Democrats caused recession in 2007

[GWV5903]

'91 was the bottom, by 2005 we hit an incredible peak in housing starts, and we will do it again, history seems to repeat it's self...

 

[Faun]

... only none of that appears in your link.

It's not in the link?

Besides common sense it appears you need glasses...

It's in the middle of the page...

• Up to 6% of the final contract sales price for down payment and/or closing costs.
• Available for first-time and repeat homebuyers.
• Approved for new construction and resale homes.
• No geographical restrictions.

Too bad that's not what you posted, dumbfuck.

Again .... here's what you posted -- and it's not in your link. Capiche?

"Here's a link Nehemiah Program for FHA Down Payments Grants , under this program which originated in 1996 the seller rolled in the down payment and closing cost, in essence the buyer would have no more than $500 in to the purchase, at the same time Sub Prime had FICO requirements as low as 560 to 580 for Zero Down, No Escrows, No PMI and again as little as $500 invested..."​

Now what the fuck is wrong with you that you keep posting shit as though it appears in the links you're posting -- when it doesn't.

So now you're not a Liberal? Did you wake up in another fantasy world? Who gives a fuck what you put down, stay on topic, you're to easily diverted, we are talking about the millions who put down NOTHING MORON!!!!

Of course I am -- now what does that have to do with your idiocy that I'm a leech. Either you can tell me how much I put down on my current home and prove I'm a "leech" or you expose yourself as the conservative imbecile you appear to be....

And your qualifications are what? Let's see Edward Pinto Edward J. Pinto - AEI , he has forgotten more about this subject than you will ever know about anything...

My ability to read and comprehend, which puts me light years ahead of you. Hell, you keep posting crap with links which don't even contain the text you attribute to them.

So what? I had a ARM for years, I saved thousands, you have no clue what the hell you're talking about, most ARM's had 1 to 2 caps...

Who gives a shit about your anecdotal personal experience -- which you're probably lying about anyway? Regardless, too many home owners couldn't afford the increases when their rates went up to 5-6 percent. With little invested in their property, they simply walked.

Sub Prime Loans were usually 2/28's or 3/27's, the intent was good, but they couldn't cover the property taxes dumb ass... [/SIZE][/FONT]

More bullshit. States like mine don't allow more than a 3% increase in property tax in a given year, yet we had an enormous number of foreclosures. Not because of property taxes but due to readjusted ARMs that lifted the nut above the borrowers' ability to keep up.

With every post you make, you reveal abject ignorance on the matter. But then, you are a conservative, so it's to be expected.

 

[Faun]

No shit Sherlock and we had been pumping out millions of ZERO DOWN LOANS for a decade, trillions of dollars and too many defaulted, it's really simple...

You are truly fucking conservative deranged.
"Millions" of "zero down loans," huh?

"trillions of dollars," huh?

The Nehemiah down payment gift program has been around since 1997, and it has helped over 210,000 families get into homes. The program has generated over $865 million in down payments funds.​

Oh, and check this out, choadbreath ... here's the link which contains that text....

http://www.homeloanbasics.com/pdf/article/271-FHAMortgageDownPaymentHelpNehemiahProgram.pdf

... what a concept, huh?

 

[owebo]

No shit Sherlock and we had been pumping out millions of ZERO DOWN LOANS for a decade, trillions of dollars and too many defaulted, it's really simple...

You are truly fucking conservative deranged.
"Millions" of "zero down loans," huh?

"trillions of dollars," huh?

The Nehemiah down payment gift program has been around since 1997, and it has helped over 210,000 families get into homes. The program has generated over $865 million in down payments funds.​

Oh, and check this out, choadbreath ... here's the link which contains that text....

http://www.homeloanbasics.com/pdf/article/271-FHAMortgageDownPaymentHelpNehemiahProgram.pdf

... what a concept, huh?

My favorite invention by liberals was the NINJa loan......anything to move CRA forward at any cost......

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Hey, if you can claim to have been in the mortgage industry since 1648, I don't see why I should be precluded from being a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve.....

I am not a lender, just a builder...

Are you maintaining that it was a "loan program"? It wasn't.

No it is not a loan program, it was the seed that started the housing bubble in the early '90's that started crashing in late 2007...

Off the top of my head, around 580....

No, 500 is the low, I have personally seen a 516 close with a 20 year term...

So you have Boldly Asserted........perhaps you could provide a citation supporting that claim?

Here's a link Nehemiah Program for FHA Down Payments Grants , under this program which originated in 1996 the seller rolled in the down payment and closing cost, in essence the buyer would have no more than $500 in to the purchase, at the same time Sub Prime had FICO requirements as low as 560 to 580 for Zero Down, No Escrows, No PMI and again as little as $500 invested...

Today you can still receive Zero Down mortgages from our Federal Government via USDA Loans http://www.rd.usda.gov/files/fact-sheet/RD-FactSheet-RHS-SFH502Direct.pdf

Loan products like these examples didn't exist before the Community Reinvestment Act...

