Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Meet the new round of foreclosures. Same as the old round of foreclosures   (washingtonpost.com ) divider line
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

2460 clicks; posted to Business » on 12 Mar 2010 at 9:15 AM (6 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



56 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2010-03-12 09:16:32 AM  
Wut?

But Obami stopped all that nonsense!
 
2010-03-12 09:23:50 AM  
The depression is global. We just got back from overseas and every third building in the downtown area had a To Let sign in the window.

Peak Oil will insure that things never get over-heated (i.e. normal) again. Basically, right-wing/left-wing/no-wing, tell your candidate to get off the crapper and start financing alternate energies.
 
2010-03-12 09:29:51 AM  
I've noticed a sudden (and rather drastic) spike in home prices around here recently. Has something changed that people are suddenly getting $100k+ more than they were a few months ago?
 
2010-03-12 09:31:47 AM  
this is threatening a new wave of foreclosures that could hit just as the real estate market has begun to stabilize.

Well...then...the real estate market...hasn't really stabilized at all, then...has it?

/I typed slowly so that all may understand.
 
2010-03-12 09:45:48 AM  
Jesus. I didn't think all the debt the Feds have taken on to bail out housing was a good idea, by any means, but I thought it would at least give the impression of working for a few years. But this indicates that it's hardly even having an effect. That's pretty terrifying. A bunch of debt was taken on to result in a failure.
 
2010-03-12 09:51:35 AM  
BOOTSTRAP TIME!

turboninjas.com
 
2010-03-12 09:58:29 AM  
We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgment of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song

frecuenciax.files.wordpress.com
 
2010-03-12 09:59:05 AM  
I don't like to see people losing their homes, but I do believe that if you can't afford to live there it's time to suck it up and leave once you figure out the least bad option.

It might wake some minds up, some innovation up to have people drastically change their lifestlye to meet what they can currently afford. Especially if the bulk of the welfare for the employable dries up.
 
2010-03-12 10:01:01 AM  

IrateShadow: I've noticed a sudden (and rather drastic) spike in home prices around here recently. Has something changed that people are suddenly getting $100k+ more than they were a few months ago?


Well the govt is bribing them with $8000 each to go out and buy. That's enough to spur demand. Maybe in your area the banks are cutting off their REO listings. Shadow inventory. Fun stuff.
 
2010-03-12 10:05:49 AM  

wolvernova: Well the govt is bribing them with $8000 each to go out and buy. That's enough to spur demand.


Which may be encouraging people to buy a house they aught not to. I thought that was the sort of thing that got us into this mess in the first place.
 
2010-03-12 10:10:39 AM  
We bought in the Baltimore/DC metro area late summer last year as first time homebuyers and the first home price points were getting a huge run up in competition in the space of a couple months. The tax credit combined with prices ceasing to fall as quickly let loose the pent up demand and has pretty much stabilized prices/cause them to rise slightly. Nothing to say it'll stay that way, but I can afford my new place and intend to stay for a decade or two, so I don't really care unless we lose an income.
 
2010-03-12 10:11:29 AM  
Hail to the foreclosure, foreclosure, foreclosure,
Hail to the foreclosure, foreclosure man!
As the cost doubles he burst our house bubbles,
Hail to the foreclosure, foreclosure man!
He knows where to spark it and crashes our market,
Hail to the foreclosure, foreclosure man!
 
2010-03-12 10:53:28 AM  

RockIsDead: Wut?

But Obami stopped all that nonsense!


you haven't been keeping up with current events, have you?

Big Business and Wall Street run the UseNited States of America now.


unless Obama happens to be a warlock, that won't change anytime soon, republican moron.
 
2010-03-12 10:55:03 AM  

Gasological: We bought in the Baltimore/DC metro area late summer last year as first time homebuyers and the first home price points were getting a huge run up in competition in the space of a couple months. The tax credit combined with prices ceasing to fall as quickly let loose the pent up demand and has pretty much stabilized prices/cause them to rise slightly. Nothing to say it'll stay that way, but I can afford my new place and intend to stay for a decade or two, so I don't really care unless we lose an income.


that is because most of the jobs in that area are Federal Government jobs.


doesn't apply to the rest of the Nation.

but you already knew that.
 
2010-03-12 10:57:41 AM  
BIGGEST AMERICAN BANK LIE OF THE LAST 50 YEARS.........


Bank: we don't want these homes. they're empty. they are costing us money...........we'd rather keep the family in the home.

bank (day two): sir, you have 30 days to move out.........


day 3: home sits abandoned for months/years.

now you know!!
 
