Skip to comments.
New Mortgage Foreclosures Set Record
Yahoo ^
| 09/06/07
| Martin Crutsinger
Posted on 09/06/2007 8:28:05 AM PDT by Moonman62
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 next last
1
posted on
09/06/2007 8:28:05 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
To: Moonman62
The GOVERNMENT needs to stay out of this.
The government promotes irresponsibility. It should NOT be up to the government to pay your mortgage. GEESH!
2
posted on
09/06/2007 8:30:14 AM PDT
by
nmh
(Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
To: Moonman62
At least that's what all the freeper housing experts said when others tried to point out the underlying problems over the past several years.
3
posted on
09/06/2007 8:31:42 AM PDT
by
flashbunny
(<--- Free Anti-Rino graphics! See Rudy the Rino get exposed as a liberal with his own words!)
To: Moonman62
5.12 percent of all loans. That’s one out of twenty.
Don’t be tellin me this is just a “subprime” problem and the “market is so small it can’t have an effect”
What happens if it goes to one out of five?
4
posted on
09/06/2007 8:38:02 AM PDT
by
djf
(Send Fred some bread! Not a whole loaf, a slice or two will do!)
To: ex-Texan
5
posted on
09/06/2007 8:38:50 AM PDT
by
Calpernia
(Hunters Rangers - Raising the Bar of Integrity http://www.barofintegrity.us)
To: djf
The delinquency rate, which tracks the number of people who are behind in their payments but have not yet entered the foreclosure process, was also up sharply during the spring, rising to 5.12 percent of all loans, up nearly three-fourths of a percentage point from the same period a year ago.If you're going to hype it, hype it with the facts: Delinquencies are up almost .75 points since last year.
6
posted on
09/06/2007 8:41:34 AM PDT
by
Petronski
(Cleveland Indians: Pennant -17)
To: nmh
The GOVERNMENT needs to stay out of this. Good, then tell the Federal Reserve to stop trying to slam the economy with interest rates.
7
posted on
09/06/2007 8:42:15 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: Moonman62
Democrats have blamed predatory lending practices for a large part of the current problems and have introduced a number of bills aimed at helping homeowners stay in their houses. So--This "subprime crisis" is smoke'n'mirrors for the dims to stifle free enterprise??
IT'S THE ECONOMY, STUPID RING ANY BELLS!??
8
posted on
09/06/2007 8:45:12 AM PDT
by
BlabItGrabIt
(Sly, Shy, and Wry)
To: djf
Dont be tellin me this is just a subprime problem and the market is so small it cant have an effect It was Bernanke and Paulson who kept repeating that.
9
posted on
09/06/2007 8:47:02 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: Moonman62
What about the houses that builders have given to the banks? These don’t show up as mortgage defaults.
10
posted on
09/06/2007 8:49:08 AM PDT
by
DaveArk
To: Moonman62
Democrats have blamed predatory lending practices for a large part of the current problems..Yeah, it's got NOTHING to do with people buying more house than they can afford.
11
posted on
09/06/2007 8:50:01 AM PDT
by
Puppage
(You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
To: Moonman62
Democrats have blamed predatory lending practices for a large part of the current problemsTypical class warfare pap from the Jackass party. I blame people not paying their bills.
12
posted on
09/06/2007 8:58:25 AM PDT
by
Dr.Deth
To: Puppage
I bought more house than I could afford 20 years ago. I still own it and it’s the best investment I ever made.
13
posted on
09/06/2007 9:00:43 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: Moonman62
Bernanke and Paulson were right.
The foreclosures in the sub-prime mortgage market are not the real problem here. They are a very small portion of the housing market.
The bigger issue is foreclosures of homes that were constructed, purchased and financed purely on speculation -- by people with good credit records who never had any intention of living in them. THIS is what is ultimately going to drive the housing market to collapse. There are simply too many homes out there and not enough buyers.
14
posted on
09/06/2007 9:01:30 AM PDT
by
Alberta's Child
(I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
To: Moonman62
I had a long conversation with a real estate broker recently. He said that this problem began with the politically motivated push to entitle all Americans to own their own homes, whether they could afford them or not. A prescription for disaster. Predictable.
15
posted on
09/06/2007 9:02:35 AM PDT
by
tennteacher
(Duncan Hunter '08)
To: Alberta's Child
Where I am people who can’t sell, and that’s everybody, are renting their places out. Rents are still sky high.
16
posted on
09/06/2007 9:05:19 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: Moonman62
Huh how is the fed trying to slam the economy with interest rates?
Speculators are to blame, they created a false demand and drove up prices. Our builder had to put in a clause that you had to live in the house for 6 months.
17
posted on
09/06/2007 9:05:30 AM PDT
by
psjones
(u)
To: tennteacher
That’s partially the reason. There are many factors. Plus, the real estate boom occurred in many countries besides here.
18
posted on
09/06/2007 9:10:06 AM PDT
by
Moonman62
(The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
To: tennteacher
One thing to consider is that California has 12% of the US population and housing here is colapsing hard and hasn’t really started yet.
For the most part the large % of the housing market, prices are already 20% lower thsn their highs and falling.
When our economy colapses it’s such sa large % of the total that it’s going to affect the entire country even if your housing market isn’t colapsing.
19
posted on
09/06/2007 9:12:22 AM PDT
by
dalereed
To: Moonman62
Right. But anyone who bought a home in the last couple of years and is trying to sell it today probably can't charge enough rent to cover the cost of the home.
I live in a very nice town in the NYC area, and there was a small townhouse development built next door to me last year. The units pre-sold for somewhere around $650,000 apiece back in 2004, and they were listed for $850,000+ when they were completed last year. Not a single one of them has been sold, and the prices have been reduced to around $725,000 in the last few months.
If they're still on the market in January, I'm going to put in a bid of $250,000 on one of them -- just to see what happens.
20
posted on
09/06/2007 9:12:58 AM PDT
by
Alberta's Child
(I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson