To all you Americans who don't own a home

[Le Jacquelope]

I'm not a libertarian, but I do believe in many of the precepts. I do believe there should be a minimum safety net, but that "net" is very low, bare subsistance...I don't want anyone to starve.

And I want people to be put back on their feet to work again.

A high school graduate gets out of school and works at an auto body shop for minimum wage, then gets a few pay increases but is still considered "poor". Five years later, an Uncle decides to help him with the down payment on a garage, he works diligently and 10 years later he's making 200-300 grand. He works for a few more years, sells out, retires, diversifies his portfolio and puts most of it into safe funds that keep growing, but throw off a minimal income stream (kids are through college, the house is paid for and there's no reason for lots of income)....now he's low income again.

That sounds like abusing the system, especially if he's using his "low income" status to get access to poverty-related government programs.

Abuse happens, even of the free market. (See: Yankee capitalism.)

There's a lot of fluctuation between the income levels. Very few people stay in $7 per hour jobs for their lifetimes as their sole source of income. (are you an exception LT?)

Is that what your argument is based on? That people who oppose you are low income because they defend the dignity and honor of the poor?

I wonder what those rich ultra left Democrats would say to a relatively poor fellow like you?

I know I'm laughing at you - for one thing I earn a hell of a lot more than any of you ignorami believe. But unlike WARBRIDE I'm not posting up personal details. What proof do you plan on offering that you're earning more than $7/hr?

 

[Le Jacquelope]

All points conceded to everyone because I'm tired of the argument.

All that evil needs to win is for apathy to set in.

 

[LovetoGiveRoses]

I didn't say that the retired fellow in my example above collected welfare benefits, only that people fluctuate between income levels through their whole lives. The people who are the "poor" today are often the "middle" or "high" income brackets a few years from now and those in the "high" or "middle income brackets often move to the "lower" income brackets at some point too.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

I didn't say that the retired fellow in my example above collected welfare benefits, only that people fluctuate between income levels through their whole lives. The people who are the "poor" today are often the "middle" or "high" income brackets a few years from now and those in the "high" or "middle income brackets often move to the "lower" income brackets at some point too.

Your example just keeps forcing me to look at the fact that he is hiding income to appear poor. I can't help but feel that it's a relevant issue.

People who use safe funds seriously abuse the system and don't even, if I know correctly, pay the proper taxes. That's hurting all of the rest of us and the very credibility of Government programs.

Aside from those who abuse the system like that, I'm not seeing any point in the issue of someone moving between income brackets. I'm not proposing Government programs to buy people homes - although we do have the HUD to do that.

In fact, when someone talks about buying homes with little or no money down, they're talking about stuff like FHA loans. One could say the FHA invalidates any claim that owning a house is damned expensive - except that one would also have to say such a Government program is legitimate and acceptable. If you're a Libertarian then supporting HUD/FHA is utter blasphemy because it just goes to show you that some Government programs truly do help people.

Think about it for a second, if owning homes were so easy as Ishmael says it is, more poor people would not only be owning homes, but they'd be flipping them right and left.

If it were possible to do that I would certainly be the first person to post a major how to on Lit and give The Knowledge to the masses. Flipping houses will make you insanely rich insanely quick.

 

[MagicFingers]

13%

The percentage of people in OC (NOT "The OC"!) who can afford to buy a median priced home!
What's wrong with this picture??
From someone hiding my millions in income so I can live in poverty.

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

People in OC not bright enough to live in Pittsburg where they can afford a house?

My 100K home here would go for a mill there.

And the people are friendlier!

 

[TirelessTongue]

Re: Re: To all you Americans who don't own a home

Well, one out of 4 ain't bad, I suppose.
Here, the average house in an average (not good) neighborhood is OVER $500,000!!! Had a condo, but gave it to the EX so my kids would have a place to live.
So, $50,000 down, + $20,000 in fees, + $5-10,000/yr in taxes, + $3,000 in mortgae ins, + home ins, + $3,000/mo payments...
Sure, I'll buy 2 tomorrow!
Maybe it works in Podunk, USA, but not here.
Don't know why you felt you needed to call some good, but unfortunate people morons!

AMEN !!!

 

[Ishmael]

Re: 13%

The percentage of people in OC (NOT "The OC"!) who can afford to buy a median priced home!
What's wrong with this picture??
From someone hiding my millions in income so I can live in poverty.

