U.S. homelessness on decline: HUD reports 30 percent fall from '05 to '07

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Jul 30, 2008.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,378
    Likes Received:
    790
    Some 1.6 million people were forced to use an emergency shelter or transitional housing at some point between 2006 and 2007, but the number of people who are chronically homeless dropped nearly 30 percent from 2005 to 2007, according to a report made public Tuesday......................



    More Here
     
  2. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Someone probably slipping a neurotoxin in the food bank chow.
     
  3. rdwhite

    rdwhite
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2008
    Messages:
    434
    Likes Received:
    0
    The banks approved millions of mortgage loans for people who could not afford them, that is why the homeless number decreased. So they will be homeless again soon, unless the USA (Unified Seizer of Assets) uses money it took from me by force :BangHead: to pay bills for people who bought more house than they could afford with money they did not have.
     
  4. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,653
    Likes Received:
    158
    Interestingly the drop is because the government has changed the definition of homeless. As a result of this I see no credibility in the current report. I do not knowif the data is "the most successful to date," but as the definition changed it cannot truthfully say that it has changed. Looks like election year politics .... again.

    http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1827876,00.html
     
  5. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,430
    Likes Received:
    72
    No. The banks were not giving out loans to people on the streets. These families would have likely remained in small apartments had they not been given loans.
     
  6. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    The banks were doing creative financing such as ARMs (adjustable rate mortgages) so people who could not afford the houses could get the loans.

    The 2 most important basic features of ARMs:

    Initial interest rate. This is the beginning interest rate on an ARM.
    The adjustment period. This is the length of time that the interest rate or loan period on an ARM is scheduled to remain unchanged. The rate is reset at the end of this period, and the monthly loan payment is recalculated.

    It is always better to get a 30-year fixed rate. When people could not afford the payments on a 30-year fixed rate on the house they wanted to buy, the banks greedily offered them ARMs knowing full well they'd end up having to forclose. It's a great short sale market now for people who want to invest and/or flip.
     
  7. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,430
    Likes Received:
    72
    This is very true. My point, however, was that the banks were not offering any kind of financing to homeless people. Does anyone honestly think the banks were throwing out ARMs to homeless guys under a bridge?
     

Share This Page

Loading...