Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Cube
Participant[quote=Sandi Egan][quote=SD Transplant]If convicted, she faces a maximum term of 19 years in state prison[/quote]
Right. $60K was not enough, so now we are stuck with paying all her bills for another 19 years. That’s the way to amend the state budget.[/quote]Right. And, I’m betting it would be waaaaay cheaper to just keep her on welfare for 19 years than to prosecute and incarcerate her.
ParticipantIn reading thus far, I have seen a number of comments about tax revenue implications and about home price implications. What I would see as a consequence, though, is a general reduction in leverage used to purchase housing (regardless of the possible outcomes of the other two). It will be less attractive to be as greatly leveraged and less attractive to carry the debt for so long.
If that reduction in leverage is sufficiently large, it would contract the money supply (probably supporting the outcomes of lower housing prices and lower tax revenue). While I think that less leverage in the housing market is a good thing, the government would certainly be opposed to the deflationary effects that would likely follow. Perhaps this plan is more attractive to them if they can magically lower mortgage interest rates to offset the loss of the MID…
ParticipantIn reading thus far, I have seen a number of comments about tax revenue implications and about home price implications. What I would see as a consequence, though, is a general reduction in leverage used to purchase housing (regardless of the possible outcomes of the other two). It will be less attractive to be as greatly leveraged and less attractive to carry the debt for so long.
If that reduction in leverage is sufficiently large, it would contract the money supply (probably supporting the outcomes of lower housing prices and lower tax revenue). While I think that less leverage in the housing market is a good thing, the government would certainly be opposed to the deflationary effects that would likely follow. Perhaps this plan is more attractive to them if they can magically lower mortgage interest rates to offset the loss of the MID…
ParticipantIn reading thus far, I have seen a number of comments about tax revenue implications and about home price implications. What I would see as a consequence, though, is a general reduction in leverage used to purchase housing (regardless of the possible outcomes of the other two). It will be less attractive to be as greatly leveraged and less attractive to carry the debt for so long.
If that reduction in leverage is sufficiently large, it would contract the money supply (probably supporting the outcomes of lower housing prices and lower tax revenue). While I think that less leverage in the housing market is a good thing, the government would certainly be opposed to the deflationary effects that would likely follow. Perhaps this plan is more attractive to them if they can magically lower mortgage interest rates to offset the loss of the MID…
ParticipantIn reading thus far, I have seen a number of comments about tax revenue implications and about home price implications. What I would see as a consequence, though, is a general reduction in leverage used to purchase housing (regardless of the possible outcomes of the other two). It will be less attractive to be as greatly leveraged and less attractive to carry the debt for so long.
If that reduction in leverage is sufficiently large, it would contract the money supply (probably supporting the outcomes of lower housing prices and lower tax revenue). While I think that less leverage in the housing market is a good thing, the government would certainly be opposed to the deflationary effects that would likely follow. Perhaps this plan is more attractive to them if they can magically lower mortgage interest rates to offset the loss of the MID…
ParticipantIn reading thus far, I have seen a number of comments about tax revenue implications and about home price implications. What I would see as a consequence, though, is a general reduction in leverage used to purchase housing (regardless of the possible outcomes of the other two). It will be less attractive to be as greatly leveraged and less attractive to carry the debt for so long.
If that reduction in leverage is sufficiently large, it would contract the money supply (probably supporting the outcomes of lower housing prices and lower tax revenue). While I think that less leverage in the housing market is a good thing, the government would certainly be opposed to the deflationary effects that would likely follow. Perhaps this plan is more attractive to them if they can magically lower mortgage interest rates to offset the loss of the MID…
Participant[quote=Ready411]
Seems there are more 1st time buyers buying on a whim doing the 3.5% down FHA loans. That’s my problem. If this is the new standard, and these are the people I will have to compete against, it will change the entry level market because they have a different view on the value of money.[/quote]This is my main concern in a nutshell. If I use 20% down as my standard, but others are using 3.5% (or less) and are only looking at debt service, it’s not a market in which I want to compete. I don’t want to play the game of “who’s willing to promise to pay more for a house”. That’s a game of one-ups-manship I don’t want to play.
Participant[quote=Ready411]
Seems there are more 1st time buyers buying on a whim doing the 3.5% down FHA loans. That’s my problem. If this is the new standard, and these are the people I will have to compete against, it will change the entry level market because they have a different view on the value of money.[/quote]This is my main concern in a nutshell. If I use 20% down as my standard, but others are using 3.5% (or less) and are only looking at debt service, it’s not a market in which I want to compete. I don’t want to play the game of “who’s willing to promise to pay more for a house”. That’s a game of one-ups-manship I don’t want to play.
Participant[quote=Ready411]
Seems there are more 1st time buyers buying on a whim doing the 3.5% down FHA loans. That’s my problem. If this is the new standard, and these are the people I will have to compete against, it will change the entry level market because they have a different view on the value of money.[/quote]This is my main concern in a nutshell. If I use 20% down as my standard, but others are using 3.5% (or less) and are only looking at debt service, it’s not a market in which I want to compete. I don’t want to play the game of “who’s willing to promise to pay more for a house”. That’s a game of one-ups-manship I don’t want to play.
Participant[quote=Ready411]
Seems there are more 1st time buyers buying on a whim doing the 3.5% down FHA loans. That’s my problem. If this is the new standard, and these are the people I will have to compete against, it will change the entry level market because they have a different view on the value of money.[/quote]This is my main concern in a nutshell. If I use 20% down as my standard, but others are using 3.5% (or less) and are only looking at debt service, it’s not a market in which I want to compete. I don’t want to play the game of “who’s willing to promise to pay more for a house”. That’s a game of one-ups-manship I don’t want to play.
Participant[quote=Ready411]
Seems there are more 1st time buyers buying on a whim doing the 3.5% down FHA loans. That’s my problem. If this is the new standard, and these are the people I will have to compete against, it will change the entry level market because they have a different view on the value of money.[/quote]This is my main concern in a nutshell. If I use 20% down as my standard, but others are using 3.5% (or less) and are only looking at debt service, it’s not a market in which I want to compete. I don’t want to play the game of “who’s willing to promise to pay more for a house”. That’s a game of one-ups-manship I don’t want to play.
ParticipantSoftware Engineer, ~1.5% raise, but 401K match was chopped in half, employee health plan contribution up, benefits down (higher copays, higher deductibles), some perks chopped as well.
Net, about a 7% pay cut. Good to have a job though, I suppose.
ParticipantSoftware Engineer, ~1.5% raise, but 401K match was chopped in half, employee health plan contribution up, benefits down (higher copays, higher deductibles), some perks chopped as well.
Net, about a 7% pay cut. Good to have a job though, I suppose.
ParticipantSoftware Engineer, ~1.5% raise, but 401K match was chopped in half, employee health plan contribution up, benefits down (higher copays, higher deductibles), some perks chopped as well.
Net, about a 7% pay cut. Good to have a job though, I suppose.
-
AuthorPosts