Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > California  > CA Real Estate (#2)      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 MermaidSari
Joined: 2/4/2007
Msg: 51
view profile
History
CA Real Estate (#2)Page 3 of 8    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)
So as we watch RE prices inch up in many states ... who believes now we are in a recovery? What about the Stock market?

Mermaid stares in her crystal ball and sees a foggy crystal ball?

Will the banks unload inventory (or are they beginning to) and what do you think about about the current economic markets (given earlier predictions). :->

Who is still buying gold and why? ;-p
 MermaidSari
Joined: 2/4/2007
Msg: 52
view profile
History
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 1/4/2010 11:36:07 AM
Trueblooo...what is interesting is that Grenspan had a completely different take that Bernanke. He suggested raising rates long ago due to the potential outcome of devastating inflation that could throw the U.S. into a greater depression (while the feds have been declaring a recession solely).

In the late 30's/40's Germany's inflation comes to mind...this and their events are quite similar minus the predicted level of pending inflation (as you know, in Germany a person would work all day and at the end of the day the price of a commodity would increase beyond the worker's reach).

Fortunately we have measures in place to avoid of such financial collapse again...or do we? I see true ignorance in the current administration's spending habits. Hitler did the same when he took over. Albeit, he slaughtered and robbed innocent victims to counter his spending.

And moving forward to Real Estate...this shadow inventory is becoming more and more interesting as far as the banks holding back. It was predicted a large release by September and then the beginning of this year.

If holding inventory (and considering that banks are now owned partially by the fed)...it would keep prices more stable and create a 'faux' appearance of recovery, no?

 sd_matt
Joined: 7/9/2006
Msg: 53
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 1/6/2010 3:00:50 PM
If interest rates creep up what will the banks have to do to keep their shadow inventory looking good on paper? Or is that already covered with shady appraisal methods?
 The Minister of Dudeness
Joined: 6/11/2006
Msg: 54
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 1/9/2010 1:20:41 PM
Housing analyst Ramsey Su recently wrote:

Fixing Freddie and Fannie (and FHA)

Freddie, Fannie and FHA kept the real estate market alive in 2009 by providing subsidized financing with the help of the Feds and the Treasury. This is not sustainable.

When the GSEs were placed under conservatorship over a year ago, they were given $100 billion of play money, and then raised to $200 billion and there are rumors that it may be increased to $300 billion – each.

The GSEs had not been profitable, are not profitable and have no plan to become profitable in the foreseeable future. Their losses are equivalent to a subsidy for the housing market. How long can this subsidy continue and what are the ramifications when they are removed?

In 2010, the GSEs are supposed to reduce their combined portfolio to $1.7 trillion. If there are no buyers for agency MBS after the Feds exit the market, the GSEs may be forced to increase their portfolio in direct violation of the terms of the conservatorship. The other alternative would be to raise the mortgage rates until buyers for the agency securities can be found.

In 2010, funding for the GSEs can no longer be by the Treasury alone and will require congressional approval.

2010 cannot be business as usual for the GSEs. Are we going to see a good bank/bad bank proposal? Are the GSEs going to be nationalized indefinitely, along with ownership of Citi, GM and AIG? Is there some secret committee working on an exit plan?

I opine that the probability of disruption is very high. The GSEs will not fail, that is a given. However, it is a certainty that the agencies are going to cost the taxpayers a lot of money; the only question is how much.


The point is, the Gubment (who funds its activities with our taxpayer dollars) has been pumping hundreds of billions into housing to prop up the artificial and false wealth associated with real estate to protect the balance sheets of the lenders who hold real estate as loan collateral. The reason for this is the banking lobby owns much of Congress, while less than half of us taxpayers ever exercise our voting privileges. So there ya go.

As Congress and the current Administration print fiat currency out of blank paper at a dizzying pace to fund a huge wide variety of very expensive programs aimed at social re-engineering, the Gubment must raise interest rates sooner or later to stymie inflation and induce the Chinese and Indians to continuing buying said fiat play money. So if mortgage rates go to 6% or above, housing caves and the banks take a hit and the citizen who owns a home (about 69% of us do) goes deeper underwater, and most importantly to the Gubment, taxpayers might actually go to the polls to vote AND come armed with a now-informed vote to cast instead of one based on "hope and change".

