POL - Remember this?

[Anthony]

i don't begrudge someone who took an ARM loan out - there was in fact a rather "safe" or lucrative time in the housing boom that getting such a risky loan was a smart investment. you'd have to be seriously retarded to take such a loan now, with the housing marktet in decline. but when it was prudent to invest, and emphasis on invest, it wasn't so bad. if you were gonna flip your house in under 2 years it was a decent way to get your foot in the door. ARMs aren't for people looking to stay in their homes for 10+ years. to expect your income to increase at some insane level in order to beat the ARM balloon interest increase - you just didn't play that hand correctly and made a grandios mistake at your own expense.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Hell Atlantic

i don't begrudge someone who took an ARM loan out - there was in fact a rather "safe" or lucrative time in the housing boom that getting such a risky loan was a smart investment. you'd have to be seriously retarded to take such a loan now, with the housing marktet in decline. but when it was prudent to invest, and emphasis on invest, it wasn't so bad. if you were gonna flip your house in under 2 years it was a decent way to get your foot in the door. ARMs aren't for people looking to stay in their homes for 10+ years. to expect your income to increase at some insane level in order to beat the ARM balloon interest increase - you just didn't play that hand correctly and made a grandios mistake at your own expense.

This is true. I regret not doing it myself. We had the opportunity, just didn't pull the trigger. If you could get in on the ground floor with a new purchase, the Boom was....A BOOM! I watched home and land property prices skyrocket. "Too Much" I said. "Houses here don't cost that much" I said. In a few years these people won't be able to afford these mortgages. Well, lots of those people came out WAY ahead, while I was afraid of upgrading. I could have done it, and done it right. I just wasn't really willing to do what it would have taken.

That said, when I hear of people defaulting on adjustible and Interest Only mortgages, I don't blame anyone but them.

Hell Bush said affordable homes right in his speach. He wasn't talking about the same ones we are mentioning in this thread. He was talking about houses in Texas and Montana.

[Farrah Whitworth-Rahn]

You know, the Reds dropped their home opener today, and Bushie threw out the first pitch. Coincidence? Hmmm....

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Hell Bush said affordable homes right in his speach. He wasn't talking about the same ones we are mentioning in this thread. He was talking about houses in Texas and Montana.

exactly. even the "affordable homes" in NYC are areas that the average family wouldn't want to live in. you shouldn't have images of white picket fences and tree lined streets in chic metropolitan cities and your neighbors waving "hello" to you as you go to pick up your morning paper from the porch. that's not the affordable homes Bush was referring to.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Farrah Whitworth-Rahn

You know, the Reds dropped their home opener today, and Bushie threw out the first pitch. Coincidence? Hmmm....

Pete Rose was unavaliable?

[Flasch186]

I think that perhaps my correlary skills are better than yours. I can see all of the ingredients, Including bush's speech, and see where it will get us. I tend to think that, for issues, that one supports, they, you, look at each ingredient seperately and since theyre all seperate they are all mutually exclusive leabing the "self Responsibility" card in play. I think that Self responsibility card is simply another ingredient along with many other ingredient including this administartions push to have more people go out and get mortgages. That IS an ingredient IMO, Ill admit that you all dont think so. Ok, doesnt change the fact that we're going to have flooded foreclosure market, a result of the ingredients, and that propped up economy (falsely IMO) will come to a halt, ESPECIALLY if we deport all the immigrants at the same time (not a threadjack - just another ingredient).

[Farrah Whitworth-Rahn]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Ok, doesnt change the fact that we're going to have flooded foreclosure market,

Great! I'll finally be able to pick up a vacation home pretty cheap. I've been saving for one for a while and I can't wait to see where all the bargains are going to be.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Was he in Alabama then?

It was Dallas, TX!

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

I think that perhaps my correlary skills are better than yours....

That's okay we still have spelling on our side.









Sorry...I'm snippy remember.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

I think that perhaps my correlary skills are better than yours. I can see all of the ingredients, Including bush's speech, and see where it will get us. I tend to think that, for issues, that one supports, they, you, look at each ingredient seperately and since theyre all seperate they are all mutually exclusive leabing the "self Responsibility" card in play. I think that Self responsibility card is simply another ingredient along with many other ingredient including this administartions push to have more people go out and get mortgages. That IS an ingredient IMO, Ill admit that you all dont think so. Ok, doesnt change the fact that we're going to have flooded foreclosure market, a result of the ingredients, and that propped up economy (falsely IMO) will come to a halt, ESPECIALLY if we deport all the immigrants at the same time (not a threadjack - just another ingredient).

Seriously.

This reach you are making is INSANE.

Bush's speach that you quoted specifically noted that we need to make more affordable homes so that we can become an ownership society. It notes that there are changes that need to be made to do it.

