Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SD Realtor
ParticipantOnce again your answers display an elitist attitude that you know what is best for others and that they can “cope”. Furthermore your examples of how to “cope” display just how out of touch you are with families, senior citizens, and other people who basically live paycheck to paycheck.
You have this sense that everyone can live like you and get by and “cope” just like you do. You are a single (probably white) male who likes to think that people can just wade through what will be the hardest times they will have faced with solutions like eating oatmeal and yogurt.
Furthermore you “agree” with someone who makes a stupid comment about eating poor even though that poster just recently bought a home. What does that poster know about “eating poor”?
I know several military families who are just barely getting by. My wife does volunteer work with other families who are on the brink. Honestly your statements are so damn arrogant it is really astounding.
You make it sound like these high prices will only be temporary and the govt will fix everything in a few months. Don’t worry about it… build denser housing. Really? That is your answer? Have you ever been to govt housing projects Brian? Your snappy one liner will be, “Well the govt can make more efficient housing that will be cheap!” Really Brian? When? When pigs freeking fly.
What is your solution for seniors on fixed income?
*****************
Yes our country has severe, very very severe problems. We are fat, we are lazy. This may or may not change. May argument is not that change will not come, because brother it may not. I would be far more willing to bet that many people will indeed NOT BE ABLE TO COPE. They will have a substantially reduced quality of life. They dont get to travel to Vietnam or own a place in Philly like lucky Brian does. They struggle through life as a single mom at Vons with 2 kids, or a 72 year old man living on SS. They are a military family needing help from charity or their church to make ends meet.
You could use some reality lessons Brian. Your arrogance is shocking.
ParticipantOnce again your answers display an elitist attitude that you know what is best for others and that they can “cope”. Furthermore your examples of how to “cope” display just how out of touch you are with families, senior citizens, and other people who basically live paycheck to paycheck.
You have this sense that everyone can live like you and get by and “cope” just like you do. You are a single (probably white) male who likes to think that people can just wade through what will be the hardest times they will have faced with solutions like eating oatmeal and yogurt.
Furthermore you “agree” with someone who makes a stupid comment about eating poor even though that poster just recently bought a home. What does that poster know about “eating poor”?
I know several military families who are just barely getting by. My wife does volunteer work with other families who are on the brink. Honestly your statements are so damn arrogant it is really astounding.
You make it sound like these high prices will only be temporary and the govt will fix everything in a few months. Don’t worry about it… build denser housing. Really? That is your answer? Have you ever been to govt housing projects Brian? Your snappy one liner will be, “Well the govt can make more efficient housing that will be cheap!” Really Brian? When? When pigs freeking fly.
What is your solution for seniors on fixed income?
*****************
Yes our country has severe, very very severe problems. We are fat, we are lazy. This may or may not change. May argument is not that change will not come, because brother it may not. I would be far more willing to bet that many people will indeed NOT BE ABLE TO COPE. They will have a substantially reduced quality of life. They dont get to travel to Vietnam or own a place in Philly like lucky Brian does. They struggle through life as a single mom at Vons with 2 kids, or a 72 year old man living on SS. They are a military family needing help from charity or their church to make ends meet.
You could use some reality lessons Brian. Your arrogance is shocking.
ParticipantOnce again your answers display an elitist attitude that you know what is best for others and that they can “cope”. Furthermore your examples of how to “cope” display just how out of touch you are with families, senior citizens, and other people who basically live paycheck to paycheck.
You have this sense that everyone can live like you and get by and “cope” just like you do. You are a single (probably white) male who likes to think that people can just wade through what will be the hardest times they will have faced with solutions like eating oatmeal and yogurt.
Furthermore you “agree” with someone who makes a stupid comment about eating poor even though that poster just recently bought a home. What does that poster know about “eating poor”?
I know several military families who are just barely getting by. My wife does volunteer work with other families who are on the brink. Honestly your statements are so damn arrogant it is really astounding.
You make it sound like these high prices will only be temporary and the govt will fix everything in a few months. Don’t worry about it… build denser housing. Really? That is your answer? Have you ever been to govt housing projects Brian? Your snappy one liner will be, “Well the govt can make more efficient housing that will be cheap!” Really Brian? When? When pigs freeking fly.
What is your solution for seniors on fixed income?
