Foreclosures

  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Oct 02, 2008 2:49 AM GMT
    Foreclosure Alley


    Gesh...so sad....


    [URL]http://p.castfire.com/fcieq/video/26078/26078_2008-09-25-215549.flv[/URL]



  • dfrourke

    Posts: 1062

    Oct 02, 2008 2:55 AM GMT
    this was simply amazing...just walked away....

    wow.

    - David icon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2008 3:14 AM GMT
    Wow! I knew that this is is a frightening problem but never expected people to just leave everything.

    Also makes me think I could buy in the U.S. and live like a king, provided there is even a job available soon.

    I hope these people can afford to rent afterward.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 02, 2008 7:14 PM GMT
    Thanks for posting this. I copied it and sent it to everyone on my yahoo address list.

    Why is it that there is 700 billion available for the people who caused this catastrophe and not any for the folks that are loosing their homes like this. It is unbelievable. I think that all the fatcats who are responsible for this ought to be hung up and had their balls fried. I will even supply the huevos rancheros sause.

    These bankers are responsible for this and yet they could not think of a single second hand company to call to make sure that all this merchandise was not just thrown away. Yeah, they said they contacted a charity group that would not turn up in time, like that was the only alternative.

    Also, at a time when the Colorado River is being drained for the water usage of these people, no effort is being made to save all the pool water to irrigate even the plants along the freeway.

    What a colossal waste!!!!

  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Mar 22, 2011 5:36 PM GMT
    And a few years later....


    US Treasury to sell $142bn of mortgage assets

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12814609
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 22, 2011 8:09 PM GMT
    This is so, so sad. I can't believe they are just throwing everything in the dumpster! The stuff could at least be taken to charities and distributed. What a waste.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 22, 2011 8:15 PM GMT
    alexander7 saidThanks for posting this. I copied it and sent it to everyone on my yahoo address list.

    Why is it that there is 700 billion available for the people who caused this catastrophe and not any for the folks that are loosing their homes like this. It is unbelievable. I think that all the fatcats who are responsible for this ought to be hung up and had their balls fried. I will even supply the huevos rancheros sause.

    These bankers are responsible for this and yet they could not think of a single second hand company to call to make sure that all this merchandise was not just thrown away. Yeah, they said they contacted a charity group that would not turn up in time, like that was the only alternative.

    Also, at a time when the Colorado River is being drained for the water usage of these people, no effort is being made to save all the pool water to irrigate even the plants along the freeway.

    What a colossal waste!!!!



    You should instead take your anger out at congress (mostly liberals like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, but also with Bush's sanction) who were instrumental in ordering government-chartered fannie and freddie to push into more subprime loans and pressuring commercial banks to give loans to people who could not afford them, all for the supposed purpose of making homes "more affordable" and to "advance" home ownership "diversity". While bankers also hold part of the blame they did not decide one day to put everything in jeopardy simply to watch everything collapse and never would have engaged in these practices otherwise -- this was was directly related to government interference which always creates a bubble and then a bust.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Mar 22, 2011 8:29 PM GMT
    I see this is from 2008, but the numbers of foreclosures are still ridiculous.
    In my neighborhood we have several, including 2 on my side of the development. As a board member of the HOA, I took it upon myself to mow the lawns of the 2 that were foreclosed.. at least to keep them in some sort of order last year..... it looks like I'll have to do it again, they still are under the control of the banks, even now.... and Kansas doesn't have alot of foreclosure problems.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 22, 2011 8:32 PM GMT
    I think it is happening next door to us... for the second time in five years! icon_neutral.gif
  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Mar 22, 2011 8:46 PM GMT
    HndsmKansan saidI see this is from 2008, but the numbers of foreclosures are still ridiculous.
    In my neighborhood we have several, including 2 on my side of the development. As a board member of the HOA, I took it upon myself to mow the lawns of the 2 that were foreclosed.. at least to keep them in some sort of order last year..... it looks like I'll have to do it again, they still are under the control of the banks, even now.... and Kansas doesn't have alot of foreclosure problems.



    I think that my HOA charges high monthly/weekly fees if yards are not taken care of that banks are responsible to pay for. It seems to force them to hire someone to take care of the yards. If you have a lawyer on your board, add the fee to your books after voting for it and then ask the lawyer to write a letter to the bank.

