patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,259,344 comments by 15,036 users - Ceffer, ElYorsh online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 121 - 160 of 301 Next » Last » Search these comments
Looks like Ohioan FB’s are getting some aid!
Is it coming out of tax revenue ?
FAB,
The best example of nutty rent control in SF that I can think of is that the stables in Golden Gate Park were under rent control until the stables were condemned and stopped operating.
People had leased stables in the 1970s and were subletting them to other horse owners at market rate.
The Parks Trust and the Stables Foundation are working to get the stables and an arena rebuilt, and get community riding back in the city. They are both very aware of the astoundingly stupid former rent control on stables and are making sure that the business model is superior this time.
I just find it amazing that there was rent control that allowed subletting on public stables here.
Wow - I came out as Raistlin Majere. I am shocked! Not too sure if this is a good thing. Perhaps learning about it know will help prevent me from his fate...
**Insert Evil Laugh here**
Peter P
2007 Feb 9, 6:41am
Wow - I came out as Raistlin Majere. I am shocked!
Wow.
I was also shocked that I came out as Harry Potter. :)
Looks like Ohioan FB’s are getting some aid!
Is it coming out of tax revenue ?
It's from the Department Of Development which is funded by the State so it must be.
"Once-In-a-Lifetime" what a joke, but hey you can get a free sandwich!
I actually don't see in this ad what I heard on the radio this morning which was 40k off. I guess they want to wait until the last second to decide how desperate they are and therefore how much to discount.
40k is 20% down as most of these places are around 200k. Even the low end is falling fast!
StuckInBA,
I love it; paint the tape down! As you know, others have done this on the way up for years.
Paul
SiBA: Buy it for cash and less it for less to your wife. Then she will turn around and sell it for even less back to you. All cash transactions. That will definitely stir the pot.
That's the sort of advice I've been looking for. That is truly inspired thinking.
Will it lower the property's assessment too? ROFL
Correction to my previous post:
So you (well, your child) may be able to get away with selling the stock in small bits from 2008 to 2010 to keep the unearned income (cap gains) under the limit.
Also, does anyone here utilize Utah's 529 plan?
Forbes says:
"The Utah Education Savings Plan continues to set the standard for low costs among 529 plans," Morningstar said. "Over five other states that offer cheap Vanguard index funds, Utah earns kudos for keeping total costs down by tackling the administrative burden itself--charging only 0.25%--and it doesn't levy anything at all for choosing its money market option."
EBGuy :
This no cap gain period might be a good time for me to convert my kid's UTMA account to a 529 account in their name. When I did UTMA - I wasn't aware of 529. The 529 is not as much a hindrance in getting aid as UTMA is. Since 529 accept only cash, I will have to sell UTMA holdings for conversion. The no cap gain tax might just be the right window to do it.
If I do it - assuming there no other tax gotchas, then I will go to Vanguard for 529, that much is sure.
Not advice of any kind.
Punchbowl Says:
Well, it looks like I’m Data :-( .
Don't feel too bad, I came up as Wesley Crusher.
Peter P
2007 Feb 9, 8:03am
Don’t feel too bad, I came up as Wesley Crusher.
Well, at least I am not Darth Bubblehead. Where is Fake P?
allah Says:
I think the middle class will be tomorrow’s welfare recipients.
Then we are really screwed. Because it is the middle class that contributes to production in exchange for wages. If you remove the incentive for this class to work, you are well and truly f’cked.
SP
Sorry, this may only apply to Long Island New York; I keep forgetting who my audience is.
Peter P
2007 Feb 9, 8:12am
I wonder how the author (physicist by trade) was able to construct such a believable picture of social structure and ethics of three absolutely different human and non-human civilizations being smashed into each other.
Human behavior is highly unpredictable yet, at the same time, highly predictable.
As long as we've been discussing toxic loans here, I figured we'd pretty much covered nearly every possible minefield with option-ARMs. But then something clicked for me when I was thinking about the "fixed/teaser" lock period on the 10-year option-ARMs, which is the longest "lock" period I've seen for these things so far (emphasis on "so far").
Most option-ARMs sold today allow the FB to choose a 1-2% teaser rate during the "fixed" period, while the rest of the interest just negatively amortizes on the lender’s balance sheets as "imputed income" (bullshit of course, but all perfectly legal accounting). For a 10/1 option-ARM, this could be a pretty looong time. And as far as the lender's concerned, everything's peachy --because a "loss" isn't really a loss until it's booked, right? Not good news for those of us who might wish to see the crash play out quickly, so we can eventually buy at a reasonable price.
However, there appears to be a catch: regardless of whatever pick-a-payment “fixed†period their loan has, once the FB hits the maximum ceiling allowed for negative equity accumulation (typically 115-125% of original loan balance), they MUST begin making “real†full-interest + principal amortizing payments. You can have a 10-year fixed/teaser lock period on your option-ARM, but if you hit that magic maximum LTV number well before your 10 years are up, your loan automatically resets.
Bang --your 10/1 option-ARM just reset to a 5/1 or 3/1 or whatever-ARM at the "real" rate, say, LIBOR + 2% (roughly 7.5% today). In other words, if the borrower always chooses the minimum payment, there's no way s/he can ever reach the theoretical 10-year mark under their super-low "fixed" rate. Game over for FB, right?
Is there a flaw in my reasoning, or am I missing something here?
Sorry, this may only apply to Long Island New York; I keep forgetting who my audience is.
Uh, how does that only apply to Long Island?
A few posts ago, I pointed out that in the future, there will only been execs (Directors, VPs, CxO's) and people working at Walmart, Applebee, etc to serve them.
Globalization can only mean a greater cap between have and have not.
Is there a flaw in my reasoning, or am I missing something here?
I think your are quite correct. I remember reading about this aspect of -ve ammo loan. The plan A is always to refinance again when that limit is hit - because at the time of refinance the house is worth double so you can actually get some equity - without having to pay anything towards principal. This is how you "get in". Plan B was never really needed.
From what I have been told by a loan broker - here in BA - this is how MANY people bought homes in 2005 and 2006. According to the casual discussion, at least half of her clients chose option ARMs and NOT A SINGLE one chose FRM.
"The emperor has no clothes" moment is not far away for BA.
I thought this was a real estate blog.
Foreclosures up 42% in 06 vs 05.
The end is near
@Allah - click on it (the chart is also a link).
Ok, let's sing-along everybody!:
"Head, shoulders, knees and toes, knees and toes
Head, shoulders, knees and toes, knees and toes..."
@Allah - click on it (the chart is also a link).
Yes, I figured that out myself; but thanks :lol:
« First « Previous Comments 121 - 160 of 301 Next » Last » Search these comments
Please help the REIC and banksters! (for those unfamiliar with the term, please refer to the Housing Bubble Glossary).
They need our help. Signs their beloved mega-global housing/credit bubble is beginning to falter are now everywhere and unmistakable. No matter how low toxic-mortgage lenders lower "standards", it appears that they've exhausted their supply of typical FBs (innumerate 'tards and Marshall Reddick-worshipping specuvestors) and now they're even running short on falling-knife-catchers.
Sure, they're counting on a taxpayer-funded federal bailout of banks/lenders and GSEs --after all isn't that what taxpayers are for? They don't call it "Privatize profits, Socialize Risk" for nothing, do they? That's a gimme. Problem is, even with suckers like YOU footing the bill for some f***ing idiots' mistakes, there's still no way to avoid some pain for the industry players. Some toxic lenders have already gone out of business, while others are restating incomes/losses and teetering on the edge of insolvency --and this is only the beginning! Plus, lots of newly minted Realthwhores, fly-by-night mortgage brokers and hit-the-number appraisers are now facing unemployment.
This just will not do! Pain and negative consequences are for thrifty, responsible suckers like you --not the REIC!! Oh, the humanity... what to do, what to do?
Wait --I've got it!:
The biggest problem right now with maintaining that permanently high plateau is that rents cannot easily be inflated with debt, the way housing prices can. There is no such thing as a fraudulent cash-out refis, HELOCs or neg-ams for renters --they must pay their rent with real earned income and/or savings (yes, some people out there still have savings --can you believe it?!). Since renters must pay rent using real money vs. monopoly bubblebucks, there's no way to ignite crazy bidding wars on rentals. And global wage arbitrage is keeping wages firmly in check --no inflation happening there (crooked CEOs excepted, of course). Sadly, there's currently no way to funnel huge amounts of Fed/MBS/Chinese liquidity into the hands of renters, so they can bid rents to the sky.
And herein lies the solution: the REIC must create new debt vehicles for RENTERS!
Your assignment: How can the REIC and banksters create enormous new debt vehicles for renters, capable of inflating rents as high as house prices, thereby cancelling the rent-vs.-buy imbalance --without having to resort to any of that pesky wage inflation?
Discuss, enjoy...
HARM
#housing