On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John Smith
wrote:



The rest of what you had to say, bad decisions, paying too much for a
home, etc. ... well ya', that is covered in "Life 101." If you missed
that class, problems will keep arising until you do take that class! ...
don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for over valued
property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a real
bargain.

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the house,
don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?
--
Don Kirkman

There are a lot of new houses that were poorly built.

You gonna get a free house!,,,, you gonna get free gas!,,,,, gonna pay
off your mortgage!,,,,, you gonna get free health care!,,,,,,,
cuhulin

On 10/15/11 17:47 , Don Kirkman wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John
wrote:



The rest of what you had to say, bad decisions, paying too much for a
home, etc. ... well ya', that is covered in "Life 101." If you missed
that class, problems will keep arising until you do take that class! ...
don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for over valued
property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a real
bargain.

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the house,
don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?


When I bought my last house, I carefully constructed the budget. When
I got to the financing stage, every carrier I spoke with pushed like mad
to get me to take a non-traditional mortgage for far more than I'd
considered, with variable interest, balloon payments, and 'creative'
structures, all based on the assumption that 1) I'd be selling the
property at a substantial profit within 5 years and 2) incomes always rise.

I resisted, and stayed with a 30 year fixed at the interest that I'd
shopped around for. And was told that rate was no longer available, so
the non-traditional was my only option.

They sold it hard. "You should buy the maximum amount of house you
can possibly afford, and you can afford this." "You're upwardly mobile,
you'll be selling to upgrade before the interest rates increase and make
a bundle in the process." "You won't be in the house by the time the
balloon comes due." Even going so far as to tell me that at my age, a
traditional 30 year fixed would simply not be available. But that a 15
year ARM was a virtual certainty to be approved, at nearly 50% more than
I'd planned to borrow.

I eventually found the mortgage I wanted, at the rate I wanted, and
when things collapsed in the housing market, and the economy slowed, I
had both equity and a payment I could manage. But it was a fight to the
death to get a lender to agree to the traditional mortgage.

Few go into this kind of transaction with a fierce determination to
do things his own way. Most I've encountered would be quickly swayed by
both the temptation of more house than they thought they could afford,
or the enticing finance opportunity when so reassured by the lending
agency that the risk is small, and the benefits so great.

Now, I'm not, by a long shot, opposed to creative financing. I've
been quite creative in financing my businesses. And a couple of really
nice cars. But only in the short term, and only for small, manageable
amounts of money. Specifically, so I'd be prepared as economic fortunes
change.

So, though I'm hardly one of those 'invade Wall Street' protest
types, who blames all ills in the universe of Man on the banking system,
I can say that I've seen first hand some of the more underhanded, and
manipulative behaviours that have led a lot of folk down a very
turbulent river.

So, yes: Who is the culprit, indeed.

p

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in
:

On 10/15/11 17:47 , Don Kirkman wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John
wrote:



The rest of what you had to say, bad decisions, paying too much for
a home, etc. ... well ya', that is covered in "Life 101." If you
missed that class, problems will keep arising until you do take that
class! ... don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for
over valued property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a
real bargain.

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the
house, don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?


When I bought my last house, I carefully constructed the budget.

Good plan.....

When
I got to the financing stage, every carrier I spoke with pushed like
mad to get me to take a non-traditional mortgage for far more than I'd
considered, with variable interest, balloon payments, and 'creative'
structures, all based on the assumption that 1) I'd be selling the
property at a substantial profit within 5 years and 2) incomes always
rise.

What you have is several people (real estate, financial lenders, etc..)
all wishing to get as much out of the deal as *they* possibly can. After
all, it is up to *you* to make the payments, not them.

I resisted, and stayed with a 30 year fixed at the interest that
I'd
shopped around for. And was told that rate was no longer available, so
the non-traditional was my only option.

Or a fixed at a higher rate, I presume.......

They sold it hard. "You should buy the maximum amount of house you
can possibly afford, and you can afford this."

