Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test)


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 3:36:07 PM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

They had a veto proof majority on the most critical financial bills, so yes. Bush had no say.


There is no such thing, as recent history has shown.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 4:07:13 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

They had a veto proof majority on the most critical financial bills, so yes. Bush had no say.


There is no such thing, as recent history has shown.



Oh? And how exactly has recent history shown that?

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 4:17:40 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
In order to have a veto-proof majority, it meant many Republicans had to "cross the line". There was no guarentee that would be the case.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 5:00:54 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

In order to have a veto-proof majority, it meant many Republicans had to "cross the line". There was no guarentee that would be the case.



So they voted for the bill but would not vote to override a veto? stop it.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 5:03:31 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Thats not what i said. Bush had no say? You mean he couldnt control his own party? You mean he couldnt prevent the republicans of his own party from voting against his bills?

ETA

The definition of a veto-proof margin is ...

Veto-proof describes those votes with a margin sufficient to override a veto, should it occur.
Since a 2/3 vote is required to override, a veto-proof majority is 290 in the House and 67 in the Senate.

http://www.c-span.org/guide/congress/glossary/vetproof.htm

< Message edited by tazzygirl -- 7/22/2010 5:05:24 PM >


_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 5:13:29 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Thats not what i said. Bush had no say? You mean he couldnt control his own party? You mean he couldnt prevent the republicans of his own party from voting against his bills?

ETA

The definition of a veto-proof margin is ...

Veto-proof describes those votes with a margin sufficient to override a veto, should it occur.
Since a 2/3 vote is required to override, a veto-proof majority is 290 in the House and 67 in the Senate.

http://www.c-span.org/guide/congress/glossary/vetproof.htm


No, he didnt necessarily have "control" of the GOP, anymore than Blowboy has "control" of the Dems. And you might look at the voting on EESA 2008 since that was the context this was raised in...veto proof majorities in both houses.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 5:20:44 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Thats not what a vto proof majority means.

And the EESA was not veto proof as only 263 of the House voted for it.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 5:23:30 PM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

They had a veto proof majority on the most critical financial bills, so yes. Bush had no say.


There is no such thing, as recent history has shown.



Oh? And how exactly has recent history shown that?


It has shown that by demonstrating a veto-proof majority needs the majority to act in unison.

Do I need to list the examples?

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 5:29:24 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

They had a veto proof majority on the most critical financial bills, so yes. Bush had no say.


There is no such thing, as recent history has shown.



Oh? And how exactly has recent history shown that?


It has shown that by demonstrating a veto-proof majority needs the majority to act in unison.

Do I need to list the examples?



I already listed the most important counter-example..it only takes one to disprove that "there is no such thing"

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 5:54:39 PM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

It sorta begs the question "what sort of genius would approve a 103% loan to someone with a 520 credit score?"


Someone who was able top repackage the loan in a CDO with AAA rating, naturally.


_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 6:54:10 PM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

I kinda like the good, old fashioned, work hard, pay your bills, save your money, find a house for approx 1/2 what the mortgage lender told you 'you could afford', make a fat down payment, make double payments for 15 years....... and voila'!!!! You've bought a house!!!

Silly me.




LaTig, that's what I always did! But now that I'm older I just make the regular payment every month. Why make my brother and sister "rich" I figure.

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to LaTigresse)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/22/2010 7:16:53 PM   
thornhappy


Posts: 8596
Joined: 12/16/2006
Status: offline
What do you see as a big mortgage?  I got this condo the Nehemiah plan, where the developer puts down 3%, I put down one mortgage payment.   The sales price was less than the old 2.5 x gross income rule-of-thumb.  I've never missed a payment, nor made a late one.

This program was discontinued in October of 2008.  I've come across articles showing a very low default rate with these loans.  You actually do homework on budgeting, etc. (I felt pretty sheepish doing that stuff, I'd already owned a home.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mrbob726

joether - If someone can't save enough to come up with a 5% down payment, how can you expect them to be able to make payments on a big mortgage ? It has nothing to do with how we got here - it has everything to do with how we get away from it.


(in reply to mrbob726)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 7/23/2010 9:41:04 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

It sorta begs the question "what sort of genius would approve a 103% loan to someone with a 520 credit score?"


Someone who was able top repackage the loan in a CDO with AAA rating, naturally.



Would you consider that "someone" a predator?

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 8/4/2010 9:51:46 AM   
cuckoldmepls


Posts: 855
Joined: 11/29/2007
Status: offline
Some very good comments especially on how we need to start doing business the old fashion way which is require down payments. I would even go so far to say that we need to return to the days when a local bank loaned money to buy a local home and actually held on to the loan for 30 years until it was paid for. Not sell it to some foreign bank for a quick profit. When banks are allowed to sell mortgages, there is not much incentive to make good, responsible loans to begin with, not withstanding the government agencies and regulations that force banks to make easy loans to begin with.

As far as the comments blaming this mortgage collapse on Bush, you should be aware that Bush warned Congress of the impending disaster years in advance, and Congress did nothing. I suspect their reasoning was about the same as not cancelling NAFTA. If you cancel NAFTA and the Chinese trade deal, and the economic collapse accelerated, then you will get blamed for it. Even though we all know our economy is permanently going down hill anyway. So if they made credit more difficult to obtain, and the economy took a nosedive, then they would get blamed for that too, even though this time their gamble failed, and it almost caused a depression.

