Downpayment Aid OK'd for Poor Families

AP ^ | 10/1/2003 | JIM ABRAMS

[truthkeeper]

The bill, said Rep. Katherine Harris, R-Fla., the chief sponsor in the House, "empowers tens of thousands of low-income Americans to overcome this striking inequality in our land of opportunity."

Well isn't this special.

[fortaydoos]

I agree. The half trillion dollar annual deficit, adding yet more foreign gifts paid for by IOUs with my grandkids' names on them, is disgusting.

[pau1f0rd]

One step closer to socialist Europe. We don't even have this in England.

[Orangedog]

I'm radpidly coming to the conclusion that conservatives are going to have to force a crisis within the GOP very, very soon if it is ever to recover. As it stands on 2 October 2003, there is nothing more useless than a comfortable Republican. If they won't fear the conservatives, let 'em fear the Democrats.

Oh, I think they are going to get a serious wake-up call in November 2004. Less than 500 votes put Bush in the White House. I'm pretty sure that the GOP has pissed off enough of the base to either keep them at home or vote 3rd party. Their control over both houses of congress will be up in the air as well. My House rep (Pryce) and Senator (Voinabithch) will definately NOT be getting my votes next year.

[RiflemanSharpe]

Another waste of money we do not have.

[CurlyDave]

Renters pay property taxes, too. There is no new tax revenue generated with this.

This will increase the price of all houses by increasing demand. Therefore it will increase property taxes, however marginally.

If one is an investor in single family housing this bill will benefit you in two ways:

1. Immediate price increase.

2. Bargains in distressed properties coming soon as these people are foreclosed.

As a landlord, I have looked at the home-ownership vs. renter question for a number of years. Among people with similar incomes the largest distinguishing factor between homeowners and renters is not income. I rent houses to people whose income would more than qualify them for purchase of a home with existing mortage plans.

The primary difference is that, in general, renters lack the ability to plan ahead, and therefore never save for their goals. Families with good incomes will have no savings, or at best one or two months income worth of savings.

It is absolutely amazing how families will treat the rent being due on the 1st of the month as a "nasty financial surprise" rather than a predictable expense which can be budgeted.

[FITZ]

Supporters said children of homeowners do better in school and have higher high-school graduation rates than the children of renters, and that this new group of homeowners would boost the U.S. economy.

Children of homeowners do better because their parents aren't taking food stamps, WIC and the rest but are setting a good example by studying hard themselves and working for a living. If the government has to buy them their homes, it's just another very large welfare program that will grow and grow and grow. Why should someone work hard to save up a downpayment while someone else can just get the government to hand it to them?

[StriperSniper]

The socialist revolution is almost complete. : (

[Lurkd Long Enough]

Please wake me up when this spending orgy is over. The money to rebuild iraq is one thing, but where in the heck did this boondoggle come from?

Welfare for a down payment on a house. Who would have thunk it?

[FITZ]

Thus tax revenue increases.

If they won't/can't save money for a down-payment --- then how will they save money when their taxes are due? That can be another future government program --- provide them some money for property taxes --- or else make them exempt.

[JohnGalt]

If you can 'rationalize' one, you consent to the other.

[HamiltonJay]

I got news for you guys, governments been subsidizing home ownership directly and indirectly for years... this is just one more in a liteny of programs that already exist.

In fact, FHA, VA, HUD already underwrite or insure huge amounts of mortgages out there.... unless you paid all cash for your house, you probably were subsidized in some manner by the government as well.

I don't agree with this program, as I don't think it helps anything... but mortgage industry pretty much exists in america today because of government backing.

[HamiltonJay]

Yep, no doubt about it. I look forward to the future earnings... keep the hand outs going Washington.. some of us love capitalizing on the cleanup of your messes.

[JohnGalt]

The gubmint maintains a monopoly on the currency and de facto the mortagage industry through the Fannie boongdoggles. Your idea of a subsidy is hardly the same as a give away since there is no real choice in the manner.

The gubmint of course, counts on folks believing that their Pnozi scheme is indispensible for securing the American Dream.

The rest of us know that gubmint is the problem.

[Lurkd Long Enough]

governments been subsidizing home ownership directly and indirectly for years... this is just one more in a liteny of programs that already exist.

Great, thanks for your explanation. It's peachy keen that we get another great federal program. After all, this is just one more?

And what's $400 million more being added to the deficient? Pshaw!

[HamiltonJay]

You can get into a house in the US in all but the hottest markets, with little or no money down if you have anything remotely resembling decent credit and income.

I fail to see the overall need for this program... well actually I do, more pandering to the largely inner city poor, who frankly just don't have their lives together, and thanks to government hand out, and coddling largely never will.

[Lurkd Long Enough]

This bill is a perversion of the American dream.

[Lijahsbubbe]

It's peachy keen that we get another great federal program

Well how else do you expect immigrants to get homes as soon as they come over here? Remember, it's votes that count!

[FITZ]

well actually I do, more pandering to the largely inner city poor

But since this has Republicans pushing it --- I don't think it's even meant for the inner city poor because those votes have been turned over to the democrats long ago. This is pandering to the new --- and already larger minority group whose votes the Republicans somehow believe are still up for grabs.

[Kozak]

Because the mortgage industry is essentially a government operation, when these people default, and they will, (that is why no one will loan them the money i nthe first place), mortgage holders will absorb the cost.

It's way worse then that. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are private entities whose loans are GUARANTEED by the Feds read TAXPAYERS ( remember the S&L bailout? ). THAT will look like a simple bounced check compared to what happens if Fannie and Freddie go down.