Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:08 AM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,455,215 times
Reputation: 4243

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
its not a rebate, its a credit.. There is no law against negotating the seller pay your closing costs for you, nor is there one thats says the seller cant allot for things like carpeting replacement, etc, and nothing in your link indicates that its fraud. Are you just linking to things thinking people wont read them?
Remember, they are a realestate agent. Some of the biggest thieves in the country. They get big payouts for doing basically something the buyer could do themselves. They know their time in this profession is limited, they want the government to continue to make it easy for people to buy houses so they can continue to make absurd unwarranted money from these deals. Realestate agents are part of the reason why house prices got so damn high. It was rigged to calculate their inflated commision prices in to the price of the house.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:09 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by walidm View Post
Makes sense

Though it can be a difficult concept for some to understand...

Tax prorations are a debit to the seller (because they are moved from his escrow account) and credit to the buyer
I stopped here because you just tried telling me this didnt take place. Wait, not only did you say this wasnt taking place, but you tried to say that people were committing fraud by doing so.. Now you are admitting its common practice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:10 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,858,215 times
Reputation: 4585
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
and that TAXPAYER service needs to be CUT

you want a loan..pony up a decient downpayment...10% is not too much to ask....
FHA, let me see. Federal Housing Administration. F as in Federal!!! Egads, don't want no Big Gubment....!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:10 AM
 
855 posts, read 1,173,327 times
Reputation: 541
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
what makes you THINK that it should be 3.5%

its a LOAN..

I put 25% down on my mortage..and 15% down on the other

the standard HAS BEEN 10-20% for DECADES until clinton had them lowered in 1995

that's was 3/4 of the cuase of the housing bubble/bust...giving credit were it wasnt deserved....especially 'no-doc', and 'interest only'

the government caused the bust...

yet the market prices have still been going up...for your first house, when did you buy? how much did it cost?? 400k? 500k?? like it costs some of us who live in areas where all the jobs are?


is there abuse? certainly. but is it fair to make it more increasingly difficult for younger people just starting out to purchase homes? you older people have your houses...and have likely established your life...what about the rest of us in the millennial set? we'll be paying for previous generations' missteps til the end of time, especially since now that you've made your money, you don't want the tax increases on the "rich"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:11 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Here is a part of the speech where Bush launched his massive deregulation program to push loans to people who could not afford them. It led to a tsunami of 40 separate actions to lower lending standards. Yes, Clinton did similar things too and so did Reagan, but never at this scale.

It sounds like the Republicans have realized it was a tragic mistake.

Bush's mission to get 5.5 million low income minorities mortgages when they would not otherwise qualify for them.
Fail yet again.. Bush supported people getting mortgages, but he did NOT support unqualified people getting them.. Why dont you stop lying?

in fact Bush tried to make it much more difficult to get mortgages, tried to increase the standards 13 different times, and Democrats blocked them every time. They even had congressional hearings on the matter..

What are these 40 seperate actions by Bush, to lower the lending standards because this is a new one..

Democrats blocking any such increase in requirements under Bush

YouTube - ‪Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis‬‏
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:13 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
FHA, let me see. Federal Housing Administration. F as in Federal!!! Egads, don't want no Big Gubment....!
Um.. if you've been following the thread, we conservatives would actually get rid of FHA, so yes, we are consistant in that we dont want no big government..
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
Remember, they are a realestate agent. Some of the biggest thieves in the country. They get big payouts for doing basically something the buyer could do themselves. They know their time in this profession is limited, they want the government to continue to make it easy for people to buy houses so they can continue to make absurd unwarranted money from these deals. Realestate agents are part of the reason why house prices got so damn high. It was rigged to calculate their inflated commision prices in to the price of the house.
Ahhh, that might actually explain things.. yep, realtors do have an incentive to keep the down payments low so they can sell more..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:16 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by chariega View Post
is there abuse? certainly. but is it fair to make it more increasingly difficult for younger people just starting out to purchase homes? you older people have your houses...and have likely established your life...what about the rest of us in the millennial set? we'll be paying for previous generations' missteps til the end of time, especially since now that you've made your money, you don't want the tax increases on the "rich"
Home ownership isnt for people just starting out. Its for people who are financially secure, able to substain a monthly payment, job security, etc.. And increasing the amount from 3.5% to 5% isnt a hurdle that even young people cant overcome, considering seller credits. Many peoples yearly tax refund would be sufficient to cover the down payment alone.

Tax increases on the rich have nothing to do with this, its ridiculous to even bring that into the discussion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:21 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,488,320 times
Reputation: 9618
nope this was mostly clinton..bush tried to continue, then tried to stop,.. and barney frank and the dud dodd stoped the reform that would have saved the housing bust from happening

Higher Loan-to-Value Ratio; Fannie Mae Eases Refinancing Rules
By Mervyn Rothstein
Published: November 28, 1993
The Federal National Mortgage Association, the country's largest source of home mortgage funds, has revised its policy to make it easier for some homeowners to refinance their mortgages and take advantage of current low interest rates.

The change expands Fannie Mae's mortgage refinancing policy to include home loans with as high as a 95 percent loan-to-value ratio. Previously, refinancing required no more than a 90 percent loan-to-value ratio.

....
.NYT 1993....

Fannie Mae Seeks to Ease Home Buying
By KEITH BRADSHER,
Published: March 10, 1994
WASHINGTON, March 9— The organization that stands behind many of the nation's mortgages is taking broad steps to make home ownership easier for lower-income Americans, particularly recent immigrants and minorities, people involved in the effort said today.

Under the new rules, banks would have more flexibility in lending to people who already owe a considerable amount of money or who cannot afford a down payment equal to 20 percent of the price of a home, the people said. Tuesday Announcement.
President Clinton is tentatively scheduled to attend the announcement. The Administration is urging that loans be more broadly available to poor and lower-middle-income Americans.
Fannie Mae Seeks to Ease Home Buying - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/1994/03/10/business/fannie-mae-seeks-to-ease-home-buying.html?scp=695&sq=fannie+mae&st=nyt - broken link)
-----------------------------------------

Published: June 8, 1997

calls its ''no-doc product'' -- as in no documents needed.

According to Jay Siegel, a vice president at Moody's Investor Service: ''Subprime loans have exploded from $7 billion in 1992 to $37 billion in 1996 as a sector of the entire securitized conventional loan market.'' That $37 billion, Mr. Siegel said, represents 11 percent of all the conventional loans that were securitized in 1996, up from 1.4 percent in 1992.

According to Jay Siegel, a vice president at Moody's Investor Service: ''Subprime loans have exploded from $7 billion in 1992 to $37 billion in 1996 as a sector of the entire securitized conventional loan market.'' That $37 billion, Mr. Siegel said, represents 11 percent of all the conventional loans that were securitized in 1996, up from 1.4 percent in 1992.

The agencies have also, for the first time, become guarantors of subprime loans. In fact, on May 21, Freddie Mac agreed to guarantee the securitization of $227.3 million in subprime loans originated by the First Union Home Equity Bank.

Several industry analysts point out that the trend toward subprime lending has been a boon to the nation's affordable housing movement. ''There are more subprime opportunities that dovetail well with C.R.A.-required lending,'' said Mr. Gumbinger.

C.R.A. is the Community Reinvestment Act, a law passed by Congress in 1977 to combat red-lining -- the systematic policy of banks to avoid making loans in poor communities. The law requires Federally regulated banks and savings and loans, but not mortgage banks, to ''help meet the credit needs of communities in which they are chartered.'' If one of those lenders applies to Federal regulatory agencies for a merger or a new charter, it must demonstrate that it has originated a sufficient number of loans in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.

Giving Credit Where Credit Was Denied - NYTimes.com

-----------------------------------

Homeowners Record Is Set in Third Quarter
By STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: November 1, 1997
Independent analysts, as well as those in the Clinton Administration, say that the rising number of homeowners -- including many, like Ms. Crittendon, who are first-time buyers -- is the result of several factors. These include low interest rates, low unemployment, rising incomes, a number of Federal assistance programs, increased competition among mortgage lenders, and better enforcement of fair-housing laws.

''It's not just that it's a strong economy,'' said Andrew M. Cuomo, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. ''It's that people are willing to believe that they'll have a job long term, that their house will appreciate and that their incomes will grow.''

These increases stem in part from rising incomes and lowered unemployment among minorities and single women. The rise is also the result of several policies adopted by the Bush and Clinton Administrations. Starting in 1991, for example, Federal regulators, when asked to approve bank mergers, began to include a bank's lending history in low- and moderate-income areas as part of their review.

