Posted on 11/14/2008 11:51:19 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Good for a laugh!
I agree his advice is immoral. Lying, cheating, screwing someone over is not the right way to do things no matter what anyone else has done.
He certainly is full of himself.
Not true... They suck up all the Section 8 federal housing dollars they can get.
This is how Dianne Fiendstein made lots of her slumlord money in S.F...
ping
I saw someone writing about people living in their STORAGE UNITS the other day, which is cheap rent and a place out of the rain, but not much more than that.
The rental theory is risky because if the landlord defaults on the loan, you are still out on the street.
Ruff Times?
While driving across rural southern Arizona, it appeared to me that the number one housing unit was the trailer or the motor home. We probably have tiny Trailer Cities and Motor Home Cities sprouting up all over the country now that people are losing their homes. Do we even have enough rental units to house everyone ? I have no clue as to how people are living in their storage units. They track when you enter and leave through the security gate. They may stay there a few hours during the day and spend the night in their cars. Unless they have an arrangement with the storage unit manager. I have been down and out in the past. When my first business failed. And I can tell you from experience that government is not your friend when you are down and out. They expect everyone to have money to pay all their fees or else. And the police hate squatters. Gonna be a lot of down and out people hating the Gmen.
I did go through all that, lost the house & everything in it, no need for my skills in the state I was in so left the wife and kids with her dad, went north where there was work, had a job 10 hours from crossing the border, stayed with a friend for 1 1/2 months and went down and got my family. I had hopes for the house, and was current in my payments when I left, but I couldn't make two payments, so told the bank what was going on, and the bank sold it for 2/3 the previous year's price. They never came after me, no bankruptcy, just quite a few years of end to end 7 day work weeks to regroup.(We did pay off the credit cards, eventually, and never missed a payment)
I checked my fico score a few days ago and it was 792.
I doubt this guy has ever been in a situation he couldn't justify shirking his responsibility on.
Sounds like Obama's Daddy.
Yes, and I am encouraged by the responses I read on the thread.
We have fallen a long way from the days where your handshake was your bond, and a person cared about their honor.
Sure, Bob.
From July 19, 2004, Business Week Online, "Is A Housing Bubble About To Burst? As rising rates send mortgage payments higher, demand may cool": [...] A downturn in housing would squeeze recent buyers who overleveraged themselves to pay top prices -- and risk slowing the entire economy by cooling consumer spending as well as housing construction, lending, and the real estate business.
[...]
A downturn in housing, if it comes, is likely to chill the economy. People will feel less wealthy, hence more reluctant to spend. Goldman, Sachs & Co. (GS ) economist Jan Hatzius, among others, argues that a decline in housing wealth dampens consumer spending at least twice as much as a same-sized loss in the stock market. Even homeowners who still feel like spending would have a harder time qualifying for home-equity loans or cash-out refinancings -- a major source of consumer liquidity for the past few years.
[...]
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has downplayed the danger of a national housing bubble, arguing in part that housing is a local market. [...] But bubbles are appearing in enough markets that their impact, if they were to pop, would be felt nationally.
[...]
The most troublesome aspect of the price runup is that many recent buyers are squeezing into houses that they can barely afford by taking advantage of the lower rates available from adjustable-rate mortgages. That leaves them fully exposed to rising rates. In fact, the rise in one-year adjustable rates since late March has already raised annual borrowing costs for new buyers by 25%. And data from the Federal Housing Finance Board show that the most expensive markets tend to have the highest share of buyers with adjustable-rate mortgages.
Today's housing prices are predicated on an impossible combination: the strong growth in income and asset values of a strong economy, plus the ultra-low rates of a weak economy. Either the economy's long-term prospects will get worse or rates will rise. In either scenario, housing will weaken. Caveat emptor.
--By Peter Coy in New York and Rich Miller in Washington, with Lauren Young in New York and Christopher Palmeri in Los Angeles
That this guy is suggesting conservatives act like Democrats. This sounds precisely like the attitude of the "Huey Long branch" of the Democrats.
Newsletters that are quietly right, year after year, need somone like Mark Hulbert, the Consumer Reports of market-advice letter writers, to score their advice over time, otherwise they'll never get much attention -- and few subscriptions.
(Ignore Hulbert when he descends into punditry and high-concept number-crunching ["does the 'Santa Claus effect' work? the 'sell in May' rule?"], something MarketWatch demanded of him after he sold them his newsletter. Just read him for ratings and for facts culled from his data and fashioned into factual articles, which he still produces.)
There are some pretty good guides out there yet. Among them: Bob Brinker, Dan Sullivan, Bob Stovall. Stan Weinstein still gets hot streaks. Most of the old Rukeyser panel of guests were pretty good and can be listened to: Liz Ann Sonders, for instance, and Stovall and Weinstein. Gail Dudack is still around -- she was dropped from Rukeyser's group right at the end of 1999 because her value indicia for something like 18 months kept saying "sell, don't buy". Gail was right, the Elves were wrong, big wrong, that time.
Correct.
It was ... about 25% of your gross income, with other variables tossed in such as time on the job, job security, etc. etc..
Now it seems that the "children" running the country have been dumbed down to thinking it's anything they want it to be.
Isn't that new math fun?
Thank GOD my farm is paid for. All I pay is $680 a year property taxes.
Personally, I think all money lenders are crooks. We didn’t have any choice but to finance the farm when we first bought it. We had only been married four years at the time but managed to pay if off in less than 10 years.
We have since been beseiged by banker “crooks” wanting us to mortgage it with one of those “home equity line of credit” loans so that we can have money to buy whatever we want. I always tell them to get lost. The last straw came when my husband bought his current truck. He had a good trade-in so the loan wasn’t that much but it didn’t qualify for a low interest auto loan since it was slightly past the age limit. They wanted him to buy it with a home equity loan at a low interest rate. When the loan officer mentioned it I almost came across the desk at her. My husband actually thought we should do it. I told both of them, in NO uncertain or ladylike terms, that I would not put up a $300,000 farm to buy a $12,000 truck in order to save 3% interest. I told the loan officer that no bank would take my home if something happened to my job, etc. She said “oh we wouldn’t do that” and I just laughed at her. We ended up with a personal loan at 9% interest but the farm was safe from those leaches.
Banks and other lending institutions are legal crooks in my book. My husband and I have different ways of managing money because I would prefer to never borrow money for anything. I will not sign away our home for any reason though.
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.