2010-03-12 11:03:02 AM  

GoldSpider: wolvernova: Well the govt is bribing them with $8000 each to go out and buy. That's enough to spur demand.

Which may be encouraging people to buy a house they aught not to. I thought that was the sort of thing that got us into this mess in the first place.


It is. I've been waiting to buy for a while now. I cannot wait for this credit to die. Every potential future first time buyer/sucker has jumped into the shark tank. Demand will be absurdly low. Sellers will be desperate. Hopefully they start pushing these foreclosures through too.
 
2010-03-12 11:04:55 AM  

Linux_Yes: Bank: we don't want these homes. they're empty. they are costing us money...........we'd rather keep the family in the home.


Better to kick the deadbeats out and sell the house to a family that can actually afford it. Affordable housing = good for the economy.
 
2010-03-12 11:09:20 AM  

wolvernova: Better to kick the deadbeats out and sell the house to a family that can actually afford it. Affordable housing = good for the economy.


Given stagnant wages, who can afford the bloated prices? Let's face it, everything is overvalued and wages simply aren't enough to cover the prices unless those prices fall or wages increase. And the former requires more wealth leaving the lower and middle-classes in the same manner of the stagnant wages.

We're getting to the point where we need more money in order to keep this perserve system going. Unless the rich really need all of that money, they're just sabotaging themselves as well.
 
2010-03-12 11:11:25 AM  

wolvernova: Linux


why do so many homes sit vacant then, genius??


now hurry, you need to come up with a good one!
 
2010-03-12 11:21:05 AM  

YixilTesiphon: Jesus. I didn't think all the debt the Feds have taken on to bail out housing was a good idea, by any means, but I thought it would at least give the impression of working for a few years. But this indicates that it's hardly even having an effect. That's pretty terrifying. A bunch of debt was taken on to result in a failure.


It was successful for the banks. But they're banks. They're going to do what they think is in their best short term interest (remember, lack of foresight got them into this mess). It's sheer naïveté to actually believe that the banks were not going to artificially limit supply in the short term. But, the market isn't playing along, so fairly soon, they're going to have a new set of problems and will have their hands out once again.
 
2010-03-12 11:31:24 AM  
This is from a government doc released Jan 30th. A guy from a financial website (forget which) analyzed it a bit more in depth, but basically I am repeating his conclusions at the bottom


"Supporting home prices is an explicit policy goal of the Government. As the White House stated in the announcement of HAMP for example, 'President Obama's programs to prevent foreclosures will help bolster home prices.' In general, housing obeys the laws of supply and demand: higher demand leads to higher prices. Because increasing access to credit increases the pool of potential home buyers, increasing access to credit boosts home prices. The Federal Reserve can thus boost home prices by either lowering general interest rates or purchasing mortgages and MBS. Both actions, which the Federal Reserve is pursuing, have the effect of lowering interest rates, which increases demand by permitting borrowers to afford a higher home price on a given income. Figure 3.7 provides a graphic representation of the relationship between possible Government actions and their impact on home prices."

Hmm ok, so if you provide ridiculously low interest rates, more people will borrow more money, and in conjunction with the $8000 tax credit, be able to bid more for homes than they ordinarily would, thereby putting upward pressure on home prices.

So it seems that what the government wants to do to fix the ruins that the burst housing bubble left, is to recreate the conditions that created the farking bubble in the first place.

I imagine their prescription for a hangover is to start drinking again.
 
2010-03-12 11:39:09 AM  

wolvernova: Linux_Yes: Bank: we don't want these homes. they're empty. they are costing us money...........we'd rather keep the family in the home.

Better to kick the deadbeats out and sell the house to a family that can actually afford it. Affordable housing = good for the economy.


Ghost towns in suburbia are even better!
 
2010-03-12 11:41:27 AM  

Linux_Yes: you haven't been keeping up with current events, have you?

Big Business and Wall Street run the UseNited States of America now.


unless Obama happens to be a warlock, that won't change anytime soon, republican moron.


I know you're a troll, but blaming all of this on the Republicans is as moronic as blaming the financial condition of the country in January 2009 on Obama.
 
2010-03-12 11:43:27 AM  

YixilTesiphon: Linux_Yes: you haven't been keeping up with current events, have you?

Big Business and Wall Street run the UseNited States of America now.


unless Obama happens to be a warlock, that won't change anytime soon, republican moron.