    I don't know if we have any more foreclosures in my neighborhood at the moment. Sales have really picked up. The house next door sold in a couple days and one friend just sold her home above asking price before it was even listed on the MLS. She did not even get a chance to get the house ready to sell. When people heard that she was buying a new home, they jumped on it. I know that the foreclosures and people with financial problems caused people to not make their HOA dues which resulted in a $15/mo increase this year, our biggest increase ever. Oh well, I'm glad my HOA is financially healthy. It pays for our community events as well. icon_smile.gif
  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Mar 24, 2011 2:33 AM GMT
    ^
    wow...i was totally wrong. I just spoke to one of the board members. We have 12 homes that owe the association a total of $50,000 and then few others that owe less than $1,000. I think that means that we have roughly 12 homes that are either in foreclosure or are in the process of foreclosure. For those homes to owe that much, that means that they would have to not have been paying the dues for several years. That surprises me. I have no idea which ones they are because they seem to be all being taken care of. We have 327 homes. I guess that explains most of the $15/mo increase in dues.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 24, 2011 2:46 AM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidThis is so, so sad. I can't believe they are just throwing everything in the dumpster! The stuff could at least be taken to charities and distributed. What a waste.
    I basically saw the same article on PBS- where people just walked away from their homes with my family at the dinner table. I really couldn't have said it any better than mock here. This honestly has to be one of the most depressing things I have seen in my lifetime and it really disgusts me.

    However, considering that this is a practice conducted by the banks themselves, I have to side with Alexander on this one. Bad business practices are bad, m'kay.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 24, 2011 12:57 PM GMT
    Wow...so the banks get a bailout AND they get their property back.
    Win-win for the banks, but fuck the people who lost everything.
    This is nothing but legalized crime.
  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Mar 24, 2011 3:49 PM GMT
    ^
    yeah...I question who really has the power in this country. Is it the financial industry or the government? They are in bed with each other...the financial industry has too much influence in our government. I think we really need to seriously consider getting rid of publicly financed campaigns. Politicians should not be influenced by who gives them the most money. Taking away the influence of money will also reduce corruption in our government which will help us domestically and internationally in making better decisions. If we take the money out of it, it puts more power to the voters, which is the way it should be. Yes, it would mean the government would pay for political campaigns, but it would also mean that we could limit spending on political campaigns. It is ridiculous how much money is wasted. That alone however would be a huge battle in the marketing/media industry.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 24, 2011 3:55 PM GMT
    metta8 said^
    yeah...I question who really has the power in this country. Is it the financial industry or the government? They are in bed with each other...the financial industry has too much influence in our government. I think we really need to seriously consider getting rid of publicly financed campaigns. Politicians should not be influenced by who gives them the most money. If we take the money out of it, it puts more power to the voters, which is the way it should be. Yes, it would mean the government would pay for political campaigns, but it would also mean that we could limit spending on political campaigns. It is ridiculous how much money is wasted. That alone however would be a huge battle in the marketing/media industry.
    I don't question that.. I know for sure! It's that obvious!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 24, 2011 3:57 PM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    metta8 said^
    yeah...I question who really has the power in this country. Is it the financial industry or the government? They are in bed with each other...the financial industry has too much influence in our government. I think we really need to seriously consider getting rid of publicly financed campaigns. Politicians should not be influenced by who gives them the most money. If we take the money out of it, it puts more power to the voters, which is the way it should be. Yes, it would mean the government would pay for political campaigns, but it would also mean that we could limit spending on political campaigns. It is ridiculous how much money is wasted. That alone however would be a huge battle in the marketing/media industry.
    I don't question that.. I know for sure! It's that obvious!



    The only reason politicians spend that much money on ads is because their voters are influenced by campaigning...

    It's not the greedy elites that are dangerous, it's the combination of a greedy elite and a moronic populace.
  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Mar 30, 2011 10:36 PM GMT
    ^
    I would also like to see what the politicians would do if they were on an even playing field with small limited campaign budgets. I think that it may help other parties and candidates that are not taken seriously because they don't have the huge campaign budgets to back them. It may also encourage people to run that are not multi-millionaires.


    Where the Bailout Went Wrong

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/opinion/30barofsky.html?_r=2&ref=todayspaper
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2011 10:48 PM GMT
    At the almost certain risk of getting flamed - I work in the financial services industry in a somewhat mortgage-related capacity.

    TARP clearly failed to stabilize housing prices and failed to help individual homeowners in any direct way. However, TARP did save the U.S. from what was shaping up to be a truly catastrophic financial meltdown. I'm talking, Armageddon-like. If you think what we have is bad, you don't really know how close we came to something much, much worse.

    The ultimate cost of TARP is nowhere near the original $700 billion authorized. Because of how investments were structured and are being paid back, the current cost is estimated at $19 billion. Not chump change by any means, but arguably worth it.

    Anyone who thinks that financial institutions are really getting away with anything hasn't dealt with the myriad of new regulations that are being proposed and adopted almost daily, some of which are good efforts to address the roots of the financial crisis, others of which are just ignorant or punitive and are actually impeding the recovery.

    Jeez, I sound like a frigging conservative. Flame away. icon_wink.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 31, 2011 1:13 AM GMT
    showme saidAt the almost certain risk of getting flamed - I work in the financial services industry in a somewhat mortgage-related capacity.

