Sat, 1 Dec 2012, 11:41pm PST
That is $5.56 per month. Seems like a small price to pay to get a government no-skin-in-the-game loan.
That $5.56 quickly adds up when the Government comes up with a new fee or a new way to increase existing fees every three months. In the two years since I've bought, there's already over $300 a month in such fees.
New home owners are the new, pass the tax down to them whipping post. Another reason I'm glad I bought when I did.
I'm only paying $72 a month. The difference in these fees on my mortgage when I bought, and the fees that are 4X the amount. Is the difference in me never being able to refinance at a a lower rate. Even at 2% I'd probably end paying a few hundred more a month, by the time interest gets down to 2%. By that time these fees might be $500 collectively, as a new fee is devised every 3 months.
Sun, 2 Dec 2012, 12:07am PST
Like (1) Dislike
The problem is that people who have little or no equity are basically renters and should be treated as such. If you have less then 25% skin in the game you should be required to maintain the property and not make alterations without permission. And you should be out in lessthan 90 days just like a renter if you cant pay. In a business partnership 51% ownership calls the shots. With housing the real owner has no say. But maybe if the real owners (banks) did have a say the whole illusion of homeownership would be gone and more people would rent. If the risk to the banks and/ or govt was less mortgage insurance could be less.
Too many people are coming in with 3.5% and depreciate the home and bail and or stop paying and squat. We all have to pay for this.