LOL. Median huh? Got to love that statistician shit.

Did you hear about the statistician who drowned in a lake whose median depth was 3 inches?

Check the building code and zoning laws.

Ishmael

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

Our mobility as a society has been cited as one of the reasons for the demise of the American family yet why is it so many people seem to be rooted in spots despite there being little opportunity...

 

[Georgia Girl]

Because those spots are where our roots are. As the divorce rate continues to rise and the number of single parents escalates having that solid support stucture becomes more and more important.

If you are not employed, having family to watch the kids so you can look for a job is vital. Same for going to school to enable you to find a better job.

It can make it very difficult to move from an area despite there not being the economic base that is preferred.

 

[Fawkin'Injun]

My roots are in Wyandotte County and I cut the fawkers and ran at the earliest opportunity! I live in a great place now. I'm even thinking of putting down some roots...

 

[Georgia Girl]

If I moved to a metro area I would have greater opportunities but where I am now in a rural area my child and I have family surrounding us.

Maybe I'm just chicken to move because this is home.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Re: 13%

The percentage of people in OC (NOT "The OC"!) who can afford to buy a median priced home!
What's wrong with this picture??
From someone hiding my millions in income so I can live in poverty.

What's wrong with that picture is the priggish assumption that it's only unaffordable to lazy incompetent losers.

It's the foundation of everything Ishmael and others like him say.

 

[Pookie]

Re: Re: 13%

... lazy ...

^^^ The key word here, which LT is very familiar with. The other one is "excuses."

 

[Ishmael]

Re: Re: Re: 13%

^^^ The key word here, which LT is very familiar with. The other one is "excuses."

Not to mention "argue with a billboard."

What amazes me is that he's managed to alienate even those that share his politics.

He talks about "ownership" and "flipping real estate" out of one side of his mouth, and implies that the government should subsidize his activities out of the other side.

Ishmael

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Re: Re: Re: Re: 13%

Not to mention "argue with a billboard."

What amazes me is that he's managed to alienate even those that share his politics.

He talks about "ownership" and "flipping real estate" out of one side of his mouth, and implies that the government should subsidize his activities out of the other side.

Ishmael

Ishmael is it possible that the inability to comprehend what I or other people say, is why you continue to alienate voters?

You really shouldn't be playing the "alienation" card when it is played against you every time an election comes along.

 

[Ishmael]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 13%

Ishmael is it possible that the inability to comprehend what I or other people say, is why you continue to alienate voters?

You really shouldn't be playing the "alienation" card when it is played against you every time an election comes along.

You know what? You've talked gibberish throughout this whole thread. No one's agreed with you in any substantial way. But you persist.

You started out talking about the ability to buy a home and have now changed that to the price of real estate in your own market. Two different subjects bucko.

And if you want to bitch about the cost of real estate in the So. Cal and SF markets you better be willing to talk about the manipulation of those markets by your local politicians. That's right LT, government. And those area's aren't the only ones, just happen to be the most notable and the worst.

But as is your trait, when snookered in one debate you change the subject and the focus.

woof

Ishmael

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 13%

You know what? You've talked gibberish throughout this whole thread. No one's agreed with you in any substantial way. But you persist.

You keep confusing your lack of reading comprehension skills with me speaking "gibberish". That's problem #1.

You started out talking about the ability to buy a home

Nobody is going to sell a home to someone living at the poverty line unless it's through an FHA loan. Period.

and have now changed that to the price of real estate in your own market. Two different subjects bucko.

No it's not, bucko. It's one and the same.

And if you want to bitch about the cost of real estate in the So. Cal and SF markets

The only place you're going to find land at the price you keep talking about is on some scam show by John Beck or at a relatively unknown real estate auction. Which is like hitting the lottery.

you better be willing to talk about the manipulation of those markets by your local politicians. That's right LT, government. And those area's aren't the only ones, just happen to be the most notable and the worst.

Really, what evidence do you have that Government drives up the cost of real estate more than, say, the popularity of the land among competing buyers?

But as is your trait, when snookered in one debate you change the subject and the focus.

