Shopping at Amazon?
Wait! If you click on the Amazon banner link at the top of the page first, HCN will get a percentage of anything you purchase for 24 hours!
Open predictions
Our local book authors
User login
Who's online
There are currently 26 members and 157 guests online.
I don't think someone who owns two properties who's looking for a bailout is representative of an average person.
On the other hand....
If the banks start going under, the average person will be someone who's worried sick about what's going to happen to their checking account.
These stories are old news Tanta.
You knew it a couple of years ago, I knew it a couple years ago, yet Greenspin was hawking adjustables?
The question is why? Why would this be a game plan for our country? Are they just that stupid or is there a background conspricy?
OT, but look what's in BMY's 10Q...
Those AAA securities are marked down by about half. It's hitting everyone:
"As of December 31, 2007, the company had approximately $2.2 billion of cash, cash equivalents and short-term marketable securities. In addition, the company had $811 million of principal invested in ARS. The ARS held by the company are private placement securities with long-term nominal maturities for which the interest rates are reset through a dutch auction each month. The monthly auctions historically have provided a liquid market for these securities. The company's investments in ARS represent interests in collateralized debt obligations supported by pools of residential and commercial mortgages or credit cards, insurance securitizations and other structured credits, including corporate bonds. Some of the underlying collateral for the ARS held by the company consists of sub-prime mortgages.
Consistent with the company's investment policy guidelines, the ARS investments held by the company all had AAA/Aaa credit ratings at the time of purchase. With the liquidity issues experienced in global credit and capital markets, the ARS held by the company at December 31, 2007 have experienced multiple failed auctions as the amount of securities submitted for sale has exceeded the amount of purchase orders. In addition, in the fourth quarter of 2007, $79 million of principal invested in ARS held by the company were downgraded and others were placed on credit watch. All of these securities retain at least one AAA rating.
The estimated market value of the company's ARS holdings at December 31, 2007 was $419 million, which reflects a $392 million adjustment to the principal value of $811 million. ***
Expired
The story may be old but Tanta's comment is so succinct and to the point it's priceless.
If you speculate in real estate, you are a real estate speculator. Period.
Well with the current market, she's certainly unlikely to get paid and lose her amateur status.
Bernacke and the government can do a lot of things. However they can't create millions of people of homebuyng age out of thin air. As for this woman and all like her you are speculators if you own more than one home period.
She can forget it. I myself sat out the RE boom -- instinct told me to. Been saving my hard cash like mad. Why should I pay for a bailout for this woman? And the millions like her.
The hell with 'em.
Why do I think Ms. Sanchez will do "what everyone else is doing" with her two mortgages - and perhaps even in the polling booth?
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse (generous gifts) from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the world's greatest civilization has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence. From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance, from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back into bondage."
Alexander Tyler circa 1787 re the
fall of the Athenian Republic.
As for this woman and all like her you are speculators if you own more than one home period.
I am not, actually, saying that there is no difference between an investment property and a speculative purchase.
Perhaps this sounds arbitrary, but it is in fact how we traditionally underwrote the things in the resi portfolio: if you are buying the property to rent it out and create positive cash flow, it's an investor property. If you are buying it to flip and make gain on sale, you're speculating.
So, no, I don't think everyone who owns more than one home is a speculator. I simply think the speculators are trying to get themselves lumped in with serious RE investors because there is frequently some actual economic purpose to be served in stimulating real investment.
CR: Check out this graph.
Ya sure there was no bubble...
Bubble Graph for Kern County, CA
More to the point than the issue of whether we would call the lady a speculator is the question of just what does she expect politicians to do about it?
That's what gets me about this vapid little exercise in "trained journalism". It it's either an exercise in futility or an exercise in misdirection.
We've been to the Big Island a couple of times, but with my concerns on the economy going forward we have had to pretty much ruled it out. They really should consider the needs of average people. They can't sit back and let things happen to people.
End of an Error they can't create millions of people of homebuyng age out of thin air.
Sure they can. Simply announce that anyone who can post a $10,000 bond to the federal government and buys a home with 50% down (within the territorial United States) will be granted a 5 year residence permit, and would be eligible for automatic renewal of the permit, and after five years would be eligible to apply for citizenship.