As an aside, the banks and lenders are actually in the business of buying new money that is coming off the Gubment’s printing presses, then lending it out, then servicing the loan repayments for a while before dumping off the loan (and the liability is carries) back to the Gubment (FHA, Fannie, Freddie), who has and will continue to come to the taxpayer base to pay the freight for the operation of the game. What a scheme.

But the banks are holding a lot of shadow inventory that does affect their profits, at least until they hand the loan over to the Gubment/FHA/Fanny/Freddie. So there is some accounting strategy in play.

There are around 11-12,000 homes listed for sale in San Diego County, and about 19,000 homes that are in foreclosure but are not yet listed for sale. That means there are about 30-31,000 homes in the “for sale” pipeline. It won’t actually happen all at once, but if the banks start dumping that inventory at a quicker pace, the average time-on-market could swell from about 4 months to 10 or more months. And this does not include the activity of the higher segments of the market as higher-priced homes are just now starting to fall in price since the biggest decline and recovery so far has been in the lower price segments. A one year supply of homes for sale extends the “buyers” market.

One theory as to why banks are not releasing "shadow inventory" on to the market is for how they would have to account for the loss. If the home HAD been worth 600k but is now worth 300k, they would have to write off the whole 300k in loss at the of re-sale. Bit if they hold on to it as an asset they can depreciate it and delay taking the hit, thus saving their current balance sheet, P&L and possibly a hit on their earnings thus decreasing their stock market valuation, executive bonus payments, etc. Big banks are making record profits for a variety of reasons—a major one being they are not recording real estate losses but holding on to some of these assets to be either disposed of later when their earnings can take it or when they NEED to sell it.

I know someone who did not pay their mortgage since October of 2008. Their house was sold in December of 2009 as a short sale for 200k less than the original price. In the meantime, the lender was reporting a loss of $2800 per month for 14 months instead of a 200k lump sum. In the meantime, in recent months the citizenry has forked over several TRILLION dollars to the banks--TARP, etc.--while the financial institutions cook the books with the blessing of the very people elected to look out for the citizens' interests.)

A housing downturn typically takes 16 to 20 quarters. But the Gubment has so greatly intervened in the current housing market for political reasons, that the usual benchmarks cannot be as reliable when trying to pencil out a purchase decision.

And in the current quarter we just entered, 45% of all commercial real estate will begin undergoing the re-financing process!

Good luck, and keep your checkbook handy to keep sending in your tax dollars to fund this circus.
 sd_matt
Joined: 7/9/2006
Msg: 55
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 1/9/2010 9:54:35 PM
Yup DHB's latest is about the "Moral Hazard". Will the buyers have the last laugh or did the bailout account for both waves (the past and the upcoming) of loan recasts?

Anyway, 57 percent of the second wave will be in CA alone. If the first bailout didn't cover the upcoming wave of loan recasts then the politicians will be between a rock and a hard place. How willing will the other 49 states be to sit while left-wing-looneyville is bailed out on their backs?
 onthewestside
Joined: 4/18/2007
Msg: 56
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 2/9/2010 2:35:16 PM
Other than roads, passing health care would be the only other thing you would get for your tax dollar right now. And people are still against it! Most people have no clue what's in their best economic interest. Same people who pay too much for houses...i.e majority are fools...
 onthewestside
Joined: 4/18/2007
Msg: 57
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 2/9/2010 2:37:33 PM
Yes housing will continue to fall. For reasons mentioned everywhere...
 GolfCoast
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 58
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 2/9/2010 3:22:31 PM
Onthe west I'm breathless with anticipation to lean how adding 50 million people to the health care system without increasing supply will "get my tax dollars right". Break that down for me, tell me what I don't know is good for me. Now it may be good for someone, granted, but good for me? Are you prescient?
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 59
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 2/9/2010 5:36:15 PM
It was a speculative market and now the housing prices are where they are supposed to be. I have no sympathy for someone who bought a $300, 000 home that was really only worth $120.000. they are worth what the market will bear and trying to refinance people that are under water on their homes is just too bad. sty in your house and ride it out instead of someone bailing you out. It was you who signed on the dotted line.

