NAME ONE THING OBAMA HAS DONE RIGHT... WITH FACTS AND STATISTICS.

[geoff]

Ok, I really do not support this President nor his agenda. But, i do give credit when it is due. One thing the President did that was good...the HARP program for borrowers who are underwater. Under his administration, this program was put in place to help homeowners refinance. How do I know? I sell mortgages, it is my business to know.

[BanginJimmy]

Ok, I really do not support this President nor his agenda. But, i do give credit when it is due. One thing the President did that was good...the HARP program for borrowers who are underwater. Under his administration, this program was put in place to help homeowners refinance. How do I know? I sell mortgages, it is my business to know.

HARP was a decent program, but it didnt actually change anything, it just put on a bandaid. For some, that bandaid was enough to get them through. For others, it was a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.

[geoff]

HARP was a decent program, but it didnt actually change anything, it just put on a band aid. For some, that bandaid was enough to get them through. For others, it was a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.

I know first hand that HARP saved a lot of people a great deal on their monthly payments. I don't see it as a band aid, it was more like a small reparation to homeowners who despite the economic recession maintained good standing on their mortgages. Think about it, the banks screw a bunch of people over ( specifically with ARMS ) and then the markets crash. Home values plummet therefore putting a lot of people out of the market to refinance. They were stuck in high interest rates and were told by the big banks that there was nothing that could be done due to the home being underwater...nice scheme no? These people were trapped in crazy loans while historically low rates in the 2's & 3's were being sold left and right. Hate the guy and disagree with just about everything that he stands for...but he did save a lot of people from losing their homes. They are actually in the works now for expanding the eligibility of the program for borrowers that had loans not owned by Fannie or Freddie.

[BanginJimmy]

I know first hand that HARP saved a lot of people a great deal on their monthly payments. I don't see it as a band aid, it was more like a small reparation to homeowners who despite the economic recession maintained good standing on their mortgages. Think about it, the banks screw a bunch of people over ( specifically with ARMS ) and then the markets crash. Home values plummet therefore putting a lot of people out of the market to refinance. They were stuck in high interest rates and were told by the big banks that there was nothing that could be done due to the home being underwater...nice scheme no? These people were trapped in crazy loans while historically low rates in the 2's & 3's were being sold left and right.

What part of this was NOT the fault of people buying homes they couldnt actually afford?

Some call it predatory lending, I call it stupid people not reading what they are signing.


I call it a bandaid for the simple fact that nothing was done to prevent it from happening again. ARMs are still out there even though interest rates are already rising. The govt is still pushing banks to write loans for people that wont pay them back, the Fannie and Freddie are buying them up. Until the govt steps in and prevent these types of loans (ARMs, interest only ect) and stops encouraging their use by backing them through the GSE's we are just asking for a fresh round of economic failure.

[geoff]

What part of this was NOT the fault of people buying homes they couldnt actually afford?

Some call it predatory lending, I call it stupid people not reading what they are signing.


I call it a bandaid for the simple fact that nothing was done to prevent it from happening again. ARMs are still out there even though interest rates are already rising. The govt is still pushing banks to write loans for people that wont pay them back, the Fannie and Freddie are buying them up. Until the govt steps in and prevent these types of loans (ARMs, interest only ect) and stops encouraging their use by backing them through the GSE's we are just asking for a fresh round of economic failure.

I find it odd that I would even debate someone on the "good" that Obama has done lol. That being said, when is the last time you actually applied for a mortgage? I deny people on a daily...yes daily basis. The idea behind an ARM, Interest Only, ect...is not in itself a "bad idea" or "predatory" in any way. If i have a borrower looking to purchase a home but flip it in the next 2-5 years...why would he/she not want an ARM/Interest only loan? Let's call it what it really is...the 90's and 00's were an era of "free money". Sure the lobbyists pushed regulation changes...but EVERYBODY was on board. The people all wanted a piece of the "American Dream" and everybody else wanted a piece of the pie. There was money to be made...great deals of money. I hear the stories from loan officers all the time. They made a killing. The true problem was that they were giving away money...100% financing with 80/20 loans, stated income/assets, ect...Yeah the big banks screwed everyone...and better yet...after the bailout and after the "recovery" the banks still denied people the ability to refinance since there was no equity in the home...enter Obama and the HARP program. No matter which way you try to swing it...it was a good thing he did.