Whether the results would work out well in the long term is another question, but it damned well would bring every criminal in the globe to put down 50% on a property, and a lot of them would buy in Florida. You'd also get a lot of rich people from unstable countries.
You'd also get a lot of beaten maids.
I'm not recommending it, but this is close to the policy Canada followed a while back.
375K - unemployment claims this week!
I'm sure it didn't help that Ms Sanchez is named, well, Sanchez, and so presumably a 'person of color', hence an automatic object of sympathy for PBS types.
Oops:
I'm sure it didn't help...
Should be didn't hurt of course.
Re:"I'm not recommending it, but this is close to the policy Canada followed a while back."
MaxedOutMama
My country did what?
I'm wondering if you could provide a little elaboration on this statement.
"REBear writes:
375K - unemployment claims this week!
REBear | 01.31.08 - 8:39 am | #"
Nothing another 50bps can't solve!
More to the point than the issue of whether we would call the lady a speculator is the question of just what does she expect politicians to do about it?
I think it is the same point. She expects politicians to treat her as a business having an actual economic purpose. Which is why we can't call her a "speculator."
No, I have no more idea than anyone else does what she thinks politicians can do about business cycles. I have no idea what politicians think they can do about business cycles, come to think of it.
This is a borrower with a foot in both camps: she owns a principal residence she's struggling to pay for; that makes her an "average person." She also owns a speculative POS that undoubtedly just needs to be written off by everyone (worthless excess inventory). She's a great candidate for bankruptcy, but I suspect that BK is one of those "things that happen" that she thinks shouldn't be allowed to happen to her. Why not? Because she wasn't "speculating," you see. She was "investing her money." She wants to redeem the investment, and someone somewhere is halting redemptions. Why, they shouldn't be allowed to get away with that!
MOM,
We do it in the US too. This was an easy google:
Gateway Pundit: Another Saudi Family Convicted of Slavery in Colorado
It is interesting that Ms Sanchez makes statements without having any ideas of her own on what should be done. Maybe that's the same rational thought process that lead her to buy a property in 2005?
If she wasn't a speculator, why is she having difficulty making payments? I'm sure she performed a projected income and expense schedule and cash flow analysis. What went wrong with her model?
From Wiki:
"Financial speculation, involves the buying, holding, selling, and short-selling of stocks, bonds, commodities, currencies, collectibles, real estate, derivatives, or any valuable financial instrument to profit from fluctuations in its price as opposed to buying it for use or for income via methods such as dividends or interest."
By my own definition speculation in real estate is buying a home because you think the "value" will go up, not because it generates income. Very few homes purchased during the boom are income generating (by rents) because of the enormous high prices relative to rents.
What is most disturbing about this lady is the "You cannot sit back and let things happen to people" comment. I would argue that for some people that are not in trouble taking our tax money and throwing it away on dissapointed "homeowners" is a bad thing to happen to them, so who is more important?
Anon-
Many of us love miscellaneous wisdom bombs like that; this one seems particularly apropos. You should pick a handle or alias so we can appreciate your contributions fully!
And I, too, guess that we could sit back and let things happen to people. Presumably, she hopes someone will buy her a house, that she can then rent out for a full profit, with no expenses.
Let me think for a sec ... ummm, no.
If you speculate in real estate, you are a real estate speculator. Period.
It's not speculating because real estate always goes up. Now turn those machines back on!
I'm fascinated by how poorly the story is written, the epitome of its type.
"You wouldn't call [her] a speculator" is just a cliche. The reporter did not stop to consider whether "you" would call her any such thing. It's a stock phrase, shorthand for, "She's just an average person like you."
Which is itself a cliche, the image of the hapless, hardworking American victim of sharp-suited bankers and mysterious market forces.
It would have taken work for the reporter to examine whether she is, in fact, a speculator. And even more work to Google the numerous poll results showing that "average Americans" do not support a bailout for the likes of Ms. Sanchez, despite her finger-wagging at the politicians.
We should sell bumper stickers to promote the new political correctness...
I [heart] FBs
Specuvestors R People 2
Home is where your investments is
You meet the nicest people on the court house steps
My other car is (now) my house...
Etc.
Somehow, with a teaching job and a daughter headed off to college, she got financing to buy a second house - Based on a solid pro-forma that it was a profitable rental income property, no doubt? But of course a new President will bail her out and make her wealthy. Sounds like a plan.
It is interesting that Ms Sanchez makes statements without having any ideas of her own on what should be done. Maybe that's the same rational thought process that lead her to buy a property in 2005?
From studies of low-information voters, the most surprising thing you get is that a lot of them don't even understand what a political issue is. Usually, it means they don't get that something can be fixed by political means, but sometimes they just assume it's like a magic wand. I assume that she wants somebody to turn the clock back to 2005 somehow.
Today's column in our local paper by Michelle Malkin ("The Politics of Foreclosure"):
Michelle Malkin : The Politics of Foreclosure - Townhall.com
Discusses the kind of mentality cited above - and mentions this blog. Roby
threetorches that would be a nice wisdom bomb if it weren't utter horseshit.
I do agree with you that our friend anon should pick a handle.
Was Ms Sanchez planning to share any gains on the property with strangers?
Which is why we can't call her a "speculator."
Excellent points Tanta.
Unless she bought a cardboard box, I am surprised that a teacher was allowed a mortgage on a second home in the first place.
In any event, one would think a teacher would have done enough due dilly(homework!) to know that mania was present. Apparently she isn't a history prof.
This is America no one is ever liable for their screwups.....EVER!
Is one stamp enough to mail back two sets of keys?
God help me, I find myself agreeing with Crazy Michelle Malkin. Real estate crashes make for strange bedfellows, I guess.
Kp,
Due diligence is so passe.
She's a great candidate for bankruptcy, but I suspect that BK is one of those "things that happen" that she thinks shouldn't be allowed to happen to her. There's still some stigma associated with personal (as opposed to corporate) bankrupcy. She wants the protection from creditors and debt forgiveness but not the word bankrupcy. Perhaps we should take a lesson from Herb Stein and start calling them bananas. She could go to a "banana court" and plead in front of a "banana judge". Perhaps that would be more acceptable.
...You wouldn't call Sandra Sanchez a real estate speculator.
I guess you would call her someone that borrowed money to purchase an asset that she planned to pay back only if the asset increased substantially in value.
When I go to a doctor I depend on his/her knowledge of medicine to help make me well. W
hen I call a electrician I'm purchasing his/her knowledge
Why is it so hard to understand that when a person purchases a home they have confidence in the real estate agent, lender, etc., to provide them with information to make an informed decision.
My background is in social service, helping the homeless and I've yet to meet a family that chose to be homeless.
I've saved for years, on a non-for-profit wage, to purchase a home and I find this website very helpful however I realize my new found knowledge will never come near to those of you who have made a living in this area. When I decide to purchase a home I will depend on honest people around me to help me make the decision.
FWIW, teachers at private schools are paid even worse than those toiling in our public schools. If that seems possible.
rp, given the thankless and good work that you do, you deserve the best advice available. Good luck.
Discusses the kind of mentality cited above - and mentions this blog.
Oh boy. Michelle's been here.
I see it hasn't made her any smarter. My point about "fig leaves" has always been that they are convincing--more or less--because there really are victims of predation and borrowers in real financial distress. This is why the fig-leafers make our analytic job so difficult: they want to blend in with a real crowd.
Michelle seems to think that the fact of ruthless defaulters means that all defaulters are ruthless.
Then it becomes just another excuse to ask that people who failed to speculate be "rewarded." I thought conservatives thought that virtue was its own reward, but apparently not.
Sandra Sanchez, struggling now to make payments on two homes, thinks the GOP and Democratic candidates are beginning to pay attention.
Maybe they could trade in the homes for government subsidized snake-oil. The government could create a snake-oil exchange with a snake-oil index. Instead of saying that the house is worthless you could say that it's worth 3 bottles of snake-oil (at todays market rate). It maybe a bit redundant to all of the FHLB and TAF auctions though.
i'm in ur cofferz gettin ur poneez
She was a speculator, pure and simple. She bought a second house as an investment. She needs to be allowed to fail and should not be helped.