I know you're a troll, but blaming all of this on the Republicans is as moronic as blaming the financial condition of the country in January 2009 on Obama.


He didn't. He said Big Business and Wall St run the country. And he called someone a "republican moron".
 
2010-03-12 11:44:39 AM  

yakmans_dad: Ghost towns in suburbia are even better!


Well, it reduces urban sprawl if nothing else...
 
2010-03-12 11:46:13 AM  

Marshmallow Jones: I imagine their prescription for a hangover is to start drinking again.


That works for me in the middle of a long weekend or vacation, but its gonna be Monday morning here in America pretty damn soon. What?? Its Wednesday??? I missed how much work?

I'm with the group that says the tax credit to help people buy something they can only marginally afford is retarded. I have a good enough background in econ and public policy to expound further, but I wont. Its just retarded.
 
2010-03-12 11:46:21 AM  

yakmans_dad: YixilTesiphon: Linux_Yes: you haven't been keeping up with current events, have you?

Big Business and Wall Street run the UseNited States of America now.


unless Obama happens to be a warlock, that won't change anytime soon, republican moron.

I know you're a troll, but blaming all of this on the Republicans is as moronic as blaming the financial condition of the country in January 2009 on Obama.

He didn't. He said Big Business and Wall St run the country. And he called someone a "republican moron".


Fair enough. I guess my impression of that post was bleeding over from his usual nonsensical rants.
 
2010-03-12 11:53:24 AM  
Well when the housing prices get back down to a 3 to 1 ratio (price to Median income) like they were for pretty much the whole of last century then the market will become stable.

The funny part of the article is the wishful thinking "That impact could be muted if enough buyers emerge to snap up properties or efforts to enroll borrowers in mortgage relief programs improve." Considering another article earlier this week indicated that about 50% of Americans have less than 10,000 saved. Dunno where this magical 3 trillion dollars to buy up 10+ million homes is going to come from in the private sector.

I still wish we would have just let these corrupt a-hole banks crumble to the ground. But then again in America the people at the top who make the decisions are almost never accountable for them.
 
2010-03-12 11:59:02 AM  
Here are 8 years of housing prices in the U.S. The claims that you've seen at various times in the last few years that "housing is rebounding" all happened during those occassional upticks in prices. But as you can see, overall, they're still dropping.

i47.tinypic.com
 
2010-03-12 12:16:56 PM  

Linux_Yes: wolvernova: Linux

why do so many homes sit vacant then, genius??


now hurry, you need to come up with a good one!


Banks are slow to put them on the market because it would hasten a market correction. Drip drip drip, sell for more. It's called shadow inventory. There's your answer, dipshiat.
 
2010-03-12 12:27:14 PM  
As a 22 year old who just bought a 30 year mortgage, I'm really getting a terrified kick outta these replies....
 
2010-03-12 12:27:25 PM  
Peak Oil will insure that things never get over-heated (i.e. normal) again. Basically, right-wing/left-wing/no-wing, tell your candidate to get off the crapper and start financing alternate energies.

No. For two reasons (and neither is because I oppose alternative energies):

1. Alternative energies will finance themselves. As oil prices rise, alternatives become affordable...ta da!

2. There is no way a politician will fund the RIGHT alternates. They will fund whatever research is being done in the district of the most powerful members. Which is how we end up with HFCS instead of sugar in our Cokes. The right alternative will win out, see #1.
 
2010-03-12 12:29:28 PM  

Marshmallow Jones: Hmm ok, so if you provide ridiculously low interest rates, more people will borrow more money, and in conjunction with the $8000 tax credit, be able to bid more for homes than they ordinarily would, thereby putting upward pressure on home prices.

So it seems that what the government wants to do to fix the ruins that the burst housing bubble left, is to recreate the conditions that created the farking bubble in the first place.

I imagine their prescription for a hangover is to start drinking again.


That's pretty much it in a nutshell. But what the fed did in the past year didn't have nearly the impact what the $8000 taxpayer robbery/bribe had. It increased prices by well over that amount in many areas. In my neighborhood alone prices have shot up $30k-$40k beginning with its inception. Now why would buyers pay such a premium to get $8k? Because they are idiots and their realtor won't tell them that's what's happening because then they won't get their commission.

But now what happens when the credit ends? All future suckers were displaced to 2009. Any gain in prices will be erased. All those future buyers are no longer there. Who will by the glut of foreclosures coming down the pike? Well I don't they have really thought that one through. Just kick the can down the road, let the suckers respond in a rational (though idiotic) fashion. Frankly I find the whole "gimme $8000 yay" shiat to be disgusting.

Teddy Hopper: I'm with the group that says the tax credit to help people buy something they can only marginally afford is retarded. I have a good enough background in econ and public policy to expound further, but I wont. Its just retarded.


Anybody with any sense at all knows it's retarded. There is no economic justification for it. None. It's funneling billions of dollars into the hands of the people that profit from sales volume. It helps sellers that are greedily clinging to their bubble values. The only people that are actively supporting this are realtors (after all, this credit was proposed I believe from NAR, the realtor lobbying group) and ironically buyers that thought there was some sort of net gain on their end (again, they are idiots for not realizing the increased demand is costing them a premium beyond the credit amount... dumbasses).

Any rational person with at least a fundamental understanding of economics knows this program is just farking awful.

2chris2: Here are 8 years of housing prices in the U.S. The claims that you've seen at various times in the last few years that "housing is rebounding" all happened during those occassional upticks in prices. But as you can see, overall, they're still dropping.


Not just that, but given the govt interference in the form of credits/bribes, low rates, foreclosure moratoriums, and the shadow inventory from the banks, we will see some significant decreases in the future when those are reversed.
 
2010-03-12 12:31:59 PM  
Marshmallow Jones


So it seems that what the government wants to do to fix the ruins that the burst housing bubble left, is to recreate the conditions that created the farking bubble in the first place.

I imagine their prescription for a hangover is to start drinking again.


http://www.econstories.tv/home.html

/seemed appropriate
//especially with the analogy you used
 
2010-03-12 12:35:17 PM  

Gasological: We bought in the Baltimore/DC metro area late summer last year as first time homebuyers and the first home price points were getting a huge run up in competition in the space of a couple months. The tax credit combined with prices ceasing to fall as quickly let loose the pent up demand and has pretty much stabilized prices/cause them to rise slightly. Nothing to say it'll stay that way, but I can afford my new place and intend to stay for a decade or two, so I don't really care unless we lose an income.


Or more people viewed their house as a home, and not a turn-around investment, this never would have happened.
 
2010-03-12 12:41:57 PM  

wolvernova: Well the govt is bribing them with UP TO $8000 each to go out and buy.



FTFY.

Keep in mind that the $8,000 is the MAXIMUM credit you can get back. The actual ammount you qualify for is adjusted based on your income. I bought a house in 2009 and my credit is actually going to be around $4500. That's not enough to "bribe" anyone when you're talking about a purchase that's $150k+.

If anything, I imagine the first-time home buyers credit might have incentivised people to try to speed up their purchases to qualify for it in time. But do you know anyone who wasn't in the home-buying market but suddenly changed their mind because of a credit that might be worth, at best, 2-4% of the purchasing price?
 
2010-03-12 01:24:52 PM  

wolvernova: Anybody with any sense at all knows it's retarded. There is no economic justification for it. None. It's funneling billions of dollars into the hands of the people that profit from sales volume. It helps sellers that are greedily clinging to their bubble values. The only people that are actively supporting this are realtors (after all, this credit was proposed I believe from NAR, the realtor lobbying group) and ironically buyers that thought there was some sort of net gain on their end (again, they are idiots for not realizing the increased demand is costing them a premium beyond the credit amount... dumbasses).



The reason it was proposed was to give a home-owner an incentive to buy instead of investment money buying it and sitting on it. Otherwise, it will then be turned into a rental slum or just sit there rotting.

The 10% tax credit is very very specific. You have to be first time home buyer, have to live there 3 years after buying and must be your primary residence.
 
2010-03-12 01:25:36 PM  

Tjos Weel: Peak Oil will insure that things never get over-heated (i.e. normal) again. Basically, right-wing/left-wing/no-wing, tell your candidate to get off the crapper and start financing alternate energies.

No. For two reasons (and neither is because I oppose alternative energies):

1. Alternative energies will finance themselves. As oil prices rise, alternatives become affordable...ta da!



Oh, C_R_A_P

You've learned nothing the last 3 years. You still believe in magic capitalism.
 
2010-03-12 01:31:17 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: FTFY.

Keep in mind that the $8,000 is the MAXIMUM credit you can get back. The actual ammount you qualify for is adjusted based on your income. I bought a house in 2009 and my credit is actually going to be around $4500. That's not enough to "bribe" anyone when you're talking about a purchase that's $150k+.