It is not a bandaid. If you are not currently selling mortgages or in the business...then you don't know what you are talking about. Underwriting guidelines are extremely strict and there are MANY in place that are there to avoid another bubble like the last one. I could write books about all the measures put into place to avoid it.

[BanginJimmy]

when is the last time you actually applied for a mortgage?

Refied on my house 2 years ago.

I deny people on a daily...yes daily basis. The idea behind an ARM, Interest Only, ect...is not in itself a "bad idea" or "predatory" in any way. If i have a borrower looking to purchase a home but flip it in the next 2-5 years...why would he/she not want an ARM/Interest only loan? Let's call it what it really is...the 90's and 00's were an era of "free money". Sure the lobbyists pushed regulation changes...but EVERYBODY was on board. The people all wanted a piece of the "American Dream" and everybody else wanted a piece of the pie. There was money to be made...great deals of money. I hear the stories from loan officers all the time. They made a killing. The true problem was that they were giving away money...100% financing with 80/20 loans, stated income/assets, ect...Yeah the big banks screwed everyone...and better yet...after the bailout and after the "recovery" the banks still denied people the ability to refinance since there was no equity in the home...enter Obama and the HARP program. No matter which way you try to swing it...it was a good thing he did.

It is not a bandaid. If you are not currently selling mortgages or in the business...then you don't know what you are talking about. Underwriting guidelines are extremely strict and there are MANY in place that are there to avoid another bubble like the last one. I could write books about all the measures put into place to avoid it.

About 4 months ago I did a preapproval and was approved for 330k mortgage from BoA, a little less from Wells Fargo and USAA. Here's the thing though, there is no possible way I could actually pay a 330k mortgage on my measly 75k a year income and still afford things like food and electricity. If thats the idea of tight standards, I guess we should be lucky we got off as easy as we did with foreclosures because banks must have been bending over backwards to top the others approval amount. Maybe I could have gotten 1mil back then.

[geoff]

Refied on my house 2 years ago.




About 4 months ago I did a preapproval and was approved for 330k mortgage from BoA, a little less from Wells Fargo and USAA. Here's the thing though, there is no possible way I could actually pay a 330k mortgage on my measly 75k a year income and still afford things like food and electricity. If thats the idea of tight standards, I guess we should be lucky we got off as easy as we did with foreclosures because banks must have been bending over backwards to top the others approval amount. Maybe I could have gotten 1mil back then.

There is no perfect way to make sure the borrowers will pay their mortgages. At some point in time, doesn't the consumer have some sort of responsibility? Underwriting standards allow 31% of gross income to be used as a total housing payment including Principle/Interest/Taxes/Insurance and mortgage insurance.In your case for example, you have $6250 a month of qualifying income, your total payment could not exceed $1937.50 a month. In addition to that, your total monthly debt obligations can not exceed 43% of your total income or $2687.50. That would leave you with $3562.50 left over for other things...of course that is gross income not net.If they had to go based off of net income minus all " living expenses" then no body in America would be a home owner except for the elite. The standards are tight enough ( especially with new QM and ATR regulations )to keep banks from writing bad loans. There is a nice middle ground for the availability of credit and responsible origination.

[ISAtlanta300]

there is no possible way I could actually pay a 330k mortgage on my measly 75k a year income and still afford things like food and electricity. .

Then you're doing it wrong. I know someone that lives on $1800 in expenses (mortgage, food, bills etc), and makes barely $2500 a month. He is swinging it and will have his home paid off in 10 years (he did a 15 yr loan). His loan was for 160K btw.... and he makes a measly 30K a year...