[cr]

The problem with blatantly committing fraud even if you initially pull it off is actually qualifying for the bailout, particularly in California.

Everything I read about Paulson’s plan and now this FDIC pre-re-negotiated loan terms basically makes them sound like window dressing.

For the Paulson plan a lender has to agree to lose 10% off of today’s price of your home. Under the IndyMAC FDIC plan you have to prove you qualified for the loan in the first place.

I know a guy who worked at IndyMAC and a conversation with a potential borrower would go like this:

IndyMAC broker: What’s your income?
Alt-A borrower: Uh, around $50k
IndyMAC broker: Yeah, can you get that a little higher?
Alt-A borrower: Well, I guess I could say $100k
IndyMAC broker: Yeah, how about 200k?
Alt-A borrower: Uh, well, yeah, I guess.

I sure hope it puts more downard pressure, because I’m only seeing high teen price drops where I’m looking.

So far.

[cr]

The problem with blatantly committing fraud even if you initially pull it off is actually qualifying for the bailout, particularly in California.

Everything I read about Paulson’s plan and now this FDIC pre-re-negotiated loan terms basically makes them sound like window dressing.

For the Paulson plan a lender has to agree to lose 10% off of today’s price of your home. Under the IndyMAC FDIC plan you have to prove you qualified for the loan in the first place.

I know a guy who worked at IndyMAC and a conversation with a potential borrower would go like this:

IndyMAC broker: What’s your income?
Alt-A borrower: Uh, around $50k
IndyMAC broker: Yeah, can you get that a little higher?
Alt-A borrower: Well, I guess I could say $100k
IndyMAC broker: Yeah, how about 200k?
Alt-A borrower: Uh, well, yeah, I guess.

I sure hope it puts more downard pressure, because I’m only seeing high teen price drops where I’m looking.

So far.

[cr]

The problem with blatantly committing fraud even if you initially pull it off is actually qualifying for the bailout, particularly in California.

Everything I read about Paulson’s plan and now this FDIC pre-re-negotiated loan terms basically makes them sound like window dressing.

For the Paulson plan a lender has to agree to lose 10% off of today’s price of your home. Under the IndyMAC FDIC plan you have to prove you qualified for the loan in the first place.

I know a guy who worked at IndyMAC and a conversation with a potential borrower would go like this:

IndyMAC broker: What’s your income?
Alt-A borrower: Uh, around $50k
IndyMAC broker: Yeah, can you get that a little higher?
Alt-A borrower: Well, I guess I could say $100k
IndyMAC broker: Yeah, how about 200k?
Alt-A borrower: Uh, well, yeah, I guess.

I sure hope it puts more downard pressure, because I’m only seeing high teen price drops where I’m looking.

So far.

[cr]

The problem with blatantly committing fraud even if you initially pull it off is actually qualifying for the bailout, particularly in California.

Everything I read about Paulson’s plan and now this FDIC pre-re-negotiated loan terms basically makes them sound like window dressing.

For the Paulson plan a lender has to agree to lose 10% off of today’s price of your home. Under the IndyMAC FDIC plan you have to prove you qualified for the loan in the first place.

I know a guy who worked at IndyMAC and a conversation with a potential borrower would go like this:

IndyMAC broker: What’s your income?
Alt-A borrower: Uh, around $50k
IndyMAC broker: Yeah, can you get that a little higher?
Alt-A borrower: Well, I guess I could say $100k
IndyMAC broker: Yeah, how about 200k?
Alt-A borrower: Uh, well, yeah, I guess.

I sure hope it puts more downard pressure, because I’m only seeing high teen price drops where I’m looking.

So far.

[cr]

I’m no expert, but I think there actually is money floating around which is what gives us rampant inflation, but banks don’t want to lend as much as they did prior, and the mortgage heavy ones are scrambling to raise capital. Coincidentally it’s those banks that pay higher rates on CDs, but still nothing much over 4%.

Which brings it back to the Fed. You’re basically right in them being a big (if not entire) cause of it and the weak dollar high inflation recipe for recession, because banks aren’t going to pay that much more to borrow your money if they can borrow from Helicopter Ben. They’re probably only borrowing at this point to survive, instead of funding thousands and thousands of Alt-A and subprime mortgages and furthering consumer debt.

I think the true cause of the entire mess is people have been spending more money than they could afford for too long. Now that revolving debt is catching up to itself and banks are making it more costly to borrow to make up for their losses, but the Fed thinks it’s easy money is still the answer.

I don’t know how much that helps, and I’m sure many here can answer your question better than I.

[cr]

I’m no expert, but I think there actually is money floating around which is what gives us rampant inflation, but banks don’t want to lend as much as they did prior, and the mortgage heavy ones are scrambling to raise capital. Coincidentally it’s those banks that pay higher rates on CDs, but still nothing much over 4%.

Which brings it back to the Fed. You’re basically right in them being a big (if not entire) cause of it and the weak dollar high inflation recipe for recession, because banks aren’t going to pay that much more to borrow your money if they can borrow from Helicopter Ben. They’re probably only borrowing at this point to survive, instead of funding thousands and thousands of Alt-A and subprime mortgages and furthering consumer debt.

I think the true cause of the entire mess is people have been spending more money than they could afford for too long. Now that revolving debt is catching up to itself and banks are making it more costly to borrow to make up for their losses, but the Fed thinks it’s easy money is still the answer.