It started a mentality that crashed and burned in 2008...

You really have no clue.

___________________________________________

The Federal Reserve Board has found no connection between CRA and the subprime mortgage problems. In fact, the Board's analysis (102 KB PDF) found that nearly 60 percent of higher-priced loans went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods, which are not the focus of CRA activity. Additionally, about 20 percent of the higher-priced loans that were extended in low- or moderate-income areas, or to low- or moderate-income borrowers, were loans originated by lenders not covered by the CRA. Our analysis found that only six percent of all higher-priced loans were made by CRA-covered lenders to borrowers and neighborhoods targeted by the CRA. Further, our review of loan performance found that rates of serious mortgage delinquency are high in all neighborhood groups, not just in lower-income areas.

FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?​

THE CRA INVESTIGATION REPORT

But a new study by the respected National Bureau of Economic Research finds, "There is a clear pattern of increased defaults for loans made by these banks in quarters around the (CRA) exam. Moreover, the effects are larger for loans made within CRA tracts," or predominantly low-income and minority areas.

CRA regulations are at the core of Fannie's and Freddie's so-called affordable housing mission. In the early 1990s, a Democrat Congress gave HUD the authority to set and enforce (through fines) CRA-grade loan quotas at Fannie and Freddie.

We want your CRA loans because they help us meet our housing goals," Fannie Vice Chair Jamie Gorelick beseeched lenders gathered at a banking conference in 2000, just after HUD hiked the mortgage giant's affordable housing quotas to 50% and pressed it to buy more CRA-eligible loans to help meet those new targets. "We will buy them from your portfolios or package them into securities."

She described "CRA-friendly products" as mortgages with less than "3% down" and "flexible underwriting."


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: New Study Finds CRA 'Clearly' Did Lead To Risky Lending



Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending



The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?

According to one enforcement agency, "discrimination exists when a lender's underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants." Note that these "arbitrary or outdated criteria" include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history--the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring.

The government has promoted bad loans not just through the stick of the CRA but through the carrot of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which purchase, securitize and guarantee loans made by lenders and whose debt is itself implicitly guaranteed by the federal government.

The Government Did It - Forbes



Let me know if you need more resources surrounding CRA and how President Clinton changed the regulation to push banks into accepting risky loans to be made to low income families, as I have done a lot more research on the subject, with plenty more information to follow.

 

[Faun]

Hey, if you can claim to have been in the mortgage industry since 1648, I don't see why I should be precluded from being a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve.....

I am not a lender, just a builder...

Are you maintaining that it was a "loan program"? It wasn't.

No it is not a loan program, it was the seed that started the housing bubble in the early '90's that started crashing in late 2007...

Off the top of my head, around 580....

No, 500 is the low, I have personally seen a 516 close with a 20 year term...

So you have Boldly Asserted........perhaps you could provide a citation supporting that claim?

Here's a link Nehemiah Program for FHA Down Payments Grants , under this program which originated in 1996 the seller rolled in the down payment and closing cost, in essence the buyer would have no more than $500 in to the purchase, at the same time Sub Prime had FICO requirements as low as 560 to 580 for Zero Down, No Escrows, No PMI and again as little as $500 invested...

Today you can still receive Zero Down mortgages from our Federal Government via USDA Loans http://www.rd.usda.gov/files/fact-sheet/RD-FactSheet-RHS-SFH502Direct.pdf

Loan products like these examples didn't exist before the Community Reinvestment Act...

It started a mentality that crashed and burned in 2008...

You really have no clue.

___________________________________________

The Federal Reserve Board has found no connection between CRA and the subprime mortgage problems. In fact, the Board's analysis (102 KB PDF) found that nearly 60 percent of higher-priced loans went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods, which are not the focus of CRA activity. Additionally, about 20 percent of the higher-priced loans that were extended in low- or moderate-income areas, or to low- or moderate-income borrowers, were loans originated by lenders not covered by the CRA. Our analysis found that only six percent of all higher-priced loans were made by CRA-covered lenders to borrowers and neighborhoods targeted by the CRA. Further, our review of loan performance found that rates of serious mortgage delinquency are high in all neighborhood groups, not just in lower-income areas.

FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?​

THE CRA INVESTIGATION REPORT

But a new study by the respected National Bureau of Economic Research finds, "There is a clear pattern of increased defaults for loans made by these banks in quarters around the (CRA) exam. Moreover, the effects are larger for loans made within CRA tracts," or predominantly low-income and minority areas.

CRA regulations are at the core of Fannie's and Freddie's so-called affordable housing mission. In the early 1990s, a Democrat Congress gave HUD the authority to set and enforce (through fines) CRA-grade loan quotas at Fannie and Freddie.

We want your CRA loans because they help us meet our housing goals," Fannie Vice Chair Jamie Gorelick beseeched lenders gathered at a banking conference in 2000, just after HUD hiked the mortgage giant's affordable housing quotas to 50% and pressed it to buy more CRA-eligible loans to help meet those new targets. "We will buy them from your portfolios or package them into securities."