A friend of mine bought a house during the 80s bubble for 250,00 and had to hold on to it for ten years to get his money back.

If you fell for the predatory lending then you got what you deserved.

There is no way in any world that a 2 bedroom cottage is worth 300,000 but yet people paid it, and now they cry.

hell the land and the materila to build it weren't worth that when it was brand new.

that is how i judge property prices when i look at land. What it the median rate for the land plus cost to build and labor. If you are asking for more than that its not worth it. If it is an older home i start deducting for age. This formula has never done me wrong, my grandpa the real estate investor was pretty smart. NEVER buy in a sellers market.

Just wait until the commercial markets go under, you haven't seen anything yet.
 kittybiscuit
Joined: 2/11/2007
Msg: 60
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 2/20/2010 5:29:44 PM
The banks are holding on to foreclosures and letting them on the market in a controlled manner. I see empty houses all over the place but they are not on the market (yet were short sales a few months ago, so they got foreclosed but the bank isn't selling). So the houses go up a bit then go down a bit. I don't think there is going to be a huge dump out in the lower end at least, so if someone is buying in the 200-300k range, I don't think they are losing out. Now the million dollar homes? Total agreement. There has been very little adjustment there.
 MermaidSari
Joined: 2/4/2007
Msg: 61
view profile
History
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 2/25/2010 10:10:02 AM
Westside...health care? (Wow...I take a break and look what happens). :-p You want the gov. to manage this? What trust you have my dear in our gov. (you and the banks)? :-p

There is an upside to lowering business cost in taxpayer paid health care that I will not deny. My thinking is though can we call it 'care' anymore if the gov. manages business that it does not specialize in...such as medicine. And...I beg to differ...socialists (many in gov) are not against the health care bill.

Finally are we taxed enough and what is the difference from paying via choice over forced taxation? Not a thread on politics and the last RE thread got shut down due to political quarrel...

So back to this shadow RE inventory. What can we expect via this hold out on the market?

Thanks Dudeness for the worthy read and all who contributed.

Kitty...would you agree if a bank holds an asset...it is not collecting its gain from the said asset if held from collection? While we might realize who is paying for the losses (taxpayers)...what about the health of the bank? We have seen what occurs to other markets when banks collapse. We also witnessed the RE market follow in this collapse. So you believe we are leveling out regardless of the shadow inventory being held?

Thanks. :-)
 Gogetter1956
Joined: 1/9/2010
Msg: 62
view profile
History
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 2/25/2010 6:53:32 PM
The .gov is already on a big enough power grab as if they don't already have enough. Just look at the amount of land in the west that .gov still owns. Argh
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 63
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/1/2010 8:55:57 AM
Distressed Homes Sell at 26% Discount in U.S. as Supply Swells
By Dan Levy - Sep 29, 2010 9:00 PM PT

Foreclosures are adding to a swelling U.S. housing supply as an unemployment rate of 9.6 percent and the end of a federal homebuyer tax credit dampen purchases.


Sept. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Charles Lieberman, chief investment officer at Advisors Capital Management LLC, and Demir Gjokaj, an analyst at Majestic Research, talk about the outlook for the U.S. housing market. Lieberman and Gjokaj also discuss the U.S. economy and stocks. They talk with Roben Farzad on Bloomberg Television's "Taking Stock." (Source: Bloomberg)

Homes in the foreclosure process sold at an average 26 percent discount in the second quarter as almost one-fourth of all U.S. transactions involved properties in some stage of mortgage distress, according to RealtyTrac Inc.

A total of 248,534 homes that sold in the period had received a default or auction notice or been seized by banks, RealtyTrac said in a report today. The number was up 5 percent from the first quarter and down 20 percent from a year earlier, according to the Irvine, California-based data seller.

“We’re still clearly building up more distressed inventory,” Rick Sharga, RealtyTrac’s senior vice president, said in a telephone interview. “That will either put downward pressure on prices or keep them from going up.”

The discount reflects the average sales price of homes in the foreclosure process compared with properties not in distress, according to RealtyTrac. About 24 percent of all homes sold were in some stage of foreclosure, down from 31 percent in the first quarter. The average price of a distressed property was $174,198, up from $171,971, the company said.

Foreclosures are adding to a swelling U.S. housing supply as an unemployment rate of 9.6 percent and the end of a federal homebuyer tax credit dampen purchases. Home seizures in August reached a record for the third time in five months, with more than 95,000 repossessions, RealtyTrac said earlier this month. Home prices dropped in July, the eighth consecutive year-over- year decline, the Federal Housing Finance Agency said Sept. 22.

‘Extraordinary’ Spike

Distressed sales dropped as a portion of total transactions because the homebuyer tax credit of as much as $8,000 spurred an “extraordinary sales spike,” Sharga said. The benefit expired April 30.

Sales of homes with mortgage distress probably will account for a quarter to a third of all transactions through 2011, up from 1 to 3 percent before the housing crisis, Sharga said.

“Many people elected to use the $8,000 credit as their discount, rather than buy a house that needed $8,000 worth of work,” Sharga said.

Bank-owned properties sold for an average discount of almost 35 percent in the second quarter, little changed from both the previous quarter and a year earlier. Such properties accounted for 15 percent of all U.S. home sales, down from almost 19 percent in the first quarter and 20 percent a year earlier, RealtyTrac data show.

Short Sales

Properties in default or scheduled for auction sold for an average discount of almost 13 percent, down from 16 percent in the previous quarter and 19 percent a year earlier. These homes are often sold in short sales, where lenders accept less than the outstanding loan amount for the property, RealtyTrac said. Sales of properties either in default or headed for auction accounted for 9 percent of all transactions.

The average price was $154,147 for bank-owned properties and $204,932 for homes in default or scheduled for auction, RealtyTrac said.

Nevada had the highest proportion of distressed sales of any U.S. state in the second quarter, with 56 percent of all transactions involving properties seized by banks or at risk of foreclosure. Arizona ranked second at 47 percent, while California was third at 43 percent.

Distressed sales accounted for at least a quarter of total sales in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Florida, Michigan, Georgia, Idaho and Oregon, RealtyTrac said.

Ohio had the highest average price discount for foreclosed homes at almost 43 percent. Kentucky followed at 41 percent and California was third at 39 percent.

Michigan, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa and the District of Columbia all had average distress discounts of at least 35 percent, RealtyTrac said. The company sells default data from more than 2,200 counties representing 90 percent of the U.S. population.
 TheManOfTheHouse
Joined: 5/10/2008
Msg: 64
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/9/2010 10:50:52 PM
http://cgi.money.cnn.com/tools/homepricedata/index.html
you can see there projected price fall for this year. Because foreclosures are being held up means there will be a surge of more foreclosures later. And more will be coming over the next 2 years in addition anyways. They are just delaying the inevitable. Banks don't want to be home owners, they cant pay the mortgage, they are keeping people paying what ever they can to keep up some kind of cash flow. An opportunity may be coming. A further price depression is due. And cheap money is available for the financially sufficient folks. Is December 2010, 2011 or 2012 the golden time? Inflation is coming in my opinion, to me this seems the only way out of this debt mess. That's paying off the debt with cheaper dollars. Quantitative easing is another way of saying inflation. And watching the currency and commodity markets it is already started.
 fzrhusker
Joined: 10/8/2005
Msg: 65
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/10/2010 11:31:00 PM
SORRY ABOUT THE CAPS MY KEY BOARD BROKE

HELL GATE IS JUST THE MOST RECENT DESCRIPTIVE WORD FOR THE MESS FROM OUR NATION'S CAPITOL WITH 26 DAYS TO GO AND COUNTING, ABOUT THREE DAYS AGO, THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, NANCY PEOLSI FIRED OFF A VERY LONG MEMO TO ALL OVER WASHINGTON D.C. AND THE MEMBERS THAT REGULATE THE BANKS AND THEIR INTERNAL AFFAIRS, ACCUSING THEM OF NOT READING NOT EVEN ONE FORECLOSURE ON A SINGLE HOUSE, SO NANCY MADE A BACK DOOR DEAL WITH PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA IN THE OVAL OFFICE ON AN IDEA OF HOW THE DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP CAN WIN AS MANY FRIENDS AS POSSIBLE TO KEEP THEIR LEADERSHIP AFTER THIS NOVEMBER 2 ELECTION.

