I guess Bank of America is going to be begging for a taxpayer funded bailout after they give all these mortgages to people who can't afford to pay...

[Concerned American]

Why do you feel I skipped anything?
If you lose 5 and gain 17 your net is +12.

I apparently am missing your point.

 

[Concerned American]

Was my graph from a questionable source or not? You are just all over the place here.

Was your graph at all relevant to the topic? Neither is this post. ^^^ If you want to get back to the relevance of paying more in rent than to buy being stupid and people who do that not being smart enough to take advantage of the program, then we can continue, otherwise quit wasting my time, I don't have time for irrelevant lying trolls.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Was your graph at all relevant to the topic? Neither is this post.

You made a claim about the source for my graph, do you still stand by that claim?

 

[Concerned American]

You made a claim about the source for my graph, do you still stand by that claim?

Did someone fart? That is about as relevant as your idiotic post. ^^^

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Did someone fart? That is about as relevant as your idiotic post. ^^^

Look, you made the claim, either stand by it or take it back.

 

[Concerned American]

Look, you made the claim, either stand by it or take it back.

Yeah, you made the claim that it wasn't stupid to pay $500 more for rent than a mortgage--moronic, but you made the claim before you started deflecting with irrelevant crap about marital status in the military. That is your typical MO, your ass is being handed to you and you attempt to deflect with irrelevant bullshit. This is no different. NO, I am not going to respond to your request to deflect from the OP, so run along Gigi. You've wasted enough bandwidth.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Yeah, you made the claim that it wasn't stupid to pay $500 more for rent than a mortgage--moronic, but you made the claim before you started deflecting with irrelevant crap about marital status in the military. That is your typical MO, your ass is being handed to you and you attempt to deflect with irrelevant bullshit. This is no different. NO, I am not going to respond to your request to deflect from the OP, so run along Gigi. You've wasted enough bandwidth.

So you lack the integrity to stand by your claims, well at least you are consistent in that regard.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A handout is a handout. It is still a redistribution of wealth by the government and it is wrong. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. I guess I am misunderstanding. On one post you seem to be in opposition to government handouts and on others you seem to be attempting to justify them.

Yup, the government redistributed wealth from taxpayers to people who wanted to get their underwater mortgages refinanced.

Government did not redistribute wealth from taxpayers to bailout banks.
Banks paid back those short term loans at a big profit to the US Treasury.

Do you notice the difference?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I apparently am missing your point.

It's basic math. The money lost on the banks that went under before repaying the loans was more than made up by the money gained from the banks that did repay the loans.
TARP did not make money on every single loan, but over all made money.

Is that clear enough?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Oh, really? My daughter's rent for her two-bedroom apartment in Virginia was $1450 a month in an average complex. The mortgage on her home in Tennessee is less than $1000 a month.

The odds are that a mortgage for a house or condo with the same square footage in her neighborhood would cost about the same as her rent. The difference is that she would be responsible for maintenance and the profits (equity) would be going into her pocket instead of the landlord's.
One of my co-workers who retired about the same time I did was complaining about always being broke because his rent was so high. I pointed out that I was living rent-free in a paid off house and I had advised him to buy a condo or townhome fifteen years ago and he could be living rent-free as well if he had. At the time he refused because he didn't want to have to budget for repairs and taxes. He wanted the money for new cars, collector guitars that he didn't even have insured and partying.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Idiot! I bought houses in South Carolina and Virginia in my last 10 years of active duty. I guess you never heard of the GI Bill home loans.

Every other married officer and senior enlisted person I knew bought their houses. I can't help the fact that you were a peon jarhead!

Most married troops with half a brain use their BAQ to buy houses. Maybe he was single and lived in the barracks, so he didn't qualify for BAQ. As an E-4 when I was in the second time in the mid-seventies I rented a nice apartment for my wife and I because I had no experience in home ownership and didn't plan to stay in Colorado Springs when I ETSd. In the end it was a good decision because my worthless ex-wife would have gotten the house in the divorce a few years later.

 

[Concerned American]

So you lack the integrity to stand by your claims, well at least you are consistent in that regard.

