[patientrenter]

Patience, SDR. We can only be patient, and ready to pounce. It is very frustrating at times, but ya gotta distract yourself when that happens.

[patientrenter]

Patience, SDR. We can only be patient, and ready to pounce. It is very frustrating at times, but ya gotta distract yourself when that happens.

[patientrenter]

Patience, SDR. We can only be patient, and ready to pounce. It is very frustrating at times, but ya gotta distract yourself when that happens.

[patientrenter]

Patience, SDR. We can only be patient, and ready to pounce. It is very frustrating at times, but ya gotta distract yourself when that happens.

[patientrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]…this is the government’s way of attempting a “soft landing” in terms of market valuation on those toxic assets.[/quote]

If I were not a cynic, Allan, I would believe this. My cynical side says that what’s really going on is redirecting the consequences of bad actions from the principal orchestraters and beneficiaries to the innocent bystanders. In other words, my cynical side tells me the soft landing is marketed as a rescue for us all, but it’s really a smokescreen for a painless escape by the primary perpretators.

[patientrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]…this is the government’s way of attempting a “soft landing” in terms of market valuation on those toxic assets.[/quote]

If I were not a cynic, Allan, I would believe this. My cynical side says that what’s really going on is redirecting the consequences of bad actions from the principal orchestraters and beneficiaries to the innocent bystanders. In other words, my cynical side tells me the soft landing is marketed as a rescue for us all, but it’s really a smokescreen for a painless escape by the primary perpretators.

[patientrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]…this is the government’s way of attempting a “soft landing” in terms of market valuation on those toxic assets.[/quote]

If I were not a cynic, Allan, I would believe this. My cynical side says that what’s really going on is redirecting the consequences of bad actions from the principal orchestraters and beneficiaries to the innocent bystanders. In other words, my cynical side tells me the soft landing is marketed as a rescue for us all, but it’s really a smokescreen for a painless escape by the primary perpretators.

[patientrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]…this is the government’s way of attempting a “soft landing” in terms of market valuation on those toxic assets.[/quote]

If I were not a cynic, Allan, I would believe this. My cynical side says that what’s really going on is redirecting the consequences of bad actions from the principal orchestraters and beneficiaries to the innocent bystanders. In other words, my cynical side tells me the soft landing is marketed as a rescue for us all, but it’s really a smokescreen for a painless escape by the primary perpretators.

[patientrenter]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]…this is the government’s way of attempting a “soft landing” in terms of market valuation on those toxic assets.[/quote]

If I were not a cynic, Allan, I would believe this. My cynical side says that what’s really going on is redirecting the consequences of bad actions from the principal orchestraters and beneficiaries to the innocent bystanders. In other words, my cynical side tells me the soft landing is marketed as a rescue for us all, but it’s really a smokescreen for a painless escape by the primary perpretators.

[patientrenter]

” will the removal of the Government guarantee (as is the suggestions) really provide incentives to ensure the underlying loans are good?”

Of course it would. As long as you didn’t replace it with another govt guarantee, like a govt guarantee against bank losses if banks take on the risk.

But this misses the whole point of FNM and FRE and FHA. They are there to funnel money into housing demand, to make home prices higher than they would otherwise be. Since most voters own homes, and most voters really want to see their home prices high, not low, pols direct various institutions to do things that increase house prices. If they pulled the guarantee from FHA loans, pols would replace it with something else. If they didn’t, home prices would really collapse, and voters and banks would besiege Congress.

[patientrenter]

” will the removal of the Government guarantee (as is the suggestions) really provide incentives to ensure the underlying loans are good?”

Of course it would. As long as you didn’t replace it with another govt guarantee, like a govt guarantee against bank losses if banks take on the risk.

But this misses the whole point of FNM and FRE and FHA. They are there to funnel money into housing demand, to make home prices higher than they would otherwise be. Since most voters own homes, and most voters really want to see their home prices high, not low, pols direct various institutions to do things that increase house prices. If they pulled the guarantee from FHA loans, pols would replace it with something else. If they didn’t, home prices would really collapse, and voters and banks would besiege Congress.

[patientrenter]

” will the removal of the Government guarantee (as is the suggestions) really provide incentives to ensure the underlying loans are good?”

Of course it would. As long as you didn’t replace it with another govt guarantee, like a govt guarantee against bank losses if banks take on the risk.

But this misses the whole point of FNM and FRE and FHA. They are there to funnel money into housing demand, to make home prices higher than they would otherwise be. Since most voters own homes, and most voters really want to see their home prices high, not low, pols direct various institutions to do things that increase house prices. If they pulled the guarantee from FHA loans, pols would replace it with something else. If they didn’t, home prices would really collapse, and voters and banks would besiege Congress.

[patientrenter]

” will the removal of the Government guarantee (as is the suggestions) really provide incentives to ensure the underlying loans are good?”

Of course it would. As long as you didn’t replace it with another govt guarantee, like a govt guarantee against bank losses if banks take on the risk.

But this misses the whole point of FNM and FRE and FHA. They are there to funnel money into housing demand, to make home prices higher than they would otherwise be. Since most voters own homes, and most voters really want to see their home prices high, not low, pols direct various institutions to do things that increase house prices. If they pulled the guarantee from FHA loans, pols would replace it with something else. If they didn’t, home prices would really collapse, and voters and banks would besiege Congress.

[patientrenter]

” will the removal of the Government guarantee (as is the suggestions) really provide incentives to ensure the underlying loans are good?”

Of course it would. As long as you didn’t replace it with another govt guarantee, like a govt guarantee against bank losses if banks take on the risk.

But this misses the whole point of FNM and FRE and FHA. They are there to funnel money into housing demand, to make home prices higher than they would otherwise be. Since most voters own homes, and most voters really want to see their home prices high, not low, pols direct various institutions to do things that increase house prices. If they pulled the guarantee from FHA loans, pols would replace it with something else. If they didn’t, home prices would really collapse, and voters and banks would besiege Congress.

[patientrenter]

It’s a very good explanation in layman’s terms of how the PPIP is designed to overprice assets, whilst giving the impression that they are just helping to set the ‘right’ price.

I think the truth is that those who knew anything already knew that, and the rest of the public is unreachable, even with the best explanation. Besides, the public wants their homes to have as high a market value as possible, along with their equities. As the saying goes, “it’s hard to get a man to understand something when his salary [or wealth in this case] depends on him not understanding it”.

[Author]

Posts