Debates
04 Dec 08
04 Dec 08
'Homeowners struggling to pay their mortgages were given a reprieve by Gordon Brown yesterday when he unveiled a plan to let people affected by the economic downturn take a two-year mortgage interest payment holiday.'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/dec/04/brown-mortgage-interest-break-repossessions
Strikes me as practical. Too late to implement in the USA?
04 Dec 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de NageIt's like trying to smother a fire with hay, the flames will disappear for a moment, but they'll be back, easy credit on imaginary money, and guvamints everywhere cranking up the money printing machine.
'Homeowners struggling to pay their mortgages were given a reprieve by Gordon Brown yesterday when he unveiled a plan to let people affected by the economic downturn take a two-year mortgage interest payment holiday.'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/dec/04/brown-mortgage-interest-break-repossessions
Strikes me as practical. Too late to implement in the USA?
Rudd in Aus, was sitting on a big fat surplus (aka you've all been over taxed) handing out "free" thousands to first home buyers, luring people into debt for the rest of the price, guaranteeing some financial institutions which means they can't cock up no matter how much and to who they lend too with the added benefit there was a run on the institutions he didn't guarantee.
04 Dec 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageFor one, it is a massive discrimination against renters. What do they get? And why don't they deserve to get something?
'Homeowners struggling to pay their mortgages were given a reprieve by Gordon Brown yesterday when he unveiled a plan to let people affected by the economic downturn take a two-year mortgage interest payment holiday.'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/dec/04/brown-mortgage-interest-break-repossessions
Strikes me as practical. Too late to implement in the USA?
04 Dec 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI think the basic idea is not bad, in principle, but I have some doubts about the implementation.
Let's deal with the primary issue first, please. Is this a good idea in principle or not?
Example:
The prime minister said the scheme would cover any household which suffered a redundancy or "significant loss of income". This would, for the first time, extend help to households where one family member loses their job and the other remains in work.
There might be situations where a couple can prevent repossession only if one is made redundant. I understand the need to help people who need the most, but maybe the criteria shouldn't be directly on employment status.
04 Dec 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI think the US Treasurey is going to unveil a program of 4.5% on a thirty year mortgage to get the housing market going.
'Homeowners struggling to pay their mortgages were given a reprieve by Gordon Brown yesterday when he unveiled a plan to let people affected by the economic downturn take a two-year mortgage interest payment holiday.'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/dec/04/brown-mortgage-interest-break-repossessions
Strikes me as practical. Too late to implement in the USA?
04 Dec 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageFor a government to forcibly remove profit from a business contract between two private parties is, not practical. More like a disaster.
'Homeowners struggling to pay their mortgages were given a reprieve by Gordon Brown yesterday when he unveiled a plan to let people affected by the economic downturn take a two-year mortgage interest payment holiday.'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/dec/04/brown-mortgage-interest-break-repossessions
Strikes me as practical. Too late to implement in the USA?
04 Dec 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI think you have to look at the fundamental issue first.
Let's deal with the primary issue first, please. Is this a good idea in principle or not?
Does this make sense? You get a $200,000 mortage to be paid back over 20 years. With interest you will have paid approx $400,000 to the bank so the bank will make a $200,000 profit from you just by lending someone else's money to you.
This is highway robbery. Our banking system is not one designed to ensure the financial stability of a civilization. Instead, it has morphed into a system designed to generate maximum profit at minimal risk to the lender.
So, in this context, does anyone think reducing the amount of interest paid on a mortgage is a bad idea?