WE CAN ORDER A TOTAL ONE YEAR FREEZE ON ALL FORECLOSURES AND WIN OVER THEIR VOTES AND THEY WILL THINK THAT WE ARE EXACTLY LIKE PRESIDENT FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT FOR SAVING THEIR HOUSE, THIS AS SHE EXPLAINED WILL JUST HELP THEM OUT FOR THE NEXT 26 DAYS, REGARDLESS IF 23 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN THIS COUNTRY ARE UPSIDE DOWN IN THE WATER AND THE TOTAL OF UPSIDE DOWNS WILL CONTINUE TO RISE IN ONE YEAR'S TIME, NANCY FIGURES THAT "WHAT THE HELL, THE COUNTRY IS TOO IGNORANT TO CARE REALLY AND AS SHE EXPLAINED THAT THE PRICES ON EVERYTHING AS FAR AS GOODS AND SERVICES ARE JUST TOO HIGH ANYWAY" , THIS LOGIC FITS RIGHT IN TO THE MIND SETS OF SOCIALISM ON A TOTAL SCALE.

WITH THE BANKS NOT BEING ALLOWED TO REGULATE THEMSELVES, THE BANKS ARE LEFT HOLDING LOTS OF BAD PAPER WITH A CHOICE OF CHAPTER 11 OR A VICIOUS MERGER WITH ANOTHER BANK THAT REALLY DOES NOT WANT TO BE INVOLVED WITH ONE ANOTHER, EVENTUALLY AS NANCY LET ON TO THE PRESIDENT, AMERICA WILL BE FORCED TO LOWER THE SAVAGE INTEREST RATES DOWN TO A LEVEL OF THAT IN JAPAN WHICH IS AT "0" AND HAS BEEN FOR FOURTEEN YEARS, BUT, WHAT THE HELL, IT WILL TAKE MORE THAN TWO DECADES TO WORK OUT OF THIS CRAP, BUT, OUR PARTY CAN DO IT AND WE DON'T REALLY CARE IF THE APPRECIATED VALUES OF ALL OF THE HOMES IN AMERICA PLUMMETS ALONG WITH EVERYTHING ELSE THAT AMERICA BUYS AND IF THAT HAPPENS, WE CAN JUSTIFY LOWERING EVEN THE MINIMUM WAGE BACK DOWN TO PRE-1960 COSTS OF 75 CENTS AN HOUR AND THUS LOWERING EVERYBODY'S SALARIES SIGNIFICANTLY AND THAT SHOULD PUT AMERICA IN COMPETITION WITH THE REST OF THE WORLD AGAIN. THIS WAS TALKED ABOUT ON LATE NIGHT TALK RADIO AND IS NOT EVEN OPEN TO ANY TELEVISION STATION OR ANY NEWSPAPER, INCLUDING THE WALL STREET JOURNAL AS A LID IS ON THIS STORY UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION, THE SAD PART ABOUT THIS IS THAT IT IS ALREADY IN THE FIX AND THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT NONE OF US CAN CHANGE AS IT WASN'T EVEN A BILL TO BE VOTED ON, JUST AN ABSOLUTE ORDER FROM THE WHITE HOUSE "TO REALLY GET AN IDEA OF THE SOCIALIST MINDSETS, GO OUT AND WATCH THE MOVIE " I WANT YOUR MONEY", TO BE RELEASED ON OCTOBER 15'.