Ishmael face it, you're a scammer. Unless you hit the real estate lottery the poor can't get a home without a government program (a FHA loan). Even one of your buddies on here slipped and admitted that's how he got his first home. All bets are off when someone gets their first home. After that you usually have enough equity to get more, if you manage your finances right.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Hey gentlereaders, I just saw Ishmael advertising his real estate purchasing plan on TV last night:

http://www.shopping-as-seen-on-tv.com/amazingprofits.jpg

 

[Le Jacquelope]

And you idiots keep saying that homes are still affordable?!


http://www.usatoday.com/money/2005-10-08-greenspan-mortgages_x.htm#

Greenspan concerned about interest-free loans and other riskier mortgages
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan is turning up the volume on his warnings about the potential perils of certain risky mortgages if the high-flying housing market loses significant altitude.

There are signs some companies are getting the message. A few have begun scaling back some types of those mortgages or making them less appealing by raising costs.

Greenspan mostly is worried about homeowners who took out an interest-only mortgage or option adjustable-rate mortgages to buy property they otherwise could not afford. Borrowers and lenders holding such loans could get clobbered if housing prices drop or interest rates rise.

"In the event of widespread cooling in house prices, these borrowers, and the institutions that service them, could be exposed to significant losses," Greenspan said recently.

Doug Duncan, chief economist at the Mortgage Bankers Association, said it's "not only Greenspan, but it is also the market" that is driving some changes.

"If you are going to make a loan, you either have to be able to hold it in your own portfolio or you have to have someone to sell it to," Duncan said. As some investors demand a higher return for the risk they are taking, some companies may boost loan costs. "If you change the pricing, there's going to be fewer borrowers for which the loan will be viable," Duncan said.

Interest-only mortgages require that the homeowner initially pay only the interest on the loan for a set period. Option ARMs gives the homeowner flexibility to decide how much to pay each month. One of the options is a minimum payment that covers only a portion of the monthly interest.

These mortgages are appealing to people who need cash for other expenses. But it also exposes them to far greater risk — if housing prices drop, their loan could be worth more than their property. If interest rates rise, their loan will become expensive to pay off.

The Mortgage Bankers Association estimates that interest-only loans accounted for 17% of the $1.225 trillion in home loans originated in the second half of 2004, the most recent period for which this information is available. Previously, the association did not break out these types of loans.

It does not have figures for option ARMs.

Banking regulators are monitoring the flurry of risky mortgages and plan to issue regulatory guidance to banks.

"The easier availability of first mortgages has helped many marginal borrowers obtain loans and it has helped banks sustain loan volume and profits," said John Dugan, comptroller of the currency.

"But looser underwriting standards and the more widespread penetration of riskier mortgage products have raised questions about how these loans will fare in the event of a rise in interest rates or a softening in house prices," Dugan said.

Though there are signs of cooling, home sales still are on pace for a fifth straight record yearly increase, powered by low interest rates. Meantime, prices have skyrocketed.

The average home price soared by 13.43% during the 12 months ending June, the biggest gain in more than a quarter-century, according to the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.

Nevada had the biggest increase, 28.13%, followed by Arizona, 27.82; Hawaii, 25.92; California, 25.16; and Florida, 24.45.

Greenspan has warned homeowners, lenders and investors that they should not count on similar increases. "History has not dealt kindly" with that kind of optimism, he said in August.

When the housing boom simmers down, prices will not rise nearly as much and could fall in some markets, he said.

New Century Financial Corp. is reducing the number of interest-only mortgages it issues to 25% during the second half of this year from 33% in the first half. It does not offer option ARMs.

A lessened appetite for these loans among investors in the secondary mortgage market was a driving factor behind the decision. In the secondary market, loans are purchased from banks and other lenders, pooled together, then sold to investors around the world.

H&R Block's Option One Mortgage raised the rates to brokers on all its mortgage products, including interest-only loans, by four-tenths of a percentage point. The boost was needed in part because profit margins had gotten extremely tight, spokesman David Gunasegaram said.

The company does not have plans to reduce interest-only mortgages. They accounted for 13.2% of mortgages granted to consumers through its retail business in the May-through-July quarter and 24.5% sold to brokers through its wholesale business. The mortgage lender does not offer option ARMs.

At Wells Fargo, interest-only mortgages so far this year make up about 25% of the mortgages it originates. It does not provide option ARMs. There are no plans to trim interest-only loans.

"We'll monitor the volume. We'll monitor the credit quality and as long as everything looks good we'll continue to offer it," said Greg Gwizdz, executive vice president and retail national sales manager for Wells Fargo Home Mortgage.

