U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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)
View Poll Results: Yey or Nay on the Housing Bill?
Yey 8 13.79%
Nay 50 86.21%
Voters: 58. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-23-2008, 12:51 PM
 
Location: Chino, CA
1,458 posts, read 3,008,453 times
Reputation: 553

Advertisements

I couldn't tell from the other post whether people were for or against the housing bill so I decided to create a quick poll. Also, if possible to open up for debate on the pros and cons of the bill and its' economic impact.

-chuck22b
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-23-2008, 01:04 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,043 posts, read 11,829,498 times
Reputation: 1394
This will just cause food and energy prices to rise substantially. The advantage is that it puts off the pain until after the elections.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2008, 01:29 PM
 
Location: Chino, CA
1,458 posts, read 3,008,453 times
Reputation: 553
What's the difference from this plan versus:

- houses goes into foreclosure
- local/state government buys it up
- makes house into affordable housing units instead of building them
- sells back to people who gone into foreclosure

I think this plan just circumvents this whole process and reduces the costs on Tax payers. States and Local government housing departments all have statutes to provide affordable housing. This bill just bypasses the foreclosure process and has the lenders write-down the losses right away.

-chuck22b
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2008, 02:05 PM
 
Location: Charleston, SC
5,615 posts, read 13,162,717 times
Reputation: 2539
I would like to vote 'Nay' at least several times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2008, 02:53 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,043 posts, read 11,829,498 times
Reputation: 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck22b View Post
What's the difference from this plan versus:

- houses goes into foreclosure
- local/state government buys it up
- makes house into affordable housing units instead of building them
- sells back to people who gone into foreclosure

I think this plan just circumvents this whole process and reduces the costs on Tax payers. States and Local government housing departments all have statutes to provide affordable housing. This bill just bypasses the foreclosure process and has the lenders write-down the losses right away.

-chuck22b
Your course of events assumes the broke "homeowner" who is evicted as a result of foreclosure will get a 2nd shot. When mortgages become almost entirely 20% down on a universal scale, how is this family going to "buy back" the house? They will likely rent for a long time.

The new homeowner of this home will be the savers who either rented or bought well under their means.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2008, 03:39 PM
 
Location: Chino, CA
1,458 posts, read 3,008,453 times
Reputation: 553
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak View Post
Your course of events assumes the broke "homeowner" who is evicted as a result of foreclosure will get a 2nd shot. When mortgages become almost entirely 20% down on a universal scale, how is this family going to "buy back" the house? They will likely rent for a long time. From investors? right?

The new homeowner of this home will be the savers who either rented or bought well under their means.
Like you were saying getting loans now a days is harder therefore creating fewer buyers.... so, the new homeowner would be the banks for awhile... or investors that can purchase and rent the place out. At least if we keep the current residents in the house, it'll be actual resident properties vs. investor/bank properties.

These broke homeowners should of been affordable housing candidates in the first place.
Well, the house just passed the bill, 272-152, and now it's in the Senate.

The First Time home buyer credit is suppose to "compensate" those new home owners that are savers and can afford it. They are actually the ones that benefit the least out of all this (considering the difficulty in getting a loan (higher rates), and finding a house as inventory shrinks, etc.). Homeowners that can afford their homes are also "taxed" since they don't get a re-adjustment BUT, they can feel better that housing prices should stabilize.

The principal would be reduced to 90% of current market price which would be 30+% off from peak (depending on area). If these "broke" home owners can't afford a 40%+ discount on their principal, then they shouldn't even be living in a house. Their principal and mortgage payments should be bellow rental unit prices which is a pretty big incentive to stay in the house. But, they do take these loans with a penalty. When they sell, they'll have to repay the government for its' help... so the government isn't doing this all for nothing and there's also an incentive to stay and pay.

Basically this should stabilize the market... and penalize people for waiting too much longer since housing stock should fall over time.

From the stock market and world reactions, it seems like investors like the plan.

-chuck22b

Last edited by chuck22b; 07-23-2008 at 03:52 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2008, 04:27 PM
 
2,197 posts, read 6,819,918 times
Reputation: 1687
Thumbs down Taxpayers, open your checkbooks!

No, no, a thousand times NO!

We are now officially a socialist country. Any pretense of capitalism or a free market economy is laughable. Gee, wonder why nobody's laughing?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2008, 04:49 PM
 
19,114 posts, read 20,689,920 times
Reputation: 8400
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodbyehollywood View Post
No, no, a thousand times NO!

We are now officially a socialist country. Any pretense of capitalism or a free market economy is laughable. Gee, wonder why nobody's laughing?
The thing is people will STILL call it a "free market"... can you believe that? When did a free market ever have "bailouts", "entitlements", and "subsidies"...? You know whats going to happen with this "pseudo-free market"... its going to create a lot of problems and then people are going to say "The problems are because of the free market."... arrggghhh
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2008, 05:07 PM
 
19,114 posts, read 20,689,920 times
Reputation: 8400
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck22b View Post
What's the difference from this plan versus:

- houses goes into foreclosure
Doesn't cost a cent to taxpayers...

Quote:
- local/state government buys it up
Using taxpayer money....

Quote:
- makes house into affordable housing units instead of building them
Using taxpayer money...

Quote:
- sells back to people who gone into foreclosure
Using taxpayer money

Quote:
I think this plan just circumvents this whole process and reduces the costs on Tax payers. States and Local government housing departments all have statutes to provide affordable housing. This bill just bypasses the foreclosure process and has the lenders write-down the losses right away.

-chuck22b
Lets do it the other way...

Let it foreclose - doesn't cost taxpayers one cent
Lender tries to sell it at auction - doesn't cost taxpayers one cent
New owners move in - doesn't cost taxpayers one cent

Lets take a bad scenario...

Let it foreclose - still doesn't cost taxpayers a dime
Lender tries to sell it and FAILS - doesn't cost taxpayers anything
Home is looted and considered for demolition - doesn't cost taxpayers anything still... fine the lender for the demolition if it isn't sold..

Home prices around surrounding area drop - saves taxpayers money by lowering their property tax rates...
Crimes increase in these neighborhoods - it is being demolished at the lender's expense already, NOT a problem.. give them one month to sell after criminal activity started or fine them 200% of cost of demolition and city demolishes the home at lender's expense...

Cost to taxpayers.. NOTHING... taxpayer wins.. otherwise with the housing bill, cost to taxpayers? Over 1 Trillion dollars... yeah, I say no to the housing bill...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2008, 05:34 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,068 posts, read 74,813,660 times
Reputation: 27602
Well I think it's a done deal. Homeowners will get their mortgages reworked to lower amounts and a fixed rate and we end up paying the difference.

Staying on the straight and narrow and living right just doesn't seem to benefit people anymore.

We are turning socialist..the government WILL help anyone in trouble and then charge it back to us in the form of taxes.
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 > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:07 AM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top