THE OTHER SAD PART OF THIS STORY IS THE STATE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND THE MIND SET OF PAST GOVERNOR JERRY BROWN WHOM IS ALREADY SHAKING HANDS WITH NANCY PELOSI AND GLORIA ALREAD AND HOW JERRY BROWN IS GOING TO KEEP THE MOST EXPENSIVE UNION IN THE NATION OUT HERE IN CALIFORNIA BY STRONG ARMING 5.3 BILLION DOLLARS TO BALANCE THE BUDGET THIS NEXT FISCAL YEAR AND EVERY YEAR AFTERWARDS, JERRY BROWN CREATED THIS UNION IN THE LATE 1970'S ALONG WITH THE CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR BOARD AND NOW, HE WANTS TO CLUTTER THE ENTIRE COAST LINE WITH HIGH RISE SKYSCRAPERS THAT WILL BE A PLACE TO LIVE, WHILE HE RAISES THE PRICE OF GASOLINE TO 9 DOLLARS A GALLON, IF YOU IN YOUR STATE THINK YOU HAVE A SCRAPER RUNNING YOUR SHOW, YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING YET UNTIL YOU HAVE LISTENED TO JERRY BROWN.

I JUST WANT TO WISH ALL OF YOU THE BEST OF LUCK IN THE FUTURE.
 GolfCoast
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 66
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/11/2010 5:50:49 AM
As long as the real estate market does not have a free-flow of inventory and money, the longer theeconomy stays in the doldrums. Even Obama's guy Axelrod was on the Sunday news shows admitting that a termination of the foreclosure process was bad for all parties. The moral hazard introduced by this idea is the number of people who will stop making house payments further stressing an already fragile market.

The left is so often determined to suspend the iron laws of economics, and an equal number of times wrong.
 GolfCoast
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 67
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/11/2010 12:14:43 PM
Thinking you would benefit greatly from reading a history of the CRA (well you might not, but a seeker of truth would).
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 68
view profile
History
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/12/2010 1:35:09 AM

a mortgage is a simple contract, written in the favor of and by the banks, no less.


Of course, you don't explain why anyone would enter into an agreement whose terms so clearly favored the other party. Nor do you explain why courts would enforce agreements like that. In fact, they've often refused to enforce them.


If the banks are so greedy that that they gave the loan without exercising their fiduciary responsibility because they found a secondary way of profitting from the process


Once again, pure conjecture. You don't offer any evidence that lenders improperly used any "secondary way" to profit from mortgages, nor do you specify what it consisted of.

At the same time, you ignore the CRA, even though it's at the root of this whole problem. In the mid-1990's, the Clinton administration changed the rules which implement this law, ostensibly to make it easier yet for blacks to become homeowners.

These rules gave "community organizations" like ACORN power to coerce lenders into making home loans to minority applicants who weren't qualified. If lenders refused, and therefore didn't meet their quotas for this type of loan, these civilian overseers could make life very hard for them by reporting them to federal supervisory agencies whose approvals the lenders needed to do business.

The absurd premise behind the CRA was that lenders really had no valid reasons for refusing to approve more home loans for blacks. It was just their lame excuse that they were denying loans only to those blacks who didn't have the financial qualifications for them. In this myth, apparently, so intense and vicious was the racial bias of these lenders that to satisfy it, they were willing to forego all the profit they could have made off these perfectly justifiable loans.

What happened in the *secondary* mortgage markets is a different story. It certainly involved corruption--partly by people like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, who were supposed to be doing their part to supervise the packaging and resale of these mortgages.

But none of that ever could have happened if the bad mortgage loans hadn't been made in the first place. And the main cause of that was the CRA, which gave groups of private citizens authority to coerce lenders into making loans they otherwise never would have made.

Thomas Sowell has just written a book about how the residential mortgage fiasco led to the financial collapse of 2008.
 GolfCoast
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 69
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/12/2010 7:39:08 AM
The proposition is quite simple; if the law was needed to end discrimination, it sooner or later was going to coerce banks into lending to pet Dem deadbeats. As a great president once said, Mission Accomplished.

I actually read the news and listen to the arguments... for decades. Bankers argued until recent times the end of red-lining was the beginning of imprudent loans. Then they stopped complaining because the government agreed to buy the loans leaving them all the benefits and none of the bad...it's called fascism, it ends in bailouts.

Of course libs only remember the part that serves their worldview.
 GolfCoast
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 70
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/12/2010 10:23:22 AM
I agree, you don't understand logic. Perhaps some pictures. You may be running out of reasons to utilize ignorance as an excuse.