She described "CRA-friendly products" as mortgages with less than "3% down" and "flexible underwriting."


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: New Study Finds CRA 'Clearly' Did Lead To Risky Lending



Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending



The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?

According to one enforcement agency, "discrimination exists when a lender's underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants." Note that these "arbitrary or outdated criteria" include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history--the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring.

The government has promoted bad loans not just through the stick of the CRA but through the carrot of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which purchase, securitize and guarantee loans made by lenders and whose debt is itself implicitly guaranteed by the federal government.

The Government Did It - Forbes



Let me know if you need more resources surrounding CRA and how President Clinton changed the regulation to push banks into accepting risky loans to be made to low income families, as I have done a lot more research on the subject, with plenty more information to follow.

So? As the link I gave showed, CRA still amounted to a whopping 6% of the residential toxic loans and zero percent of the commercial toxic loans.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Whenever democrats want to say that it was the economic policies of the repubican party that led to the recession of 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 then someone should just point out this video


There are plenty of other videos of democrats preventing people from addressing the issues that led to the housing bubble and collapse.

The buck stops at the Oval Office, see President Bush's comment on Oct. 15,2002, here,

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html

And,
Expanding Home Ownership
"This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."

- President George W. Bush, December 16, 2003

The Accomplishments

Increasing Homeownership

• The US homeownership rate reached a record 69.2 percent in the second quarter of 2004. The number of homeowners in the United States reached 73.4 million, the most ever. And for the first time, the majority of minority Americans own their own homes.
• The President set a goal to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million families by the end of the decade. Through his homeownership challenge, the President called on the private sector to help in this effort. More than two dozen companies and organizations have made commitments to increase minority homeownership - including pledges to provide more than $1.1 trillion in mortgage purchases for minority homebuyers this decade.
• President Bush signed the $200 million-per-year American Dream Downpayment Act which will help approximately 40,000 families each year with their downpayment and closing costs.
• The Administration proposed the Zero-Downpayment Initiative to allow the Federal Housing Administration to insure mortgages for first-time homebuyers without a downpayment. Projections indicate this could generate over 150,000 new homeowners in the first year alone.
• President Bush proposed a new Single Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit to increase the supply of affordable homes.
• The President has proposed to more than double funding for the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP), where government and non-profit organizations work closely together to increase homeownership opportunities.
• The President proposed $2.7 billion in USDA home loan guarantees to support rural homeownership and $1.1 billion in direct loans for low-income borrowers unable to secure a mortgage through a conventional lender. These loans are expected to provide 42,800 homeownership opportunities to rural families across America.

here,

Record of Achievement - Expanding Home Ownership

 

[Faun]

Whenever democrats want to say that it was the economic policies of the repubican party that led to the recession of 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 then someone should just point out this video


There are plenty of other videos of democrats preventing people from addressing the issues that led to the housing bubble and collapse.

The buck stops at the Oval Office, see President Bush's comment on Oct. 15,2002, here,

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html

And,
Expanding Home Ownership
"This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."

- President George W. Bush, December 16, 2003

The Accomplishments

Increasing Homeownership

• The US homeownership rate reached a record 69.2 percent in the second quarter of 2004. The number of homeowners in the United States reached 73.4 million, the most ever. And for the first time, the majority of minority Americans own their own homes.
• The President set a goal to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million families by the end of the decade. Through his homeownership challenge, the President called on the private sector to help in this effort. More than two dozen companies and organizations have made commitments to increase minority homeownership - including pledges to provide more than $1.1 trillion in mortgage purchases for minority homebuyers this decade.
• President Bush signed the $200 million-per-year American Dream Downpayment Act which will help approximately 40,000 families each year with their downpayment and closing costs.
• The Administration proposed the Zero-Downpayment Initiative to allow the Federal Housing Administration to insure mortgages for first-time homebuyers without a downpayment. Projections indicate this could generate over 150,000 new homeowners in the first year alone.
• President Bush proposed a new Single Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit to increase the supply of affordable homes.
• The President has proposed to more than double funding for the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP), where government and non-profit organizations work closely together to increase homeownership opportunities.
• The President proposed $2.7 billion in USDA home loan guarantees to support rural homeownership and $1.1 billion in direct loans for low-income borrowers unable to secure a mortgage through a conventional lender. These loans are expected to provide 42,800 homeownership opportunities to rural families across America.

here,

Record of Achievement - Expanding Home Ownership

And he, along with Republicans, achieved that goal...

"Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high!" - George Bush, 2004 RNC acceptance speech

Mission Accomplished, George Bush

 

[GWV5903]

Too bad that's not what you posted, dumbfuck.

Again .... here's what you posted -- and it's not in your link. Capiche?

Nehemiah Program
Loan Assistance Programs Canceled in 2008
More FHA Loan Information:

FHA Loan Tips
FHA Loan Questions
FHA Down Payments
FHA Appraisals
FHA Inspectors
FHA Foreclosures
FHA Jumbo Loans
FHA Prequalify
The Obama Mortgage
Hope for Homeowners

Elimination of Non Profit Down Payment Assistance: On July 30, 2008, President Bush signed the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 which prohibits seller-funded DPA (Down Payment Assistance) for loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration. Prior to this bill, the seller could contribute up to 6% to the buyer to cover either a down payment or closing costs on an FHA loan. The changes took effect on Oct. 1, 2008. We provide this information for reference only. These grants are no longer available.

The Nehemiah Program has helped over a quarter of a million Americans purchase homes. Unlike some down payment assistance programs, Nehemiah offers down payment help to anyone who qualifies for an approved FHA loan. There are no limits on income or assets, but buyers must have an FHA loan or be pre-approved for an FHA mortgage. The Nehemiah program offers:

• Up to 6% of the final contract sales price for down payment and/or closing costs.
• Available for first-time and repeat homebuyers.
• Approved for new construction and resale homes.
• No geographical restrictions.

As with most down payment assistance programs, these funds are not available for "second mortgage" or home equity loans; Nehemiah is intended to help people buy a new home. The process for applying for Nehemiah is similar to most other down payment assistance programs:

• Find a house and make the seller an offer.
• When the offer is approved, contact your loan officer.
• Tell your realtor you want to buy the home using the Nehemiah program.
• Your loan officer applies to the Nehemiah program on your behalf.
• Nehemiah down payment assistance will be sent before you close on the home.

Down payment assistance programs generally require the seller to pay a fee to participate. This fee is considered a payment for services rendered and not a tax-deductible charitable contribution.

Since this program is no longer available, we recommend that you get pre-approved for a low down payment FHA home loan.

I have highlighted it for you, this is in the middle of the page. Do you need it in crayon?

Obviously you don't own a home or you would know that a down payment was necessary as well as closing cost to close on it...

Basic math, let's see if you can follow $150,000 home price, 6% Seller contribution = $9,000, new price is $159,000, DP = $4,373 + CC of $4,262 = $9,000! EM of $500 is all the borrower had to invest, some even owned for less...

You really have no idea how this works, just admit it, you DON'T KNOW SHIT ABOUT HOUSING, ALL YOU KNOW IS WHAT YOUR KEEPERS FEED YOU!!!!!!

Now what the fuck is wrong with you that you keep posting shit as though it appears in the links you're posting -- when it doesn't.

The fact that you can't read this is no real surprise, the vast majority of Liberals struggle with the basics of accountability...

Of course I am -- now what does that have to do with your idiocy that I'm a leech. Either you can tell me how much I put down on my current home and prove I'm a "leech" or you expose yourself as the conservative imbecile you appear to be....

You're a Liberal, Liberal's believe the governments job is to support you, has that changed? You do understand that a leech sucks the life out of you, correct? Hence the moniker "leech", sounds like your picture could be next to the definition in Websters or is it one of your companions?

Who gives a shit about your anecdotal personal experience -- which you're probably lying about anyway? Regardless, too many home owners couldn't afford the increases when their rates went up to 5-6 percent. With little invested in their property, they simply walked.

Very few lifetime caps were 5% to 6%, most were 1% after the first 3 years and 2% lifetime caps, some as high as 3% to 4%. Your assertion is exaggerated, just like most of the garbage that comes out your mouth or ass, negative ARM's are the bad product, but you would have to know what you were talking about...

More bullshit. States like mine don't allow more than a 3% increase in property tax in a given year, yet we had an enormous number of foreclosures. Not because of property taxes but due to readjusted ARMs that lifted the nut above the borrowers' ability to keep up.

Again, you have no clue, the vast majority of Sub Prime loans did not require escrows, but you don't know what escrows are, that is obvious. No were did I say their taxes went up, basic comprehension is not your forte...

THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO PAY PROPERTY TAXES IN THEIR MONTHLY PAYMENT, DUMB ASS...

With every post you make, you reveal abject ignorance on the matter. But then, you are a conservative, so it's to be expected.

Just admit it, you know nothing about mortgages or housing or what really occurred to create the mortgage meltdown, but most Liberals are in denial about most issues with accountability...

If I had not been accountable for my actions most of my life I would probably live in denial too...

 

[GWV5903]

You are truly fucking conservative deranged.
"Millions" of "zero down loans," huh?

"trillions of dollars," huh?

The Nehemiah down payment gift program has been around since 1997, and it has helped over 210,000 families get into homes. The program has generated over $865 million in down payments funds.

Nehemiah was one of many Non Profits that funded DPA, but you would have to know what you were talking about, LOL...

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Hey, if you can claim to have been in the mortgage industry since 1648, I don't see why I should be precluded from being a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve.....

I am not a lender, just a builder...

Are you maintaining that it was a "loan program"? It wasn't.

No it is not a loan program, it was the seed that started the housing bubble in the early '90's that started crashing in late 2007...

Off the top of my head, around 580....

No, 500 is the low, I have personally seen a 516 close with a 20 year term...

So you have Boldly Asserted........perhaps you could provide a citation supporting that claim?

Here's a link Nehemiah Program for FHA Down Payments Grants , under this program which originated in 1996 the seller rolled in the down payment and closing cost, in essence the buyer would have no more than $500 in to the purchase, at the same time Sub Prime had FICO requirements as low as 560 to 580 for Zero Down, No Escrows, No PMI and again as little as $500 invested...

Today you can still receive Zero Down mortgages from our Federal Government via USDA Loans http://www.rd.usda.gov/files/fact-sheet/RD-FactSheet-RHS-SFH502Direct.pdf

Loan products like these examples didn't exist before the Community Reinvestment Act...

It started a mentality that crashed and burned in 2008...

You really have no clue.

___________________________________________

The Federal Reserve Board has found no connection between CRA and the subprime mortgage problems. In fact, the Board's analysis (102 KB PDF) found that nearly 60 percent of higher-priced loans went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods, which are not the focus of CRA activity. Additionally, about 20 percent of the higher-priced loans that were extended in low- or moderate-income areas, or to low- or moderate-income borrowers, were loans originated by lenders not covered by the CRA. Our analysis found that only six percent of all higher-priced loans were made by CRA-covered lenders to borrowers and neighborhoods targeted by the CRA. Further, our review of loan performance found that rates of serious mortgage delinquency are high in all neighborhood groups, not just in lower-income areas.

FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?​

THE CRA INVESTIGATION REPORT

But a new study by the respected National Bureau of Economic Research finds, "There is a clear pattern of increased defaults for loans made by these banks in quarters around the (CRA) exam. Moreover, the effects are larger for loans made within CRA tracts," or predominantly low-income and minority areas.

CRA regulations are at the core of Fannie's and Freddie's so-called affordable housing mission. In the early 1990s, a Democrat Congress gave HUD the authority to set and enforce (through fines) CRA-grade loan quotas at Fannie and Freddie.

We want your CRA loans because they help us meet our housing goals," Fannie Vice Chair Jamie Gorelick beseeched lenders gathered at a banking conference in 2000, just after HUD hiked the mortgage giant's affordable housing quotas to 50% and pressed it to buy more CRA-eligible loans to help meet those new targets. "We will buy them from your portfolios or package them into securities."

She described "CRA-friendly products" as mortgages with less than "3% down" and "flexible underwriting."


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: New Study Finds CRA 'Clearly' Did Lead To Risky Lending



Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending



The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?

According to one enforcement agency, "discrimination exists when a lender's underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants." Note that these "arbitrary or outdated criteria" include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history--the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring.

The government has promoted bad loans not just through the stick of the CRA but through the carrot of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which purchase, securitize and guarantee loans made by lenders and whose debt is itself implicitly guaranteed by the federal government.

The Government Did It - Forbes



Let me know if you need more resources surrounding CRA and how President Clinton changed the regulation to push banks into accepting risky loans to be made to low income families, as I have done a lot more research on the subject, with plenty more information to follow.

So? As the link I gave showed, CRA still amounted to a whopping 6% of the residential toxic loans and zero percent of the commercial toxic loans.

6% ... you clearly don't know enough about the CRA, nor what those changes under Clinton meant, if you believe that, the CRA Investigation by the National Bureau of Economic Research doesn't even share in your view.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

THE CRA INVESTIGATION REPORT

But a new study by the respected National Bureau of Economic Research finds, "There is a clear pattern of increased defaults for loans made by these banks in quarters around the (CRA) exam. Moreover, the effects are larger for loans made within CRA tracts," or predominantly low-income and minority areas.

CRA regulations are at the core of Fannie's and Freddie's so-called affordable housing mission. In the early 1990s, a Democrat Congress gave HUD the authority to set and enforce (through fines) CRA-grade loan quotas at Fannie and Freddie.

We want your CRA loans because they help us meet our housing goals," Fannie Vice Chair Jamie Gorelick beseeched lenders gathered at a banking conference in 2000, just after HUD hiked the mortgage giant's affordable housing quotas to 50% and pressed it to buy more CRA-eligible loans to help meet those new targets. "We will buy them from your portfolios or package them into securities."

She described "CRA-friendly products" as mortgages with less than "3% down" and "flexible underwriting."

Read More At Investor's Business Daily: New Study Finds CRA 'Clearly' Did Lead To Risky Lending



Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending


The Clinton administration regulations offered a formal invitation. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition—a foundation-funded umbrella group for community activist groups that PROFIT from the CRA—issued a clarion call to its members in a leaflet entitled "The New CRA Regulations: How Community Groups Can Get Involved.
"Regulatory approval of bank mergers depended, in part, on positive CRA ratings. "To avoid the possibility of a denied or delayed application," advises the NCRC in its deadpan tone, "lending institutions have an incentive to make formal agreements with community organizations." By intervening—even just threatening to intervene—in the CRA review process, left-wing nonprofit groups have been able to gain control over eye-popping pools of bank capital, which they in turn parcel out to individual low-income mortgage seekers. In addition to providing the nonprofits with mortgage money to disburse, CRA allows those organizations to collect a fee from the banks for their services in marketing the loans. The Senate Banking Committee has estimated that, as a result of CRA, $9.5 billion so far has gone to pay for services and salaries of the nonprofit groups involved.
NACA itself—not the banks—determines whether a mortgage applicant is qualified, and it closes sales right in its own offices. It expects to close 5,000 mortgages next year, EARNING A $2,000 ORGANIZATION FEE ON EACH. Its annual budget exceeds $10 million.