This is the real reason that Senator Dodd's statement is so incredulous. If people can't afford to save up money for a down payment on large purchases such as a home, then they certainly won't be able to save up money for financial emergencies such as a major car breakdown, a/c heating system going out or plumbing emergencies etc.. This means that the first time they have an unexpected financial crisis, they most likely will have to put off their mortgage payment which starts the ball rolling. If they have a spouse and kids, that just triples the number of financial emergencies they will probably have. It's absolutely insane not to require down payments on large purchases.

From the banks point of view, banks use down payments as a method of first determining whether you can actually save up money, which is the first step in determining whether you can handle financial emergencies, then they are supposed to look at your take home income, and make a financial determination as to whether you can handle the payments. Out of greed, and government regulations that purposely made credit too easy, the mortgage industry failed miserably.

Another reason banks traditionally have required down payments for large purchases is so they can recover their losses should someone default. For example, let's say someone wants to buy a $20,000 used car. The bank loans the money with no down payment, and the guy blows the engine up within a week of purchasing it. Well the guy couldn't save up enough money for a down payment, so he sure doesn't have $3,000 for a new engine, and he decides to just let the bank have it back since he can't drive it any more. Well the bank has to spend $3,000 for a new engine to sell it, and most likely will take a $3,000 loss on it. Where as if they had required a 10% down payment, it would have only been a $1,000 loss. This doesn't sound like much, but it does add up especially when you consider the losses on homes that banks absorb without requiring down payments. There's also the reality of deflating home markets for various reasons, which means a bank has to take more losses when things go wrong. In short, down payments provide a cushion for banks to protect themselves from losses. Too many losses, and banks, and government mortgage industries go under. If you don't make credit more difficult to get, it will just continue.

The bottom line is this. If you make credit too easy, half the people out there are not responsible enough to make wise decisions and handle their finances responsibly. The people in charge have to do it for them. Some people are just not cut out for home ownership at least until they mature and learn some financial responsibility. With renting at least you don't have unexpected expenses on the home. For people who can't afford to save up a down payment while paying rent, then the most logical course of action is to split the rent with someone else like a family member, friend or significant other, until you can save enough for a down payment.


(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 8/4/2010 9:58:09 AM   
Jeffff


Posts: 12600
Joined: 7/7/2007
Status: offline
Your posts are long and silly.

I won't read them or believe anything in them


I hope this helps.

_____________________________

"If you don't live it, it won't come out your horn." Charlie Parker

(in reply to cuckoldmepls)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 8/4/2010 10:41:22 AM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Real Estate broker here and I saw this mess coming 5 or 6 years ago when they started doing 103% loans to people who had credit ratings of 520 or so.  Then, they wonder why they arent making payments.  Hell, they have NEVER made payments, that's why their credit sucks.


It sorta begs the question "what sort of genius would approve a 103% loan to someone with a 520 credit score?"

None of you seem to have picked up on the effects of capitalism (turning paper into money) on home financing and mortgaging.

Allow me to explain that 'genius.' He makes money via a commission on the loan, the mortgage co. makes money selling it Fannie or Freddie or if unconventional...a big bank in NY.

The big banks then 'package' them with other mortgages and now in the millions combined...make money selling them to investors all over the world.

Got that great old AAA rating from my golf buddy who made money 'selling' me that rating.

Kinkroids, home buying was removed from the free market [sic] under Roosevelt when he created Fannie Mae. What a deal knowing the houses I sell go to somebody who could get a mortgage if only because we know the 'govt.' warehouser would buy it.

Then the govt. will raise the qualifying mortgage limits right along with me raising the price of my house to make more money...after the land owner raised his price to me...to make more money.

Getting govt. into the mortgage warehousing business has done a whole for home builders and land owners, making more money...making it worse for the home buyer...costing him more money.

The home buyer is the customer and we are all here and off his labor over 30 or more years...to make money.

Soon, mortgage companies all around joined the party and wrote bad loans to make money off Freddie, Fannie (govt. backed) or to NY banks (too big to fail) and have it insured by AIG and they too...to make money and all because if necessary...also too big to fail.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 8/4/2010 12:58:19 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
No, I was telling them to find a payment they were comfortable with and stick to that.  15 years in the business and I have sold 2 homes that got foreclosed on.

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 8/4/2010 5:29:52 PM   
DarkSteven


Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

I won't explain it for you now, and let's see if you can figure out why this little paragraph is so incredulous.



How can a paragraph be incredulous?


_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to cuckoldmepls)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 8/4/2010 5:48:53 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

I won't explain it for you now, and let's see if you can figure out why this little paragraph is so incredulous.



How can a paragraph be incredulous?



If it has a life of its own?

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) - 8/4/2010 9:33:27 PM   
thornhappy


Posts: 8596
Joined: 12/16/2006
Status: offline
Some folks would rather make a low down payment and keep the extra cash on hand for...I don't know...investment...emergency funds.

Bush trumpeted housing numbers almost every week as part of his "ownership society" stuff.  If he didn't know how people were buying these loans, then he or his staff was clueless beyond belief.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The 5% Rule (IQ test) Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094