*****************
Yes our country has severe, very very severe problems. We are fat, we are lazy. This may or may not change. May argument is not that change will not come, because brother it may not. I would be far more willing to bet that many people will indeed NOT BE ABLE TO COPE. They will have a substantially reduced quality of life. They dont get to travel to Vietnam or own a place in Philly like lucky Brian does. They struggle through life as a single mom at Vons with 2 kids, or a 72 year old man living on SS. They are a military family needing help from charity or their church to make ends meet.
You could use some reality lessons Brian. Your arrogance is shocking.
ParticipantI agree with that UCG but I thought the article was pretty neat. It pointed out a few important issues. First off that doctors in Australia are paid much less then they are out here. That there is a MUCH LOWER issue with regards to TORT reform. Finally that the govt very much encourages people to get private health insurance. Also that people cannot be denied due to previous conditions.
Not to be lost is the issue that the pharma industry (and other lobbyists) have a much tighter stranglehold on the US govt then in Australia so I do not see much hope and change. Yes there will be a govt system put in place but we are already seeing many exceptions being granted as well as those same industries still have a stranglehold on govt.
Same beat, different drummer. More people covered which is good. Let’s see how much it cost.
ParticipantI agree with that UCG but I thought the article was pretty neat. It pointed out a few important issues. First off that doctors in Australia are paid much less then they are out here. That there is a MUCH LOWER issue with regards to TORT reform. Finally that the govt very much encourages people to get private health insurance. Also that people cannot be denied due to previous conditions.
Not to be lost is the issue that the pharma industry (and other lobbyists) have a much tighter stranglehold on the US govt then in Australia so I do not see much hope and change. Yes there will be a govt system put in place but we are already seeing many exceptions being granted as well as those same industries still have a stranglehold on govt.
Same beat, different drummer. More people covered which is good. Let’s see how much it cost.
ParticipantI agree with that UCG but I thought the article was pretty neat. It pointed out a few important issues. First off that doctors in Australia are paid much less then they are out here. That there is a MUCH LOWER issue with regards to TORT reform. Finally that the govt very much encourages people to get private health insurance. Also that people cannot be denied due to previous conditions.
Not to be lost is the issue that the pharma industry (and other lobbyists) have a much tighter stranglehold on the US govt then in Australia so I do not see much hope and change. Yes there will be a govt system put in place but we are already seeing many exceptions being granted as well as those same industries still have a stranglehold on govt.
Same beat, different drummer. More people covered which is good. Let’s see how much it cost.
ParticipantI agree with that UCG but I thought the article was pretty neat. It pointed out a few important issues. First off that doctors in Australia are paid much less then they are out here. That there is a MUCH LOWER issue with regards to TORT reform. Finally that the govt very much encourages people to get private health insurance. Also that people cannot be denied due to previous conditions.
Not to be lost is the issue that the pharma industry (and other lobbyists) have a much tighter stranglehold on the US govt then in Australia so I do not see much hope and change. Yes there will be a govt system put in place but we are already seeing many exceptions being granted as well as those same industries still have a stranglehold on govt.
Same beat, different drummer. More people covered which is good. Let’s see how much it cost.
ParticipantI agree with that UCG but I thought the article was pretty neat. It pointed out a few important issues. First off that doctors in Australia are paid much less then they are out here. That there is a MUCH LOWER issue with regards to TORT reform. Finally that the govt very much encourages people to get private health insurance. Also that people cannot be denied due to previous conditions.
Not to be lost is the issue that the pharma industry (and other lobbyists) have a much tighter stranglehold on the US govt then in Australia so I do not see much hope and change. Yes there will be a govt system put in place but we are already seeing many exceptions being granted as well as those same industries still have a stranglehold on govt.
Same beat, different drummer. More people covered which is good. Let’s see how much it cost.
ParticipantScarlett
The home may not be held by a bank and thus it is not an REO. The home most likely had two mortgages on it. As evidenced by the records there was an 87k purchase made at a trustee sale. That purchase was most likely made on the second mortgage. There is a first that was originated back in 2003 for 375k but it is a guess as to figure out what the balance is on that sale. The person making the purchase for 87k is more then likely someone who is not a good flipper OR it is someone who believes that they can get more then 87k back out of the deal. It all depends on what the balance of the first is.
Thus there is no deception on anyones part.
