[patientrenter]

[quote=jpinpb]Would you not be able to do a 3% FHA? Pretty close to zero down, depending on the loan amount.[/quote]

If you can get 3% down, get the seller to pay all the costs, and creatively get a 3% loan from the seller or someone, then you’re at very little financial risk, as far as I can see. It would be worth determining your eligibility for all the different programs for irresponsible people and systematically maximizing your upside while covering yourself on the downside. I am sure there are services that can advise on how to do all this very effectively. Where are our realtors?

[patientrenter]

[quote=jpinpb]Would you not be able to do a 3% FHA? Pretty close to zero down, depending on the loan amount.[/quote]

If you can get 3% down, get the seller to pay all the costs, and creatively get a 3% loan from the seller or someone, then you’re at very little financial risk, as far as I can see. It would be worth determining your eligibility for all the different programs for irresponsible people and systematically maximizing your upside while covering yourself on the downside. I am sure there are services that can advise on how to do all this very effectively. Where are our realtors?

[patientrenter]

[quote=jpinpb]Would you not be able to do a 3% FHA? Pretty close to zero down, depending on the loan amount.[/quote]

If you can get 3% down, get the seller to pay all the costs, and creatively get a 3% loan from the seller or someone, then you’re at very little financial risk, as far as I can see. It would be worth determining your eligibility for all the different programs for irresponsible people and systematically maximizing your upside while covering yourself on the downside. I am sure there are services that can advise on how to do all this very effectively. Where are our realtors?

[patientrenter]

[quote=jpinpb]Would you not be able to do a 3% FHA? Pretty close to zero down, depending on the loan amount.[/quote]

If you can get 3% down, get the seller to pay all the costs, and creatively get a 3% loan from the seller or someone, then you’re at very little financial risk, as far as I can see. It would be worth determining your eligibility for all the different programs for irresponsible people and systematically maximizing your upside while covering yourself on the downside. I am sure there are services that can advise on how to do all this very effectively. Where are our realtors?

[patientrenter]

[quote=flu]Seattle was never cheap. Too many Amazon and MSFT millionaires

But people are pretty cool there. You want to talk about cultured people, it’s a great place to be. Just have to deal with the rain.[/quote]

Agree. Why pay prices set by people with huge sources of wealth? I’ll enjoy my visits to Seattle, and let others pay the price to live there.

[patientrenter]

[quote=flu]Seattle was never cheap. Too many Amazon and MSFT millionaires

But people are pretty cool there. You want to talk about cultured people, it’s a great place to be. Just have to deal with the rain.[/quote]

Agree. Why pay prices set by people with huge sources of wealth? I’ll enjoy my visits to Seattle, and let others pay the price to live there.

[patientrenter]

[quote=flu]Seattle was never cheap. Too many Amazon and MSFT millionaires

But people are pretty cool there. You want to talk about cultured people, it’s a great place to be. Just have to deal with the rain.[/quote]

Agree. Why pay prices set by people with huge sources of wealth? I’ll enjoy my visits to Seattle, and let others pay the price to live there.

[patientrenter]

[quote=flu]Seattle was never cheap. Too many Amazon and MSFT millionaires

But people are pretty cool there. You want to talk about cultured people, it’s a great place to be. Just have to deal with the rain.[/quote]

Agree. Why pay prices set by people with huge sources of wealth? I’ll enjoy my visits to Seattle, and let others pay the price to live there.

[patientrenter]

[quote=flu]Seattle was never cheap. Too many Amazon and MSFT millionaires

But people are pretty cool there. You want to talk about cultured people, it’s a great place to be. Just have to deal with the rain.[/quote]

Agree. Why pay prices set by people with huge sources of wealth? I’ll enjoy my visits to Seattle, and let others pay the price to live there.

[patientrenter]

It’s not just the net external debt, flu. That’s actually fairly small compared to the perceived net internal debt. Every $1 of debt is someone else’s savings. But if you were to do a survey of US voters, and ask them their (non-equity) savings and their debt, you’d find the average debt number is much bigger, and many more people see themselves as in net debt than vice versa.

