Democrats as Robin Hood: steal from renters, give to loan owners and banksters

Jul 11th, 2011  
by IrvineRenter  in Library News

Astute Observations

Astute Observation by awgee
2011-07-11 04:58 AM

yup

Astute Observation by GK
2011-07-11 06:36 AM

Wow. Incidentally, I just love how politicians endorsing programs like this one talk suggest that those who are in danger of “losing their home” have been paying their mortgages for 28/30 years and simply had bad luck befall them at that point. They never mention that most who are losing “their home” don’t actually own ONE SPECK of it, “bought” something they couldn’t actually afford from day 1, and already raped the lender/taxpayer via excess HELOC and general payment deadbeatism. Quite staggering.

Astute Observation by Bill
2011-07-11 08:53 AM

So you’re upset over generalizations you say?

Astute Observation by AZDavidPhx
2011-07-11 05:37 PM

Yes!  Yes!

And what about renters?  We have homes too!  No Government assistance for us when we have bad luck!

Unemployed renter?  Just go crash on your friend’s couch you putz, get out of my face I cannot even stand to look at you.

Unemployed house debtor?  Well sir, right this way - how can I help you sir?  We have some great programs available to assist you in servicing your debt!  Right this way!  Can I get you something sir?  Bottled water?  Coke?

Astute Observation by Bill
2011-07-11 08:40 AM

Steal from renters?  Whoa, what garbage.  Don’t you know what forbearance is?  This doesn’t involve you Larry.

Astute Observation by awgee
2011-07-11 08:57 AM

Yeah, Larry!  You just don’t know what forebearance is and how the government, (you), will not end up paying anything for this.

Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!  Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!

Astute Observation by wheresthebeef
2011-07-11 01:55 PM

Bill, the phone is ringing…this might be one of those double up 6% commisions.  Don’t waste too much time here!!!

Astute Observation by AZDavidPhx
2011-07-11 05:33 PM

Is Bill a “r"ealtor or a random FB?

Astute Observation by Perspective
2011-07-11 08:48 AM

I think all articles like this should begin and end with:

“Principal reduction achieved through foreclosure is superior to all other forms of principal reduction.”

There is no truer statement, yet somehow this fact is lost on homedebtors and the media.

Astute Observation by AZDavidPhx
2011-07-11 05:31 PM

Housedebtors do not care about their fellow man one bit.  You would not hear one word from them if the foreclosed house did not effectively lower the fantasy prices of all the neighboring houses around it.

Oh, the foreclosed house next door means that my house is not worth less to a prospective buyer?! Holy F**K, the Government must do something immediately!  For the children of these poor souls!

Astute Observation by Soylent Green Is People
2011-07-11 08:55 AM

Here’s a private company starting a principal forgiveness program. It’s the new normal:

http://www.housingwire.com/2011/07/11/pmi-to-pay-underwater-borrowers-to-stay-put

The “money” quote:

“Participation in RH Reward is voluntary and there is no cost to the homeowner, according to PMI. The cash will come after a lengthy period of keeping the mortgage current, generally from 36 to 60 months. According to PMI, the reward will be between 10 to 30% of the unpaid principal balance.”

It appears to be more expensive to pay a claim on a foreclosure than it is to pay a persons principal down.

My .02c

Soylent Green Is People

Astute Observation by ldfpgh
2011-07-11 09:04 AM

On the contrary Bill, it involves everyone.  This administration is continually ignoring responsible people and making them pay for the selfish and idiotic actions of the masses.  I for one, don’t feel the need to pay for people like you who peddled overpriced homes to people who had no ability to pay for it.  The lack of financial conservatives in the past few years has been astounding;  as are the things that homeowners believe they are entitled to, merely because they own a home.  It’s a joke, as are the majority of your troll comments.  So thank you Larry for continuing to provide information and call out the current b.s. that is being peddled on us—regardless of all of the OCAR and its pundits whining.

Astute Observation by Chapulin Colorado
2011-07-11 09:17 AM

Thanks for the article IR.
But this policy is bullshit.  How the heck is it fair that a loanowner can squat while I have to pay rent and get srewed by the IRS fleecing my opportunity to buy.  I have been waiting for years for this to hit bottom…. now I will have to wait more years…  I should just buy a house and never pay a single mortgage payment…  squat for 3+ years like a bunch of loanowners here in Sacramento.  Who do we contact about this BS?

Astute Observation by Planet Reality
2011-07-11 09:18 AM

Aren’t renters now able to take out an FHA loan and obtain this unemployment insurance?  Not saying this is good policy, however it appears to be available to anyone who wants it. 

FHA is irrelevant to Irvine.

Astute Observation by AZDavidPhx
2011-07-11 05:39 PM

Aren’t renters now able to take out an FHA

No, PR.  Renters are not allowed to use FHA loans to pay rent.  It doesn’t work that way.  Thanks for the astute observation though - it changed my life.

Astute Observation by Planet Reality
2011-07-11 05:45 PM

All you have to do is buy a house with an FHA loan.

You then have this one year unemployment insurance to have no monthly rent payment.  This is accomplished with a 3.5% down payment.

This is available to anyone wants it.  It has no bias.  Play the game or not, your choice.

Astute Observation by Swiller
2011-07-11 08:58 PM

Too funny again. Not one of them will “play the game” as much as they whine and b1tch about how the homeowner is making out so well.

Well, there it is, PR calls out the huge band of hypocrites….C’MON, buy the house and DEFAULT!!!
It’s the best thing since sliced bread, and by Gawd, I’m willing to bet you can get 5 years of free rent by the time all this blows over right?

.....crickets. The Ponzi winners sold in 2004-2006, but they didn’t do anything wrong, that profit is all good. It was FRAUD from top to bottom, when you point fingers, point them at everyone who benefited from the raping of american home value stability, no wait, point them at the victims who will lose their only home, yes, that’s much easier, AND they have no money or political ties.

Astute Observation by Planet Reality
2011-07-12 06:25 AM

No, I’m not saying that.

This is unemployment insurance.  Similar to auto
companies saying you will have no monthly payment while you are unemployed.

Again, not saying this is good policy.  Just calling it out for what it is.  It’s a government incentive to buy a house with an FHA loan.  If you became unemployed not only would you receive unemployment, you would also have no monthly payment thanks to the government.

This is taking away some uncertainty for a current buyer.  You can whine or you can understand what this does.

Astute Observation by just some guy
2011-07-12 09:10 AM

Alright, here it goes…...

I concur with PR.  There, I said it.  I have been struggling with this idea for quite some time.  My motivation for buying a home relatively soon has almost nothing to do with whether or not I think it is a good time to buy.  Rather, my decision would primarily be based on buying some “unemployment” insurance.  If I don’t pay my rent, I get evicted in 30 days. If I don’t pay my mortgage, I could have a year before I get evicted.  If I do FHA financing and only put down the minimum 3.5%, then not only do I preserve my cash, but the bank, errrrrr….I mean the Gubbamint will take it’s sweet time repossessing my rather average starter home.  The biggest roadblock that is keeping me from pulling the trigger is the PMI.  For 400k, I think it is slightly above $400/mo. for a minimum of 5 years.  And let’s not forget the HOA’s dues.  Yowza!!!!  I would rather put that money into a Roth-IRA.

Astute Observation by Planet Reality
2011-07-12 09:54 AM

It’s a logical conclusion if you are buying at rental parity.

You are combatting curent rental inflation while obtaining unemployment insurance.

Astute Observation by Swiller
2011-07-13 07:51 AM

*You* might not be saying that PR, but I am. Let all the whiners go buy a home if it’s so freaking good to “get over” on society. But they won’t, because they know losing your home sucks a$$ and there most definitly ARE downsides.

I understand your premise, but the majoirty homeowner mentality hasn’t quite grasped what you are pointing too. After generations and generations of stable housing increases, now you have to re-train the wheel running hamsters to HEDGE their purchase with a low down and government backed unemployment insurance.

Did anyone see THIS trick to keep housing prices inflated? I didn’t.

Astute Observation by Planet Reality
2011-07-13 08:31 AM

It should be correctly viewed as a way to motivate purchases on the low end and also increase unemployment benefits
to low end home owners.

Lower end areas are screwed anyway so I doubt this will help.  This has no impact in premium areas. 

The inland desert areas have no future as summers go to 120 degrees and energy and water cost hyper inflate.

Astute Observation by Mat Masters
2011-07-11 09:18 AM

Forbearance is lame,  no consideration for prudent renters who chose not to buy at high prices like some sheeple.  Now us renters are going to pay for them to stay in their houses at inflated mortgage balances, pretty lame policy. 

Part of me thinks that banks must be in way more trouble then they are letting on since policies like this only help them . 

Only other thought is Oboma is trying to buy votes.  His goal is to get reelected so it make sense for him (but not for me!!!!!!)

