Democrats Infuse Communism Into Mortgage Loans
- Thread starter 2012Bearcat
- Start date
Man I don't know:
"“These changes to upfront fees will strengthen the safety and soundness of the Enterprises by enhancing their ability to improve their capital position over time,”
Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Sandra Thompson said the new rules are designed to "increase pricing support for purchase borrowers limited by income or by wealth" and comes with "minimal" fee changes.
The untruncated sentence "These updated pricing grids include the upfront fee eliminations announced in October 2022to increase pricing support for purchase borrowers limited by income or by wealth."
Those up front fee eliminations announced on October 2022 were the waivers bearcat is harping on that went into place last December. Nothing to do with the change in LLPA fee schedule.
So no that doesn't establish that the grid recalibration "The new regs have zero to do with default rates and collateral."
You might be the most dense person I’ve ever encountered on a message board. The public policy behind cutting fees for poor credit individuals should be obvious to all. Apparently it’s not. Let me help you out
Biden raises costs for homebuyers with good credit to help risky borrowers
The administration's new rule will reduce mortgage fees for riskier borrowers but will be subsidized by borrowers with higher credit scores.
www.newsweek.com
I am sorry but linking to more articles from anti Biden sources imputing motives on Fannie Mae isn't very convincing.You might be the most dense person I’ve ever encountered on a message board. The public policy behind cutting fees for poor credit individuals should be obvious to all. Apparently it’s not. Let me help you out
Biden raises costs for homebuyers with good credit to help risky borrowers
The administration's new rule will reduce mortgage fees for riskier borrowers but will be subsidized by borrowers with higher credit scores.
Again from the horse's mouth:
"These changes to upfront fees will strengthen the safety and soundness of the Enterprises by enhancing their ability to improve their capital position over time,"
Two members of the board's slow 10 make 07pilt look like Mensa member Geena Davis.You might be the most dense person I’ve ever encountered on a message board. The public policy behind cutting fees for poor credit individuals should be obvious to all. Apparently it’s not. Let me help you out
Biden raises costs for homebuyers with good credit to help risky borrowers
The administration's new rule will reduce mortgage fees for riskier borrowers but will be subsidized by borrowers with higher credit scores.
For 07pilt, since he's the premier progressive dumbass in this thread. An editorial from the editorial board of the WSJ, who are infinitely more intelligent and briefed on this subject:
www.wsj.com
Opinion | Upside Down Mortgage Policy
A new federal housing rule will make reliable borrowers subsidize risky loans.
www.wsj.com
LolFor 07pilt, since he's the premier progressive dumbass in this thread. An editorial from the editorial board of the WSJ, who are infinitely more intelligent and briefed on this subject:
Opinion | Upside Down Mortgage Policy
A new federal housing rule will make reliable borrowers subsidize risky loans.
You are being unfair to my friend. Like you he has staked out a position and provided information to justify it. Like you he accepts only information that justifies his opinion and rejects any contrary position as immaterial, missing the point. He uses the typical “Alinsky” tactic of arguing until he exceeds your patience, you give up the conversation in disgust and walk away. At that point he considers he “won” the debate. I have found it is easier on my nerves to walk away early in the conversation. Just say enough to make your point and then be done with it. You have to know going in you are not going to change his mind any easier than he will change yours. You need to learn you are not making your points to teach him anything, your real audience is the rest of us who are following the debate; make your points with them in mind. In that respect Pilt unknowingly provides a great service. When your ideas are superior to his it becomes obvious to the rest of us. In this instance he may think he “won” because he chased you away, but the rest of us saw clearly who the real “winner” was. So be of good cheer! And admire Pilt for his service to the rest of us!
thetruth might smoke, joke and take dope but he don't play games. Many of the Cowboys have wit skills I can only dream of. I'm gonna try to stop laughing now.For 07pilt, since he's the premier progressive dumbass in this thread. An editorial from the editorial board of the WSJ, who are infinitely more intelligent and briefed on this subject:
Opinion | Upside Down Mortgage Policy
A new federal housing rule will make reliable borrowers subsidize risky loans.
Because this system would encourage people to take out loans at 90+% LTV, then upon closing, pay off the 20% and eliminate PMI. I guess this is better for the uber-wealthy who has a tax accountant to manage every expense, but your screwing your average good credit borrower with extra closing costs up front or requiring them to chase their lender after closing to get PMI removed. Its simply another Democrat policy that favors the ultra-wealthy and the economic cellar dweller at the expense of the average working class American.
No ones arguing that Fannie Mae may not need to charge higher costs. Its the fact that the costs which were linear in relation to LTV are now calculated on a bell curve whereas those with an LTV between 70-85% pay the highest fees and LTVs below 60% and over 90% pay the fewest fees. That latter piece flies in the face of all logic, especially in an economy where the assets are depreciating. You are encouraging LOW LTV loans, which will increase the rate of Credit Default Swap purchases and the increased rate of default that these loans have will lead directly to another AIG.
This is a solution, if you're willing to buy an additional ton or two of air handler to cover the additional cubic footage of your attic space. Like all government regulations, it would simply add a couple extra thousand dollars to the construction costs.
Of course this is true. You increase fees on those who have demonstrated a capability to pay them. So you'll raise capital. But its simply more Democrat 'fairness' that says that responsible borrowers should pay fees to subsidize the fees on the high LTV loans taken out by the 'less wealthy'
At least one person does
Not if you include mortgage insurance. Which why wouldn't you?
Pilt would never do that. He stands with the little guy through thick and thin!
And still below last March's sales rate, so down YoY. That's called selective metrics.
Basically, people aren't willing to sell their houses at a reduced value, and people aren't willing (or able) to pay the elevated price. So house prices aren't going down, but instead sales are simply becoming less common.
And last month's surge on new home contracts isn't a surprise. When the SVB bank run hit, industry interest rates fell by over a point. If you're timing was really good, you could get a 30 year mortgage under 5% for about 3 days. People were smart enough to lock in on new homes at those lower rates and so you see a surge of new home contracts in this month's metrics. With rates returning back near 7%, that one month metric will prove to be the outlier.
The irony is that if you are in the 80-90% LTV, you get double-****ed as you pay PMI AND a higher fees on the loan.
Yea that's why builders are revising their building plans looking for any way to reduce the cost of building a house. SMFH
No that's called the profit motive.
I'm just posting facts, sorry if they disturb your worldview.
LMAO, now not only are you an economic and policy expert, you're an expert on building houses. SMFH
It takes zero industry expertise, just like a high school level understanding of what a business does.
Waco house building was white hot. Moonlight Park in Suburb Hewitt sold a bunch of lots to volumn builder Stylecraft. Local high end builders have really slowed. There's a bunch of low end Stylecraft dumps completed now setting vacant in Moonlight Park. A bunch! Not one is under contract as of this AM. Creekside in Waco so far hasn't sold any lots to volumne builder Stylecraft or John Houston. John Houston has bought a bunch of lots and has and is building in some other subdivisions.
PMI worked great in '08, didn't it? I mean, all those LTV loans had PMI back then didn't they? PMI isn't some new phenomenon. And yet the Federal Government had to cut multi-billion dollar checks to keep AIG afloat after committing to all the credit default swaps. Counting on PMI to solve the risk problem of increasing LTV loans is financial suicide.
I thought I "NM" my post fast enough. I mistakenly linked you to a post by CDS in another thread which linked to an article from "The Atlantic". I tried to revoke my post, but your reply was clearly quicker. So I apologize for my mistake.
