Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
cr
Participant[quote=PadreBrian]To be fair to the US tax payer, the bail-out was designed to repay the tax payers. If you want a 40% reduction in your loan, spiting the profit when you sell it is only reasonable…they are like a silent partner in this. [/quote]
Not sure what you mean about repaying tax payers. This bill is at the expense of the tax payers, in the form of a blank check for FNMA and FMAC to guarantee toxic waste bought by Chinese shareholders so they don’t dump their US bonds and implode our economy.
Participant[quote=PadreBrian]To be fair to the US tax payer, the bail-out was designed to repay the tax payers. If you want a 40% reduction in your loan, spiting the profit when you sell it is only reasonable…they are like a silent partner in this. [/quote]
Not sure what you mean about repaying tax payers. This bill is at the expense of the tax payers, in the form of a blank check for FNMA and FMAC to guarantee toxic waste bought by Chinese shareholders so they don’t dump their US bonds and implode our economy.
Participant[quote=PadreBrian]To be fair to the US tax payer, the bail-out was designed to repay the tax payers. If you want a 40% reduction in your loan, spiting the profit when you sell it is only reasonable…they are like a silent partner in this. [/quote]
Not sure what you mean about repaying tax payers. This bill is at the expense of the tax payers, in the form of a blank check for FNMA and FMAC to guarantee toxic waste bought by Chinese shareholders so they don’t dump their US bonds and implode our economy.
ParticipantIsn’t part of the new legislation that rental income can no longer be used as income to qualify for a loan.
In other words, you have to basically qualify for both loans you’re carrying w/o counting rental income…or was I misinformed?
ParticipantIsn’t part of the new legislation that rental income can no longer be used as income to qualify for a loan.
In other words, you have to basically qualify for both loans you’re carrying w/o counting rental income…or was I misinformed?
ParticipantIsn’t part of the new legislation that rental income can no longer be used as income to qualify for a loan.
In other words, you have to basically qualify for both loans you’re carrying w/o counting rental income…or was I misinformed?
ParticipantIsn’t part of the new legislation that rental income can no longer be used as income to qualify for a loan.
In other words, you have to basically qualify for both loans you’re carrying w/o counting rental income…or was I misinformed?
ParticipantIsn’t part of the new legislation that rental income can no longer be used as income to qualify for a loan.
In other words, you have to basically qualify for both loans you’re carrying w/o counting rental income…or was I misinformed?
ParticipantIt doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen, although Hanky and Bernanky will do all in and outside their power to keep people spending moeny they don’t have.
But the timing PS gave is about 6 months, not the 12 that tracks 79%, but even still, we haven’t seen the worst of housing that will continue to drag on our economy for years to come and things are different this time.
The chart didn’t account for the raid on the dollar’s value we’ve seen only delaying the inevitable.
The S&P at 600 may be a stretch but the rally we saw today is hollow.
ParticipantIt doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen, although Hanky and Bernanky will do all in and outside their power to keep people spending moeny they don’t have.
But the timing PS gave is about 6 months, not the 12 that tracks 79%, but even still, we haven’t seen the worst of housing that will continue to drag on our economy for years to come and things are different this time.
The chart didn’t account for the raid on the dollar’s value we’ve seen only delaying the inevitable.
The S&P at 600 may be a stretch but the rally we saw today is hollow.
ParticipantIt doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen, although Hanky and Bernanky will do all in and outside their power to keep people spending moeny they don’t have.
But the timing PS gave is about 6 months, not the 12 that tracks 79%, but even still, we haven’t seen the worst of housing that will continue to drag on our economy for years to come and things are different this time.
The chart didn’t account for the raid on the dollar’s value we’ve seen only delaying the inevitable.
The S&P at 600 may be a stretch but the rally we saw today is hollow.
ParticipantIt doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen, although Hanky and Bernanky will do all in and outside their power to keep people spending moeny they don’t have.
But the timing PS gave is about 6 months, not the 12 that tracks 79%, but even still, we haven’t seen the worst of housing that will continue to drag on our economy for years to come and things are different this time.
The chart didn’t account for the raid on the dollar’s value we’ve seen only delaying the inevitable.
The S&P at 600 may be a stretch but the rally we saw today is hollow.
ParticipantIt doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen, although Hanky and Bernanky will do all in and outside their power to keep people spending moeny they don’t have.
But the timing PS gave is about 6 months, not the 12 that tracks 79%, but even still, we haven’t seen the worst of housing that will continue to drag on our economy for years to come and things are different this time.
The chart didn’t account for the raid on the dollar’s value we’ve seen only delaying the inevitable.
The S&P at 600 may be a stretch but the rally we saw today is hollow.
Participant[quote=CDMA ENG]So,
I have to ask, what is the benefit in this. Even if the current home owners want to stay in the property for the next couple of years at some point aren’t they going to say “why the hell am I paying 400K for this house when its only worth 300K?”. At some point they will walk away anyway?!?
Sounds like good money after bad again to me.
Take Care Piggs…[/quote]
You’re right it is. First the banks have to agree to participate, not just the homeowner (who in all likelihood will be better off walking, particularly in CA).
Then there’s a really Marxist part of the bill where the Government gets a minimum 50% of the equity from your house when you sell:
• < 1 year 100% of equity goes to government/lenders • < 2 years 90% of equity ” ” • < 3 years 80% of equity ” ” • <4 years 70% of equity ” ” • <5 years 60% of equity ” ” • >5 years 50% equity share
So who stands to benefit? The government, after spending OUR money on this, and the lender, who just has to take a hit up front.
This starts to look as much like retribution to the homeowner as it does a bailout.
-
AuthorPosts