If anything, I imagine the first-time home buyers credit might have incentivised people to try to speed up their purchases to qualify for it in time. But do you know anyone who wasn't in the home-buying market but suddenly changed their mind because of a credit that might be worth, at best, 2-4% of the purchasing price?



The flippers.

Tax credit is for this year and would be in the buyer's hand. The house price would go up within three years and then house would be sold. The actual paid for the house isn't $150K, it's just mortgage is for $150K.
 
2010-03-12 01:34:00 PM  
If anything, I imagine the first-time home buyers credit might have incentivised people to try to speed up their purchases to qualify for it in time. But do you know anyone who wasn't in the home-buying market but suddenly changed their mind because of a credit that might be worth, at best, 2-4% of the purchasing price?.

Probably not, but bringing demand forward could very well make the problem of these looming foreclosures that much worse. I'd be willing to bet at this time next year we'll still be discussing this yet-to-expire housing credit.
 
2010-03-12 01:38:40 PM  
yakmans_dad

magic capitalism

The people who think that I (and those like me) think that capitalism is magic arent very bright.

The last 3 years are examples of what happens when you mess around with a free market. Let me make this very clear: THE HOUSING MARKET CRASHING WAS A GOOD THING. The boom was the bad thing. The correction was necessary. Unfortunately, they wont let it fully correct. Trying to boost housing prices is a big fail. We need to completely crash (and yes, it will go down too far, but oh well, thats life). We also needed to look idiotic banks fail and deal with the results.

Without failure, success is not possible.
 
2010-03-12 01:39:22 PM  

wolvernova: Banks are slow to put them on the market because it would hasten a market correction. Drip drip drip, sell for more. It's called shadow inventory. There's your answer, dipshiat.



More than shadow inventory, banks realized that there was a lot of fraud going on.

For example, a house would be given to realtor X to sell. Realtor would put it up for sale for $29,999 and sell to his cousin for $29,999. The actual value would be around $100K.

Suppose the bank applied some supervision on the sale prices. Then, the realtor would send a team to rip every valuable item off the house and blame it on the previous tenants/vandals. Appliances, fixtures etc all stolen; there were some foreclosed houses with nothing on them which I know the previous owner didn't leave as such. No kitchen cabinets, bathroom is just pipe ends, not a single light fixture, no appliances etc

The banks had no idea how to deal with this massive foreclosures. They are still trying to figure it out. I actually feel bad for the banks since after the realtor ripped off the banks, ate 6% off and then title companies etc took everything out, the house that they mortgaged for $170K was getting them back $15K.
 
2010-03-12 01:40:25 PM  
But do you know anyone who wasn't in the home-buying market but suddenly changed their mind because of a credit that might be worth, at best, 2-4% of the purchasing price?.

Yes. Well, they might have been in it anyway, but they sped it up and are trying to get it done now.

Same thing with the cash for clunkers. It just led people who wanted to buy to buy NOW instead of spread out over next year or so.
 
2010-03-12 02:07:32 PM  

mr0x: The reason it was proposed was to give a home-owner an incentive to buy instead of investment money buying it and sitting on it. Otherwise, it will then be turned into a rental slum or just sit there rotting.

The 10% tax credit is very very specific. You have to be first time home buyer, have to live there 3 years after buying and must be your primary residence.


It's full of fraud. People have been signing their 5 year old kids up for it and getting the money.

It was enacted to increase sales volume to generate commission for the RE industry. Look at who pushed the bill, that says it all. It drove up prices well beyond the value of the credit in many areas. This is not good for homebuyers. It took future demand and brought it to the past. Now we will see that lack of demand down the road and nothing will have been gained. Unless, of course, you're a realtor.

Tjos Weel: The people who think that I (and those like me) think that capitalism is magic arent very bright.


They also don't know jack about economics.

mr0x: More than shadow inventory, banks realized that there was a lot of fraud going on.

For example, a house would be given to realtor X to sell. Realtor would put it up for sale for $29,999 and sell to his cousin for $29,999. The actual value would be around $100K.


That is very true. Another tactic is to list it at a price the bank approves of, claim there are no offers (I've heard many cases where they won't even put a key in the lock box so nobody can look at it), then sell it to a friend or family. The RE industry is sickening and completely corrupt. The game is completely rigged to reward the uneducated and overpaid whores that we call realtors.

mr0x: The banks had no idea how to deal with this massive foreclosures. They are still trying to figure it out. I actually feel bad for the banks since after the realtor ripped off the banks, ate 6% off and then title companies etc took everything out, the house that they mortgaged for $170K was getting them back $15K.


