Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Yep, right, you betcha, and absolutely correct, sir!
1 posted on 07/20/2010 5:14:46 AM PDT by Notary Sojac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Notary Sojac
The political case for federal intervention was strong. Americans had come were led to believe by lobbyists and politicians that took the lobbyists money that homeownership was essential to economic security and that it made for better citizens.

That's how it should read.

2 posted on 07/20/2010 5:22:02 AM PDT by raybbr (Someone who invades another country is NOT an immigrant - illegal or otherwise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Notary Sojac

The article is correct. Clinton and Bush stupidly assumed that if you gave people a house, you could endow them with the qualities of character associated with people who acquired homes on their own.

Really, I often think that the only good thing about the Bush Administration was Cheney.

Bush infuriated me with his American Dream initiative:

http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/affordablehousing/programs/home/addi/

I’ll never know if this initiative was naive stupidity or an attempt to buy votes back from the even more irresponsible Liberal machine. Either way, I felt as if it was a BIG part of the creation of the real estate bubble, as well as its collapse. A lot of those people moved into homes at asking price and never made a payment.


4 posted on 07/20/2010 5:31:29 AM PDT by Liberty Ship ("Lord, make me fast and accurate.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Notary Sojac

A well reasoned piece. One area that I would like to see addressed in more detail is the psychological aspect of ownership. As was pointed out, early on, substantial downpayments,a nd short term mortages, were the norm. Now, when it became possible to buy a home with literally nothing down, and 30-40 year amortizations..then is that reall “ownership”...or are you really just renting...It’s similar in many ways to the question of buying vs leasing a car.


5 posted on 07/20/2010 5:36:44 AM PDT by ken5050 (Save the Earth..It's the only planet with chocolate!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Notary Sojac

The “O” administration is like sharks on a feeding frenzy... they smell blood in the water.

These guys are raiding the till while there is still anything worth having.... the more America is deconstructed and bankrupt… the better “O” will look to his idiot supporters who only consider the immediate, temporary and personal.

“O” supporters actually think he’s a god who can step in and do some kind of miraculous ‘fix’ which has somehow escaped the ability or attention of his VERY capable predecessors and contemporaries … people actually who DO possess experience and an understanding of these things!

What a tribe of howling monkeys we have in DC!! It is as if the entire nation has developed this kind of ethical torpor and mental inertia.

Has every one of the politicians in DC been drugged or suffered massive head trauma! How can they all sit there conducting business as usual when while the “O” house-of-cards administration ransacks industry, demolishes constitutional integrity, loots the economy and thumbs his nose a the American RIGHT to national sovereignty???!!!


6 posted on 07/20/2010 5:41:38 AM PDT by SMARTY ("What luck for rulers that men do not think." Adolph Hitler)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Notary Sojac

With today’s difficulties involved in financing a home, maintaining a home, and selling a home, I think there will be a shift towards more renting and leasing in the future.

The unemployed who are lucky enough to find a new job don’t need an albatross of home ownership in a market where there are no buyers.

All three of my grown kids rent/lease their houses for less than my mortgage payment. They like the flexibility in that it allows them easier options if relocation becomes necessary.

If I thought I could sell mine at a ‘reasonable price’ today,
I would be gone tomorrow, and find a lease/rental property.


7 posted on 07/20/2010 5:41:51 AM PDT by Repeal The 17th (If November does not turn out well, then beware of December.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Notary Sojac

The first sentence is wrong. The credit was not extended. The time to close on the contract that was entered into by April 30th was extended because some of the homes weren’t finished.

And as you’ll notice builders are crying ‘cause the sales have dried up. I don’t know what the answer is except to “go to the mattresses”.


9 posted on 07/20/2010 5:48:44 AM PDT by Terry Mross ( Democrat-Republican, whatever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Notary Sojac
At the end of June, the House of Representatives voted to extend the $8,000 homebuyers’ tax credit, by an extraordinary margin of 409–5.

The author is either completely misinformed, or 100% wrong. Either way, he dumps his credibility by opening his piece with this falsehood. The HoR voted to extend the deadline of the tax credit ($8,000 for new home buyers, $6,500 for buyers who had lived in their previous homes for at least 5 years, with income cap limits for both categories) beyond 30 June IF and ONLY IF they had sold their homes by 30 April but were unable to close by 30 June. That's it. There were too many people trying to close by the 30 June deadline, and ran into problems with loan qualification deadlines, appriasals, and all the other trappings of closing. The tax credit was NOT extended. Only the paperwork deadline for those who had already sold by 30 April.

According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the mortgage-interest deduction is expected to cost $637 billion over the five years ending in 2015. The exclusion of capital gains on primary residences is expected to cost another $215 billion over the same five years, with the deductibility of state and local property taxes on owner-occupied homes adding $151 billion. In total, these subsidies will reduce federal revenue by well over $1 trillion over a decade during which the federal government is expected to run a $9 trillion deficit. A gradual phase-out of these subsidies is therefore not only smart economics, but a fiscal necessity.

This just drives me insane.

So, let's try and buy into his rationale: the government should be allowed to steal more of people's money via confiscatory taxation, because it is somehow justified that allowing people to keep their own money "costs" the government too much? People get to be taxed LESS because they are allowed to deduct interest on mortgages, and he is arguing for the government to eliminate this and take MORE of people's money?! Great. Just great.

He tries to argue that with the debt and deficit, we can't "afford" this tax break - and implies it will go to paying down the national debt, and/or reduce annual budget deficits. Good luck with that one.

Here is a brilliant clue he seemed to miss: when the home buying tax credits stopped, the market reacted vehemently in the negative. SURPRISE! The government temporarily decided to take LESS of people's money at the point of a gun, and the market reacted favorably. As soon as Uncle Sugar elbowed his way back into the room to demand more tax money for his pockets, the market dries up.

Gee....this is hard to fathom......

He has some good points: not everyone should have a house. We can thank liberals for trying to "give" every moron a mortgage they could not afford. But eliminating tax deductions for current home owners is stupid and will hurt everyone.

Which is precisely why it will probably happen.

God help us all.

19 posted on 07/20/2010 7:00:05 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Ping


25 posted on 07/20/2010 7:24:21 AM PDT by Professional Engineer (Conservative States of America has a nice ring to it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson