Does anyone agree with the $700 bailout?

[Cancel 2016.2]

SF makes it up as he goes.

You are an idiot. I provide data on the home price declines. I provide the data on the default rate on subprimes.

YOU provide nothing other than... well I sell some REOs and I like saw some sell for 50 cents and many areas are down 50% blah blah blah.... with NO friggin data to support what you are saying.

 

[Cancel7]

I had responded. I don't think anyone TRIED to do this. I am willing to listen to your reasoning as to why you think this was deliberate. Thus far I have only heard something to the effect of 'it gives them an excuse to privatize everything'. But I haven't seen an explanation as to HOW it does this.

Not saying that it is/isn't true... but I simply don't understand how you get to that point.

No no, why the bush administration attempted to foist a plan onto this country that would dump billions in bad debt on the taxpayer with no equity stake?

 

[uscitizen]

How about the S&L bailout SF. We made money on that and the bonds that financed it have not come due yet ?

 

[KingCondanomation]

Obfuscate, Warren Buffett has bought up some and he is a smart investor no?

What's really sad in all this is we shouldn't even be having this debate. If government were much smaller with much less taxes, there would be enough private equity (whose holders are far more qualified than government at finding value) to buy up what was actually worth anything and avoid this whole ugly mess.

 

[Obfuscate]

Obfuscate, Warren Buffett has bought up some and he is a smart investor no?
.

That would show there is money in the private markets, however he invested when the bailout was imminent. So he gets to cash in on the taxpayer also. It's smart to invest in wall street when the Government will bail them out.

 

[Obfuscate]

You are an idiot. I provide data on the home price declines. I provide the data on the default rate on subprimes.
.

It's too bad your home values was outdated and even that old estimate is 25% down. Also, in 5 years basically of sub prime it's a 25% default rate. You understand they have 30 years until they come to maturity don't you? Please explain how people who can't afford them and can't sell them will carry them to maturity unless the Government lowers their rate to below market and below inflation. IE a big loss. I'm sure glad you don't work at our bank. Although you would be a riot in loan officer meetings.

 

[Damocles]

bump

I'm reading up on it, there was something in my memory that I am seeking, but I can say that I posted that out of memory and it looks to be inaccurate.

SF, what say you? Was the S&L bailout a net gain and why?

 

[Cancel7]

I'm reading up on it, there was something in my memory that I am seeking, but I can say that I posted that out of memory and it looks to be inaccurate.

SF, what say you? Was the S&L bailout a net gain and why?

LOL

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

How did the S&L things turn a profit?

It didn't.

How did the Sweden debt turn a profit?

Fuck sweden.

They don't touch them because they don't have the capital. They don't work for the public good.

But even with enough capital, bad investements are still bad.

You're moronic. Stop getting your market understanding from fascists.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

No no, why the bush administration attempted to foist a plan onto this country that would dump billions in bad debt on the taxpayer with no equity stake?

Hmmm... I know that is probably rhetorical.... but i shall answer... prepare yourself... this might just come as a surprise to you..... Bush.... is a dumbass.

 

[Cancel7]

Hmmm... I know that is probably rhetorical.... but i shall answer... prepare yourself... this might just come as a surprise to you..... Bush.... is a dumbass.

Really. and Paulson? And Bernarke?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It's too bad your home values was outdated and even that old estimate is 25% down. Also, in 5 years basically of sub prime it's a 25% default rate. You understand they have 30 years until they come to maturity don't you? Please explain how people who can't afford them and can't sell them will carry them to maturity unless the Government lowers their rate to below market and below inflation. IE a big loss. I'm sure glad you don't work at our bank. Although you would be a riot in loan officer meetings.

No shit... really??? their final maturity is 30 years.... thanks captain obvious.

Again dumbshit.... if you have a mortgage for $300k and the government buys that mortgage for even 50 cents on the dollar... what did the government pay?

thats right.... 150k. If home values dropped by your 50%... then the current value of the property is also 150k (assuming of course that most of these people had no equity, which is probably the case).

So you now hold a $150k mortgage on a $150k property. If a person could afford that $300k at say 3% ARM... they can afford a fixed rate of 6% on a $150k mortgage. Current 30 yr fixed rates avg....6%.

Now on the more desperate loans... they are pricing at 15-30 cents. The math on those also works.

As for the default rate on subprimes... it was only recently that it jumped to a 25% default rate. You are assuming that the default rate will remain that high (actually you are asserting that it will go to 100%). The default rate will go down as the economy improves.


