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.
Do you understand that statistically, there's a huge difference between 28% of all homeowners and 28% of homeowners with a mortgage, right?
I'd just like clarification from you that you're clear that there's a pretty big difference between the two.
Oh please. You are splitting hairs again. OBVIOUSLY they are referring to those with mortgages. Then again those that paid cash during the bubble certainly have lost equity too.
Not to add insult to injury but there are plenty of other articles that conclude the same thing (that things are going to get worse before they get better). There is this one for example:Banks Can't Hold Back Highend Mortgage Foreclosures For Long
100% up to 650,000 is readily available. For physicians who have completed residency in the last 10 years.
100% up to $417,000 for residents fellows and interns.
I have said several times I am concerned about the economy. An unsupported number thrown out, either purposely or sloppily, to mislead consumers does not change the fact that I am concerned about the economy.
I've already stated anyone with some intelligence will realize that "underwater homeowners" refers to those with mortgages. You seem to keep arguing that as misleading like it could mean something else... Seriously, though, it can't... Someone who owns a home outright can't ever logically be "underwater". It's not possible.
Quote:
There is a significant track record here, of using incomplete citations specifically to mislead and promote an agenda. Numerous times, and some of them are truly quite bizarre.
The attempt to mislead by overstating the issue via omitting information within the same sentence or paragraph is typical. In this instance, it was the very next phrase that was omitted.
What is the agenda? Make prices go down further? You can't be serious. Because if you are then you need to look at Mr. Lawrence Yun as #1 on that "promoting an agenda" via media list.
Quote:
How many homes, by percentage of housing stock, in America are owned by people who are underwater?
We have no idea, and this article did nothing to quantify.
Distraction at best... and I actually get your point. But, we can't stop there. We'd have to talk about all the outright owners who had their "retirement savings" wrapped in houses and lost big. We'd have to talk biflation and it would be a long drawn out argument.
Quote:
How many USDA, VA, HomePath, Community reinvestment loans were written at 100% funding last month or year, some even with closing costs rolled in, which mean that the owners are underwater as soon as they settle in?
Or, at minimum, have gained no equity?
How much should those loans play on our emotions?
Are they all a disaster, today, for the market?
Just about everyone who turns the keys on a home loses 5-6% equity instantly for costs to sell it. We all kind of accept that - I mean, RE only goes up. I like the HUD programs and, in fact, have read details on how they could fund themselves or even make a bit of money. It's Barney Frank and those "derivative" clowns over at Freddie that put them under the bus. You should be worried about the programs for who is running them - aka the bankers.
Quote:
If 14%, or 15%, or 28% of all homes in the USA are underwater, how many of them are for sale, currently on the market?
Whatever that number is, I am still worried about the economy.
Reason for selling is subjective and could swing from personal disaster to outright greed. The ones "holding out" (the I'm not giving this away crowd) and not listing are part of that equation. It should have us all worried.
Quote:
Should we all roll self-flagellating in the dirt, and wear sack cloth and ashes because of some raw number that really has no market application?
I will pass on that opportunity.
Whether you want to believe it or not, your profession helped to create this monster. Not close to the driving force (see Banks), but you certainly were complicit. It wouldn't be appropriate to throw your hands in the air yelling the sky is falling, I don't think any of us should be doing that. But we should be taking a long hard look on what can be done to turn the tide... Maybe that's the simple question that this article is asking. How can we turn this around? I mean we're all for a little ride it out attitude most days, but you can clearly see from this RE forum that people keep starting threads - many of them pointing at this Zillow data. Great - I helped make your point for you... awesome.
Oh please. You are splitting hairs again. OBVIOUSLY they are referring to those with mortgages. Then again those that paid cash during the bubble certainly have lost equity too.
Lots of these articles are designed to oversensationalize the already sensational real estate environment. A perfect example is your thread title & the title of the article:
"... 28% of homeowners underwater"
One automatically assumes that 28% of ALL homeowners are underwater - without stopping to think that there's a large segment of the population who owns their home outright.
Which leads people to think that the housing crisis is an even bigger problem than it already is.
emilybh, I agree with you and can't rep you any more. I see it coming down to ending the wars as part of fixing our economic troubles. We simply can't afford all of the military spending.
I disagree. I don't think our economy can survive the end of the wars. I think our president knows this and this is why he has stalled on his decree to bring the troops home. These wars are keeping the economy going. According to most popular reports we are just coming out of "the great recession". If we bring all the troops home and stop buying goods to fight the war then it will bring the economic recovery to a grinding halt.
I'm not sayin that its right or a good reason to continue fighting, just saying that ending the wars isn't going to help the economy. They will never cut our taxes, they will just shift spending.
MikeyKid and Emily couldn't say what you've already written any better. You guys got the point right on the money.
Also, why would anyone want to sensationalize a disaster? What was sensationalized were statements such as "you better buy now before you are priced out of the market", or "they aren't growing anymore land, you better buy", also "the 900 sqft home for 2BDRM/Bath for $400K fixer upper is a great deal", oh and "there isn't a such thing as a bubble".
Naleyrocks, I can see your point. But really, I don't know, don't really believe we are fighting any wars at this time. Think that is what we are being told to justify the spending and or the pat downs at the airport. IMO I think this is about gaining control of natural resources abroad whether it be oil, cotton, and or precious metals. This will make the folks who are really controlling this country wealthier.
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.
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.