In 1993, Congress ordered the two Federally chartered lending companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to increase their loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers. In 1995, seeking to save his department from elimination by the newly elected Republican-led Congress, Housing Secretary Henry G. Cisneros adopted a ''national homeownership strategy'' that eased requirements to qualify for Federal Housing Administration-insured loans and reduced closing costs by as much as $1,200 on those loans for first-time buyers.

Homeowners Record Is Set in Third Quarter - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/01/us/homeowners-record-is-set-in-third-quarter.html?scp=66&sq=1995+fannie&st=nyt - broken link)

-----------------------

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
By STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: September 30, 1999
WASHINGTON, Sept. 29— In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

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.

In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

''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.''

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 officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - NYTimes.com

----------------------

U.S. Proposes Rules to Help House Buyers
Published: March 5, 2000

WASHINGTON, March 3— The federal government has proposed new rules that would make it easier for low-income house buyers to qualify for mortgage loans, a move intended to help blacks and other minorities buy houses.

The proposed rules from the Department of Housing and Urban Development would require two of the largest housing finance companies in the country, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to increase the percentages of overall loans that they offer to lower-income families from the current standard of 42 percent to 48 percent in 2000 and to 50 percent in 2001.



The companies would be required over the next 10 years to buy $2.4 trillion in mortgages from banks and other lenders to assist the 28 million American families with low and moderate incomes. Many of those families are minorities, housing officials said.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fall under federal oversight because they receive special exemptions from Congress from all state and local taxes except property taxes and from Securities and Exchange Commission registration requirements.

The requirements for mortgage purchases were last set in 1995. The goals were up for renewal this year, as required by Congress. The housing administration could have lowered the goals or have left them unchanged. After a 60-day public comment period, a final rule is expected in the fall.

U.S. Proposes Rules to Help House Buyers - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2000/03/05/us/us-proposes-rules-to-help-house-buyers.html?scp=1101&sq=fannie+mae&st=nyt - broken link)

''This rule will greatly expand the supply of affordable housing across the country,'' said Housing Secretary Andrew M. Cuomo.

The companies buy mortgages for homes and apartment buildings from banks, savings and loans and other mortgage lenders, and package and sell the loans to investors. When Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae buy mortgages from lenders, they provide the lenders with cash to issue new mortgages.


--------------------

President Clinton, with the blessing of Democrats in Congress, advanced an agenda which they called, The National Homeownership Strategy: Partners in the American Dream. (Do a Web search.) In short, it encouraged mortgage lenders to loosen-up their requirements for those seeking mortgages, thus making home ownership available to those who otherwise wouldn't qualify - in other words, for those who couldn't afford it.

The government, as a result, relaxed requirements for the federal guarantee on those mortgages: lowered income to payment ratio, relaxed income verification, reduced (or eliminated) down payments, etc. Mortgage lenders, as ones who issued those government backed loans, were encouraged - or possibly directed - to follow suit. (I say directed to follow suit because those lenders had to follow government rules if they wanted to continue to be able to issue FHA loans.)

The National Homeownership Strategy: Partners in the American Dream, is a "..... public-private partnership working to dramatically increase homeownership opportunity in America. Under the directive of President Clinton, the Partnership was formed in 1995 by nearly 60 national organizations that care about homeownership. Today, the Partnership consists of 66 members representing lenders, real estate professionals, home builders, nonprofit housing providers, and federal, state and local governments.

HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo said: "The good news as we mark National Homeownership Week is that homeownership in America is at record levels. But the bad news we face is that many of HUD's homeownership and other programs are under attack by some members of Congress. The success of our homeownership initiatives proves that HUD in combination with local organizations can further our goal of even more homeownership and fulfill our commitment to liberty and equity for all."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:25 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,488,320 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by chariega View Post
is there abuse? certainly. but is it fair to make it more increasingly difficult for younger people just starting out to purchase homes? you older people have your houses...and have likely established your life...what about the rest of us in the millennial set? we'll be paying for previous generations' missteps til the end of time, especially since now that you've made your money, you don't want the tax increases on the "rich"
Quote:
you older people have your houses
you older people...is that how you look at your peers???

I bought my first house at 40...and my second at 45..I am currently 51

why do you 'younger' people think you should have everything handed to you on a silverplatter, with out working for it


rich.????..dude I make 60k...that's not rich
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-24-2011, 09:27 AM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,867,563 times
Reputation: 18304
Well if you listened to geithner's testimony to congress shifting the market more to privtae loans is te game plan with higher req
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:50 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top