Home › Forums › Closed Forums › Buying and Selling RE › Sensible rules proposed for mortgage industry
- This topic has 125 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 7 months ago by
Scarlett.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 6, 2011 at 5:49 PM #685500April 6, 2011 at 8:06 PM #684376
an
Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
Actually, I believe in other countries, including some countries in Europe, a 50% downpayment IS required when buying property.[/quote]
Talking about other countries, isn’t it true that most don’t have fixed rate mortgage as well?April 6, 2011 at 8:06 PM #684425Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
Actually, I believe in other countries, including some countries in Europe, a 50% downpayment IS required when buying property.[/quote]
Talking about other countries, isn’t it true that most don’t have fixed rate mortgage as well?April 6, 2011 at 8:06 PM #685054Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
Actually, I believe in other countries, including some countries in Europe, a 50% downpayment IS required when buying property.[/quote]
Talking about other countries, isn’t it true that most don’t have fixed rate mortgage as well?April 6, 2011 at 8:06 PM #685195Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
Actually, I believe in other countries, including some countries in Europe, a 50% downpayment IS required when buying property.[/quote]
Talking about other countries, isn’t it true that most don’t have fixed rate mortgage as well?April 6, 2011 at 8:06 PM #685546Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
Actually, I believe in other countries, including some countries in Europe, a 50% downpayment IS required when buying property.[/quote]
Talking about other countries, isn’t it true that most don’t have fixed rate mortgage as well?April 6, 2011 at 9:20 PM #684396briansd1
Guest[quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
The limit should be low because housing subsidy should be for basic shelter, not fancy houses.
April 6, 2011 at 9:20 PM #684445Guest[quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
The limit should be low because housing subsidy should be for basic shelter, not fancy houses.
April 6, 2011 at 9:20 PM #685074Guest[quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
The limit should be low because housing subsidy should be for basic shelter, not fancy houses.
April 6, 2011 at 9:20 PM #685215Guest[quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
The limit should be low because housing subsidy should be for basic shelter, not fancy houses.
April 6, 2011 at 9:20 PM #685566Guest[quote=AN]Why set a arbitrary low limit like $250k? Why not require 50% down and have no limit? A $250k with 5-20% down is much riskier than a $500k loan with 50% down.[/quote]
The limit should be low because housing subsidy should be for basic shelter, not fancy houses.
April 6, 2011 at 10:04 PM #684406Participant[quote=briansd1]
The limit should be low because housing subsidy should be for basic shelter, not fancy houses.[/quote]
$250k can buy you a mcMansion in some area and a 800 sq-ft shack in another. Which do you consider a fancy house?April 6, 2011 at 10:04 PM #684455Participant[quote=briansd1]
The limit should be low because housing subsidy should be for basic shelter, not fancy houses.[/quote]
$250k can buy you a mcMansion in some area and a 800 sq-ft shack in another. Which do you consider a fancy house?April 6, 2011 at 10:04 PM #685084Participant[quote=briansd1]
The limit should be low because housing subsidy should be for basic shelter, not fancy houses.[/quote]
$250k can buy you a mcMansion in some area and a 800 sq-ft shack in another. Which do you consider a fancy house?April 6, 2011 at 10:04 PM #685225Participant[quote=briansd1]
The limit should be low because housing subsidy should be for basic shelter, not fancy houses.[/quote]
$250k can buy you a mcMansion in some area and a 800 sq-ft shack in another. Which do you consider a fancy house? -
AuthorPosts
- The forum ‘Buying and Selling RE’ is closed to new topics and replies.