[bubba99]

Good question. I believe the owning costs would have been about lower than my purchases 10 years earlier. But I don’t see any bubble level appreciation in the next 5 to 10 years.

But you make a good point. The half million cash profit I took from the sale of properties probably weights the equation in favor of owning. There is no appreciation potential in renting.

[bubba99]

Good question. I believe the owning costs would have been about lower than my purchases 10 years earlier. But I don’t see any bubble level appreciation in the next 5 to 10 years.

But you make a good point. The half million cash profit I took from the sale of properties probably weights the equation in favor of owning. There is no appreciation potential in renting.

[bubba99]

Good question. I believe the owning costs would have been about lower than my purchases 10 years earlier. But I don’t see any bubble level appreciation in the next 5 to 10 years.

But you make a good point. The half million cash profit I took from the sale of properties probably weights the equation in favor of owning. There is no appreciation potential in renting.

[bubba99]

One twist in the walk-away strategy is “integrity”. Although I know it is a contract, and the contract allows for foreclosure as a remedy – my employer says it is an integrity issue. And a foreclosure – unless I perfect all of the non-recourse dept – will result in termination.

So the bottom line is – walk away from the mortgage and lose your job.

I wonder how many companies besides the US Government feel this way?

[bubba99]

One twist in the walk-away strategy is “integrity”. Although I know it is a contract, and the contract allows for foreclosure as a remedy – my employer says it is an integrity issue. And a foreclosure – unless I perfect all of the non-recourse dept – will result in termination.

So the bottom line is – walk away from the mortgage and lose your job.

I wonder how many companies besides the US Government feel this way?

[bubba99]

One twist in the walk-away strategy is “integrity”. Although I know it is a contract, and the contract allows for foreclosure as a remedy – my employer says it is an integrity issue. And a foreclosure – unless I perfect all of the non-recourse dept – will result in termination.

So the bottom line is – walk away from the mortgage and lose your job.

I wonder how many companies besides the US Government feel this way?

[bubba99]

One twist in the walk-away strategy is “integrity”. Although I know it is a contract, and the contract allows for foreclosure as a remedy – my employer says it is an integrity issue. And a foreclosure – unless I perfect all of the non-recourse dept – will result in termination.

So the bottom line is – walk away from the mortgage and lose your job.

I wonder how many companies besides the US Government feel this way?

[bubba99]

One twist in the walk-away strategy is “integrity”. Although I know it is a contract, and the contract allows for foreclosure as a remedy – my employer says it is an integrity issue. And a foreclosure – unless I perfect all of the non-recourse dept – will result in termination.

So the bottom line is – walk away from the mortgage and lose your job.

I wonder how many companies besides the US Government feel this way?

[bubba99]

It surprises me that anyone thinks this will really be a change. For years corporations have hired lobbyists to clear the way with plenty of cash.

Foreign governments like Israel, Japan, and China have their own lobbying arms with a lot of cash. In the past 10 years, there does not seem to be a limit to what these lobbies can do for their own foreign citizens. Our citizens seem blind to the many concessions we are making to foreign governments because of the massive amount of cash spent in Washington.

No, the latest Supreme Court ruling will change very little.

[bubba99]

It surprises me that anyone thinks this will really be a change. For years corporations have hired lobbyists to clear the way with plenty of cash.

Foreign governments like Israel, Japan, and China have their own lobbying arms with a lot of cash. In the past 10 years, there does not seem to be a limit to what these lobbies can do for their own foreign citizens. Our citizens seem blind to the many concessions we are making to foreign governments because of the massive amount of cash spent in Washington.

No, the latest Supreme Court ruling will change very little.

[bubba99]

It surprises me that anyone thinks this will really be a change. For years corporations have hired lobbyists to clear the way with plenty of cash.

Foreign governments like Israel, Japan, and China have their own lobbying arms with a lot of cash. In the past 10 years, there does not seem to be a limit to what these lobbies can do for their own foreign citizens. Our citizens seem blind to the many concessions we are making to foreign governments because of the massive amount of cash spent in Washington.

No, the latest Supreme Court ruling will change very little.

[bubba99]

It surprises me that anyone thinks this will really be a change. For years corporations have hired lobbyists to clear the way with plenty of cash.

Foreign governments like Israel, Japan, and China have their own lobbying arms with a lot of cash. In the past 10 years, there does not seem to be a limit to what these lobbies can do for their own foreign citizens. Our citizens seem blind to the many concessions we are making to foreign governments because of the massive amount of cash spent in Washington.

No, the latest Supreme Court ruling will change very little.

[bubba99]

It surprises me that anyone thinks this will really be a change. For years corporations have hired lobbyists to clear the way with plenty of cash.

Foreign governments like Israel, Japan, and China have their own lobbying arms with a lot of cash. In the past 10 years, there does not seem to be a limit to what these lobbies can do for their own foreign citizens. Our citizens seem blind to the many concessions we are making to foreign governments because of the massive amount of cash spent in Washington.

No, the latest Supreme Court ruling will change very little.

[bubba99]

Clearly this buyer took a gamble and lost. He should have know better. But some of the story does hit home. The part about having to send in the same paperwork 5 times to an unresponsive bank.

I think all the media attention to “loan modifications” is giving the gamblers a false hope. The banks are not modifying squat, and it is time that someone report honestly that you can forget any real help on mortgages. Take your losses and move on.

[bubba99]

Clearly this buyer took a gamble and lost. He should have know better. But some of the story does hit home. The part about having to send in the same paperwork 5 times to an unresponsive bank.

I think all the media attention to “loan modifications” is giving the gamblers a false hope. The banks are not modifying squat, and it is time that someone report honestly that you can forget any real help on mortgages. Take your losses and move on.

[Author]

Posts