In general, that is true.....however, not with a VRM.

"You're upwardly
mobile, you'll be selling to upgrade before the interest rates
increase and make a bundle in the process." "You won't be in the house
by the time the balloon comes due."

Yeah.......uh huh.....

Even going so far as to tell me
that at my age, a traditional 30 year fixed would simply not be
available. But that a 15 year ARM was a virtual certainty to be
approved, at nearly 50% more than I'd planned to borrow.

Interestingly, they are still out there. Your estimate of the payment
would be true. A $150K loan at, say 4.50% for 30 years would cost you
$760 P&I while that same load at the same interest rate for 15 years
would cost you $1147 P&I. Of course, your total cost of the loan would
be a lot less. $273,600 for the 30 year and $206,460 for the 15 year.

I eventually found the mortgage I wanted, at the rate I wanted, and
when things collapsed in the housing market, and the economy slowed, I
had both equity and a payment I could manage. But it was a fight to
the death to get a lender to agree to the traditional mortgage.

I have never had a problem with that.

Few go into this kind of transaction with a fierce determination to
do things his own way. Most I've encountered would be quickly swayed
by both the temptation of more house than they thought they could
afford, or the enticing finance opportunity when so reassured by the
lending agency that the risk is small, and the benefits so great.

Yep, and now you have greed on everyone's part, not just the money and
real estate portions.

Now, I'm not, by a long shot, opposed to creative financing. I've
been quite creative in financing my businesses. And a couple of really
nice cars. But only in the short term, and only for small, manageable
amounts of money. Specifically, so I'd be prepared as economic
fortunes change.

So, though I'm hardly one of those 'invade Wall Street' protest
types, who blames all ills in the universe of Man on the banking
system, I can say that I've seen first hand some of the more
underhanded, and manipulative behaviours that have led a lot of folk
down a very turbulent river.

So, yes: Who is the culprit, indeed.

Depends......could be the real estate folks, the lenders, the borrower,
or any combination of them or all three.

--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)

Witnessing Republicans and Democrats bickering over
the National Debt is like watching two drunks argue
over a bar bill on the Titanic.....

On 10/15/2011 3:47 PM, Don Kirkman wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John
wrote:



The rest of what you had to say, bad decisions, paying too much for a
home, etc. ... well ya', that is covered in "Life 101." If you missed
that class, problems will keep arising until you do take that class! ...
don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for over valued
property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a real
bargain.


I guess some missed the basic education of where the teacher asked you,
"If someone told you to jump off a cliff, would you?"

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the house,
don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?

If you are into trusting, I got something to tell you, "Give me your
money to hold, for five years, I'll give you back double!"

ROFLOL

You were kidding, right?

Regards,
JS

On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 20:36:06 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

On 10/15/2011 3:47 PM, Don Kirkman wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John
wrote:

don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for over valued
property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a real
bargain.

I guess some missed the basic education of where the teacher asked you,
"If someone told you to jump off a cliff, would you?"

I gather you haven't bought a newspaper or watched TV in the last
couple of years. Or your mind is link a steel trap--rusted shut.

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the house,
don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?

If you are into trusting, I got something to tell you, "Give me your
money to hold, for five years, I'll give you back double!"

Society is built on trust. Americans' trust in their institutions
has been badly shaken by the scandals and frauds and
profiteering*--and you apparently have no empathy with the financial
situation of millions of families.

* definitely not the same thing as making a profit.

ROFLOL

You were kidding, right?

Are you really a Horvath wannabe?
--
Don Kirkman

On 10/15/2011 11:39 PM, Don Kirkman wrote:
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 20:36:06 -0700, John
wrote:

On 10/15/2011 3:47 PM, Don Kirkman wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John
wrote:

don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for over valued
property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a real
bargain.

I guess some missed the basic education of where the teacher asked you,
"If someone told you to jump off a cliff, would you?"