So you lack the integrity to respond honestly to an OP without deflecting to irrelevant nonsense. There I fixed it for you. Got any more nonsense you want to post--we can do this all day or until the mods move it to the badlands. You pick.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Fuck off you stolen valor fuck. Between Myself (Vietnam), my Grandfather (WWI & WWII) Two uncles (WWII), My father (WWII, Korea, Vietnam), my sister (Navy nurse) and two brothers, who served twenty year careers. In my immediate family we have over 80 years service, counting grandparents and uncles, add another 28. Five of the eight of us served in war zones. Run along puke. BTW, we always bought homes.

Be fair, low ranking enlisted don't get BAQ, almost always live in the barracks, and E-1s to E-3s are usually too busy partying to bother thinking about the future. Unless things have changed since the last time I ETSd in 1979.

 

[Concerned American]

Yup, the government redistributed wealth from taxpayers to people who wanted to get their underwater mortgages refinanced.

Government did not redistribute wealth from taxpayers to bailout banks.
Banks paid back those short term loans at a big profit to the US Treasury.

Do you notice the difference?

Nope, it was still a net loss. A handout is a handout. I don't agree with any of them.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Why would a bank knowingly make a loan on a house knowing the homeowner would default? They would lose money, possible thousands upon thousands of dollars! That makes no sense. I guess you stopped to think and never restarted.

It can be a winning policy since the bank unloads the mortgage on Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, or before the crash, packaged it as a negotiable security and sold it to a sucker. That takes all the risk out of it for the bank. It was legal and a no-lose policy for the bank.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Unless the government is guaranteeing the mortgage, how is the taxpayer on the hook?

Most mortgages are guaranteed by the government.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The odds are that a mortgage for a house or condo with the same square footage in her neighborhood would cost about the same as her rent. The difference is that she would be responsible for maintenance and the profits (equity) would be going into her pocket instead of the landlord's.
One of my co-workers who retired about the same time I did was complaining about always being broke because his rent was so high. I pointed out that I was living rent-free in a paid off house and I had advised him to buy a condo or townhome fifteen years ago and he could be living rent-free as well if he had. At the time he refused because he didn't want to have to budget for repairs and taxes. He wanted the money for new cars, collector guitars that he didn't even have insured and partying.

They don't build houses that small unless they are portable mini-homes. You had to go outside to have room to change your mind.

 

[Concerned American]

Be fair, low ranking enlisted don't get BAQ, almost always live in the barracks, and E-1s to E-3s are usually too busy partying to bother thinking about the future.

In one of my posts, I made this exact point. Single GIs live in barracks and don't get housing allowance. However my point stands that married personnel get housing allowances. Lower enlisted married GIs get to live in non-standard housing on base which was usually remodeled old barracks (I ETSd in 1972) and NCOs could get Wherry housing if it was available. My family didn't like either option and we always chose to buy offbase and either sell or rent it out when we transferred. We figured it was a no brainer--that housing allowance transferred right into our pockets when we sold along with whatever appreciation was built as well.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Wrong, chihuahua breath! As has been posted earlier by many people, you are obviously not in touch with reality.

It's not risky at all. The service member has no skin in the game, his mortgage is paid by Uncle Sam via his BAQ and all the equity goes into his pocket. My Navy son in law bought three different houses that way while on active duty. He retired as a E-7. I knew of several NCOs who had bought multiple houses over the years and turned them into rental properties when they were transferred. They rented them through the base housing office to other troops, it was no risk since the Army guaranteed the rent and that any damages would be paid for by the renter. A call to a unit commander gets quick results when a renter is in default on rent or doesn't want to pay for damages when he moves out. All the owner has to do is refinance the house as rental property which frees up his VA benefit to be reused at his new duty station.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

In one of my posts, I made this exact point. Single GIs live in barracks and don't get housing allowance. However my point stands that married personnel get housing allowances. Lower enlisted married GIs get to live in non-standard housing on base which was usually remodeled old barracks (I ETSd in 1972) and NCOs could get Wherry housing if it was available. My family didn't like either option and we always chose to buy offbase and either sell or rent it out when we transferred. We figured it was a no brainer--that housing allowance transferred right into our pockets when we sold along with whatever appreciation was built as well.

This is what base housing looks like today....at lot has changed since 72