This sums it up pretty well

Although I will acknowledge that this is anecdotal, based on the recent downfall of the mortgage industry, I don't think my observations were isolated.

The majority of people that I have seen over the years have been stupidly taking out way more money than they can afford and the banks have been loans out for overpriced dumps. This was bound to happen and it was bound to happen mainly because of stupidity on the side of the banks and individuals taking out too much money.
 
Desh said:
I showed where the dems who tried to bring it to the attention of the body.

They did not have the numbers to force any action. Why did the powers in control refuse to adress what had been brought to their attention?
Click to expand...
They bring it to the attention rather than introduce legislation? Either way the resolution was weak and far too late. I did find it interesting how you suggested the very sub-primes that were allowed by the legislation that I spoke of in 1992 were all "predatory".

This thing didn't warn them of the bubble, it was an attempt to only stop predatory practices by lenders without addressing the actual bubble.

This was CYA, and not even legislation. Your excuses notwithstanding the bubble was created by "more people than ever before" owning homes. Supply and demand is the rule that applies here. With or without predatory lending practices (and I believe that the 1999 law, as I stated several times expedited the bubble and its current state, it didn't create it, it just put the bus into higher gear) that bubble was growing by artificially increasing the numbers based on bad legislation where people who were not expert played with banking risk assessments and forced banks to give loans they otherwise would not. This would have created the problem regardless of later predatory practices speeding it up. The slow road to hell still leads to hell.

Running around and saying "well it went really fast here so that must be the problem" is inane and shows a misunderstanding of the most basic rules in economics. I expect legislators to have seen the problem and changed the law. But it was a decade and a half of irresponsibility from both parts that created the problem. The 1999 law was just the cherry on top of the sundae.
 
LadyT said:
Although I will acknowledge that this is anecdotal, based on the recent downfall of the mortgage industry, I don't think my observations were isolated.

The majority of people that I have seen over the years have been stupidly taking out way more money than they can afford and the banks have been loans out for overpriced dumps. This was bound to happen and it was bound to happen mainly because of stupidity on the side of the banks and individuals taking out too much money.
Click to expand...
It is also anecdotal for me to say that some years ago, when I started investing in RE, that the foreclosures were nearly all in two areas of my city. Areas where the working folks were on the edge, and a job loss or bad situation would push them over. For the most part - honest hard working folks had something bad happen.

Now, I see pretty houses in nice neighborhoods being taken back by banks. It's something that I began to notice about three years ago.

Addendum: The houses I see coming back to banks have very little, if any, equity in them. I am seeing a lot of upside downs. What I see failing: 15 year fix - rare, 30 year fixed some, 2/28, 5/25, 80/20, ARMs and I/O - out the wazoo.
 
Last edited:
Troglodyte27 said:
It is also anecdotal for me to say that some years ago, when I started investing in RE, that the foreclosures were nearly all in two areas of my city. Areas where the working folks were on the edge, and a job loss or bad situation would push them over. For the most part - honest hard working folks had something bad happen.

Now, I see pretty houses in nice neighborhoods being taken back by banks. It's something that I began to notice about three years ago.
Click to expand...

When I saw an acquaintence get a loan for a $550K shell of a house, my boyfriend and I pretty much knew these banks were headed for a huge downfall.
 
Troglodyte27 said:
It is also anecdotal for me to say that some years ago, when I started investing in RE, that the foreclosures were nearly all in two areas of my city. Areas where the working folks were on the edge, and a job loss or bad situation would push them over. For the most part - honest hard working folks had something bad happen.

Now, I see pretty houses in nice neighborhoods being taken back by banks. It's something that I began to notice about three years ago.
Click to expand...

I saw a map up foreclosed home in my area, and I'm in a pretty wealthy area of Ohio now, and they were all over the place. I couldn't believe how many homes are foreclosed or in the process of it.
 
DigitalDave said:
I saw a map up foreclosed home in my area, and I'm in a pretty wealthy area of Ohio now, and they were all over the place. I couldn't believe how many homes are foreclosed or in the process of it.
Click to expand...

I can't get the big city-wide picture in my area. The Realtytrac map locks up and goes into "too many to display" if I zoom out beyond the next to closest level.
 
Cypress said:
I remember when Desh was posting speeches from David Walker Comptroller General of the United States, who warned that the massive borrowing and debt policy of the Bush Administration and republican congress was heading us for the cliff, that many rightwing bush fans laughed Desh off.
Click to expand...

Like Desh was the first person to complain about spending in Congress. Please.

And Desh's article is an opinion of a gentleman from a different party. Big surprise he doesn't support the tax cuts etc. He gives his spin which he is entitled too. And because he has a different economic philosophy doesn't mean he is incorrect but does not make him right either.

And the idea that one must be a member of the World Bank or one is not qualified to question the author is off the charts. It's like saying one must have a law degree to question Bill Clinton or an MBA to question Bush.
 
Stunning jump in foreclosures

Carolyn Said, Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

01-22) 11:22 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- Foreclosures and default notices skyrocketed to record peaks in California and the Bay Area in the fourth quarter of 2007, according to a report released Tuesday. The information was a fresh reminder that the slumping real estate market is continuing to have a serious impact on homeowners, particularly those with risky subprime mortgages.

Lenders repossessed 31,676 residences in California in the October-November-December period, according to DataQuick Information Systems, a La Jolla research firm. That was a dramatic 421.2 percent increase from 6,078 in the year-ago quarter.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/22/BUTEUJN7I.DTL&tsp=1
 
uscitizen said:
Stunning jump in foreclosures

Carolyn Said, Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

01-22) 11:22 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- Foreclosures and default notices skyrocketed to record peaks in California and the Bay Area in the fourth quarter of 2007, according to a report released Tuesday. The information was a fresh reminder that the slumping real estate market is continuing to have a serious impact on homeowners, particularly those with risky subprime mortgages.

Lenders repossessed 31,676 residences in California in the October-November-December period, according to DataQuick Information Systems, a La Jolla research firm. That was a dramatic 421.2 percent increase from 6,078 in the year-ago quarter.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/22/BUTEUJN7I.DTL&tsp=1
Click to expand...


SoCal is struggling as well....

http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/15/real_estate/calif_prices.ap/index.htm?postversion=2008011515
 
Cypress said:
I remember when Desh was posting speeches from David Walker Comptroller General of the United States, who warned that the massive borrowing and debt policy of the Bush Administration and republican congress was heading us for the cliff, that many rightwing bush fans laughed Desh off.
Click to expand...

you are right
 
evince said:
The law was not a danger to the economy until it was used in a Massive way to fuel a slagging economy. You change a law when it proves to harm you right?

The effects were not harmful untill it was apllied differently than it had ever been applied before.
Click to expand...


and how did they do that to the law?

by holding back the broker rules for 8 long years
 
super duper you screamed about how panicky Ca people were.


when when when will you face you were wrong and we were right.

You just LAGGED us in figuring it out and REFUSE to admitt how partisan you were
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top