Not Again!......

The [name] cowh administration is pushing banks to lend money to people with weak or questionable credit.....Isn't this the same economic logic that we haven't recovered from yet? (Frannie/Freddy)....So this means some really haven't learned from past mistakes?....Before some get their drawers in a wad.... www.washingtonpost.com from today...

libs won't read this..I posted something similar last month.

So BHO is pressing the DOJ to talk nice to banks to reassure them they will have "no worries mate" if housing loans self destruct from interpreting laws in favor of unqualified buyers/refinancers. Hmmm, I wonder how Libertards are going to blame Bush when this latest round of Obummernomics fails....

I had an 837 credit score. However, in another thread I explained how I got a call from PNC saying that one of my homes was given a waiver from Freddie and that I was eligible for a modification of my mortgage without an appraisal, income verification, or a financial statement. My interest will go from 6.75% to 4%, and would have gone to 3.2% if it was not rental property. They guessed by a general index of values.....not a specific appraisal that my property was now worth 135k and I had a balance of 147k on my mortgage. I built 4 new homes who averaged 240k appraised value in 2006-8 and I have watched their values drop almost in half. They are on canals....they are to the new Santa Rosa Fema elevations, and they meet the new building code which has allowed me lower insurance rates. If the government would have done this instead of TARP, this country would be fully recovered today......this is going to bring me about $250 a month more, and they just added the costs of the refinance to the principal. My wife is calling on two of our other mortgages which are just under 7% and have similarly had the collateral drop in half......I could end up with $750 a month positive cash flow if they are giving across the board waivers on existing mortgages which were on the secondary market. We have three mortgages with a bank in Fort Walton/Destin which had a variable new construction 30 year loan which never had an escalator clause....so it started almost at 8% and it adjusts annually....so we were going to refinance after construction, but damn....with no basement limit we are paying about 2.9% on those loans and even though the values dropped in half they are nicely cash flowing. If America would have crammed down and modified mortgages rather than transferring our wealth to banks.....our problems would be much smaller.

Did you guys read this sentence in the article:

"Administration officials say they are looking only to allay unnecessary hesi­ta­tion among banks and encourage safe lending to borrowers who have the financial wherewithal to pay."

You can't base someone's ability to repay a debt based solely on a credit score. The State of Florida Affordable Housing Agency (Florida Housing Finance Corporation) has loaned money to this group for a long time and experiences a lower default rate than what you see in the traditional banking sector. They have strict guidelines and financial education requirements.

nochain wrote:So BHO is pressing the DOJ to talk nice to banks to reassure them they will have "no worries mate" if housing loans self destruct from interpreting laws in favor of unqualified buyers/refinancers. Hmmm, I wonder how Libertards are going to blame Bush when this latest round of Obummernomics fails....

The supporters of Fannie/Freddie defended them in Congressional committees claiming that the leadership of the two investment firms were in control and knew what they were doing...many democrats on the committee defended the leaders of these institutions and then did what Bawney Frank did....blamed everyone else for the failures...Makes no sense why this administration would follow a failed path once again...

It is hardly the same thing that created the housing bubble. They were doing liars loans then, assuring people that they could easily sell their house for more than they paid for it if times got rough. The music stopped and some were left standing in the cold with no buyers.
This is not the same thing. They are trying to keep more wealth from trickling upward. Many foreclosures are being bought up by investors rather than new families. Growing the middle class back from the brink of extinction would be greatly aided by increasing the number of families who own rather than rent. As the article pointed out and as we all know, a family's home is a major way to create wealth. Renting doesn't do that.

The administration’s efforts come in the midst of a housing market that has been surging for the past year but that has been delivering most of the benefits to established homeowners with high credit scores or to investors who have been behind a significant number of new purchases.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:libs won't read this..I posted something similar last month.

No...they'll read and shift the blame and proclaim this time around it's different...but the bottom line is that loans will be given to those that should receive them and that has lead and will continue to lead to failure but it makes some feel good...

newswatcher wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:libs won't read this..I posted something similar last month.

No...they'll read and shift the blame and proclaim this time around it's different...but the bottom line is that loans will be given to those that should receive them and that has lead and will continue to lead to failure but it makes some feel good...

You're one to talk. Did you read a goddamned thing I posted?

Margin Call wrote:

newswatcher wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:libs won't read this..I posted something similar last month.

No...they'll read and shift the blame and proclaim this time around it's different...but the bottom line is that loans will be given to those that should receive them and that has lead and will continue to lead to failure but it makes some feel good...

You're one to talk. Did you read a goddamned thing I posted?

They don't listen to facts.. only faux news..

Margin Call wrote: goddamned

Admit it. It feels good to write that don't it. lol

Bob wrote:

Margin Call wrote: goddamned

Admit it. It feels good to write that don't it. lol

Knowing you used the perfect word always feels really good.

[quote="Lurch"][quote="Margin Call"]

newswatcher wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:lib

They don't listen to facts.. only faux news..

I prefer Reuters but N/W cited a Washington Post (you know - that well known ultra-conservative newspaper) article in this thread. I guess any news is "Faux News" when it casts a negative light on a liberal or liberal policy. LMAO....

[quote="nochain"][quote="Lurch"]

Margin Call wrote:

newswatcher wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:lib

They don't listen to facts.. only faux news..

I prefer Reuters but N/W cited a Washington Post (you know - that well known ultra-conservative newspaper) article in this thread. I guess any news is "Faux News" when it casts a negative light on a liberal or liberal policy. LMAO....

you still don't get it.. go back and read post 5 from MC..

[quote="Lurch"][quote="nochain"]

Lurch wrote:

Margin Call wrote:

newswatcher wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:lib

They don't listen to facts.. only faux news..

