Lending Standards Fall At FHA
This blog has long maintained that the lowering of lending standards is a desperate attempt to stave off a correction. Case in point; the FHA is aggressively going after the subprime market. "Secretary Alphonso Jackson has a request for potential first-time home buyers, especially those with limited or imperfect credit histories: When you shop for a home this spring or summer, take a hard look at the new, consumer-friendly breed of FHA mortgages now rolling into the marketplace."
The packages are crazy, of course, as the money guys push more cash at borrowers. Still, a few downsides to subprime loans are mentioned.
"Be wary of the higher rates, fees and penalties that often come with loans in the subprime market..Some subprime servicers have little or no financial or legal incentives to step in and work with delinquent borrowers..Subprime loans often impose heavy early-payoff fees."
9 Comments:
This site is not "melody.com"
If you want to read your own writing, Melody, perhaps you'd enjoy having your own site.
When I started reading this thread, there were some good points. Then it became tedious. Then you posted blather about the President with no editing to include only that information specifically relevant to housing bubbles.
As my sister would have said, "I'm going to tell Daddy on you!" Please stop hogging the site.
( 2. In 2004 proceeds from Cash-out refinancing, and Home-equity line-of-credit, accounted for 77% of total U.S. consumption.)
Where can I see this item? 77% brings many four letter words to mind.
How best to use Ever Bank to put some money outside of the dollar?
Melody, chill out. Life is not all bad.
( 2. In 2004 proceeds from Cash-out refinancing, and Home-equity line-of-credit, accounted for 77% of total U.S. consumption. http://www.mortgagebankers.org/briefs/2000/0223e.html )
Ah.. the link says 77% of mortgages took out equity; that is different than 77% of total U.S. consumption (i.e., some measure of consumer spending/GDP)
I liked Melody's posts on this thread. The "Bush resume" is a bit off-topic and bear in mind we seem to have quite a few Bush-boosters among us reading this blog. I honestly don't know what they see in him but while we're all getting along so well I hate to antagonize them :)
I can relate to Melody's anxiety and sense of insecurity about where the world is heading, at least economically speaking.
Melody,
The foot traffic information was the most useful for me.
I'm not here at Ben's blog to read any Bush-bashing. I can go to political web sites for that. I don't really think Presidents have much to do with economic cycles. They last longer than presidencies.
I think the housing bubble clearly started in 1997.
I agree with other posters, Melody, in that you have some pretty cool points, but let's leave the Bush-bashing to different sites. The coming housing crash has it's roots much deeper than the four years or so that the Bush administration policies have held reign.
"I agree with other posters, Melody, in that you have some pretty cool points, but let's leave the Bush-bashing to different sites. The coming housing crash has it's roots much deeper than the four years or so that the Bush administration policies have held reign."
I agree with Chuck on this. The main culprit in all of this bubble creation is Alan Greenspan and his band of inflating Merry Men. AG has been head of the Fed since Reagan - far too long for a egomaniacal idealouge(IMHO).
The only thing I can criticize Bush on as far as this bubble goes, is his idiotic comments about "The American Dream" of home ownership and how an almost 70% ownership level is a great thing and we should try to make the number even higher.
Luckily he's been laying off of this recently, probably because the GSE's are going south and he realizes this whole thing could turn into a gigantic bailout soon.
I doubt presidents will give the future Fed chairman so much latitude once people figure out how bad AG screwed up the job.
They should turn those military barracks that are shut down into "condo conversions" It would probably more than cover the cost of shutting these bases down :)
Post a Comment
<< Home