Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
patientrenter
Participant[quote=sfexporter]It’s so funny that she said the bank/mortgage broker deceived her by lending her the money. Did the bank put a gun on her head and force her to take the money? She is one wacko woman who lost a few marbles. [/quote]
I am sure she is an honest, fair person. She would have been just as adamant about reversing the loan and home purchase if the home price had gone up by 100%, as it had for most people who bought in the prior 10 years, and as she expected to happen to her, I am sure.
Participant[quote=sfexporter]It’s so funny that she said the bank/mortgage broker deceived her by lending her the money. Did the bank put a gun on her head and force her to take the money? She is one wacko woman who lost a few marbles. [/quote]
I am sure she is an honest, fair person. She would have been just as adamant about reversing the loan and home purchase if the home price had gone up by 100%, as it had for most people who bought in the prior 10 years, and as she expected to happen to her, I am sure.
Participant[quote=sfexporter]It’s so funny that she said the bank/mortgage broker deceived her by lending her the money. Did the bank put a gun on her head and force her to take the money? She is one wacko woman who lost a few marbles. [/quote]
I am sure she is an honest, fair person. She would have been just as adamant about reversing the loan and home purchase if the home price had gone up by 100%, as it had for most people who bought in the prior 10 years, and as she expected to happen to her, I am sure.
Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
Participant[quote=UCGal]From a taxpayer point of view… isn’t moving these homes off the fannie mae holdings a good thing? ….[/quote]
How is lending someone all (or almost all) the money to ‘buy’ a house from the taxpayers, with no recourse beyond the home if they fail to repay the loan, letting taxpayers off the hook?
ParticipantMy guess is that, of the $65bn or so that the media are telling us was “lost” by Madoff, maybe only $1-2bn were actually lost to the collective investors. Almost all of the $65bn was simply transferred (fraudulently and sometimes unfairly) from some investors to other investors.
Investors who gave Madoff $1 million 30 years ago did very well. They received more than their money back. Many who invested that long ago pulled all their money out at some time, and got full 10-12% returns. Others left their original money in all the way, and say they “lost” their investment. In fact, they did well too. They just didn’t get the bogus steady full 10-12% annual returns that they hoped for, and should never have expected or received.
Investors who put money in more recently were paying for all this largesse for the older investors. 95% of what happened in this Madoff event was that money was moved from newer investors to older investors. 5% or some smaller fraction of the money was spent by Madoff and his family or cronies.
ParticipantMy guess is that, of the $65bn or so that the media are telling us was “lost” by Madoff, maybe only $1-2bn were actually lost to the collective investors. Almost all of the $65bn was simply transferred (fraudulently and sometimes unfairly) from some investors to other investors.
Investors who gave Madoff $1 million 30 years ago did very well. They received more than their money back. Many who invested that long ago pulled all their money out at some time, and got full 10-12% returns. Others left their original money in all the way, and say they “lost” their investment. In fact, they did well too. They just didn’t get the bogus steady full 10-12% annual returns that they hoped for, and should never have expected or received.
Investors who put money in more recently were paying for all this largesse for the older investors. 95% of what happened in this Madoff event was that money was moved from newer investors to older investors. 5% or some smaller fraction of the money was spent by Madoff and his family or cronies.
ParticipantMy guess is that, of the $65bn or so that the media are telling us was “lost” by Madoff, maybe only $1-2bn were actually lost to the collective investors. Almost all of the $65bn was simply transferred (fraudulently and sometimes unfairly) from some investors to other investors.
Investors who gave Madoff $1 million 30 years ago did very well. They received more than their money back. Many who invested that long ago pulled all their money out at some time, and got full 10-12% returns. Others left their original money in all the way, and say they “lost” their investment. In fact, they did well too. They just didn’t get the bogus steady full 10-12% annual returns that they hoped for, and should never have expected or received.
Investors who put money in more recently were paying for all this largesse for the older investors. 95% of what happened in this Madoff event was that money was moved from newer investors to older investors. 5% or some smaller fraction of the money was spent by Madoff and his family or cronies.
ParticipantMy guess is that, of the $65bn or so that the media are telling us was “lost” by Madoff, maybe only $1-2bn were actually lost to the collective investors. Almost all of the $65bn was simply transferred (fraudulently and sometimes unfairly) from some investors to other investors.
Investors who gave Madoff $1 million 30 years ago did very well. They received more than their money back. Many who invested that long ago pulled all their money out at some time, and got full 10-12% returns. Others left their original money in all the way, and say they “lost” their investment. In fact, they did well too. They just didn’t get the bogus steady full 10-12% annual returns that they hoped for, and should never have expected or received.
Investors who put money in more recently were paying for all this largesse for the older investors. 95% of what happened in this Madoff event was that money was moved from newer investors to older investors. 5% or some smaller fraction of the money was spent by Madoff and his family or cronies.
ParticipantMy guess is that, of the $65bn or so that the media are telling us was “lost” by Madoff, maybe only $1-2bn were actually lost to the collective investors. Almost all of the $65bn was simply transferred (fraudulently and sometimes unfairly) from some investors to other investors.
Investors who gave Madoff $1 million 30 years ago did very well. They received more than their money back. Many who invested that long ago pulled all their money out at some time, and got full 10-12% returns. Others left their original money in all the way, and say they “lost” their investment. In fact, they did well too. They just didn’t get the bogus steady full 10-12% annual returns that they hoped for, and should never have expected or received.
Investors who put money in more recently were paying for all this largesse for the older investors. 95% of what happened in this Madoff event was that money was moved from newer investors to older investors. 5% or some smaller fraction of the money was spent by Madoff and his family or cronies.
ParticipantIs this legal?
-
AuthorPosts
