- This topic has 485 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 17 years ago by
SD Realtor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 4, 2007 at 7:30 PM #109080December 4, 2007 at 8:29 PM #109005
patientrenter
Participant“People like the OP, and borrowers in general, will not be bailed out.”
FairEconomist, I have to disagree with you here. When home prices are supported by actions that grant public money or valuable guarantees to borrowers or their lenders, there is a transfer from taxpayers in general to any indebted homeowners who still have some equity, or to any lenders facing losses. Even the reduction in lender losses becomes a future transfer to leveraged homeowners, as future home prices go up in response to cheaper lending spurred by the prospect of future bailouts.
Patient renter in OC
December 4, 2007 at 8:29 PM #109109Participant“People like the OP, and borrowers in general, will not be bailed out.”
FairEconomist, I have to disagree with you here. When home prices are supported by actions that grant public money or valuable guarantees to borrowers or their lenders, there is a transfer from taxpayers in general to any indebted homeowners who still have some equity, or to any lenders facing losses. Even the reduction in lender losses becomes a future transfer to leveraged homeowners, as future home prices go up in response to cheaper lending spurred by the prospect of future bailouts.
Patient renter in OC
December 4, 2007 at 8:29 PM #109143Participant“People like the OP, and borrowers in general, will not be bailed out.”
FairEconomist, I have to disagree with you here. When home prices are supported by actions that grant public money or valuable guarantees to borrowers or their lenders, there is a transfer from taxpayers in general to any indebted homeowners who still have some equity, or to any lenders facing losses. Even the reduction in lender losses becomes a future transfer to leveraged homeowners, as future home prices go up in response to cheaper lending spurred by the prospect of future bailouts.
Patient renter in OC
December 4, 2007 at 8:29 PM #109152Participant“People like the OP, and borrowers in general, will not be bailed out.”
FairEconomist, I have to disagree with you here. When home prices are supported by actions that grant public money or valuable guarantees to borrowers or their lenders, there is a transfer from taxpayers in general to any indebted homeowners who still have some equity, or to any lenders facing losses. Even the reduction in lender losses becomes a future transfer to leveraged homeowners, as future home prices go up in response to cheaper lending spurred by the prospect of future bailouts.
Patient renter in OC
December 4, 2007 at 8:29 PM #109159Participant“People like the OP, and borrowers in general, will not be bailed out.”
FairEconomist, I have to disagree with you here. When home prices are supported by actions that grant public money or valuable guarantees to borrowers or their lenders, there is a transfer from taxpayers in general to any indebted homeowners who still have some equity, or to any lenders facing losses. Even the reduction in lender losses becomes a future transfer to leveraged homeowners, as future home prices go up in response to cheaper lending spurred by the prospect of future bailouts.
Patient renter in OC
December 5, 2007 at 8:01 AM #109160Anonymous
GuestYes, homeowners with equity remaining after the crash will get a bailout. But with a crash of 30% or so coming, that’s going to be a pretty select group – and the OP isn’t going to be in it. Rescuing the financial systems will have some beneficial second-order effects but I don’t really feel comfortable calling that a “bailout”. Almost everybody will benefit from that – fewer jobs lost, fewer commercial bankruptcies, etc. My point is that almost every dollar spend on this bailout will end up in the hands of the investment banks and ABS holders, so it should be viewed as a bailout of them. Calling it a bailout of homeowners is just some lipstick on the pig to make a bailout of Citibank and assorted hedge funds more palatable to the general public.
December 5, 2007 at 8:01 AM #109272GuestYes, homeowners with equity remaining after the crash will get a bailout. But with a crash of 30% or so coming, that’s going to be a pretty select group – and the OP isn’t going to be in it. Rescuing the financial systems will have some beneficial second-order effects but I don’t really feel comfortable calling that a “bailout”. Almost everybody will benefit from that – fewer jobs lost, fewer commercial bankruptcies, etc. My point is that almost every dollar spend on this bailout will end up in the hands of the investment banks and ABS holders, so it should be viewed as a bailout of them. Calling it a bailout of homeowners is just some lipstick on the pig to make a bailout of Citibank and assorted hedge funds more palatable to the general public.
December 5, 2007 at 8:01 AM #109303GuestYes, homeowners with equity remaining after the crash will get a bailout. But with a crash of 30% or so coming, that’s going to be a pretty select group – and the OP isn’t going to be in it. Rescuing the financial systems will have some beneficial second-order effects but I don’t really feel comfortable calling that a “bailout”. Almost everybody will benefit from that – fewer jobs lost, fewer commercial bankruptcies, etc. My point is that almost every dollar spend on this bailout will end up in the hands of the investment banks and ABS holders, so it should be viewed as a bailout of them. Calling it a bailout of homeowners is just some lipstick on the pig to make a bailout of Citibank and assorted hedge funds more palatable to the general public.
December 5, 2007 at 8:01 AM #109310GuestYes, homeowners with equity remaining after the crash will get a bailout. But with a crash of 30% or so coming, that’s going to be a pretty select group – and the OP isn’t going to be in it. Rescuing the financial systems will have some beneficial second-order effects but I don’t really feel comfortable calling that a “bailout”. Almost everybody will benefit from that – fewer jobs lost, fewer commercial bankruptcies, etc. My point is that almost every dollar spend on this bailout will end up in the hands of the investment banks and ABS holders, so it should be viewed as a bailout of them. Calling it a bailout of homeowners is just some lipstick on the pig to make a bailout of Citibank and assorted hedge funds more palatable to the general public.
December 5, 2007 at 8:01 AM #109319GuestYes, homeowners with equity remaining after the crash will get a bailout. But with a crash of 30% or so coming, that’s going to be a pretty select group – and the OP isn’t going to be in it. Rescuing the financial systems will have some beneficial second-order effects but I don’t really feel comfortable calling that a “bailout”. Almost everybody will benefit from that – fewer jobs lost, fewer commercial bankruptcies, etc. My point is that almost every dollar spend on this bailout will end up in the hands of the investment banks and ABS holders, so it should be viewed as a bailout of them. Calling it a bailout of homeowners is just some lipstick on the pig to make a bailout of Citibank and assorted hedge funds more palatable to the general public.
December 5, 2007 at 1:50 PM #109570GuestTG: “Marion, I’ll take that bet!!! You name the wager because if left to me it would probably be highly inappropriate.”
TG,inappropriateness is relative…
I think that if we did bet, sooner or later you might lose your shirt. Are you prepared to lose your shirt?…
😉
December 5, 2007 at 1:50 PM #109683GuestTG: “Marion, I’ll take that bet!!! You name the wager because if left to me it would probably be highly inappropriate.”
TG,inappropriateness is relative…
I think that if we did bet, sooner or later you might lose your shirt. Are you prepared to lose your shirt?…
😉
December 5, 2007 at 1:50 PM #109712GuestTG: “Marion, I’ll take that bet!!! You name the wager because if left to me it would probably be highly inappropriate.”
TG,inappropriateness is relative…
I think that if we did bet, sooner or later you might lose your shirt. Are you prepared to lose your shirt?…
😉
December 5, 2007 at 1:50 PM #109718GuestTG: “Marion, I’ll take that bet!!! You name the wager because if left to me it would probably be highly inappropriate.”
TG,inappropriateness is relative…
I think that if we did bet, sooner or later you might lose your shirt. Are you prepared to lose your shirt?…
😉
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.