    TARP clearly failed to stabilize housing prices and failed to help individual homeowners in any direct way. However, TARP did save the U.S. from what was shaping up to be a truly catastrophic financial meltdown. I'm talking, Armageddon-like. If you think what we have is bad, you don't really know how close we came to something much, much worse.

    The ultimate cost of TARP is nowhere near the original $700 billion authorized. Because of how investments were structured and are being paid back, the current cost is estimated at $19 billion. Not chump change by any means, but arguably worth it.

    Anyone who thinks that financial institutions are really getting away with anything hasn't dealt with the myriad of new regulations that are being proposed and adopted almost daily, some of which are good efforts to address the roots of the financial crisis, others of which are just ignorant or punitive and are actually impeding the recovery.

    Jeez, I sound like a frigging conservative. Flame away. icon_wink.gif


    Ok I'll take a go icon_smile.gif. I don't think it's conservative to defend government interventions to save financial institutions that were reckless in both borrowing and lending. While for some there was simply a liquidity problem, for others, the problems were worse.

    The problems have not been resolved. Given that there was both an asset and credit bubble, while credit 'disaster' was pushed off, assets have not yet been allowed to find their floors yet. A far cheaper option could have been something like rapid takeovers and restructuring forcing banks to lose all their equity and converting some of their debts - with financial stakeholders taking more responsibility. Worse, the bailouts made already large institutions even larger - resulting in larger systemic risk and the increased likelihood of moral hazard... the argument that these larger entities are "too big to fail" is more than likely going to be heard again.

    Let's also not forget one of the largest bailouts and continuing subsidies is the support of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Random data points:

    http://www.housingwire.com/2011/03/04/report-details-hud-failures-to-protect-fha-insurance-fund-from-bad-loans "The Office of Inspector General found these lenders did not properly underwrite 140 of 284 loans reviewed, or 49%, because they weren’t following FHA requirements. "

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Housing-market-13-of-all-US-cnnm-62477853.html?x=0 "High residential vacancies are killing many housing markets, as foreclosed homes sit on the market and depress sale prices and property values. And it's only getting worse: The national vacancy rate crept up to just over 13% according to last week's decennial census report. That's up from 12.1% in 2007."

    http://www.businessinsider.com/gary-shilling-house-prices-2011-3 "Gary Shilling: And Now House Prices Will Drop Another 20%"

    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guest-post-could-declining-house-values-spark-next-taxpayer-rebellion "Could Declining House Values Spark The Next Taxpayer Rebellion?"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 31, 2011 1:36 AM GMT
    typical, I coach a volleyball team and my girls had a tourny in wildomar (inland empire) and it was ridiculous how many abandoned homes were around. however almost none of these people would have ever been able to afford a home in la county. My cousin was one of these idiots who bought their home with those ridiculous subprime rates. He ended up moving his family into a condo my dad owned. He was so depressed, kept saying how they lost everything.... I finally snapped and told him he never had it to start! You cant say you earned the right to have a home when you gave 5k down! That barely covers paperwork! you were living on borrowed time! When my parents bought their first home, back in the early 80's, they gave 20% down on a 200k home... now this fool thinks he could give 5k on a 500K home.... LOL delusional! To top it off, he will never be able to buy a home in the future because their spending spiraled out of control to keep afloat. They used credit cards to pay for food, gas and daily living... they couldnt pay that off... its been 5 years an they WE get collectors looking for them!
  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Apr 11, 2011 7:57 PM GMT


    Home-loan brokers face new limits on pay


    [QUOTE]
    The Federal Reserve’s rules are aimed at limiting predatory lending. They prohibit loan officers from being compensated based on the loan’s terms and conditions other than the loan amount.
    [/QUOTE]

    [QUOTE]
    A proposal presented by federal regulators in March laid out a way to require banks to retain more “skin in the game,” or financial capital, when packaging and selling mortgage loans — a move to prevent some of the lending problems that arose and led to a meltdown in the credit markets. Also this year, there was a proposal on the future of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the two government-sponsored enterprises currently under government conservatorship.
    [/QUOTE]

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/home-loan-brokers-face-new-limits-on-pay-2011-04-11?siteid=nwhpf
  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Jun 10, 2011 9:12 PM GMT
    Instead of Flipping, people are Flopping Properties


    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/real-estate-scam-thats-devastating-prices-2011-06-10?siteid=nwhpf
  • metta

    Posts: 39089

    Jun 10, 2011 9:16 PM GMT
    Wall Street Pushes For More Deregulation And Another Housing Bubble

    http://www.politicususa.com/en/wall-street-deregulation
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2011 9:33 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    metta8 saidWall Street Pushes For More Deregulation And Another Housing Bubble

    http://www.politicususa.com/en/wall-street-deregulation



    How is this "Gay News?"


    Because all of your topics are relevant gay topics. always.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 10, 2011 11:31 PM GMT
    Gays news "Gays Live in Houses"