patrick.net

they sure like to socialize costs onto taxpayers.

The real title:

How to transfer subsidies from taxpayers to used house salesmen and banksters.

The article I posted in another thread on the same topic said it takes 16 years for the average family to save 20%, but this one says 14, aka, we just make shit up.

What we should really do is raise underwriting standards for all guaranteed loans to at least traditional Prime standards or higher (i.e. 20% down, 28% PITI, 36% overall debt, high credit), get rid of "superconforming" loans, and lower conforming limits. We need to remove the things that make housing more expensive.

I wrote this in the comments to the article too.

No surprise here, the solutions are loans, loans and more loans. Every proposal is a method to expand credit and financing to get people into loans and push up demand. All anybody cares about is getting the borrowers to sign those pieces of paper, nobody cares if they can actually afford this new mountain of debt over 30 years. The evidence of this is the push to lower underwriting standards. And why should they care, they want to push the risk on to the government and taxpayers through government backing of loans meanwhile keeping the amount that the government guarantees high through the conforming loan limits. The realtors and lenders don’t want affordable homes, they want affordable mortgages. But those two aren’t the same thing. This isn’t a way to save the housing market, it’s a way to save realtors and lenders commissions by keeping housing prices inflated beyond what the average person can afford. The housing market is currently recovering by home prices dropping and becoming more affordable.

At least they didn't call for 40-year mortgages? Of course, that's not really their call, it's the banks' decision -- or the "market's"

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Tony Manero says

Take a shit on a Realtor®'s face. It may not fix the market, but it is the right thing to do.

Once again, you offer semi-realistic solutions. How do you suggest that I get a realtor so close to my butt?

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Tony Manero says

Tell it that you are close to making a decision on buying a house he is shilling. Once its lips get close to your butt to apply a smooch, grab its hair and shove its face into your ass crack and let go with a massive, righteous avenging dump.

elliemae says

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Tony Manero says

Take a shit on a Realtor®'s face. It may not fix the market, but it is the right thing to do.

Once again, you offer semi-realistic solutions. How do you suggest that I get a realtor so close to my butt?

Eschew Obfuscation

lol

Michael D says

I wrote this in the comments to the article too.

It was a good comment, thank you for putting it on there.

bsmith says

At least they didn't call for 40-year mortgages? Of course, that's not really their call, it's the banks' decision -- or the "market's"

They're not calling for it outright, that would be too obvious of a ploy to screw people over with debt in order to boost commission. They use general, scary, and false terms to promote a sense of urgency in freeing up credit for risky loans:

"unnecessarily high down payment requirements"

"would severely limit the number of people who could buy homes"

"would tank homebuyer demand, depress home prices further, and cause more foreclosures"

"continue to find it increasingly difficult to find affordable mortgage options"

"strips homebuyers of their savings"

These people are complete scumbags. They're criminal in their existence as a cartel, and completely malicious with their intent of manipulating Congress and the populace as a whole for their own needs. These criminals ought to be publicly executed.

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Tony Manero says

Take a shit on a Realtor®'s face. It may not fix the market, but it is the right thing to do.

bgamall4 says

This link shows that Wells Fargo is in with the realtors and with the builders.

Yes, of course it is. It wants to privatize profits and socialize losses just like the other banksters. I hope someone calls their bluff, but I am afraid that our government overlords will give in. Lower housing prices would be good for our economy, whereas subsidizing Wells Fargo and the other banksters will screw us in the long run by costing us a lot of money and giving Wells Fargo and the other banksters lots of profits at our expense.

corntrollio says

but I am afraid that our government overlords will give in

Cuz congresmen/senators and banksters have a daily candle light dinner together.

lol at the Kilt.

Just like food, energy, clothing, education, etc... housing is a form of consumption.

Imagine if farmers said that high food prices were good for the economy.

Or if Exxon Mobil said high gas prices fuel our recovery.

Or if Gap came out and said expensive clothes help Americans.

But the NAR and mortgage industry have somehow convinced us that we should PRAY for high home prices. For every person who sells a home that has doubled in value, there's a buyer who must buy a home that's twice as expensive! The buyer uses their income and savings to buy the house, the seller uses the proceeds to buy another house. For a given amount of income and savings, a high home price leaves LESS for investment or other forms of consumption.

Primary residence as an "investment" is a myth. If all homes appreciate at the same rate, there's no way for you to monetize the appreciation unless you want to move to a place of lower quality or smaller size OR incur additional debt in the form of a second mortgage.

Owning your residence and renting are both forms of consumption. Only a small portion of the costs of ownership can be classified as non-consumption.

You pay:
Interest
Taxes
Insurance
Upkeep/Improvements
HOA

You lose:
Compounding Market returns on your down payment and years of principal payments
Price Depreciation
Realtor Commissions when you sell

You get back:
Tax Deductions
Price Appreciation

Pay Out + Lose - Get Back = POOF GONE just like rent. Ownership is consumption. If its cheaper then renting, buy.

But high home prices are bad for America, they just drive up the costs of consumption. They do not create real wealth.

Buying is cheaper than renting, if you can afford to live where no jobs exist/where nobody else wants to live. Good place for retirees, except the nearest hospital is 100 miles away. Those ideas are crap, they just want easy commissions, and the flippers to come back. Building in the flood zone needs to stop, I still see it happening all of the time. I'm all for the higher down payment, my 10 percent down payment kept me from going underwater.

Coogan99,

Very well-said.