I could have sympathy for someone who bought a new home before they sold their existing home and got stuck with two homes after the credit crunch in the summer, but not her.
The reason "Housing" became an "investment" was deliberate monetary & fiscal policy. Do savers get 500K free capital gains as a married couple? Why not? You have to pay capital gains on 3% interest bearing account over $400.00
The reason this person wants a bail out is because it was the unspoken implicit contract the PTB was making with it's citizenry. People will try to save in the most viable economic commodity that they see. That process cannot be stopped but can be manipulated.
I guess part of the problem is that it's hard to tailor bailouts like those being discussed which distinguish between "victims" and "deadbeats". Note that I have a very narrow definition of victims. They would mostly be people who have encountered unexpected financial difficulties - like losing a job - or a working spouse - or getting sick. The kind of misfortunes that have always happened to some people.
Obviously - Ms. Sanchez is not a "victim" IMO. But what is surprising is how many people there are like her. My husband and I are probably in the minority here - because we didn't buy a spec house or condo in recent years. I think most of south America would have to move to Florida to soak up the extra capacity caused by speculation.
The more I have thought about this - the more I think there are at least 3 different kinds of housing problems in the US. Those caused by speculative overbuilding (e.g., in Florida) - those caused by people paying too much money for their homes (e.g., in Stockton) - and those caused by economic malaise and job losses in general (e.g., in many parts of the midwest). Of course - any particular area may have a combination of these problems (even if one is the dominant problem). Roby
Tanta wrote: "Perhaps this sounds arbitrary, but it is in fact how we traditionally underwrote the things in the resi portfolio: if you are buying the property to rent it out and create positive cash flow, it's an investor property. If you are buying it to flip and make gain on sale, you're speculating."
I know I can't argue against the underwriting guidelines, as they are what they are. However, in a lot of areas in the country you could not buy a house and rent it out for positive cash flow because the price/rent ratio was so far out of whack. Instead, the rent was used to reduce the bleeding so that they could wait a year or two and make millions. MILLIONS!!!! (rubs hands together)
So these "specuvestors" were not investors in the way that you describe them, and they were not classic speculators because they didn't just flip the property for a quick profit.
Therefore I'd like to ask how these folks were classified, in underwriting circles, and how you would see them.
Thanks!
Matthew
The trick is in constructing the correct moral narrative based on the proper archetype so when the government decides who to bless and who to blame, you're on the side of the angels. Getting buy-in from insufficiently investigative journalists is apparently a cinch.
I think someone needs to do a re-make of "It's a Wonderful Life" for these times--who plays Mr. Potter now?
Person who is not a complete and utter moron from Canada:
In the 1990s you could get into Canada I believe with a net worth of 1 million. A very large group of wealthy individuals from Hong Kong came into Canada then, because they feared the impending Chinese takeover. There were some funny outcomes, because of course it is hard to separate the wealthy honest from the wealthy criminals.
There is still a class of immigration to Canada that is economic. see instructions here. For example, an investor class immigrant must have a net worth of $800,000 and pay $400,000 to the Canadian government, which will be refunded without interest after 5 years, which amounts to a very hefty fee.
Right now I believe you have a point system, plus asylum, plus family. So it's three-tiered. The point system is for the general immigration, and you have to have significant assets, whether in the form of education, youth, etc. The idea is that Canada shouldn't be swamped by indigent people coming to you for your health-care and benefits.
i want to kick sandra's ass till i get tired!
hey, more seriously now, what kind of teacher is she? i really hope not a math teacher, that would be even more funny or sad (specially if your kids are learning from her).
MOM,
We have the "E" visas here in the US; same principle.
E1 Visa
Matthew | 01.31.08 - 10:31 am |
The people who invest for income...eg,my old man,sat out the bubble. He actually sold assets at the peak. If you are a income investor the old 20% down,cash flow positive and double digit returns will return. It's just gonna take a while.
RE got so bad in SW Florida that when I looked at a large unit to purchase the guy selling had no qualms stating the building would cash flow negative, But hey! We could make it up converting to condos. He still owns the building...
Chris
Tell me.... what the heck is going to happen when the personal tax rates (for whatever tax bracket) goes back up? If people think the government needs to bail them out of a real estate speculation....Sheesh...what the hell??? Don't they know what capitalism means? It's disgusting...
"As for this woman and all like her you are speculators if you own more than one home period."
I own 2 homes and it was never about speculation. One is in the city where I (walk to) work. The other is in the quiet country where the dog and I can breath fresh air and romp. There are a lot of frugal aspects to the arrangement, believe it or not. Like saving $400 by not commuting, saving $400 by leaving the car in the country. It goes on and on.
So many people bought a home basing the transaction on the need to make a quick profit out of it. Being needy for a transaction to work a certain way outside your own control is an indicator not to enter a transaction (and a better definition of speculation). Not until the downside is covered.
She reminds me of people, ordinary, who go rock climbing without knowing anything about it and then expect to be rescued with helicopters, etc., etc., when they get into trouble. Or people who buy houses on hurricane shores who expect insurance companies to pay for it all without complaint. "You just can't sit by and let things happen...." Yeah.
probert,
i expect the gov will just print money. they will solve ss and medicare the same way. then, the problem might be inflation and further deterioration of dollars as storage of value.
Schnaps-
Thanks for the quick research on the alleged quotation! This is why attributing your sources is dangerous...sometimes, people fact-check! I guess it is meant to be more impressive if related by an 18th century Scotsman.
In that spirit, I think it was James Watt who once said,
"Gosh, this house seems a little expensive to me. Plus, it looks like it will be costly to heat this winter. Oh, what the hell, the government would never sit back and just let things happen to people. I'll take it!"
However, in a lot of areas in the country you could not buy a house and rent it out for positive cash flow because the price/rent ratio was so far out of whack.
That is correct. Therefore, in traditional underwriting, these loan applications would be "denied." If you can't possibly make it cash flow at the contract sales price, you need to pay a lower price or it's not an investment.
Another way of looking at this: purchase money LTV is based on the lesser of sales price or appraised value. If you had admitted that you were buying an investment property, and you were not trying to bribe or pressure the appraiser into lying about it, the appraiser would develop an income analysis of the property that would show the appraised value much lower than the sales price. The lender would then lend only a percent of that lower number. You would have to supply the difference in cash, in this thing we call "down payment."
There is no law against anyone blowing his own money. A lot of these folks, however, cashed out their primary residence in order to make the big downpayment on the "investment" property. They did that because the lender required a big down payment.
There are no acceptable "speculator" loans in a 1-4 family resi mortgage portfolio. For starters, it's too expensive to put a long-term mortgage on a property and set the loan up on your servicing system and all that for a loan that is only going to be outstanding for six months at best. Commercial banks do make spec and "bridge" loans for short-term purposes, but you do pay up-front fees for those and your rate is a lot higher than 5.5%. It is just an economic fact that home mortgages are not priced like margin loans or commercial spec.
"You would have to supply the difference in cash, in this thing we call "down payment.""
Well, now I'm just plain confused. Is this "down payment" something that I can add to the financing?
In other words, how do I borrow this "down payment"?
(thanks for your answer, BTW)
Google Videos Error
Best quote:
"I've even taken out loans to help make payments!"
Entitlement Nation. I screwed up, I'm entitled to a mulligan.
What's nauseating is not the desire for help. I understand that. I sympathize with anyone with a family who's in final straits.
What's sickening is their indignation at the reluctance of everyone else to bail them out. No mea culpa, just "gimme more!"
The reason "Housing" became an "investment" was deliberate monetary & fiscal policy. Do savers get 500K free capital gains as a married couple? Why not? You have to pay capital gains on 3% interest bearing account over $400.00
SOMEBODY always owns housing. Either the owner/occupiers or landlords. So SOMEBODY has invested either their capital or their credit in the purchase of it. We as a country decided long ago to encourage owner occupation. The idea is that owners are more invested in their communities than renters. Therefore we have tax incentives and others to encourage owner occupation.
The problem is that in bubble markets we have had a classic speculative bubble and prices have risen to the point that rents CANNOT support and are only based a belief in future appreciation. At cuurrent prices buying makes no sense for either O/Os or prospective landlords. Attempting to throw new benefits and protection to one class of owners does nothing to solve the problem that purchase prices cannot be supported by rents. But these benefits are really not to blame for the bubble IMHO.
She was doing what a lot of amateur speculators were doing in probably taking a second on her residence for the downpayment on the house to flip or she bought the second house as a "primary" residence with 100% financing by way of the now notorious first and second mtg routine. This second method would involve a little bit of fraud. A lot of people were doing it and some were stranded when the game of musical chairs came to an end.
The idea is that Canada shouldn't be swamped by indigent people coming to you for your health-care and benefits.
Right.
However, it was just too amusing to read about all the "Canadians" that had to be evacuated from Lebanon during summer, 2006. On vacation, I guess.
Therefore, in traditional underwriting, these loan applications would be "denied."
I hate to use the term traditional because it implies a practice or knowledge that is handed down rather than one that should be completely obvious. Possible alternatives would be
"common sense"
"non-dumbass"
"bongwater free"
"inside the bell curve" underwriting
When I go to a doctor I depend on his/her knowledge of medicine to help make me well. W
hen I call a electrician I'm purchasing his/her knowledge
Why is it so hard to understand that when a person purchases a home they have confidence in the real estate agent, lender, etc., to provide them with information to make an informed decision.
But of course you know now, from reading this blog, that you have to be critical and not just accept anyone else's opinion, but also think: Is what they're saying absolutely true? If you're making a decision about which bananas to buy and you make a mistake, big deal. When you're putting the future of your family at risk, you need to put that consideration first.
Tanta chided me before for suggesting her words shouldn't be blindly accepted as perhaps being from some anonymous person on the internet. As if people were any better at determining who to trust in person! I've read enough of her stuff to know at what level I would trust her at, but I realize I can't extend that level to everybody.
Ms. Sanchez is the quintessential speculator. She, and the million other speculators, are responsible for the $417,000 shack in East LA.
You're welcome threetorches.
Apparently I don't have what it takes to be an Alt-A lender.
From the "every cloud has a silver lining" department--A press release I received today:
Religion Expert: Lent May Help Catholics During Economic Downturn
DURHAM, N.H. As Catholics prepare to enter the Lenten season, choosing to make financial sacrifices for religious reasons may help those concerned about the economic downturn, according to Michele Dillon, professor of sociology at the University of New Hampshire.
With the downturn in the economy and the general air of recession, individuals and families who feel they need to cut back on certain purchases might use Lent as a timely opportunity to make the sacrifices they feel necessary. Making economic sacrifices in the context of Lent with its emphasis on personal sacrifice for religious reasons might make some people feel a bit more upbeat about down-sizing some of their consumption habits, Dillon says.
Sometimes old definitions are the best. Ms. Sanchez obviously rejects words 2-4 in the second definition below so she can't be called a "speculator" but you could call here a "plunger" as used in 1913.
"From WordNet (r) 2.0:
speculator
n 1: someone who makes conjectures without knowing the facts
2: someone who risks losses for the possibility of considerable
gains [syn: plunger]"
Plunger...
"3. One who bets heavily and recklessly on a race; a reckless
speculator. [Cant]
[1913 Webster]"
Tanta wrote, I simply think the speculators are trying to get themselves lumped in with serious RE investors because there is frequently some actual economic purpose to be served in stimulating real investment.
Well, not really.
The real attraction of real estate is land. The classical liberals like Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill understood that landlords in their role of landlords contribute absolutely nothing productive to the economy, since the land was already there, and its value is provided by government and the community; they're purely parasitic. (The fact that the landowner has to pay for the privilege doesn't change this fact.)
It's true that real estate investors, on average, contribute capital (capital in the sense of classical economics, viz, one of the three factors of production (other two being land and labor)), which is a non-parasitic, valuable contribution. But it's not what makes the asset class so distinctive and attractive. Rather, government-granted licenses to steal (aka "land titles") are the focus of interest.
References:
(1) "Are you a real libertarian or a Royal libertarian?"
(2) "A Geolibertarian FAQ"
Don't these people rent out the second houses?? Rental market's improving quite a bit.
