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

To: TaxRelief
From #6 in your post:

The government should directly purchase housing assets, not real estate bonds. This would include lots and houses under construction.

I don't understand his rationale behind this. Talk about a bureaucratic nightmare! Maybe this guy is in the real estate management business and figures the feral gummint would have to contract out this part of the operation.

An aside: I was in the mortgage business in Houston when the crunch hit there in '83 - '84. It was rumored that Texaco, due to its policy of taking their transferred employees out of their homes so they wouldn't be saddled with trying to maintain two mortgages, at least temporarily, when they moved, had more property under management than any of the largest property management companies in Houston. Can't vouch for the validity, but interesting nonetheless -- to me.

18 posted on 10/01/2008 2:10:11 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (ABCNNBCBS: An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: ForGod'sSake

Well purchasing the real estate bonds would make things even worse and would do little to help anyone keep their homes, if that is the true intention behind the bailout.


19 posted on 10/01/2008 6:54:54 PM PDT by TaxRelief (Walmart: Keeping my family on-budget since 1993.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | 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