Turning Foreclosed Homes into "Affordable Housing"

Yes, why not let the income and assets of tens of millions of families collapse so you damned fascists can watch them suffer. Great idea, Tom. Great.

How are we letting the income and assets of tens of millions of families collapse ?

By failing to take inexpensive and effective measures to arrest the foreclosure crisis and positively impact the employment situation.

People make poor decisions and shit happens... get over it. Rewarding poor decision making only leads to more poor decision making.

The people who made poor decisions lost their homes, Soggy. The banks now own them. The banks don't want them.

And that's unfortunate indeed... taking taxpayer $$ and buying back the homes then turning around and selling them back to the same people at low prices just starts the cycle again. It's like taking a kid who works at Starbucks, who buys a Lexus, can't make the note and the car gets repossessed, so his parents cosign a loan so he can buy an Infinity.
 
And that's unfortunate indeed... taking taxpayer $$ and buying back the homes then turning around and selling them back to the same people at low prices just starts the cycle again. It's like taking a kid who works at Starbucks, who buys a Lexus, can't make the note and the car gets repossessed, so his parents cosign a loan so he can buy an Infinity.
Yup.

Like I said...The arsonists are now trying to convince you that they're the best ones to put out the fire.
 
I think a lot of times too, people don't understand the true cost of home ownership... its more than making the note. There's insurance, maintenance, taxes, etc.... and I'll just say it.. some people cannot afford to own a home.

It isn't bad, it isn't good.. it just is.
 
How are we letting the income and assets of tens of millions of families collapse ?

By failing to take inexpensive and effective measures to arrest the foreclosure crisis and positively impact the employment situation.

People make poor decisions and shit happens... get over it. Rewarding poor decision making only leads to more poor decision making.

The people who made poor decisions lost their homes, Soggy. The banks now own them. The banks don't want them.

And that's unfortunate indeed... taking taxpayer $$ and buying back the homes then turning around and selling them back to the same people at low prices just starts the cycle again.

The plan does not include additional taxpayer money and does not sell the homes back to the same people.

It's like taking a kid who works at Starbucks, who buys a Lexus, can't make the note and the car gets repossessed, so his parents cosign a loan so he can buy an Infinity.

That's absurd. No self-respecting Barista would drive anything but a Prius. Or a Leaf. Or dad's old Humvee:lol:

On a side note, 47% of the mortgages originated by Citi between 2006 and 2007 are now in default. 47%!!!!! <I just received that information via a listserve and I'm awaiting confirmation>
 
Last edited:
By failing to take inexpensive and effective measures to arrest the foreclosure crisis and positively impact the employment situation.



The people who made poor decisions lost their homes, Soggy. The banks now own them. The banks don't want them.

And that's unfortunate indeed... taking taxpayer $$ and buying back the homes then turning around and selling them back to the same people at low prices just starts the cycle again.

The plan does not include additional taxpayer money and does not sell the homes back to the same people.

It's like taking a kid who works at Starbucks, who buys a Lexus, can't make the note and the car gets repossessed, so his parents cosign a loan so he can buy an Infinity.

That's absurd. No self-respecting Barista would drive anything but a Prius. Or a Leaf. Or dad's old Humvee:lol:

So, am I to assume that the banks are just going to give the homes away?

self-respecting Barista

Now there's an oxymoron if there ever was one!
 
I think a lot of times too, people don't understand the true cost of home ownership... its more than making the note. There's insurance, maintenance, taxes, etc.... and I'll just say it.. some people cannot afford to own a home.

It isn't bad, it isn't good.. it just is.

absolutely agree! Nothing annoys me more than the generic "30%" rule, which cons people into believing they can afford 30% on top of all of their other debt and still have money left over to live.

What they fail to note is that the 30% is a MAXIMUM, meaning you'll have very little left over to live and any negative impact to your earnings will make it unaffordable. Especially when you put 3.5% down! I've run tthe math on what my wife and I "could" afford at 30% and it's just absurd. We'd have to give up just about every penny of disposable income.
 