Ms Sanchez is the person who would apparently "sit back and let things happen to" Ms Sanchez.
Two houses for her family is clearly at least one too many. Short-sale or BK should be on the menu; bail-outs should not.
I bought a fleet of Hyundais in 2006 and have only driven each of them for 1500 miles. Now they are hard to sell but you wouldn't call me a speculator. Luckily, the Republicans and Democrats are aware of my situation and know that I will vote very hard for the people who help me PROFITABLY close my position. Anybody need an Elantra?
liberal writes: The real attraction of real estate is land.
As someone who considers himself a liberal, it pains me to think that this is going to be viewed as representative of the thinking. Land has value, but people don't live on the land, they live in houses. Bare land is not that attractive an investment. And without 'land title' then the government owns the land? More akin to socialism or communism I think, which I suppose is still on the liberal continuum.
sdtfs --
The ideas there about land are not "liberal" per se, rather they are a 3rd way, if you will. The idea has several pieces and you won't understand it without reading for a few minutes. Look up a well-structured site about the ideas of Henry George.
How about we go back and date this article, say, January 31, 2001? How ridiculous would the following version sound to the average American? (At least, I hope it would sound ridiculous ...)
CORRESPONDENT: You wouldn't call Sandra Sanchez a stock-market speculator. The mother of two teaches at a private school. Two years ago, with a daughter headed off to college and the dot-com boom in full swing, she purchased hundreds of shares in companies including Pets.com, Webvan, and Commerce One as an investment nest egg. It seemed like a good idea at the time.
Sandra Sanchez, struggling now to meet margin calls, hears cries for a 5-year margin-call moratorium and tax write-offs of up to $1 million in stock losses against their income, and thinks the GOP and Democratic candidates are beginning to pay attention.
SANCHEZ: I think they should seriously think about letting me sell my shares back to the companies at the price I paid for them. And they know that a lot of the votes come from the average people, so you have to focus on the needs of the average people. You cannot sit back and let a bear market happen to people.
CORRESPONDENT: With that in mind, Sanchez says she'll vote today and reevaluate come November. She hopes her stocks haven't gone bankrupt by then.
A couple of years ago, many here in So. Cal. were encouraged to buy investment (rental) property, regardless of whether the rents covered the overall mortgage. And many people did. What's going to happen to the tenants in those properties once their landlords face foreclosure?
Some fools have poked a hole in the bottom of the boat we are all in. Shut up and starting bailing out (whoever is at fault is irrelevant for now)) while the hole is being fixed or we will all go down, silly people.
Everyone, including Tanta has eaten of this cake my hypocritical lil' darlings...
I forgot the most ironic thing about all of this. This woman is a teacher. No wonder our kids can't add, subtract, divide or multiply or even read. She obviously didn't do any of these or perhaps can't.
Thank you -- I watched that piece on PBS the other night and had exactly the same response to the melodramatic hook ("You wouldn't call Sandra Sanchez a real estate speculator"). I was talking back to my TV...
What baffles me is the hot air wasted by candidates pledging to keep people who bought unaffordable homes with risky mortgages from "losing their piece of the American dream."
Households in foreclosure can't possibly make up that much of the electorate can they? On top of which, that particular message shouldn't resonate very well with those who aren't facing foreclosure (hey, thanks for renting all these years -- now I'm going to hand out some cash to your neighbors who refi'd into a 110% option ARM so they could buy that bass boat parked in front of your house).
How can that possibly be a winning strategy for a politician?
A few more immigration resources on E visas for those who is considering moving to the US under the investor category:
Advice & Help - US Visa, Australia Visa, UK Visa & Canada Immigration | Global Visas
Work Permit, Work Visa and Immigration Services from SkillClear - Immigration, Working Visa and Work Permit information, services, facts and news for UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, USA and more
Fiancee, Partner and Marriage Visa Services - Marriagevisahelp.com
Legal Help, Directories, Articles, and Forums From ExpertLaw
Immigration Lawyer, Guide to U.S. Immigration law - a law firm assisting with visas, green cards, naturalization, immigration law offices of Siskind Susser, LLC -
Just thought someone might be interested. Jason.