailouts office and sell them my house for $300K, then buy it right back from them for $250K, and continue renting it out. I figure that spread will put about $500 a month in my pocket. Over 30 or 40 years, that’s a nice chunk of change. You Go, Mr Maverick!

[kicksavedave]

Its pretty funny to hear the Republicans consistently accuse the Dems of wanting “big government” as if its the root of all evil, when in fact most of the major crisis this country has faced in the last 40 years have been largely due to insufficient or removed regulations. The housing bubble, which is at the core of this whole mess, was caused entirely by lenders being allowed to do the ridiculous (NINJA loans) in absence of any real form of regulatory oversight.

So the Repubs blame Big Government for everything and charge “tax and spend” a the Dems to strike fear in the voters. When the reality is more regulation was needed to keep us out of this mess. And to top that all off, now the top Repub candidate wants to simply explode the Government and take it places it has no place being, just to desperately win the votes he needs to get elected.

I’ll say this – if McCain does somehow manage to steal this election like W did twice, then the first thing I’m going to do is head down to my local Department of Bailouts office and sell them my house for $300K, then buy it right back from them for $250K, and continue renting it out. I figure that spread will put about $500 a month in my pocket. Over 30 or 40 years, that’s a nice chunk of change. You Go, Mr Maverick!

[Huckleberry]

[quote=temeculaguy]FDIC writedowns, FHA secure, Fannie and freddie writedowns all follow a general theme and the largest misconception is that nothing is actually forgiven, rather it is suspended. Eating a few hundred grand per house is too expensive to help more than a few people. Eating the interest on a portion of the principal allows them to “help” more people, many more, a few hundred more, with the same dollars.

Wilbur Ross has proposed a three way arrangement with a private company, but the current gov’t stuff is a two way deal.

I’ve posted before that when you look at how the write down works, it is actually far worse for the fb than walking away, but they do get to have a roof over their head and they get to pay about 50% more than rent without ever building equity. When the market recovers or when they sell, whatever was “re-worked” has to be paid back and no refi or helocs can ever be taken until the rework has been paid. When you look at it, it is nothing more than a long term teaser rate, in fact it’s worse, but they think it will buy enough years for the recovery.

scenario: fb buys for 500k, 0 down. Today house is worth 300k. fb cant pay his fully amortized payment with impounds of 4k. rework takes .38 of his/her gross, figures what portion of the fully amortized that would cover, lets say 7k gross per month as $2500 a month and that is the new payment. That equates to paying on 300k, the value of the home. 200k is suspended and does not accrue interest (that interest is the cost to the gov or bank). When the market rebounds in 5 years and it sell or refi’s at 500k, fb gets nothing, bank or gov gets the whole 500. If it goes to 600k, bank gets half the profit to offset the loss of interest and fb gets 50k.

FB gets to deduct the 2500 like any homeowner would, but they are really just a renter and need to gain more than 200k in value before actually making anything and even then they only get half.

Their neighbor buys for 300k this week and when fb sells at 600k in the future and enjoys his 50k, the neighbor gets 300k. This is why only 1 in 8 that are eligible are taking advantage of this “help.”[/quote]

Considering all of the new gov’t. and bank programs/initiatives (since late ’08 when this was posted), is the above still a valid and typical scenario for loan mods in general?

[Huckleberry]

[quote=temeculaguy]FDIC writedowns, FHA secure, Fannie and freddie writedowns all follow a general theme and the largest misconception is that nothing is actually forgiven, rather it is suspended. Eating a few hundred grand per house is too expensive to help more than a few people. Eating the interest on a portion of the principal allows them to “help” more people, many more, a few hundred more, with the same dollars.

Wilbur Ross has proposed a three way arrangement with a private company, but the current gov’t stuff is a two way deal.

I’ve posted before that when you look at how the write down works, it is actually far worse for the fb than walking away, but they do get to have a roof over their head and they get to pay about 50% more than rent without ever building equity. When the market recovers or when they sell, whatever was “re-worked” has to be paid back and no refi or helocs can ever be taken until the rework has been paid. When you look at it, it is nothing more than a long term teaser rate, in fact it’s worse, but they think it will buy enough years for the recovery.

scenario: fb buys for 500k, 0 down. Today house is worth 300k. fb cant pay his fully amortized payment with impounds of 4k. rework takes .38 of his/her gross, figures what portion of the fully amortized that would cover, lets say 7k gross per month as $2500 a month and that is the new payment. That equates to paying on 300k, the value of the home. 200k is suspended and does not accrue interest (that interest is the cost to the gov or bank). When the market rebounds in 5 years and it sell or refi’s at 500k, fb gets nothing, bank or gov gets the whole 500. If it goes to 600k, bank gets half the profit to offset the loss of interest and fb gets 50k.

