|
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 Helping "Qualified" Buyers: Fannie, Freddie Detail 3%-Down Payment Mortgage
Program
Now that home prices have recovered and homes are not the bargain they were
four years ago, it is fitting the parasites once again want to make homes "
affordable" to the masses with low-down payment options.
Please consider Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac detail plans for 3% down-payment
mortgages.
Housing finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on Monday detailed
plans to once again back mortgages with down payments as low as 3%, saying
the move to make home ownership more accessible contains safeguards to
protect against abuses that led to the subprime housing market crash.
“Our goal is to help additional qualified borrowers gain access to
mortgages,” said Andrew Bon Salle, executive vice president for single
family underwriting, pricing and capital markets at Fannie Mae.
Officials said the program was designed to help credit-worthy borrowers,
particularly those with low or moderate incomes, who can demonstrate the
ability to repay a mortgage but lack the money needed for at least a 5% down
payment.
Freddie Mac will limit its program, called Home Possible Advantage, to
mortgages for first-time homebuyers. Borrowers must participate in a
homebuyer education and counseling program before receiving the loan and
will have to pay for private mortgage insurance.
Fannie Mae's program will be available to anyone who has not owned a
primary residence for three years. Private mortgage insurance will be
required but counseling and education will not.
Helping "Qualified" Buyers
Notice the statements about helping "qualified borrowers".
If you lower the qualifications to zero, everyone qualifies by definition.
But is that a "help" or a debt-trap in waiting?
My Take
If you cannot afford to put 10% down on a home, then you can't afford the
home.
I side with House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-
Texas) who stated: "Such loans are inherently risky because the borrower has
almost no financial cushion against a personal or economic downturn, vastly
increasing the likelihood they will walk away from the loan once it gets
significantly underwater."
Low down payment loans are "an invitation by government for industry to
return to slipshod and dangerous practices that caused the mortgage meltdown
in the first place and wrecked our economy." | T*********I
发帖数: 10729 | 2 If you cannot afford to put 10% down on a home, then you can't afford the
home.
AGREED | t*c
发帖数: 8291 | 3 文字游戏。 现在没首付的买主也被叫做qualified buyers了。
这个qualification是越来越低。
fha从支持5%首付降低到3%， 以后又要降低为0%了。
买房者有享受房子增值的好处，却不用承担房价下跌的风险。
下跌只要走开就行了。
Mortgage
were
【在 l****z 的大作中提到】
: Helping "Qualified" Buyers: Fannie, Freddie Detail 3%-Down Payment Mortgage
: Program
: Now that home prices have recovered and homes are not the bargain they were
: four years ago, it is fitting the parasites once again want to make homes "
: affordable" to the masses with low-down payment options.
: Please consider Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac detail plans for 3% down-payment
: mortgages.
: Housing finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on Monday detailed
: plans to once again back mortgages with down payments as low as 3%, saying
: the move to make home ownership more accessible contains safeguards to
| t**x
发帖数: 20965 | 4 楼主和楼上的还有我自己，大家天天上网，税收高，工资低，
如果没有国内背景房子接济，不降低ｄｏｗｎｐａｙｍｅｎｔ， 还会有人买房子吗？
这样实际上是被迫保护美国资产。如果不这样，还不是被北京人上海人还有孟买人把美
国的不动产全收购了。 | T*********I
发帖数: 10729 | 5 我不觉得"北京人上海人还有孟买人把美国的不动产全收购了"有什么了不起。
公平交易。你给钱，我出货。
买主owner，有ownership和responsibility，一样要赋地产税。你哪国人又有什么分别？
美国资产最怕是没有responsibility，如楼主说的情况。一拍屁股走人，或者白住，直
到被轰走，那才会噩梦。
【在 t**x 的大作中提到】
: 楼主和楼上的还有我自己，大家天天上网，税收高，工资低，
: 如果没有国内背景房子接济，不降低ｄｏｗｎｐａｙｍｅｎｔ， 还会有人买房子吗？
: 这样实际上是被迫保护美国资产。如果不这样，还不是被北京人上海人还有孟买人把美
: 国的不动产全收购了。
| t**x
发帖数: 20965 | 6 我觉得不是那么简单， 这个和左右派没有关系，
房子， 基本生活资料， 人们的工资， 国家税收，等等， 不是那么简单。
如果太低， 别的国家真就来收购了， 美国社会一下子被买得空了。。
如果太高， 中产活不下去，，，，
现在的房价， 中国美国都难受， 人们生活很累可是换来的东西太少， 有左B的问题，
效率低， 也有右B的问题， 太贪婪。。
总之， 各个国家比烂， 维持房价大概是不得不
别？
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】
: 我不觉得"北京人上海人还有孟买人把美国的不动产全收购了"有什么了不起。
: 公平交易。你给钱，我出货。
: 买主owner，有ownership和responsibility，一样要赋地产税。你哪国人又有什么分别？
: 美国资产最怕是没有responsibility，如楼主说的情况。一拍屁股走人，或者白住，直
: 到被轰走，那才会噩梦。
| p**j
发帖数: 7063 | 7 人性都是贪婪的，无非就是有能力赚钱和没能力赚钱的区别，你要说谁在法律框架下赚
钱是太贪婪，纯粹脑子有病。
【在 t**x 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得不是那么简单， 这个和左右派没有关系，
: 房子， 基本生活资料， 人们的工资， 国家税收，等等， 不是那么简单。
: 如果太低， 别的国家真就来收购了， 美国社会一下子被买得空了。。
: 如果太高， 中产活不下去，，，，
: 现在的房价， 中国美国都难受， 人们生活很累可是换来的东西太少， 有左B的问题，
: 效率低， 也有右B的问题， 太贪婪。。
: 总之， 各个国家比烂， 维持房价大概是不得不
:
: 别？
| m********8
发帖数: 7463 | 8 Responsibility 显然应该全部转嫁到中产纳税人头上。否则何谈社会公平正义？
★ 发自iPhone App: ChineseWeb 8.7
【在 T*********I 的大作中提到】
: 我不觉得"北京人上海人还有孟买人把美国的不动产全收购了"有什么了不起。
: 公平交易。你给钱，我出货。
: 买主owner，有ownership和responsibility，一样要赋地产税。你哪国人又有什么分别？
: 美国资产最怕是没有responsibility，如楼主说的情况。一拍屁股走人，或者白住，直
: 到被轰走，那才会噩梦。
|
| t**x
发帖数: 20965 | 9 问题是框架是否合理。目前的政策你觉得对你有理就承认这个框架，不利就反对这个框
架，你自己才真是有病。
我建议每人两把菜刀，自生自灭。
【在 p**j 的大作中提到】
: 人性都是贪婪的，无非就是有能力赚钱和没能力赚钱的区别，你要说谁在法律框架下赚
: 钱是太贪婪，纯粹脑子有病。
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