NO WHERE does he say it is a good idea to outstretch your personnel limits. This is just completely assinine to make this leap that people's idiotic personal decisions about a house are because of a what... 7 relatively meaningless sentences in the State of the Union that a majority of the country pays no attention to (and i'd argue a majority of the people that got these loans)...

give me a break.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

That's okay we still have spelling on our side.









Sorry...I'm snippy remember.

you speaketh the truth there...spelling is not one of my strong points however, the ingredients I listed above are true to the cause. Wade says it isn't to blame, however, to make this shepherd's pie it took more than one ingredient, to say (BTW this is NOT the only speech where he elaborated on ownership) it has nothing, zero, to do with it, I think is assinine.

[Ajaxab]

I'm not clear on how we can conclude that the uneducated are watching the State of the Union address. It would seem far more likely to me that they're flipping the channel to try to find something entertaining and upset that the President has the audacity to interrupt their favorite sitcom to tell them something.

[Flasch186]

There is no 100% of anything in this argument. When you have to use one edge of the spectrum to prove your point, than your point is probably inapplicable to the real world. Im talking about ingredients in the real world, YEs, some people, mildly educated, thinking about buying a home but not sure how to do it, listen to rhetoric, see Ditech commercials, see headliens in papers, see people making money, and think hey maybe we can do it too. then they meet Jow with Syevenson Lending fortune group, who tells them that he can make it so that their monthly payment is the same as it is in their old house, eventhough theyre getting 500 more square feet. Im not telling you anything you dont know, the argument about self responsibility is better than the one saying that the Pres. can just simply say whatever he wants cuz no one listens anyways. Than why listen and go to war? Why listen and be against SS reform? Its rather choosy to pick what that which is important that he says and that which he says that no one should listen to. Just the other day he said me and you shouldnt worry about security....I guess I shouldnt then?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Ajaxab

I'm not clear on how we can conclude that the uneducated are watching the State of the Union address. It would seem far more likely to me that they're flipping the channel to try to find something entertaining and upset that the President has the audacity to interrupt their favorite sitcom to tell them something.

LOL, exactly. if people are that dumb to blindly follow the President's advice, they're also probably not sophisticated enough to be interested in watchign the State of the Union. hell, i don't even watch the State of the Union, they're good for nothing except unnecessary rhetoric. Bush is the worst public speaker i've ever seen. i've never seen anyone who looks like even they don't believe what they're saying.

[wade moore]

Flasch, I'm sure a butterfly flapping its wings in China had an effect on this too, but why bother calculating this?

Bush's speaches are such a SMALL factor it's not worth bringing up. Let alone how you have here to demonize him and make him out to be this monster that is sending lower and middle class families into their cars to sleep at night.

[Ajaxab]

It seems this discussion is not about the ownership society, Bush or people getting caught in bad loan situations. Since very few Americans directly hear the president's speeches (only those who are in the room in which he speaks hear it directly), this discussion is about media effects. The media effects debate is ultimately unanswerable IMHO. In order to come to any conclusions we would need to, at the very least, answer the following questions:

Who hears the president's speeches? How many?
Who reads what the president has said? How many?
Who chooses to act upon what the president has said?
What actions do they take?
Can these actions be directly correlated to the president's speech? How do we know?
Who hears the content of the president's speeches through the mediation of other people? If they hear this content through interaction with others, is their decision based on the president's speech or another's interpretation of the speech?
And on and on...

Flasch may be entirely right in saying that some people may have been moved to get into more bad debt after reading/hearing Bush's speech. However, those who would critique Flasch may be entirely right in saying that the people who have got into these situations have not gotten into their predicament because of Bush's speech. Questions surrounding the speech are ultimately media effects questions--questions that I don't think can be answered.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Ajaxab

It seems this discussion is not about the ownership society, Bush or people getting caught in bad loan situations. Since very few Americans directly hear the president's speeches (only those who are in the room in which he speaks hear it directly), this discussion is about media effects. The media effects debate is ultimately unanswerable IMHO. In order to come to any conclusions we would need to, at the very least, answer the following questions:

Who hears the president's speeches? How many?
Who reads what the president has said? How many?
Who chooses to act upon what the president has said?
What actions do they take?
Can these actions be directly correlated to the president's speech? How do we know?
Who hears the content of the president's speeches through the mediation of other people? If they hear this content through interaction with others, is their decision based on the president's speech or another's interpretation of the speech?
And on and on...

Flasch may be entirely right in saying that some people may have been moved to get into more bad debt after reading/hearing Bush's speech. However, those who would critique Flasch may be entirely right in saying that the people who have got into these situations have not gotten into their predicament because of Bush's speech. Questions surrounding the speech are ultimately media effects questions--questions that I don't think can be answered.

very good point that cannot be rebuffed.