Example.... A person has an original mortgage on $300k at a teaser ARM of 3% (pmt of about $1300) and now that their ARM adjusted to 6% they can't afford the payment of $1800. They are in trouble. If the government buys that $300k mortgage for 50 cents on the dollar and refis it to a $225k mortgage at 6% fixed (payment again about $1300)...... then the consumer should be able to afford the mortgage again... correct? The 6% is the current avg for 30yr fixed debt. The government (if they hold it) gets not only the 6% income stream, but also gains from the capital appreciation in the loan.... more than likely they would turn around and sell the loan.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

No shit... really??? their final maturity is 30 years.... thanks captain obvious.

Again dumbshit.... if you have a mortgage for $300k and the government buys that mortgage for even 50 cents on the dollar... what did the government pay?

thats right.... 150k. If home values dropped by your 50%... then the current value of the property is also 150k (assuming of course that most of these people had no equity, which is probably the case).

So you now hold a $150k mortgage on a $150k property. If a person could afford that $300k at say 3% ARM... they can afford a fixed rate of 6% on a $150k mortgage. Current 30 yr fixed rates avg....6%.

Now on the more desperate loans... they are pricing at 15-30 cents. The math on those also works.

As for the default rate on subprimes... it was only recently that it jumped to a 25% default rate. You are assuming that the default rate will remain that high (actually you are asserting that it will go to 100%). The default rate will go down as the economy improves.


Example.... A person has an original mortgage on $300k at a teaser ARM of 3% (pmt of about $1300) and now that their ARM adjusted to 6% they can't afford the payment of $1800. They are in trouble. If the government buys that $300k mortgage for 50 cents on the dollar and refis it to a $225k mortgage at 6% fixed (payment again about $1300)...... then the consumer should be able to afford the mortgage again... correct? The 6% is the current avg for 30yr fixed debt. The government (if they hold it) gets not only the 6% income stream, but also gains from the capital appreciation in the loan.... more than likely they would turn around and sell the loan.

But with this many foreclosure, 225 is still to optimistic. You're still just pulling number out of your ass based on nothing but a desire for your math to work.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

SF, if your numbers were even close to that, nobody would be asking the government to step in.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

But with this many foreclosure, 225 is still to optimistic. You're still just pulling number out of your ass based on nothing but a desire for your math to work.

No dumbass, it is showing how far they can reduce the mortgage for the individual to get them back to their original payment. The Fed could refi that same deal for the $150k they paid for it. But that would drop the individuals mortgage to below what they were orginially paying and I don't believe we should do that. Especially given that the real estate valuations should rise as the economy improves.

That is how much flexibility the Fed has.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

No dumbass, it is showing how far they can reduce the mortgage for the individual to get them back to their original payment. The Fed could refi that same deal for the $150k they paid for it. But that would drop the individuals mortgage to below what they were orginially paying and I don't believe we should do that. Especially given that the real estate valuations should rise as the economy improves.

That is how much flexibility the Fed has.

There is no talk of reducing mortgages for individuals. You're speaking out of your anus again.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

There is no talk of reducing mortgages for individuals. You're speaking out of your anus again.

So you think they are going to buy these mortgages and leave them as is? Just waiting for them to blow up? Or do you think they will work to protect the taxpayers and consequently work to reduce foreclosures?

Side note... We will have to wait to see the final bill, but they stated today that there are components of the bill designed to help people stay out of foreclosure.

 

[Obfuscate]

Like I said, Superfreak makes it up as he goes. Throws out phoney numbers that don't include carry costs or the cost to the public through inflation into his hairbrained numbers. He's already been caught in his S & L made us money lie also.

Wall Street and the Congress worked together to ass rape the public and SF now wants a kiss.

 

[Freddy Figbottom]

So you think they are going to buy these mortgages and leave them as is? Just waiting for them to blow up? Or do you think they will work to protect the taxpayers and consequently work to reduce foreclosures?

Yes. I think they will do nothing to reduce foreclosures. This bill is only to protect wallstreet.

Side note... We will have to wait to see the final bill, but they stated today that there are components of the bill designed to help people stay out of foreclosure.

So then the taxpayers definitely will not make money, if they do that. You cannot have your cake and eat it too, you lying fascist piece of shit.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Like I said, Superfreak makes it up as he goes. Throws out phoney numbers that don't include carry costs or the cost to the public through inflation into his hairbrained numbers. He's already been caught in his S & L made us money lie also.

Wall Street and the Congress worked together to ass rape the public and SF now wants a kiss.

Listen dumbass... instead of chirping away with your 'SF makes things up'... how about you use the example and tell me where it is wrong. Be specific. Make sure to highlight the costs that I am supposedly ignoring.

otherwise, do shut your ass.