I prefer Reuters but N/W cited a Washington Post (you know - that well known ultra-conservative newspaper) article in this thread. I guess any news is "Faux News" when it casts a negative light on a liberal or liberal policy. LMAO....

you still don't get it.. go back and read post 5 from MC..

Apparently you don't "get it" - MCs quote was the administration response to this: "The Obama administration is engaged in a broad push to make more home loans available to people with weaker credit, an effort that officials say will help power the economic recovery but that skeptics say could open the door to the risky lending that caused the housing crash in the first place."

Did you read the article or just MCs post? Fact is it appears this administration is now willing to walk down some of the same roads that they criticized in the past.

The "skeptics" don't even know what they plan is. They've already condemned it without knowing the details....and you have still ignored the most relevant part of what I posted.

From Florida Housing Finance Corporation's last Annual Report:

"Florida Housing’s single family loans are fixed rate mortgages for homebuyers within a programmatically defined income bracket and which require homebuyer education before loan closing. [These] requirements have helped keep Florida Housing’s foreclosure rate below the state average..."

Margin Call wrote:The "skeptics" don't even know what they plan is. They've already condemned it without knowing the details....and you have still ignored the most relevant part of what I posted.

NOW that's RICH!!!!!!!.....[name] cowh healthcare....let's just pass it then we'll look to see what's inside--Rep Nancy Pelsoi (D-CA)...Guess supporters can do so without 'Knowing the details' and some are fine with that logic or lackthereof...The skeptics in this case know that bad loans lead to failures and forclosures this isn't a theory there's case history that we still haven't recovered from...

newswatcher wrote:

Margin Call wrote:The "skeptics" don't even know what they plan is. They've already condemned it without knowing the details....and you have still ignored the most relevant part of what I posted.

NOW that's RICH!!!!!!!.....[name] cowh healthcare....let's just pass it then we'll look to see what's inside--Rep Nancy Pelsoi (D-CA)...Guess supporters can do so without 'Knowing the details' and some are fine with that logic or lackthereof...The skeptics in this case know that bad loans lead to failures and forclosures this isn't a theory there's case history that we still haven't recovered from...

Explain this to us: How can I give you evidence that lending to lower-income people with less than perfect credit scores can still lead to fewer foreclosures, yet you tell me it's going to cause another crisis? Lending to people with low credit scores should not be conflated with "bad loans" when additional underwriting criteria can lead to the issuance of very good loans.

Are you under the impression it was poor people that sunk the economy? Would you like a refresher course on what caused the housing crisis? You don't seem to grasp what happened.

Margin Call wrote:

newswatcher wrote:

Margin Call wrote:The "skeptics" don't even know what they plan is. They've already condemned it without knowing the details....and you have still ignored the most relevant part of what I posted.

NOW that's RICH!!!!!!!.....[name] cowh healthcare....let's just pass it then we'll look to see what's inside--Rep Nancy Pelsoi (D-CA)...Guess supporters can do so without 'Knowing the details' and some are fine with that logic or lackthereof...The skeptics in this case know that bad loans lead to failures and forclosures this isn't a theory there's case history that we still haven't recovered from...

Explain this to us: How can I give you evidence that lending to lower-income people with less than perfect credit scores can still lead to fewer foreclosures, yet you tell me it's going to cause another crisis? Lending to people with low credit scores should not be conflated with "bad loans" when additional underwriting criteria can lead to the issuance of very good loans.

Are you under the impression it was poor people that sunk the economy? Would you like a refresher course on what caused the housing crisis? You don't seem to grasp what happened.

Just watched a news segment on this issue and there are many experts that are questioning the logic because of the past track record of loans to folks that shouldn't received them....Poor people certainly did not cause the crisis...it was the lenders extending loans that were a risk were the problem...if not why so many forecloures?...Can't imagine these lenders were so incompetent that they couldn't recognize the risk....

I get it now. Your premise is that the loans will be underwritten, with no standards, for people who cannot pay them back. Start over with a new premise.

Margin Call wrote:

newswatcher wrote:

Margin Call wrote:The "skeptics" don't even know what they plan is. They've already condemned it without knowing the details....and you have still ignored the most relevant part of what I posted.

NOW that's RICH!!!!!!!.....[name] cowh healthcare....let's just pass it then we'll look to see what's inside--Rep Nancy Pelsoi (D-CA)...Guess supporters can do so without 'Knowing the details' and some are fine with that logic or lackthereof...The skeptics in this case know that bad loans lead to failures and forclosures this isn't a theory there's case history that we still haven't recovered from...

Explain this to us: How can I give you evidence that lending to lower-income people with less than perfect credit scores can still lead to fewer foreclosures, yet you tell me it's going to cause another crisis? Lending to people with low credit scores should not be conflated with "bad loans" when additional underwriting criteria can lead to the issuance of very good loans.

Are you under the impression it was poor people that sunk the economy? Would you like a refresher course on what caused the housing crisis? You don't seem to grasp what happened.

...............................................

You have the patience of Job. He would argue with a fucking stop sign.


Remind you of anyone...?

Argue with reality shoved in their face, and always together.



No dude I know would ever use that glory hole avatar.

William wrote:
You have the patience of Job. He would argue with a fucking stop sign.

C'mon. You enjoy a redneck skewering* as much as I do.



*hat-tip to PNJ poster REQ for the terminology

Margin Call wrote:

William wrote:
You have the patience of Job. He would argue with a fucking stop sign.

C'mon. You enjoy a redneck skewering* as much as I do.



*hat-tip to PNJ poster REQ for the terminology