That’s because a lot of people’s savings are indirectly owned, through pension plans etc in which they have an interest, but whose assets they don’t manage or even see. And wealth is concentrated, so a lot savings are in the hands of a small % of people.

The result is that most US voters see low interest rates, debt forgiveness, etc in a favorable light. That the entire country has maybe 10% more debt than savings is just icing on the cake, one more nudge in the direction of making debt repudiation attractive politically.

[patientrenter]

It’s not just the net external debt, flu. That’s actually fairly small compared to the perceived net internal debt. Every $1 of debt is someone else’s savings. But if you were to do a survey of US voters, and ask them their (non-equity) savings and their debt, you’d find the average debt number is much bigger, and many more people see themselves as in net debt than vice versa.

That’s because a lot of people’s savings are indirectly owned, through pension plans etc in which they have an interest, but whose assets they don’t manage or even see. And wealth is concentrated, so a lot savings are in the hands of a small % of people.

The result is that most US voters see low interest rates, debt forgiveness, etc in a favorable light. That the entire country has maybe 10% more debt than savings is just icing on the cake, one more nudge in the direction of making debt repudiation attractive politically.

[patientrenter]

It’s not just the net external debt, flu. That’s actually fairly small compared to the perceived net internal debt. Every $1 of debt is someone else’s savings. But if you were to do a survey of US voters, and ask them their (non-equity) savings and their debt, you’d find the average debt number is much bigger, and many more people see themselves as in net debt than vice versa.

That’s because a lot of people’s savings are indirectly owned, through pension plans etc in which they have an interest, but whose assets they don’t manage or even see. And wealth is concentrated, so a lot savings are in the hands of a small % of people.

The result is that most US voters see low interest rates, debt forgiveness, etc in a favorable light. That the entire country has maybe 10% more debt than savings is just icing on the cake, one more nudge in the direction of making debt repudiation attractive politically.

[patientrenter]

It’s not just the net external debt, flu. That’s actually fairly small compared to the perceived net internal debt. Every $1 of debt is someone else’s savings. But if you were to do a survey of US voters, and ask them their (non-equity) savings and their debt, you’d find the average debt number is much bigger, and many more people see themselves as in net debt than vice versa.

That’s because a lot of people’s savings are indirectly owned, through pension plans etc in which they have an interest, but whose assets they don’t manage or even see. And wealth is concentrated, so a lot savings are in the hands of a small % of people.

The result is that most US voters see low interest rates, debt forgiveness, etc in a favorable light. That the entire country has maybe 10% more debt than savings is just icing on the cake, one more nudge in the direction of making debt repudiation attractive politically.

[patientrenter]

It’s not just the net external debt, flu. That’s actually fairly small compared to the perceived net internal debt. Every $1 of debt is someone else’s savings. But if you were to do a survey of US voters, and ask them their (non-equity) savings and their debt, you’d find the average debt number is much bigger, and many more people see themselves as in net debt than vice versa.

That’s because a lot of people’s savings are indirectly owned, through pension plans etc in which they have an interest, but whose assets they don’t manage or even see. And wealth is concentrated, so a lot savings are in the hands of a small % of people.

The result is that most US voters see low interest rates, debt forgiveness, etc in a favorable light. That the entire country has maybe 10% more debt than savings is just icing on the cake, one more nudge in the direction of making debt repudiation attractive politically.

[patientrenter]

What a joke. Someone can’t make the loan payment and then you call it paid by lending them the money to pay it? It’s no wonder the new loans are only worth 1.7 cents on the dollar. But I am sure that will be magically revalued upward if this gets much bad public attention. The source for the other 98.3 cents? If you pay taxes, that would be you. Many thanks for yet another highly effective wealth transfer scheme go to Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Tim, Larry etc., all busy “saving our economy”.

[Author]

Posts