For prospective home buyers, there are a multitude of financing choices. That means it is more important then ever to do homework, ask questions and figure out what you can truly afford and be comfortable paying.

Lenders say they lay out to customers the risks and benefits of interest-only as well as other types of mortgages.

"In the end, we are here to provide a service," Gwizdz said. "If the customer really wants it, we are going to give it to them. Keep in mind we do have our credit guidelines. So the person will still have to qualify, will still have to have the down payment and the proper credit scores, the proper income and everything else."
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Well, it's 2006 and it looks like all my comments about the unaffordability of homes have come home to roost.

The housing market is taking major hits now.

 

[Cade Is Here]

Are you a moron?

Do you realize how easy it is to own a home?

Lemme tell you how easy.

You just need
1.) A Job.
2.) Decent credit. Not great, but decent.
3.) 10% down payment. (In some cases even less is required.)
4.) The monthly payment cannot be in excess of 30% of the buyer(s) gross monthly income.

It boggles the mind why there are any adults in America who do not own a home.

What's up with that?

(Edited: I intentionally waited to add this part - the above is intended as sarcasm. It's a parody of Phrodeau, Ishmael and Miles, mostly using a direct cut and paste of their own words. Surprise! )

So that means you don't have a home???

 

[Le Jacquelope]

LOL, dumbshits, remember how you CONTRADICTED ME in this thread and what I said eventually came to pass?

C'mon, fess up. I was right. AGAIN.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

You know what? You've talked gibberish throughout this whole thread. No one's agreed with you in any substantial way. But you persist.

No one agrees with me, but I'm STILL RIGHT.

Read, bitch. READ. It's 2007 now and what I said here

HAS COME TO PASS

Now give me more of your "nobody agrees with you" bullshit. Facts don't need agreement. I have the facts and the facts say you were wrong as fuck.


This... is the GOOD news. The bad news - the waves and waves of foreclosures upon people whose incomes could NOT support your fucked up arguments in this thread - is still coming down like fallout.

http://www.citymayors.com/society/housing_usa.html

Affordable housing crisis casts a
shadow over the American Dream
By Tony Favro, US Correspondent

20 January 2007: The United States government defines affordable housing as housing for which the owner or tenant pays 30 per cent or less of his or her income. Using this standard, the National Low Income Housing Coalition calculates that nearly 95 million Americans - 35 per cent of US households - have a housing affordability problem.

Rising housing costs have created a housing shortage not only for lower-income groups that traditionally face housing challenges – people with disabilities, those in transition, and immigrant families – but also for teachers, nurses, firefighters, police officers, and other moderate-income workers.

American cities are at the center of the crisis. Eighty per cent of the 1,000 large and small American cities surveyed by the National League for Cities in 2007 reported that rising housing costs are putting a severe strain on families. For example, Chicago (Population: 2.9m) identified an immediate need of at least 200,000 affordable units; Minneapolis, Minnesota (Population: 383.000) over 50,000 units; and Lodi, California (Population 67,000) 8000 units.

Rather than fulfilling the ‘American Dream’ of homeownership, the United States is becoming “functionally poor when it comes to housing,” in the words of Paul Farmer, Executive Director of the American Planning Association.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Oh yeah, NOBODY agreed with me. Yet ISLANDTURD tells me everyone knew this was coming? Bullshit.

http://realestate.aol.com/article/i...s-surge-on-mortgage-woes/20070427174009990001

Foreclosures surge on mortgage woes
Filings were up 35 percent in the first quarter; Detroit and Las Vegas get hammered.
By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer

NEW YORK -- Foreclosure filings surged during the first quarter of 2007, as home price increases slowed or even reversed and borrowers fell behind on payments once their adjustable rates began resetting at much higher levels.

The number of filings climbed 27 percent in the first quarter compared with the fourth quarter of 2006 and 35 percent from a year earlier, according to a report released Wednesday by RealtyTrac, an online marketer of foreclosure properties.

There were more than 430,000 foreclosure filings nationwide, one for every 264 households. The filings include everything from default notices to auction sale notices to actual bank repossessions.

Nevada had the highest foreclosure rate - there was one for every 75 households. The Las Vegas area had undergone a boom in speculative real estate investing during the red-hot housing market years of 2004 and 2005 and, as prices have dropped, the speculators are taking bad beatings.