The administration announced the bold new homeownership strategy which included monumental loosening of credit standards and imposition of subprime lending quotas. HUD reported that President Clinton had committed "to increasing the homeownership rate to 67.5 percent by the year 2000." The plan was "to reduce the financial, information, and systemic barriers to homeownership" which was "amplified by local partnerships at work in over 100 cities."

Kurtz concludes, "Urged on by ACORN, congressional Democrats and the Clinton administration helped push tolerance for high-risk loans through every sector of the banking system -- far beyond the sort of banks originally subject to the CRA. So it was the efforts of ACORN and its Democratic allies that first spread the subprime virus from the CRA to Fannie and Freddie and thence to the entire financial system. Soon, Democratic politicians and regulators actually began to take pride in lowered credit standards as a sign of ‘fairness' -- and the contagion spread."

Attorney General Janet Reno, with a number of bank lending discrimination settlements already, sternly announces, "We will tackle lending discrimination wherever it appears." With the new policy in full force, "No loan is exempt; no bank is immune." "For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement," reiterated Reno.


Read more: Articles: Why the Mortgage Crisis Happened

 

[GWV5903]

No shit Sherlock and we had been pumping out millions of ZERO DOWN LOANS for a decade, trillions of dollars and too many defaulted, it's really simple...

You are truly fucking conservative deranged.
"Millions" of "zero down loans," huh?

"trillions of dollars," huh?

The Nehemiah down payment gift program has been around since 1997, and it has helped over 210,000 families get into homes. The program has generated over $865 million in down payments funds.​

Oh, and check this out, choadbreath ... here's the link which contains that text....

http://www.homeloanbasics.com/pdf/article/271-FHAMortgageDownPaymentHelpNehemiahProgram.pdf

... what a concept, huh?

"The program has generated over $865 million in down payments funds."

I didn't catch this earlier today, but $865 million in down payment funds would be somewhere around 216,000 homes and roughly $37 Billion + in loan originations...

And Nehemiah was on one of several that was doing this, but you would have to know how this worked to have a valid opinion...

 

[GWV5903]

Read more: Articles: Why the Mortgage Crisis Happened

Great time line on the truth...

 

[owebo]

Read more: Articles: Why the Mortgage Crisis Happened

Great time line on the truth...

Quite devastating to democrats....

 

[francoHFW]

Read more: Articles: Why the Mortgage Crisis Happened

Great time line on the truth...

Quite devastating to democrats....

Also a pile of RW crap. F+F lost huge market share under BOOOSH, Boooshie regulators let their pals in the private mortgage companies run wild, AIG etc insure and bundle toxic assets and sell them around the world. Dems in 2007 had nothing to do with it, you brainwashed functional morons...

 

[Faun]

Too bad that's not what you posted, dumbfuck.

Again .... here's what you posted -- and it's not in your link. Capiche?

Nehemiah Program
Loan Assistance Programs Canceled in 2008
More FHA Loan Information:

FHA Loan Tips
FHA Loan Questions
FHA Down Payments
FHA Appraisals
FHA Inspectors
FHA Foreclosures
FHA Jumbo Loans
FHA Prequalify
The Obama Mortgage
Hope for Homeowners

Elimination of Non Profit Down Payment Assistance: On July 30, 2008, President Bush signed the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 which prohibits seller-funded DPA (Down Payment Assistance) for loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration. Prior to this bill, the seller could contribute up to 6% to the buyer to cover either a down payment or closing costs on an FHA loan. The changes took effect on Oct. 1, 2008. We provide this information for reference only. These grants are no longer available.

The Nehemiah Program has helped over a quarter of a million Americans purchase homes. Unlike some down payment assistance programs, Nehemiah offers down payment help to anyone who qualifies for an approved FHA loan. There are no limits on income or assets, but buyers must have an FHA loan or be pre-approved for an FHA mortgage. The Nehemiah program offers:

• Up to 6% of the final contract sales price for down payment and/or closing costs.
• Available for first-time and repeat homebuyers.
• Approved for new construction and resale homes.
• No geographical restrictions.

As with most down payment assistance programs, these funds are not available for "second mortgage" or home equity loans; Nehemiah is intended to help people buy a new home. The process for applying for Nehemiah is similar to most other down payment assistance programs:

• Find a house and make the seller an offer.
• When the offer is approved, contact your loan officer.
• Tell your realtor you want to buy the home using the Nehemiah program.
• Your loan officer applies to the Nehemiah program on your behalf.
• Nehemiah down payment assistance will be sent before you close on the home.

