The Citizens purge continues......

No bias there. Clearly an objective article there. You can tell by the title. And All true because I read it on the internet.

So true!

I am not for the government running anything they do not absolutely have to. I will leave you to your theories and belief that we can not live with out the government control.

John, THEY HAVE TO!!!
No one else will write the policies in Coastal South Florida!
And as for your statement that I want government control, perhaps you could look up the definition. From someone that is the VP of one organization and president of another, it would seem that you are completely in favour of government control!

Always seems that way to me but not my business, to each his own.

I believe there is no doubt I don’t want the gov in any part of my life.

Yes, the man who owned the company with the largest fine in history for healthcare fraud, had nothing to do with this. I won’t say how,I don’t want the black SUVs showing up here, but let’s just say, I know there is plenty of fraud going around…and who pays for it all? You and I.

I have no doubt that there is plenty of fraud in the insurance rackets. There is also plenty of fraud in the food stamp scheme, social security, disability, etc… etc… etc… I do agree that we, the consumer always pay for it. I know that this may be shocking, but I am with the Meeker on this one, get rid of all of the government programs above and the fraud would be greatly reduced.

Woo hoo. It is happening more and more Steve ya better look out :wink:

I’m getting to ya :smiley:

The thing is I just call it like I see it with no prejudice and always trying to go in favor of truth and honesty and my most important mantra:
DO NO HARM

I come off as a jerk a lot but no one that knows me ever has had a bad thing to say about me.

As bad as things are for me today I loaned a neighbor $60. Since I get paid cash or money order upon my arrival I had it to loan. I imagine it was harder for him to ask than for me to give even if I never see it again.

I want to see everyone making a good buck again in Florida like the good ole days.

I have never taken advantage of anyone and never offered to do business with anyone unless I felt it was a mutually beneficial deal and I have never tried to make more money by HOLDING OTHERS BACK and trying to dictate what they can and cannot do. As far as I am concerned if you are qualified and properly licensed or have what ever credentials are needed you should be able to offer your clients any service they would like you to perform. Not many can say that as a great many try to get every dime they can get by any means possible and try to use the government or association rules to limit their competition :frowning:

I also have been on several other boards, but it does not mean I like government control. I suggest you learn the differences between, government, private, and public entities.

The bottom line, if there is no need to make a profit, then there is waste. It can not be helped it is human nature. You might want to look-up communism, socialism and free market systems while you are at it. You need to understand the benefits and failures of all three. If you like government control so much, I can suggest some other countries for you, but you might want to talk to a few people living there before moving there. This country was founded on free market system, I personally would like to keep it that way.

Now that my rant is over:

We can not afford to keep building so close to the water. Insurance companies get this, but the general populous does not. We want the view and to be close to the water. The fact is that it is getting more and more costly. Left to the free markets, the insurance would be much higher and less people would live in the coastal zones. We all know this. The people that could afford the insurance or those that did not need it would live there. We would then not be on the hook for their dangerous delight of living near water.

You know why I do not have a home on Central Park West, or the Pacific Palisades, or some tropical island? I can not afford it. Americans need to learn to live within their means.

While we are at it, the reason why we are having the mortgage crisis is because people were buying homes they could not afford, while our government was finding ways to propagate the problem.

Sorry, rant over.

You have no idea how wrong you are. None.

Look up “strategic default” and see who participates in that the most. I’ll give you a hint, it isn’t the people who in your words, “were buying homes they couldn’t afford”.

The so-called mortgage crisis is nothing more than the biggest Ponzi scheme ever unleased.

Start by looking up the founders of MERS…that should keep you busy for awhile. :wink: :wink:

Added with edit: Actually it is hard to choose between a Ponzi scheme or a “Pump and Dump” scheme. They both have the end result…bag holders…

I agree but was it not the government backing many of those bundled mortgages?