I gather you haven't bought a newspaper or watched TV in the last
couple of years. Or your mind is link a steel trap--rusted shut.

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the house,
don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?

If you are into trusting, I got something to tell you, "Give me your
money to hold, for five years, I'll give you back double!"

Society is built on trust. Americans' trust in their institutions
has been badly shaken by the scandals and frauds and
profiteering*--and you apparently have no empathy with the financial
situation of millions of families.

* definitely not the same thing as making a profit.

ROFLOL

You were kidding, right?

Are you really a Horvath wannabe?

Yeah, I have made some bad mistakes. One serious mistake is believing
the average American knew if he could afford to purchase something, or
not -- seems you have argued, and quite effectively, you are not, and
that the average person on the street has an approx. equivalent IQ ...
and more to point, that is someone elses fault that this is true!

But, now I have it down, don't let people keep proving me wrong, realize
them for the complete morons they are ... I guess I have to thank you
for that ... chuckle

Regards,
JS

On 10/15/2011 6:47 PM, Don Kirkman wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John
wrote:

The rest of what you had to say, bad decisions, paying too much for a
home, etc. ... well ya', that is covered in "Life 101." If you missed
that class, problems will keep arising until you do take that class! ...
don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for over valued
property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a real
bargain.

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the house,
don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?

Ah yes, the old Liar Loans...

The only "qualification" for the loan was could you fog a mirror? If you
were breathing, you qualified.

On 10/16/2011 9:24 AM, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
On 10/15/2011 6:47 PM, Don Kirkman wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:04:46 -0700, John
wrote:

The rest of what you had to say, bad decisions, paying too much for a
home, etc. ... well ya', that is covered in "Life 101." If you missed
that class, problems will keep arising until you do take that class! ...
don't make those bad decisions, don't pay too much for over valued
property, don't buy what you can't afford, etc.

You ignore the people who were *told* they could afford the houses
they bought. People with a duty to be diligent--brokers, financiers,
investment houses, all assured them that they deserved a good house
and by heck they could afford one because they were given them a real
bargain.

Basically, it comes down to common sense, if you can't afford the house,
don't buy it... yet ...

But if you're assured that you can afford it, who is the real culprit
here?

Ah yes, the old Liar Loans...

The only "qualification" for the loan was could you fog a mirror? If you
were breathing, you qualified.

Talk about morons!

Most people, when shopping, never get to the checkout with more in their
basket -- quite amazing when you consider the morons who bought homes!

The real question here, is why was there a big bubble of morons
purchasing homes? Is it possible they never heard, "BUYER BEWARE?"

roflol ... you just gotta love morons, it is always someone elses fault
they did something stupid ... next, I expect a cop to walk up to one and
ask them, "Why did u just shoot that person?" And, they reply, "He just
got in the way of my bullet -- it wasn't my fault!"

Regards,
JS

On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 20:24:05 -0700, John Smith
wrote:


Most people, when shopping, never get to the checkout with more in their
basket -- quite amazing when you consider the morons who bought homes!

The real question here, is why was there a big bubble of morons
purchasing homes? Is it possible they never heard, "BUYER BEWARE?"

roflol ... you just gotta love morons, it is always someone elses fault
they did something stupid ... next, I expect a cop to walk up to one and
ask them, "Why did u just shoot that person?" And, they reply, "He just
got in the way of my bullet -- it wasn't my fault!"

On the other hand, if we have policies that don't take into account
human nature, we should be prepared to live with the result.

If a business mandates changing passwords that are too difficult for
most people to memorize - it should be prepared for them being written
down on post-it notes.

If salesmen get bonuses for selling products you cannot deliver, be
prepared for business problems.

If bankers make short term money by selling mortgages over
conservative projected values (then pass them to others), expect a
mortgage breakdown.

Is it good for the country when stupid (or smart) people lose their
homes?

We shouldn't have policies that say "it's their fault, let them
suffer" - especially not when the whole country has to suffer along
with them.

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison