patrick.net

simchaland says

MyPunanyIsBiggerThanYourPunany says

Sybrib says

I was going to chime in but then realized that some posts sound like (Bay Arean) Boasting Opportunities. Besides it is transientory anyway. We’re a few mouse clicks away from heading Detroit-way.

where are the people paying 50% or more of their paycheck to rent or mortgage?

they are conspicuously missing.

Most may not have Internet access or they are working 2+ jobs to make ends meet. Where I work many people have two jobs in order to make ends meet. This is common in the “rich” Bay Area. They may not be interested or have the time to surf online let alone to post.
I’m a proud Gemorran

Also, quite frankly I don't think the people who made the choice to spend 50%+ of their income on housing are interested or perhaps even aware of Pnet. There may be some here, but for the most part I think that Pnet attracts users interested in living within their means.

To address the original question of this thread, my understanding is that under 30% of gross, on housing, is "living within your means". However, I do agree with others, that have posted, saying that it is ideally as low as possible.

corntrollio says

Think about all the people who flunked out of HAMP!

This is a majority percentage I think.

corntrollio says

70% DTI is absurd — that could be more around 100% of net in many cases!

The funny thing was the approval was granted by Fannie Mae's DU (desktop underwriter) system. Sometimes our proprietary underwriting engine would not render a decision (approve, decline, or "manual underwrite required") but default to running the loan through the DU system instead. You could request DU process it manually, but sometimes our system would just default to that. You should have seen the look on the manager's face when the loan came back, "DU: Approve". She took it to the UW, who refused to sign off on it. I believe the DTI was 72%. The UW took it to the branch manager for approval. Her decision was, "Well....if DU approved it..." and they closed the loan.

I'l love to know how that one worked out for the borrower. I'm guessing you're correct in that they were probably pushing 100% DTI on net income.

This was the trend during the bubble. If someone wasn't comfortable signing off on something, they'd pass it up the chain until someone was willing to "back" the decision to approve it. It was a lot like the nazi trials, where anyone asking for an explanation got the, "I don't know, I was just doing what they told me to." Branch managers pushed for numbers (approvals) from underwriters, and they were encouraged to take loans (physical files) home with them (illegal in many instances) and to decision them off the clock (under veiled threat of being laid off for non-performance). It really was just an assembly line. If they could find any tiny shred of justificaiton for approving a loan, they would do it. ("Well, I have a DU approval, so who am I to decline this?")

It was all about, "Do I have a defensible reason for approving this loan if someone comes asking about it later?" not, "Do I have a justifable reason for approving this loan?"

FP says

People bragging while anonymous… beats me.

What's worse, bragging anonymously on line or actually bragging to people you know?

I pay 8 percent of income to rent and over 40% a month to pay down a 15k credit card bill. I'm wacking it down by $1500-$2000 a month. I'm happy that it came together. I had some business start up cost for equipment and insurances( what a scam) and to tide me over before the checks started rolling in. I feel fortunate to have been abile to pull it together. I was Zero debt just three years ago. I'd like to never use that thing again. great thread BTW