It doesn’t matter who backed what. It is just one giant shell game. Most people do not even know who owns their loan.The entire mortgage application process is flawed from the start. People have been told they can afford a home, mainly because when you buy a home, you become trapped in it to some extent.

How many deals have you been involved in where a wind mit that yields no or little discount, causes the deal to fall apart because the client can no longer qualify for the mortgage?

People have been lied to from the very beginning and the same group keeps making more money, whether it is from the inflated stock prices, real estate, or whatever.

Some political parties believe that home ownership should be available to all. So I can see how your statements can be true.

People need to take responsibility for their actions. So many people bought homes they can not afford or with flimsy documentation because they believed that they would make more money. They did not care that the mortgage had a balloon, or that the interest rate was variable or that the rate was high, they had no reserves and finally they did not care that they could not afford it. Michelle was front and center of the whole process, she was a title agent and did too many closings.

If people are too dumb to take responsibility for signing the papers, then we deserve what we got.

This has nothing to do with political affiliation.

This has to do with a scam that was perpetuated on the ignorant. I don’t mean ignorant as in stupid, I mean ignorant of the fact they were being used to make money for others.

Here is a question for you, all of those loans that were packaged in portfolios, sold numerous times, money made each time, and finally dumped on Fannie or Freddies door, how come the homeowners never go a cut of the profits?

Personally, I think the minimum down-payment should be 25% on a home loan. Unfortunately, most do not have that amount so in order to continue the slaughter, 0 down, 3% loans were created. 125% refis another great idea.

A 125% loan tells you right up front that someone is going to get screwed. Take a wild guess who it is going to be.

And Who is the biggest proponent of those loans? The federal government. You can not help someone who is not qualified to own a home, afford a home, by lowering the qualifications. The home still costs the same and you are only making them a slave to the home or putting them in financial ruin.

It is like saying that if you did not qualify for a race that we will let you enter anyway. At that point you are the most likely to loose.

The 125% loans are just stupid. It is like buying a car for $20K and getting a check for $25K. There is noway to recover the money. We would be better served with a better personal loan system. It is basically a unsecured loan.

There is plenty of blame to go around for ALL parties involved in the transaction. I would agree with John though that the Govbment is the enabler.

John, what part of ‘rant over’ was so difficult for you to comprehend?
It usually means you are done, I guess in your case, that wasn’t true.
As for your simplistic views on a free market, they sound like those of someone fresh out of school. In the real world we know that nothing is black and white. The problems with the mortgage market were created by free market greed, slick salesmen, and mostly unwitting consumers who were sold ‘the American dream’ of homeownership, and told how they could afford it.
When you have instances of 80+ year old people being sold thirty year mortgages, something is inherently wrong with the system.
The lending institutions gave away mortgages to anyone with a heart beat, and falsified whatever they needed along the way. The government did not back most of these loans, they were bundled and sold on the free market as mortgage backed securities. As with the loans that were backed by the government, fraud on a scale never before seen was rampant. In reality a lot of people should be in jail, but as that is not good for the ‘free market’, and to prevent the collapse of the banking system, most of it was swept under the rug.

Yeah, the government enabled the banks to create this Ponzi scheme with absolutely no downside risk for them, regardless of who loses, the banks always win.

I would venture to say that 70% of the homes I inspected between 2005 & 2007 were lost to foreclosure. You knew immediately which customers never had a chance in hell of making the 1st years payments let alone 30 years.

I knew the whole thing was about to topple when at a BNI meeting the Wells Fargo guy got up and explained that he had five different programs which would allow anyone to purchase a home without any down payment, job or good credit history, there were even a few with cash-back deals. He virtually guaranteed he could get anyone a loan and challenged the room to find him someone he couldn’t get approved.

I was convinced the end was near.

Actually, someone “fresh out of school” would likely have a more socialist mindset than a free market mindset as “academia” has be over run with socialists, communists, statists, and anti capitalists. I am with John on this one. Even if you think his perception of the problem is “simplistic”.