FB gets to deduct the 2500 like any homeowner would, but they are really just a renter and need to gain more than 200k in value before actually making anything and even then they only get half.

Their neighbor buys for 300k this week and when fb sells at 600k in the future and enjoys his 50k, the neighbor gets 300k. This is why only 1 in 8 that are eligible are taking advantage of this “help.”[/quote]

Considering all of the new gov’t. and bank programs/initiatives (since late ’08 when this was posted), is the above still a valid and typical scenario for loan mods in general?

[Huckleberry]

[quote=temeculaguy]FDIC writedowns, FHA secure, Fannie and freddie writedowns all follow a general theme and the largest misconception is that nothing is actually forgiven, rather it is suspended. Eating a few hundred grand per house is too expensive to help more than a few people. Eating the interest on a portion of the principal allows them to “help” more people, many more, a few hundred more, with the same dollars.

Wilbur Ross has proposed a three way arrangement with a private company, but the current gov’t stuff is a two way deal.

I’ve posted before that when you look at how the write down works, it is actually far worse for the fb than walking away, but they do get to have a roof over their head and they get to pay about 50% more than rent without ever building equity. When the market recovers or when they sell, whatever was “re-worked” has to be paid back and no refi or helocs can ever be taken until the rework has been paid. When you look at it, it is nothing more than a long term teaser rate, in fact it’s worse, but they think it will buy enough years for the recovery.

scenario: fb buys for 500k, 0 down. Today house is worth 300k. fb cant pay his fully amortized payment with impounds of 4k. rework takes .38 of his/her gross, figures what portion of the fully amortized that would cover, lets say 7k gross per month as $2500 a month and that is the new payment. That equates to paying on 300k, the value of the home. 200k is suspended and does not accrue interest (that interest is the cost to the gov or bank). When the market rebounds in 5 years and it sell or refi’s at 500k, fb gets nothing, bank or gov gets the whole 500. If it goes to 600k, bank gets half the profit to offset the loss of interest and fb gets 50k.

FB gets to deduct the 2500 like any homeowner would, but they are really just a renter and need to gain more than 200k in value before actually making anything and even then they only get half.

Their neighbor buys for 300k this week and when fb sells at 600k in the future and enjoys his 50k, the neighbor gets 300k. This is why only 1 in 8 that are eligible are taking advantage of this “help.”[/quote]

Considering all of the new gov’t. and bank programs/initiatives (since late ’08 when this was posted), is the above still a valid and typical scenario for loan mods in general?

[Huckleberry]

[quote=temeculaguy]FDIC writedowns, FHA secure, Fannie and freddie writedowns all follow a general theme and the largest misconception is that nothing is actually forgiven, rather it is suspended. Eating a few hundred grand per house is too expensive to help more than a few people. Eating the interest on a portion of the principal allows them to “help” more people, many more, a few hundred more, with the same dollars.

Wilbur Ross has proposed a three way arrangement with a private company, but the current gov’t stuff is a two way deal.

I’ve posted before that when you look at how the write down works, it is actually far worse for the fb than walking away, but they do get to have a roof over their head and they get to pay about 50% more than rent without ever building equity. When the market recovers or when they sell, whatever was “re-worked” has to be paid back and no refi or helocs can ever be taken until the rework has been paid. When you look at it, it is nothing more than a long term teaser rate, in fact it’s worse, but they think it will buy enough years for the recovery.

scenario: fb buys for 500k, 0 down. Today house is worth 300k. fb cant pay his fully amortized payment with impounds of 4k. rework takes .38 of his/her gross, figures what portion of the fully amortized that would cover, lets say 7k gross per month as $2500 a month and that is the new payment. That equates to paying on 300k, the value of the home. 200k is suspended and does not accrue interest (that interest is the cost to the gov or bank). When the market rebounds in 5 years and it sell or refi’s at 500k, fb gets nothing, bank or gov gets the whole 500. If it goes to 600k, bank gets half the profit to offset the loss of interest and fb gets 50k.

FB gets to deduct the 2500 like any homeowner would, but they are really just a renter and need to gain more than 200k in value before actually making anything and even then they only get half.

Their neighbor buys for 300k this week and when fb sells at 600k in the future and enjoys his 50k, the neighbor gets 300k. This is why only 1 in 8 that are eligible are taking advantage of this “help.”[/quote]

Considering all of the new gov’t. and bank programs/initiatives (since late ’08 when this was posted), is the above still a valid and typical scenario for loan mods in general?

[Huckleberry]

[quote=temeculaguy]FDIC writedowns, FHA secure, Fannie and freddie writedowns all follow a general theme and the largest misconception is that nothing is actually forgiven, rather it is suspended. Eating a few hundred grand per house is too expensive to help more than a few people. Eating the interest on a portion of the principal allows them to “help” more people, many more, a few hundred more, with the same dollars.

Wilbur Ross has proposed a three way arrangement with a private company, but the current gov’t stuff is a two way deal.

I’ve posted before that when you look at how the write down works, it is actually far worse for the fb than walking away, but they do get to have a roof over their head and they get to pay about 50% more than rent without ever building equity. When the market recovers or when they sell, whatever was “re-worked” has to be paid back and no refi or helocs can ever be taken until the rework has been paid. When you look at it, it is nothing more than a long term teaser rate, in fact it’s worse, but they think it will buy enough years for the recovery.

scenario: fb buys for 500k, 0 down. Today house is worth 300k. fb cant pay his fully amortized payment with impounds of 4k. rework takes .38 of his/her gross, figures what portion of the fully amortized that would cover, lets say 7k gross per month as $2500 a month and that is the new payment. That equates to paying on 300k, the value of the home. 200k is suspended and does not accrue interest (that interest is the cost to the gov or bank). When the market rebounds in 5 years and it sell or refi’s at 500k, fb gets nothing, bank or gov gets the whole 500. If it goes to 600k, bank gets half the profit to offset the loss of interest and fb gets 50k.

FB gets to deduct the 2500 like any homeowner would, but they are really just a renter and need to gain more than 200k in value before actually making anything and even then they only get half.

Their neighbor buys for 300k this week and when fb sells at 600k in the future and enjoys his 50k, the neighbor gets 300k. This is why only 1 in 8 that are eligible are taking advantage of this “help.”[/quote]

Considering all of the new gov’t. and bank programs/initiatives (since late ’08 when this was posted), is the above still a valid and typical scenario for loan mods in general?

[cyphire]

[quote=meadandale]I agree. It’s nonsense. I don’t support either of them. Hopefully the next 4 years with Obama driving his socialist agenda is over quickly,.[/quote]

Socialist????!!! Please! Obama has been acting (in my opinion) as a luke-warm Republican… The bailouts were for wall street, not people. We haven’t received any money, we have received protection for our financial institutions and our somewhat elitist status-quo. I Love how so many Republican’s (not all, but many) scream socialism after they were responsible for most of the economic agony this nation has gone through since Reagan.

Socialist? I know some socialists and they consider Obama part of the Republican/Democratic business elite and wall street syncophants. Face it, not only has the Republican party screwed America, created un-winable wars, lied, turned our country into a police state, protected wall street and a financial system of almost complete out and out fraud, but the Democrats haven’t acted much better.

Bush and Reagan cut taxes by ADDING TO THE DEFICIT (Borrowing for those REPUBLICAN’s who just say Socialist when they should just say I DONT READ). THEY OUTSPENT EVERYONE UNDER THE SUN. THEY have destroyed our economic future by spending spending spending. And of course since the worst president in our history ran back to Texas and hasn’t been heard from since, Obama has been doing his best to not have us plunge into complete chaos.

So what have the Republican’s done lately? Two things: They take the opposition to EVERYTHING that the party in power tries to do and fix, whether good or bad for America. And they push a Evangelical agenda to further push America to the back of the bus….

Socialist??? Please – if he didn’t do what he did the Republican’s would have screamed even louder…

[cyphire]

[quote=meadandale]I agree. It’s nonsense. I don’t support either of them. Hopefully the next 4 years with Obama driving his socialist agenda is over quickly,.[/quote]

Socialist????!!! Please! Obama has been acting (in my opinion) as a luke-warm Republican… The bailouts were for wall street, not people. We haven’t received any money, we have received protection for our financial institutions and our somewhat elitist status-quo. I Love how so many Republican’s (not all, but many) scream socialism after they were responsible for most of the economic agony this nation has gone through since Reagan.