Finally, just because it went through a trustee sale does not mean that it has to be relisted. When there is a trustee sale on the first, it is pretty much a slam dunk that the home is pulled from the market and eventually relisted with someone else. When there is a second that is sold at trustee sale, it is a different situation. The first still holds sway and is not really involved in anything yet. The person or entity that bought the second can call the homeowner and let them know what went on and the same listing agent can be retained.
Honestly there is nothing wrong here. If you need any further help just post questions and I will do what I can.
ParticipantScarlett
The home may not be held by a bank and thus it is not an REO. The home most likely had two mortgages on it. As evidenced by the records there was an 87k purchase made at a trustee sale. That purchase was most likely made on the second mortgage. There is a first that was originated back in 2003 for 375k but it is a guess as to figure out what the balance is on that sale. The person making the purchase for 87k is more then likely someone who is not a good flipper OR it is someone who believes that they can get more then 87k back out of the deal. It all depends on what the balance of the first is.
Thus there is no deception on anyones part.
Finally, just because it went through a trustee sale does not mean that it has to be relisted. When there is a trustee sale on the first, it is pretty much a slam dunk that the home is pulled from the market and eventually relisted with someone else. When there is a second that is sold at trustee sale, it is a different situation. The first still holds sway and is not really involved in anything yet. The person or entity that bought the second can call the homeowner and let them know what went on and the same listing agent can be retained.
Honestly there is nothing wrong here. If you need any further help just post questions and I will do what I can.
ParticipantScarlett
The home may not be held by a bank and thus it is not an REO. The home most likely had two mortgages on it. As evidenced by the records there was an 87k purchase made at a trustee sale. That purchase was most likely made on the second mortgage. There is a first that was originated back in 2003 for 375k but it is a guess as to figure out what the balance is on that sale. The person making the purchase for 87k is more then likely someone who is not a good flipper OR it is someone who believes that they can get more then 87k back out of the deal. It all depends on what the balance of the first is.
Thus there is no deception on anyones part.
Finally, just because it went through a trustee sale does not mean that it has to be relisted. When there is a trustee sale on the first, it is pretty much a slam dunk that the home is pulled from the market and eventually relisted with someone else. When there is a second that is sold at trustee sale, it is a different situation. The first still holds sway and is not really involved in anything yet. The person or entity that bought the second can call the homeowner and let them know what went on and the same listing agent can be retained.
Honestly there is nothing wrong here. If you need any further help just post questions and I will do what I can.
ParticipantScarlett
The home may not be held by a bank and thus it is not an REO. The home most likely had two mortgages on it. As evidenced by the records there was an 87k purchase made at a trustee sale. That purchase was most likely made on the second mortgage. There is a first that was originated back in 2003 for 375k but it is a guess as to figure out what the balance is on that sale. The person making the purchase for 87k is more then likely someone who is not a good flipper OR it is someone who believes that they can get more then 87k back out of the deal. It all depends on what the balance of the first is.
Thus there is no deception on anyones part.
Finally, just because it went through a trustee sale does not mean that it has to be relisted. When there is a trustee sale on the first, it is pretty much a slam dunk that the home is pulled from the market and eventually relisted with someone else. When there is a second that is sold at trustee sale, it is a different situation. The first still holds sway and is not really involved in anything yet. The person or entity that bought the second can call the homeowner and let them know what went on and the same listing agent can be retained.
Honestly there is nothing wrong here. If you need any further help just post questions and I will do what I can.
ParticipantScarlett
The home may not be held by a bank and thus it is not an REO. The home most likely had two mortgages on it. As evidenced by the records there was an 87k purchase made at a trustee sale. That purchase was most likely made on the second mortgage. There is a first that was originated back in 2003 for 375k but it is a guess as to figure out what the balance is on that sale. The person making the purchase for 87k is more then likely someone who is not a good flipper OR it is someone who believes that they can get more then 87k back out of the deal. It all depends on what the balance of the first is.
Thus there is no deception on anyones part.
Finally, just because it went through a trustee sale does not mean that it has to be relisted. When there is a trustee sale on the first, it is pretty much a slam dunk that the home is pulled from the market and eventually relisted with someone else. When there is a second that is sold at trustee sale, it is a different situation. The first still holds sway and is not really involved in anything yet. The person or entity that bought the second can call the homeowner and let them know what went on and the same listing agent can be retained.
Honestly there is nothing wrong here. If you need any further help just post questions and I will do what I can.
ParticipantYou may want to also look at the volume for the shorts on he dollar.
-
AuthorPosts
