Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 24, 2014 at 9:39 PM in reply to: st. louis cop: “If you don’t want to get killed, don’t show up in front of me.” #777625
ltsddd
Participant[quote=HLS][quote=ltsdd]
Would you think it would be possible if it’s “the last 7 or 8 or 9 years” instead of “the last 6 years”? Would you care to share why you think such a scenario is not possible?[/quote]
Because I deal with loans, lenders, guidelines, regulations & underwriters on a daily basis and don’t just make up scenarios based on what I think I know.
[/quote]I am tracking you. I think it’s you who wrote
“but I don’t see how it’s possible for anyone who had “a bankruptcy AND foreclosure” in the last 6 years to have bought another house since then AND have enough equity to do a cash out refi recently”
I don’t think the OP said anything about how long it’s been since the “4” filed for bk & was foreclosed for. You and you alone came up with the bk & foreclosure in the last 6 years scenario.
[quote=HLS]
It makes for creative writing and the possibility of developing a movie ‘based on a true story’ though….
[/quote]Nah…it makes for a lame strawman argument.
[quote=HLS]
Nobody was getting a new loan for a few years after a bankruptcy, foreclosure or short sale.
[/quote]That’s a pretty broad statement there. But I trust that that’s your experience so it must be true.
But what is a few years? 1, 2, 5,7, 20? It must be something more than two right?
Here’s an anecdote – I know of 1 person, who is a veteran, that went through a short sale in 2010. After 2+ years he jumped back into the housing market. After going through some form of “counseling” he got the (VA) loan approved. I I guess you’ve never heard about VA loans.
[quote=HLS]BUT to assume that this was widespread because of stories in the media and internet is silly.[/quote]
hmm..you might want to read the thread again. I don’t remember seeing anyone making a claim that this is something that is widespread. You are just making up stuff and arguing against them and try to attribute that to other posters.
Participant[quote=HLS][quote=ltsdd]It’s conceivable for someone to buy a house, say in 2002 for $500K with 0% down. House value goes up to $1m in 2007. Refi with 125% cash out. Stash the roughly $700K that they cashed out somewhere. Filed for bankruptcy. Heck, they don’t even have to wait for the bk record to go away. That’s plenty of cash to perhaps scoop up a similar house during the downturn. Now, 7 years later, bk record went away – continue to step two (refi cash out)….[/quote]
Uh-Huh….and how many people do you personally know who did this ?[/quote]
Would you think it would be possible if it’s “the last 7 or 8 or 9 years” instead of “the last 6 years”? Would you care to share why you think such a scenario is not possible?
ParticipantIt’s conceivable for someone to buy a house, say in 2002 for $500K with 0% down. House value goes up to $1m in 2007. Refi with 125% cash out. Stash the roughly $700K that they cashed out somewhere. Filed for bankruptcy. Heck, they don’t even have to wait for the bk record to go away. That’s plenty of cash to perhaps scoop up a similar house during the downturn. Now, 7 years later, bk record went away – continue to step two (refi cash out)….
Participant[quote=SDowner]
No one seems to have learnt any lesson and using their homes as ATM. [/quote]You couldn’t be more wrong. These folks learned that there’s no real consequences to their fiscal irresponsibility. When the sh!t hits the fan simply file for bankruptcy, squat for a few years and then wait for a few more years for the bankruptcy record to go away and “buy” again….wash, rinse, repeat. Talking about OPM, these folks are taking it to the next level – no skin in the game, nothing to lose, so why not living it up?
The banks need to stop being an enabler in these situations.
Participant[quote=allenartlab]I would also like to add that I plan to sell the house and the house was only rented out for 1 year.[/quote]
Did you give the rooms a new paint job before you rented out the house? If the tenants didn’t put the nail holes in the wall, would you sell the house without first giving it a new coat of paint?
Participant[quote=afx114][quote=ltsdd]The potential of malfunction software/hardware and thus crashes and the liability of trillion $$$ lawsuits that followed would make the automakers think twice about making self-driving cars available to the masses. I think the risk/liability trumps the cool factor.[/quote]
The potential of human error already greatly exceeds that for software/hardware error. Tell me which is more dangerous:
- a fully tested automated system
- a bunch of sexting teenagers, drunken post-party 20-somethings, vision-impaired slow-reacting seniors, sleepy over-worked parents of 4, and roid-raging lifted truck bros
I think what we’ll see happen is that insurance costs for automated cars will be MUCH lower than that of error-prone human drivers, so manufacturers will cover those costs or roll them into the price of the cars.
We’ll probably see automation take over trucking way before it takes over commuting. The cost savings are huge: Don’t need to pay drivers, they can drive 24×7, and can “chain” up like a train, greatly improving fuel efficiency via drafting. You’re foolish if you don’t think shipping companies are already researching/testing this.[/quote]
I hear what you’re saying. The point I was trying to make is that there is a lot of risks that the automakers have to assume to integrate such technologies into vehicles. It may be safer, but all it takes is a few crashes due malfunctions or system reboots for the lawyers to come knocking. Pretty much it’s carte blanche for lawsuits against the automakers for every fender bender that is to occur. Look at how much Toyota had to pay to settle the so-called sudden-acceleration cases. Now, imagine what’s the liability will be if you’re advertising and selling autopilot cars and they involved in crashes.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=ltsdd]I bought UVXY and didn’t unload it at the end of the day….I might be in a world of hurt come Monday.[/quote]
VIX is at it’s lowest weekly close in more than 3 years. I got into UVXY again yesterday too. VIX has to go up eventually. Just a matter of whether the theta of the leverage kills me first. It’s been brutal the last few months. It’s lost almost 60% since it’s reverse split less than 5 months ago. Can’t hold it too long.[/quote]
I think if you can weather the near-term downtrend you might be royally rewarded (on second thought, UVXY has been on this perpetual downtrend since it was created). I bought it today hoping for a nice little bounce that never came…and got carried away at a luncheon that I missed the closing bell by 7 minutes…oh well.