Astute Observation by Eat that!
2011-07-11 09:45 AM

Part of me thinks that banks must be in way more trouble then they are letting on since policies like this only help them . 

Bingo!  And we have a winner.  That’s how we are going delaying the next great depression.  We gave banks billions of dollars and changed the rules on mark-to-market so that they can appear solvent. 

As for Obama buying votes.  All politician buy votes in one form or another.

Astute Observation by AZDavidPhx
2011-07-11 05:42 PM

no consideration for prudent renters who chose not to buy at high prices

Of course not.  Do you think that the Government is owned by the Rental lobby?

Astute Observation by Chapulin Colorado
2011-07-11 09:42 AM

How can I get an FHA mortgage with 3.5% down + 3.5% HomePath + 2 year fee home warranty + not pay my mortgage for 3+ years + renegotiate for principal reduction + not pay mortgage for another 3+ years + continue squatting for another 3+ years + renegotiate another principal reduction + ....

This definitely makes homeownership sound attractive!
where do I sign-up?

Astute Observation by wheresthebeef
2011-07-11 01:59 PM

Call Bill.  He has all the info!

Astute Observation by AZDavidPhx
2011-07-11 05:43 PM

You are on to something.  Better start filming the infomercial while it is still original.

Astute Observation by Mark
2011-07-11 09:46 AM

And just remember that we pay U.S. senators and representatives a premium salary plus excellent benefits to keep kicking this can down the road….to the next unfortunate and incompetent elected official who, because he/she is “all about change”, will never rectify either. 

All this new policy will succeed in doing is unnecessarily prolonging the suffering and inevitable.  These people will lose their homes.

I’m not sure who will win the 2012 election, but I get the sense that compassion for the “poor”, “downtrodden” and “foreclosed upon” will be in ever dwindling supply.  This is unfortunate, because there are a lot of people who went into foreclosure over the last several years by not “spending the house” and through no fault of their own: sudden unemployment or serious family medical issues and insufficient insurance coverage.

Astute Observation by Anonymous
2011-07-11 09:58 AM

SoCal rent hikes trail U.S. average
http://lansner.ocregister.com/2011/07/11/socal-rent-hikes-trail-u-s-average/116347/

Economy Faces a Jolt as Benefit Checks Run Out
“Close to $2 of every $10 that went into Americans’ wallets last year were payments like jobless benefits, food stamps, Social Security and disability, according to an analysis by Moody’s Analytics”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/11/business/economy/as-government-aid-fades-so-may-the-recovery.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&sq=Expiration of federal aid may be drag on spending, recovery&st=cse&scp=1

Astute Observation by neewbie2008
2011-07-11 10:08 AM

Exactly how many are due to 1. overspending (Ponzing on a house expending to appreaciate to pay off the prior loan) regardless on changing employment status, 2. true unemployment (not unemployment on top of #1), 3. Medical reasons that if a non-occurance would of been able to pay the loan.  How much is truely downtrodden and how much is pure foolishness while claiming downtroddeness?
My old work place had the option of using opting out of the health insurance and taking cash (for those covered under the spouse’s plan).  There were those collecting donation when they had a medical problems and not insurance (i.e., lied to take the cash instead of medical insurance).

Astute Observation by newbie2008
2011-07-11 10:14 AM

Robin Hood took money from the govt and gave it back to the righfull owners.  The govt did it by excess taxes and seizures in Robin Hood’s day.  Not much different from today, excess there’s no Robin Hood.  Just the taking and giving to those in power the banksters. 

I know of no body every bying a home.  They bought a house.  The wife and kids were not included in the sale.

Astute Observation by Swiller
2011-07-11 09:02 PM

Man, bummer to all the single people who live alone in their HOUSES, no way to have a home without a wife and kids.

The sickness spreads. Do it for the children.

Astute Observation by HydroCabron
2011-07-11 10:31 AM

The government keeps implementing policies to benefit one group over another not because it is the right thing to do but because it buys them votes.

And renters are paying more rent lately in my area, because there seems to be some sort of shortage of rentals developing due to newly-minted renters from the ex-homeowner pool and current renters determined not to purchase anywhere near the current are-they-on-crack asking prices.

One would think that renters would become a force to be reckoned with at some point, but much of the renting class does not vote much, and, thanks to a slew of new voter ID initiatives in many states, will be voting less in future.

The only thing I can see ending the power of the homedebtor class is a large bloc of elderly renters, as they vote religiously. It is not in the interest of the banks to have anyone with a paycheck or social security check become a renter.

Astute Observation by bmwman91
2011-07-11 11:27 AM

Rents have definitely been shooting up. I have been living & working in Mountain View (Palo Alto’s overpriced neighbor to the south) for 3 years now as a renter. Each year I have been able to keep or reduce my rent & presently pay $2312 monthly on a 3BR unit in a nice complex (with 2 roomies). Well, THIS year, if we stayed rent goes up ~$250, no negotiations. My fiancee & I are moving to a 1BR anyway, and the cheapest one in the complex is $2200. A month ago it was $1800, and a year ago it was ~$1500. Goodbye, nice complex!

Rents all over this area have shot up. It is highly desirable, and the median price of a fixer-upper junkbox in MV is still over $900k. Since relatively few people can responsibly afford that, renting has gotten hot. Even the sketchy places where your car is certain to be broken into are no less than $1000 monthly.

As a middle class couple, I can certainly say that it feels like a war is being waged against us. We have been saving prudently for years & COULD put 10-20% down in Mountain View, but that seems like pissing money away. Prices are going to drop, someday, and I won’t buy into a losing investment, particularly when they all need $50k+ in repairs & updates. The longer we wait though, the less that saved money is worth. Pretty soon, rent will match a mortgage on an overpriced house I’m afraid.

Astute Observation by Marc
2011-07-11 04:05 PM

Frankly, you should probably find a different job and relocate instead of just making your landlord richer. Imagine how much money you could save in a different location, assuming you would be able to get a similar job

Astute Observation by Mark
2011-07-11 11:29 AM

If this is the “Robin Hood” story all over again, then who is King Richard and when does he return from foreign wars to put his foot through Prince John’s head?

Astute Observation by Swiller
2011-07-11 02:20 PM

Defacrats are evil, but when you worship mammon, repugnantcans are elite.

Both parties sold out the american people and your title tries to blame the defacrats…sad. The mentality hasn’t cleared up yet, hurry up and vote 100% republicans and see what happens…I will laugh my a$$ off as social services disappear, and you are a debt slave sold into bondage with no forgiveness. The Cans support “free market” LMFAO!

The title of today’s blog bespeaks much about the originator. No worries though, OC is primarily repugnantcans. How about that for a nice elephant monikor “Repugnant Can - same old ideas to screw the little guy”.

I hope they drop the corporate tax rate to ZERO, and when there isn’t a pot to piss in, THEN see the repugnant members spin that. Broadcoms Tax Rate in California with billions of profit….1.7%. OH MY GAWD how can they operate in California? It’s repugnant.

Astute Observation by AZDavidPhx
2011-07-11 05:21 PM

Swiller, wipe the froth from your mouth. 

The title is meant to convey the irony of the Democrats, who often market themselves as the party of the little guy, selling out to bankers.

It’s no secret that Republicans are the party of the wealthy, in general.  In other words, we all know that Republicans love bankers.

The Democrats are supposed to be better than the evil bankers.  As it turns out though, they are no better than the Republicans.

Get yourself together for God’s sake man.

Astute Observation by newbie2008
2011-07-11 06:29 PM

The Republicrat GWB or Jorge has a 1 trillion bailout for the banksters and friends.
The Democrat BHO wanted change so he increase the bailout to 3 trillion.  That was the change.

Just more smoke and mirrors.  Best to have a third party or dead gridlock.  But we just can’t get deal gridlock when it comes to bailing out the banksters.

Astute Observation by Swiller
2011-07-11 08:50 PM

Aye, that’s one thing we agree on, both parties selling us out. D’s with handouts and special interests, R’s with corporate handouts and special interests….both support Endless War.

I’m not in dire straits by any means David, I saw this coming years ago and have been planning accordingly. I firmly believe the biggest jolt to americans will be simply learning to live without most of the luxuries. I do believe I’ve saved almost $600 since January by canceling cable.

Life is better when you aren’t chained to debt. Bring back 10% interest rates and drop our homes to 3x the area income please.

Astute Observation by Lemon Spaceship
2011-07-11 09:58 PM

“If borrowers can break that link, I will see how much I can borrow, then I will quit work and just keep the house. Wouldn’t you?”

Right on. I’ll buy an uber expensive house and then tell the boss what’s on my mind. It’s a beauty that only a faith-based group of fucking degenerates could justify.

IR, the world is going to Hell, about what it deserves. Most Americans are morally bankrupt spineless twits. It’s hardly a surprise that scum-scraped fucking parasites maintain their jobs by whoring out their governmental authority.

God Bless America, Land of the Degenerates and their Circuses.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

<< Back to main