It's pretty hard for me to sympathize with a bank.

But given that their losses are exacerbated by the same vermin that charge tens of thousands of dollars for you to buy or sell a house, I feel their pain
 
2010-03-12 02:24:34 PM  

wolvernova: whargarbl

The RE industry is sickening and completely corrupt. The game is completely rigged to reward the uneducated and overpaid whores that we call realtors.


Both sides are bad, vote Republican?
 
2010-03-12 03:45:37 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: Well...then...the real estate market...hasn't really stabilized at all, then...has it?


That was exactly my reaction when I first read this article. While I have always liked The Washington Post, I have been annoyed in recent months that a lot of articles in it keep referring to the current economic recovery -- you know, the one that's supposedly in progress.

The economy is not recovering yet. People are still being laid off in large groups (although not as many as before). On balance, we are still losing jobs each month (although not as many as before). Companies are still instituting pay cuts (although not as many as before). There are still a lot of foreclosures due to happen, so housing values are going to drop again.

We're not in a recovery. If anything, we're still heading towards the bottom, but we've slowed our descent and will hopefully be able to turn things around. But anyone who thinks that the worst is over is deluding himself.

Jobs and wages are the key factor in all of this. We've got several million people to put back to work, and even it we can do that, they're likely to be making far less money than they were before. Even when the economy does start to recover, it will never get back to where it was. Employers have seen to that.
 
2010-03-12 04:46:39 PM  

Fark Me To Tears: Fuggin Bizzy: Well...then...the real estate market...hasn't really stabilized at all, then...has it?

That was exactly my reaction when I first read this article. While I have always liked The Washington Post, I have been annoyed in recent months that a lot of articles in it keep referring to the current economic recovery -- you know, the one that's supposedly in progress.

The economy is not recovering yet. People are still being laid off in large groups (although not as many as before). On balance, we are still losing jobs each month (although not as many as before). Companies are still instituting pay cuts (although not as many as before). There are still a lot of foreclosures due to happen, so housing values are going to drop again.

We're not in a recovery. If anything, we're still heading towards the bottom, but we've slowed our descent and will hopefully be able to turn things around. But anyone who thinks that the worst is over is deluding himself.

Jobs and wages are the key factor in all of this. We've got several million people to put back to work, and even it we can do that, they're likely to be making far less money than they were before. Even when the economy does start to recover, it will never get back to where it was. Employers have seen to that.


I guess someone needs to create an incentive for employers to pay their employees more.
 
2010-03-12 06:15:39 PM  

wolvernova: That's pretty much it in a nutshell. But what the fed did in the past year didn't have nearly the impact what the $8000 taxpayer robbery/bribe had. It increased prices by well over that amount in many areas. In my neighborhood alone prices have shot up $30k-$40k beginning with its inception. Now why would buyers pay such a premium to get $8k? Because they are idiots and their realtor won't tell them that's what's happening because then they won't get their commission.

But now what happens when the credit ends? All future suckers were displaced to 2009. Any gain in prices will be erased. All those future buyers are no longer there. Who will by the glut of foreclosures coming down the pike? Well I don't they have really thought that one through. Just kick the can down the road, let the suckers respond in a rational (though idiotic) fashion. Frankly I find the whole "gimme $8000 yay" shiat to be disgusting.


I bought my first home six month ago. I bought it at below appraised value with a 30 year fixed mortgage and 20% down payment. I probably would have bought even without the buyer's bribe, but if the government is willing to throw in a $8,000 kicker, might as well take it.

Nemo's Brother: Or more people viewed their house as a home, and not a turn-around investment, this never would have happened.


One good thing about people who are buying houses now is that they don't expect to get 6-8% price appreciation year-after-year. They view their houses as homes. I don't expect to get rich owning a house. But I'm not at the whim of a landlord. I know that I can stay here as long as I want.
 
2010-03-13 08:37:24 AM  

dustman81: I bought my first home six month ago. I bought it at below appraised value with a 30 year fixed mortgage and 20% down payment. I probably would have bought even without the buyer's bribe, but if the government is willing to throw in a $8,000 kicker, might as well take it.


Congratulations.
 
2010-03-13 03:30:14 PM  

Tjos Weel: The last 3 years are examples of what happens when you mess around with a free market.



Sure. What the market needed was less regulation and higher margins.
 
Displayed 50 of 56 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report