And that's unfortunate indeed... taking taxpayer $$ and buying back the homes then turning around and selling them back to the same people at low prices just starts the cycle again.

The plan does not include additional taxpayer money and does not sell the homes back to the same people.



That's absurd. No self-respecting Barista would drive anything but a Prius. Or a Leaf. Or dad's old Humvee:lol:

So, am I to assume that the banks are just going to give the homes away?

The state is using money from the recent 26B settlement.

self-respecting Barista

Now there's an oxymoron if there ever was one!

Oh, good point.
 
Perhaps rather than fixating on "My Two Moms" and putting condoms on bananas, Home Economics should be taught? Seems like a whole lotta people lack rudimentary money skills... my Mom beat me over the head with the ole "don't spend money you don't have thing"... of course, she was a depression era gal.

:lol:
 
Last edited:
God help us when the federal government gets into the real estate home flipping business. Politicians can't even run a simple post office without stealing stamps. How did LBJ's great society urban renewal work out?
 
Affordable for whom? Certainly not the taxpayers who will be footing the bill.

Much better to let those houses deteriorate to the point that they need to be condemned and torn down. Many municipalities have already reached that point. Tearing them down is the only way to increase the value of other homes by reducing the total number of homes. If nobody is occupying these homes, it means nobody is paying property taxes, and since those homes just become a sore spot to the community, it reduces the value of everyone else's homes which leads to even less revenue to the municipality. But keep up with that tunnel vision on how not to fix anything.
 
Affordable for whom? Certainly not the taxpayers who will be footing the bill.

Much better to let those houses deteriorate to the point that they need to be condemned and torn down. Many municipalities have already reached that point. Tearing them down is the only way to increase the value of other homes by reducing the total number of homes. If nobody is occupying these homes, it means nobody is paying property taxes, and since those homes just become a sore spot to the community, it reduces the value of everyone else's homes which leads to even less revenue to the municipality. But keep up with that tunnel vision on how not to fix anything.
The problem began with do-gooders claiming that they could fix the "affordable housing problem" in the first place.

Besides that, if you move in a bunch of Section 8s who may not be able to pay the mortgage, what the hell makes you think that they're going to keep up on the taxes?

The whole thing is just another bank bailout at the state level...Simple as that.
 
And that's unfortunate indeed... taking taxpayer $$ and buying back the homes then turning around and selling them back to the same people at low prices just starts the cycle again. It's like taking a kid who works at Starbucks, who buys a Lexus, can't make the note and the car gets repossessed, so his parents cosign a loan so he can buy an Infinity.
Yup.

Like I said...The arsonists are now trying to convince you that they're the best ones to put out the fire.

Letting Dodd and Frank write a banking bill is like asking Hannibal Lecter to "make me something for dinner"
 
Yes, why not let the income and assets of tens of millions of families collapse so you damned fascists can watch them suffer. Great idea, Tom. Great.

How are we letting the income and assets of tens of millions of families collapse ?

By failing to take inexpensive and effective measures to arrest the foreclosure crisis and positively impact the employment situation.

People make poor decisions and shit happens... get over it. Rewarding poor decision making only leads to more poor decision making.

The people who made poor decisions lost their homes, Soggy. The banks now own them. The banks don't want them.

Funny, if the banks didn't want those houses, perhaps they should have made a better job of vetting the people to whom they were loaning money.
 
How are we letting the income and assets of tens of millions of families collapse ?

By failing to take inexpensive and effective measures to arrest the foreclosure crisis and positively impact the employment situation.

People make poor decisions and shit happens... get over it. Rewarding poor decision making only leads to more poor decision making.

The people who made poor decisions lost their homes, Soggy. The banks now own them. The banks don't want them.

Funny, if the banks didn't want those houses, perhaps they should have made a better job of vetting the people to whom they were loaning money.

The government must have forced Citi to make 47% of its loans in 2006 and 2007. That's the only explanation!:cuckoo:
 

Forum List

Back
Top