I don’t know how much that helps, and I’m sure many here can answer your question better than I.

[cr]

I’m no expert, but I think there actually is money floating around which is what gives us rampant inflation, but banks don’t want to lend as much as they did prior, and the mortgage heavy ones are scrambling to raise capital. Coincidentally it’s those banks that pay higher rates on CDs, but still nothing much over 4%.

Which brings it back to the Fed. You’re basically right in them being a big (if not entire) cause of it and the weak dollar high inflation recipe for recession, because banks aren’t going to pay that much more to borrow your money if they can borrow from Helicopter Ben. They’re probably only borrowing at this point to survive, instead of funding thousands and thousands of Alt-A and subprime mortgages and furthering consumer debt.

I think the true cause of the entire mess is people have been spending more money than they could afford for too long. Now that revolving debt is catching up to itself and banks are making it more costly to borrow to make up for their losses, but the Fed thinks it’s easy money is still the answer.

I don’t know how much that helps, and I’m sure many here can answer your question better than I.

[cr]

I’m no expert, but I think there actually is money floating around which is what gives us rampant inflation, but banks don’t want to lend as much as they did prior, and the mortgage heavy ones are scrambling to raise capital. Coincidentally it’s those banks that pay higher rates on CDs, but still nothing much over 4%.

Which brings it back to the Fed. You’re basically right in them being a big (if not entire) cause of it and the weak dollar high inflation recipe for recession, because banks aren’t going to pay that much more to borrow your money if they can borrow from Helicopter Ben. They’re probably only borrowing at this point to survive, instead of funding thousands and thousands of Alt-A and subprime mortgages and furthering consumer debt.

I think the true cause of the entire mess is people have been spending more money than they could afford for too long. Now that revolving debt is catching up to itself and banks are making it more costly to borrow to make up for their losses, but the Fed thinks it’s easy money is still the answer.

I don’t know how much that helps, and I’m sure many here can answer your question better than I.

[cr]

I’m no expert, but I think there actually is money floating around which is what gives us rampant inflation, but banks don’t want to lend as much as they did prior, and the mortgage heavy ones are scrambling to raise capital. Coincidentally it’s those banks that pay higher rates on CDs, but still nothing much over 4%.

Which brings it back to the Fed. You’re basically right in them being a big (if not entire) cause of it and the weak dollar high inflation recipe for recession, because banks aren’t going to pay that much more to borrow your money if they can borrow from Helicopter Ben. They’re probably only borrowing at this point to survive, instead of funding thousands and thousands of Alt-A and subprime mortgages and furthering consumer debt.

I think the true cause of the entire mess is people have been spending more money than they could afford for too long. Now that revolving debt is catching up to itself and banks are making it more costly to borrow to make up for their losses, but the Fed thinks it’s easy money is still the answer.

I don’t know how much that helps, and I’m sure many here can answer your question better than I.

[cr]

Why risk it?

Is an additional 1% or less worth the hassle if the bank fails?

ING will give you 3.4%, Capital One will give you 4%, and the Fed is going to have to raise rates soon anyway.

Sure you could make an extra $900 or a year with that 1%, but you’d likely lose more than that in the time it takes to get all your money from the FDIC. That’s if they remain solvent.

I wonder if you can short the FDIC…

[cr]

Why risk it?

Is an additional 1% or less worth the hassle if the bank fails?

ING will give you 3.4%, Capital One will give you 4%, and the Fed is going to have to raise rates soon anyway.

Sure you could make an extra $900 or a year with that 1%, but you’d likely lose more than that in the time it takes to get all your money from the FDIC. That’s if they remain solvent.

I wonder if you can short the FDIC…

[cr]

Why risk it?

Is an additional 1% or less worth the hassle if the bank fails?

ING will give you 3.4%, Capital One will give you 4%, and the Fed is going to have to raise rates soon anyway.

Sure you could make an extra $900 or a year with that 1%, but you’d likely lose more than that in the time it takes to get all your money from the FDIC. That’s if they remain solvent.

I wonder if you can short the FDIC…

[cr]

Why risk it?

Is an additional 1% or less worth the hassle if the bank fails?

ING will give you 3.4%, Capital One will give you 4%, and the Fed is going to have to raise rates soon anyway.

Sure you could make an extra $900 or a year with that 1%, but you’d likely lose more than that in the time it takes to get all your money from the FDIC. That’s if they remain solvent.

I wonder if you can short the FDIC…

[cr]

Why risk it?

Is an additional 1% or less worth the hassle if the bank fails?

ING will give you 3.4%, Capital One will give you 4%, and the Fed is going to have to raise rates soon anyway.

Sure you could make an extra $900 or a year with that 1%, but you’d likely lose more than that in the time it takes to get all your money from the FDIC. That’s if they remain solvent.

I wonder if you can short the FDIC…

[cr]

Wildomar is epitomizes the term “bedroom community”. I grew up there (yes it is a middle school) although that area is close to Murrieta and nice for Wildomar.

At the peak there were $750,000 McMansions in an area where the best jobs until you get to Temecula are in school districts.

Maybe the builders are defaulting on their loans.

That or someone stole the sign and put it in front of their own house.

[Author]

Posts