Socialist? I know some socialists and they consider Obama part of the Republican/Democratic business elite and wall street syncophants. Face it, not only has the Republican party screwed America, created un-winable wars, lied, turned our country into a police state, protected wall street and a financial system of almost complete out and out fraud, but the Democrats haven’t acted much better.

Bush and Reagan cut taxes by ADDING TO THE DEFICIT (Borrowing for those REPUBLICAN’s who just say Socialist when they should just say I DONT READ). THEY OUTSPENT EVERYONE UNDER THE SUN. THEY have destroyed our economic future by spending spending spending. And of course since the worst president in our history ran back to Texas and hasn’t been heard from since, Obama has been doing his best to not have us plunge into complete chaos.

So what have the Republican’s done lately? Two things: They take the opposition to EVERYTHING that the party in power tries to do and fix, whether good or bad for America. And they push a Evangelical agenda to further push America to the back of the bus….

Socialist??? Please – if he didn’t do what he did the Republican’s would have screamed even louder…

[cyphire]

[quote=meadandale]I agree. It’s nonsense. I don’t support either of them. Hopefully the next 4 years with Obama driving his socialist agenda is over quickly,.[/quote]

Socialist????!!! Please! Obama has been acting (in my opinion) as a luke-warm Republican… The bailouts were for wall street, not people. We haven’t received any money, we have received protection for our financial institutions and our somewhat elitist status-quo. I Love how so many Republican’s (not all, but many) scream socialism after they were responsible for most of the economic agony this nation has gone through since Reagan.

Socialist? I know some socialists and they consider Obama part of the Republican/Democratic business elite and wall street syncophants. Face it, not only has the Republican party screwed America, created un-winable wars, lied, turned our country into a police state, protected wall street and a financial system of almost complete out and out fraud, but the Democrats haven’t acted much better.

Bush and Reagan cut taxes by ADDING TO THE DEFICIT (Borrowing for those REPUBLICAN’s who just say Socialist when they should just say I DONT READ). THEY OUTSPENT EVERYONE UNDER THE SUN. THEY have destroyed our economic future by spending spending spending. And of course since the worst president in our history ran back to Texas and hasn’t been heard from since, Obama has been doing his best to not have us plunge into complete chaos.

So what have the Republican’s done lately? Two things: They take the opposition to EVERYTHING that the party in power tries to do and fix, whether good or bad for America. And they push a Evangelical agenda to further push America to the back of the bus….

Socialist??? Please – if he didn’t do what he did the Republican’s would have screamed even louder…

[cyphire]

[quote=meadandale]I agree. It’s nonsense. I don’t support either of them. Hopefully the next 4 years with Obama driving his socialist agenda is over quickly,.[/quote]

Socialist????!!! Please! Obama has been acting (in my opinion) as a luke-warm Republican… The bailouts were for wall street, not people. We haven’t received any money, we have received protection for our financial institutions and our somewhat elitist status-quo. I Love how so many Republican’s (not all, but many) scream socialism after they were responsible for most of the economic agony this nation has gone through since Reagan.

Socialist? I know some socialists and they consider Obama part of the Republican/Democratic business elite and wall street syncophants. Face it, not only has the Republican party screwed America, created un-winable wars, lied, turned our country into a police state, protected wall street and a financial system of almost complete out and out fraud, but the Democrats haven’t acted much better.

Bush and Reagan cut taxes by ADDING TO THE DEFICIT (Borrowing for those REPUBLICAN’s who just say Socialist when they should just say I DONT READ). THEY OUTSPENT EVERYONE UNDER THE SUN. THEY have destroyed our economic future by spending spending spending. And of course since the worst president in our history ran back to Texas and hasn’t been heard from since, Obama has been doing his best to not have us plunge into complete chaos.

So what have the Republican’s done lately? Two things: They take the opposition to EVERYTHING that the party in power tries to do and fix, whether good or bad for America. And they push a Evangelical agenda to further push America to the back of the bus….

Socialist??? Please – if he didn’t do what he did the Republican’s would have screamed even louder…

[Author]

Posts