Participant[quote=spdrun]Self-drivin’ cars, BABY! If cars can drive 5′ from each other under computer control, and crash less (thus can be smaller with smaller crumple zones), highway density can be increased. This is only 50% tongue in cheek.[/quote]
The potential of malfunction software/hardware and thus crashes and the liability of trillion $$$ lawsuits that followed would make the automakers think twice about making self-driving cars available to the masses. I think the risk/liability trumps the cool factor.
ParticipantI gave up trying to guess when and what that catalyst is for the market to correct. I am concerned enough about the potential implosion that I turned to day/week-trading with my “speculation” account. I try to stick to a couple rules – 1. not holding anything over the weekend and 2. No shorting….well, I was doing quite well up until this morning when I cashed in on VOD (nice gain after holding it for 2 days). The euphoria must have clouded my judgement and I broke both rules after that, I bought UVXY and didn’t unload it at the end of the day….I might be in a world of hurt come Monday.
Participant[quote=AN]But obviously, you can’t handle data that contradicts your POV.[/quote]
You haven’t shown any data to back up your assertion that today’s minimum wage earners are better off than those in the 80’s. Giving a couple ridiculous and irrelevant examples on how house payments have gone up at a lesser rate than minimum wage is is not considered as “data”. Show something that’s relevant to the discussion at hand – how probable is it that someone making $8/hour can afford/qualify for a a $200K house? You think?
Participant[quote=AN][quote=ltsdd][quote=AN]Minimum wage earners are not middle class.
Regardless, let’s play with your example and use that to calculate what it would take to come up with the 20% down payment:
20% down payment for $96,500 is $19,300. That takes roughly 5761 man hours to earn at $3.35.
20% down payment for $465000 is $93,000. That takes roughly 11625 man hours to earn at $8.
How is that better?[/quote]I understand minimum wage is not middle class. I don’t expect a minimum wage person to be able to buy a place like this. But they might be able to buy a place like this: http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-140009602-5281_Caminito_Cachorro_San_Diego_CA_92105
Sold for $78k in 1985 and selling for $199k today.
The payment in 1985 would be $547/month, assuming 20% down and 10% interest rate.
The payment today would be $783/month, assuming 20% down and 4.25% interest rate.
It would take 4975 hours worked @ $8 today and would take 4656 hours worked @ $3.35.
How’s that not better? You’re getting paid 2.3x more, yet your cost of living per month is ~36% higher than when it was in 1985.[/quote]
It’s not better because there are many other parameters that are left out. House payment is not the only thing that measures the cost of living. Let’s not forget that in this simple scenario we’re ignoring one important thing – today’s interest rate is an anomaly.
If you truly feel that the folks making minimum wage today are having a higher living standards than those in 1980 (then what the fvck are we doing complaining about where our country is heading?) then let’s just say we agree to disagree. It’s not necessary to cherry-pick some numbers to prove your point.
Participant[quote=AN]But don’t you think Old Town/Mission Hills is an anomaly (along with other Uptown areas) when it comes to cost of living? Here’s an example of Mira Mesa.
http://www.sdlookup.com/MLS-140023149-92126
This house was sold in 1983 for $96,500. Mortgage rates back then was ~12%. So, monthly payment back then was $794/month. Today, that house just went pending @ $465k and current mortgage rate is ~4.25%. Which puts the monthly payment @ $1830/month. You’re looking at an increase of 2.3x in housing cost for your average middle class family. That doesn’t seem to outrageous to me.[/quote]
Minimum wage earners are not middle class.
Regardless, let’s play with your example and use that to calculate what it would take to come up with the 20% down payment:
20% down payment for $96,500 is $19,300. That takes roughly 5761 man hours to earn at $3.35.
20% down payment for $465000 is $93,000. That takes roughly 11625 man hours to earn at $8.
How is that better?
Participant[quote=JohnAlt91941][quote=ltsdd]Here’s a data point. Rent for a studio in a SD community where I grew up is renting for $900+/month. That same studio rented for $75/month 34 years ago. Today’s minimum wage – $9/hour, 34 years ago $3.10/hour.
Let me know if you seriously believe that living standards has gone up for those earning minimum wages.[/quote]
That can’t be correct, unless the renters were in the home forever by 1980 and the rent didn’t come close to keeping up with the market.
I rented a studio that went for $360 in 1987 and was going for a bit under $800 in 2010.[/quote]
$75/month is correct. Nearby, 2/2 duplexes were going for about $225-250/month back then.
Your numbers are not that far off. In your case, if the rent was $800/month in 2010, then how much do you think the rent is today?
Also, I am sure other factors played a role. The neighborhood is not anywhere as “bad” as it was back in the 70s & 80s, so I would expect that to be reflected in the rents.
ParticipantHere’s a data point. Rent for a studio in a SD community where I grew up is renting for $900+/month. That same studio rented for $75/month 34 years ago. Today’s minimum wage – $9/hour, 34 years ago $3.10/hour.
Let me know if you seriously believe that living standards has gone up for those earning minimum wages.
-
AuthorPosts