The timeline.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM

The usual suspects, stupid thugs all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxMInSfanqg

Put on eye protection Barney actually can slobber through the youtube into your eyes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW5qKYfqALE&feature=related
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 71
view profile
History
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/12/2010 11:34:59 AM

I see, the bankers are fascists according to you


You're the only one saying that. The statement was that the government purchase of bad loans to benefit a pet group was fascism. I know what GC's getting at--that kind of "corporatist" collusion between the state and favored industries was the rule under Mussolini.

Here again, you distorted what someone else wrote. Either you don't know how to read carefully, or you're intentionally misstating other people's points as an underhanded way of discrediting them, because you don't have what it takes to rebut them straight up. I'll leave it to someone else to judge which.

Earlier, I had questioned why anyone would willingly enter into an agreement whose terms favored the other party, as you'd claimed people regularly do. And I had noted that courts have often refused to enforce agreements like that as legal contracts (courts disfavor contracts they believe are rigged to favor one party, finding that they are "overbearing," "unconscionable," contracts of "adhesion," etc.)

But you, in between personal insults, responded by saying this: "All papers being properly filed, can you give an example of a court that refusd to enforce a foreclosure? I'm highly skeptical of your claim." One little problem--I hadn't claimed anything of the kind.

(Just for the record, courts refuse to enforce foreclosures for several reasons. To cite just one of them, "It is well established in our law that a court of equity may refuse to foreclose a mortgage when an acceleration of the due date of the debt would be an inequitable or unjust result and the circumstances would render the acceleration unconscionable." Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp. v. Taylor, 318 So.2d 203 (Florida Dist. Ct. Appeals, 1975)).



We should leave those who disciminate to continue discriminating


Most people understand that private lenders should have the right to discriminate against anyone who can't qualify financially for a loan. To require them *not* to do that only when the applicant is black is race bias in itself. But I'd expect someone who thinks many or most white Americans are racists to like any scheme that discriminates against *them* by race.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 72
view profile
History
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/12/2010 1:57:41 PM

The banks decided it was more lucrative to ignore it, give the unqualified loans, and then insured themselves with a bet that these unqualified people could not pay back the loans . . . I don't think most Americans are racists....but I know one when I hear one.


That's a serious thing to accuse the banks of. What is your evidence for it? Or do you rely on uninformed guesses rather than facts, as you do in convincing yourself who's a racist and who isn't?

Unlike you, I don't claim to know someone's a racist just from their views on issues that may involve race. Unless I've heard someone state outright that they think one race of people is inherently superior to another, I have to assume they have other completely legitimate reasons for their views.

I believe only a coward or a liar would stoop so low as to accuse someone of being a racist, simply for disagreeing with them. But along with other kinds of name-calling, that's standard practice among leftist propagandists. That practice, and the people who engage in it, don't deserve anyone's respect.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 73
view profile
History
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/12/2010 3:43:48 PM

That would explain why you and the group are always here bellyaching about reverse racisms


I don't know what "reverse" racism is--there's only one kind of racism. And accusing people of it is a convenient crutch for leftist propagandists who detest this country and never miss a chance to run it down. Most of them fall back on name-calling because they don't have any other weapons. They can't use facts to back up the lies they're peddling, and they don't have enough intellectual integrity to care about facts anyway.

It is you who felt so free to imply that all sorts of people here, as well as Americans in general, were racists for doing various things you didn't happen to like. You had no basis for doing that, but you didn't hesitate. One of their sins, in your book, was refusing to join you in condemning Arizona for daring to try to enforce federal laws. You hadn't even read SB 1070 and had not the faintest idea what you were talking about, but you pretended to know that it was racist through and through. Now you want to deny all that, but I and everyone here know what you said.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 74
view profile
History
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/12/2010 5:58:13 PM
^^^^Thank you for making my point for me.
 GolfCoast
Joined: 3/17/2008
Msg: 75
CA Real Estate (#2)
Posted: 10/12/2010 6:47:36 PM
She doesn't hate the country, she doesn't understand it. Let's face it most libs like the parts that are like France, dislike the part that looked at distant horizons and felt the need to find a place untrod by lemmings and fools. We planned on going to the moon, the French planned how to spend August on a nude beach with good brie (even better if paid for by someone else).
Show ALL Forums  > California  > CA Real Estate (#2)