Down payment assistance programs generally require the seller to pay a fee to participate. This fee is considered a payment for services rendered and not a tax-deductible charitable contribution.

Since this program is no longer available, we recommend that you get pre-approved for a low down payment FHA home loan.

I have highlighted it for you, this is in the middle of the page. Do you need it in crayon?

Obviously you don't own a home or you would know that a down payment was necessary as well as closing cost to close on it...

Basic math, let's see if you can follow $150,000 home price, 6% Seller contribution = $9,000, new price is $159,000, DP = $4,373 + CC of $4,262 = $9,000! EM of $500 is all the borrower had to invest, some even owned for less...

You really have no idea how this works, just admit it, you DON'T KNOW SHIT ABOUT HOUSING, ALL YOU KNOW IS WHAT YOUR KEEPERS FEED YOU!!!!!!

Now what the fuck is wrong with you that you keep posting shit as though it appears in the links you're posting -- when it doesn't.

The fact that you can't read this is no real surprise, the vast majority of Liberals struggle with the basics of accountability...

What you're posting now is not what you posted earlier and what you posted earlier was not in the links you gave. I can't make that any clearer. If you still can't understand that, your inability to comprehend that falls upon you.

Of course I am -- now what does that have to do with your idiocy that I'm a leech. Either you can tell me how much I put down on my current home and prove I'm a "leech" or you expose yourself as the conservative imbecile you appear to be....

You're a Liberal, Liberal's believe the governments job is to support you, has that changed? You do understand that a leech sucks the life out of you, correct? Hence the moniker "leech", sounds like your picture could be next to the definition in Websters or is it one of your companions?

And I highlight again -- you have zero idea what, if anything, I get from the government -- zero idea how much I put down on my current home; or any home I've owned, for that matter.

That renders your above statement to be rooted 100% entirely in ignorance. Just like most of what you post.

Who gives a shit about your anecdotal personal experience -- which you're probably lying about anyway? Regardless, too many home owners couldn't afford the increases when their rates went up to 5-6 percent. With little invested in their property, they simply walked.

Very few lifetime caps were 5% to 6%, most were 1% after the first 3 years and 2% lifetime caps, some as high as 3% to 4%. Your assertion is exaggerated, just like most of the garbage that comes out your mouth or ass, negative ARM's are the bad product, but you would have to know what you were talking about...

More bullshit. States like mine don't allow more than a 3% increase in property tax in a given year, yet we had an enormous number of foreclosures. Not because of property taxes but due to readjusted ARMs that lifted the nut above the borrowers' ability to keep up.

Again, you have no clue, the vast majority of Sub Prime loans did not require escrows, but you don't know what escrows are, that is obvious. No were did I say their taxes went up, basic comprehension is not your forte...

THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO PAY PROPERTY TAXES IN THEIR MONTHLY PAYMENT, DUMB ASS...

With every post you make, you reveal abject ignorance on the matter. But then, you are a conservative, so it's to be expected.

Just admit it, you know nothing about mortgages or housing or what really occurred to create the mortgage meltdown, but most Liberals are in denial about most issues with accountability...

If I had not been accountable for my actions most of my life I would probably live in denial too...

Moron -- taxes are not hidden from people, even those not paying into an escrow account. One would have to be ignorant to not know their property taxes have to be paid. Even worse for your senility -- sticker shock from property tax bills is not among the reasons for the collapse.

 

[Faun]

Hey, if you can claim to have been in the mortgage industry since 1648, I don't see why I should be precluded from being a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve.....

I am not a lender, just a builder...

Are you maintaining that it was a "loan program"? It wasn't.

No it is not a loan program, it was the seed that started the housing bubble in the early '90's that started crashing in late 2007...

Off the top of my head, around 580....

No, 500 is the low, I have personally seen a 516 close with a 20 year term...

So you have Boldly Asserted........perhaps you could provide a citation supporting that claim?

Here's a link Nehemiah Program for FHA Down Payments Grants , under this program which originated in 1996 the seller rolled in the down payment and closing cost, in essence the buyer would have no more than $500 in to the purchase, at the same time Sub Prime had FICO requirements as low as 560 to 580 for Zero Down, No Escrows, No PMI and again as little as $500 invested...

Today you can still receive Zero Down mortgages from our Federal Government via USDA Loans http://www.rd.usda.gov/files/fact-sheet/RD-FactSheet-RHS-SFH502Direct.pdf

Loan products like these examples didn't exist before the Community Reinvestment Act...

It started a mentality that crashed and burned in 2008...

You really have no clue.

___________________________________________

The Federal Reserve Board has found no connection between CRA and the subprime mortgage problems. In fact, the Board's analysis (102 KB PDF) found that nearly 60 percent of higher-priced loans went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods, which are not the focus of CRA activity. Additionally, about 20 percent of the higher-priced loans that were extended in low- or moderate-income areas, or to low- or moderate-income borrowers, were loans originated by lenders not covered by the CRA. Our analysis found that only six percent of all higher-priced loans were made by CRA-covered lenders to borrowers and neighborhoods targeted by the CRA. Further, our review of loan performance found that rates of serious mortgage delinquency are high in all neighborhood groups, not just in lower-income areas.

FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?​

THE CRA INVESTIGATION REPORT

But a new study by the respected National Bureau of Economic Research finds, "There is a clear pattern of increased defaults for loans made by these banks in quarters around the (CRA) exam. Moreover, the effects are larger for loans made within CRA tracts," or predominantly low-income and minority areas.

CRA regulations are at the core of Fannie's and Freddie's so-called affordable housing mission. In the early 1990s, a Democrat Congress gave HUD the authority to set and enforce (through fines) CRA-grade loan quotas at Fannie and Freddie.

We want your CRA loans because they help us meet our housing goals," Fannie Vice Chair Jamie Gorelick beseeched lenders gathered at a banking conference in 2000, just after HUD hiked the mortgage giant's affordable housing quotas to 50% and pressed it to buy more CRA-eligible loans to help meet those new targets. "We will buy them from your portfolios or package them into securities."

She described "CRA-friendly products" as mortgages with less than "3% down" and "flexible underwriting."


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: New Study Finds CRA 'Clearly' Did Lead To Risky Lending



Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending



The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?

According to one enforcement agency, "discrimination exists when a lender's underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants." Note that these "arbitrary or outdated criteria" include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history--the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring.

The government has promoted bad loans not just through the stick of the CRA but through the carrot of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which purchase, securitize and guarantee loans made by lenders and whose debt is itself implicitly guaranteed by the federal government.

The Government Did It - Forbes



Let me know if you need more resources surrounding CRA and how President Clinton changed the regulation to push banks into accepting risky loans to be made to low income families, as I have done a lot more research on the subject, with plenty more information to follow.

So? As the link I gave showed, CRA still amounted to a whopping 6% of the residential toxic loans and zero percent of the commercial toxic loans.

6% ... you clearly don't know enough about the CRA, nor what those changes under Clinton meant, if you believe that, the CRA Investigation by the National Bureau of Economic Research doesn't even share in your view.

You've posted nothing which disproves that 6% figure. Not even the NBER article you posted. It showed how the CRA led to risky lending but didn't even address what portion of the toxic loans were covered by the CRA.

 

[Faun]

No shit Sherlock and we had been pumping out millions of ZERO DOWN LOANS for a decade, trillions of dollars and too many defaulted, it's really simple...

You are truly fucking conservative deranged.
"Millions" of "zero down loans," huh?

"trillions of dollars," huh?

The Nehemiah down payment gift program has been around since 1997, and it has helped over 210,000 families get into homes. The program has generated over $865 million in down payments funds.​

Oh, and check this out, choadbreath ... here's the link which contains that text....

http://www.homeloanbasics.com/pdf/article/271-FHAMortgageDownPaymentHelpNehemiahProgram.pdf

... what a concept, huh?

"The program has generated over $865 million in down payments funds."

I didn't catch this earlier today, but $865 million in down payment funds would be somewhere around 216,000 homes and roughly $37 Billion + in loan originations...

And Nehemiah was on one of several that was doing this, but you would have to know how this worked to have a valid opinion...

It could have been $37 billion if the average down payment coverage was little over 2%, but the Nehemiah program covered as much as 6%. But even at $37 billion, you're nowhere near "trillions."

And you're ignoring the American Dream Downpayment Act of 2003.

And you're ignoring Bush Minority Homeownership Plan Rests Heavily on Fannie and Freddie

And you're ignoring Bush's own words to fellow Republicans -- "Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high."

 

[GWV5903]

What you're posting now is not what you posted earlier and what you posted earlier was not in the links you gave. I can't make that any clearer. If you still can't understand that, your inability to comprehend that falls upon you.

It's the same link dumb ass, learn how to operate a computer you f'ing idiot...

And I highlight again -- you have zero idea what, if anything, I get from the government -- zero idea how much I put down on my current home; or any home I've owned, for that matter.

That renders your above statement to be rooted 100% entirely in ignorance. Just like most of what you post.

It's clear you have no real understanding of how mortgage products work, if you do own a home you didn't understand what you signed dumb ass, yet you continue to believe you do, just STFU and move on...

Moron -- taxes are not hidden from people, even those not paying into an escrow account. One would have to be ignorant to not know their property taxes have to be paid. Even worse for your senility -- sticker shock from property tax bills is not among the reasons for the collapse

The majority of Sub Prime loans did not require escrows, fact, but you would have to know what you were talking about to understand this...

And you have made this crystal clear about yourself, most Sub Prime borrowers had sub 600 FICO scores, put Zero Down and you think they understood mortgages, especially 1st time home buyers? You're just dumber than hammered dog shit...

If you had any common sense you would just crawl back under that pile of shit in between your ears and call it a day...