The Principle of Homes NEED Re-adjusting

I will take you at your word, but I find it hard that you would like this idea without your own home being upside down.

If I remember correctly, you posted something about your house last year and how it was your retirement, the the potenial gain from the sale of your house would have been a retirement and you were wondernig then what do to in this mess. Now there is an idea for the banks to buy down the upside down part of people's homes? Why?

Like Carpo asked, would this work in a similar manner when the house was worth more than the note? Why should we bail out people that over extended themselves, mostly in the hope of making money in the housing market?

Can people read the terms of the notes they are signing? Don't they know it's cheap for the first 24 months for a reason? Does anyone understand an ARM? How about a Balloon payment?

I know when I bought my house they explained everything very clearly to me and I knew what my payments would be BEFORE I bought the house.

Yeah, that is best... dates tend to make one's ideas and prophecy's easy to target with a yeap he got it or a nope he didn't.

Let me play the game... I submit that I believe over 10..... no, 100 people will be saved before the end of times.... remember this so you can say WOW!..


I honestly don't mean to be so mocking, but with your ideas and topics sometimes it's hard to do.

 

The principle is what the home owner borrowed. You're saying that the bank should take the loss rather than the home owner? Fine. What that does is simply make the bank the loser rather than the borrower. Then we'd have to bail out the bank which is what we're doing. I think the real problem is that the existing bailout package (Bush's) didn't put more of a requirement on banks to do what you're saying. They've taken the money and either sat on it or used it for other purposes like acquisitions.

 

And just where is the scripture that makes this statement?

 

I'm sorry, but no. Many Americans benefited greatly from the appreciation in the housing market.

Who also gets hit but without much attention? Renters. I do not own a home, and with rental rates increasing every year, saving up for a home isn't the easiest thing in the world, especially as the housing market has been appreciating. Now, the credit market makes it difficult to secure financing, requiring even MORE of a down payment, higher income, etc. I can make rental payments, but it would be difficult for me to obtain a mortgage that would have payments 200 dollars less per month.

Where is my stimulus? If you are proposing that homeowners (who have preferential tax treatment and the potential for appreciation) be given six-figure write-offs, I would like to have a similar amount deposited to my bank account to provide a down payment for a home.

 

You haven't said he can't afford the payments. The value doesn't matter for as long as he lives there.

It is clear that you and he look at home purchases as an investment. Be grown up and face your loss.

Investors lose money every day. And...you have lost assets only on paper unless you decide to sell.

I am amazed at you entitlement mentality.

 

Carpo I agree with you wholeheartly! I can't even wrap my mind around someone like righteousdude2 wanting to be bought out.

If the market hadn't gone south he would have cash in in a few years and retired with his profits and wouldn't have said a word. How crazy!

Another thing is very shocking too... we agreed with each other!

 

:laugh: It happens.

 

house prices need to come down

House prices need to come down until, as it was in the 1940s and 1950s, the person with a median income for his county can buy the median priced house in his county.

 

Person should have the guts

>Originally Posted by righteousdude2
>My home, and it's position in the market is none of your business.

Person who criticizes another person's job, income, and financial status should have the guts to describe his own status.

Just got my tax bill . . . Snohomish County, WA. Land and structure totaled $225K, about $100K below county median. It is free and clear.

 

righteousdude2, let me know when I can come stay at your house. I'm going to be traveling to your part of the country and figure I should get a feel for the room you want me to pay for... :laugh:

 

If the government would let the market correct itself, banks and home loan borrowers would negotiate for their own survivals. When the government taxes the nation to bail out the banks, the banks then have no incentive to negotiate.

 

Sorry, Charlie, we all have to live with the consequences of our decisions.

No one forced you (or your friend) to buy an overpriced house.

Owning a house is not a Constitutional Right.

Besides...if you hold on to the asset...it will appreciate, and the market will correct.

But keep in mind...there is no constitutionally guaranteed right to Profit from Home Ownership...

Folks need to learn that there are consequences for one's actions...and there does not need to be government action to offset bad business decisions...

The "crooks in DC" didn't force anyone to buy a home.

Some folks wouldn't have lasted a month in earlier eras of our country's history...because their sense of responsibility for their own actions is so dulled....

 

That is a sustainable solution. The reason we got into this mess is excessive appreciation without corresponding increases in salaries. You shouldn't have to depend on two average full-time salaries to be to buy one average home.

 

Yea no doubt

 

First, why aren't you blaming the guy who sold it to him, whose greed got the best of him?

Second, the house is worth whatever someone will pay for it. He doesn't know his house is worth $125,000 unless that is what he has been offered for it. In ten years, that house might be worth $500,000 and I bet he won't be complaining about it then.

If you live in the good times, you have to also live in the bad times. If he doesn't want to take $125,000 for his house, then don't sell it. It's that simple.

Houses don't come with "price protection policies."

I bought a computer last summer for $600. That same computer now can be bought for about $450. Should I go to the store and complain? Should I go to the government and ask for a bailout. Why not, given your position here?

They may have been overpriced, but no one forced anyone to buy a house. Your neighbor thought the house was worth 325,000 and agreed to pay it. He can renogotiate with the bank if he wants, but it is his problem.

The way you adjust principal down is to sell the house.

The housing industry can't cheat anyone. Houses are bought and sold by individuals. A person agrees to pay $X for a house. He wasn't forced to, and he should have done due diligence to make sure he wans't being cheated.

That no one forced them to buy.

No it's not. It is the fault of people who bought houses. If I got to the store and pay $10 for a pack of gum, that's no one's fault but mine even though I am making a horrible deal. I agreed to do it. There is, in most states, a clause in contracts where a person has three days to get out of the contract after it is signed. That clause doesn't extend to years.

The people who ran it up where the buyers, not the bankers. The bankers only loaned money to people who asked for it.

Your post is so full of problems it is unimaginable.

 

Housing prices will come down when people stop offering to pay more for them. If I am trying to sell my house, I will take the highest bid. If the highest bid is less than the house is worth to me, I won't sell it. So stop offering more money for it.

You guys seem to miss the point that houses are a market driven issue. There is a reason why a larger house in my community can be bought for less than $10,00 right now, and the same house ten miles away would be more than $100,000 ... people aren't willing to pay $100,000 to live in this community.

There is no fixed price on housing. It is worth whatever someone will pay.

I remember Bruce Williams (whose show I loved) talking to a guy who complained that his house wouldn't sell. Bruce said, "It's priced too high." The guy responded, "No, it's not." Bruce said, "You mean to tell me that if you put that house on the market for $1, it wouldn't sell?" The guy said, "Of course it would." Bruce said, "It's priced to high. What you have to find is the price between $1 and what you are asking that people will spend for your house."

A house is not worth what an appraiser or assessor says it is. A house is worth what someone will pay for it.

That's why a bank does comps in the neighborhood, comparing similar houses.

 

Yes! A house that doesn't sell in 3 months is priced to high.