Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
Chick this out:
"[BOULDER, Colo.] A jury will be asked to decide this week whether a Gunbarrel woman's pyramid of Peeps and other Easter decor on her apartment door became stale enough to warrant her eviction." Tenant claims the Peeps were a religious icon. http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/20...y-woman-asks-/ In their defense, the apartment claims the Peeps were "unsanitary." Obviously, the landlords don't know about Peeps. |
#2
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
"HeyBub" wrote in message m... Chick this out: "[BOULDER, Colo.] A jury will be asked to decide this week whether a Gunbarrel woman's pyramid of Peeps and other Easter decor on her apartment door became stale enough to warrant her eviction." Tenant claims the Peeps were a religious icon. http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/20...y-woman-asks-/ In their defense, the apartment claims the Peeps were "unsanitary." Obviously, the landlords don't know about Peeps. Speaking as a Landlord, the rental market must be far better there than it is here OR there is a lot more to this story. Pay your rent on time and keep the darned things up year round if you rent from me. |
#3
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
Colbyt wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message m... Chick this out: "[BOULDER, Colo.] A jury will be asked to decide this week whether a Gunbarrel woman's pyramid of Peeps and other Easter decor on her apartment door became stale enough to warrant her eviction." Tenant claims the Peeps were a religious icon. http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/20...y-woman-asks-/ In their defense, the apartment claims the Peeps were "unsanitary." Obviously, the landlords don't know about Peeps. Speaking as a Landlord, the rental market must be far better there than it is here OR there is a lot more to this story. Pay your rent on time and keep the darned things up year round if you rent from me. There's a lot more people looking to rent now that their credit is trashed... nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel |
#4
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
"Nate Nagel" wrote in message ... There's a lot more people looking to rent now that their credit is trashed... nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel Actually a lot of them never had "credit". The moronic loan companies loaned money to people I would not rent to. And we wonder how the "crisis" came about? |
#5
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
On Jun 21, 4:15*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Chick this out: "[BOULDER, Colo.] A jury will be asked to decide this week whether a Gunbarrel woman's pyramid of Peeps and other Easter decor on her apartment door became stale enough to warrant her eviction." Tenant claims the Peeps were a religious icon. http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/20...easter-bunnies... In their defense, the apartment claims the Peeps were "unsanitary." Obviously, the landlords don't know about Peeps. The word gunbarrel is what got my attention |
#6
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
In article ,
"Colbyt" wrote: "Nate Nagel" wrote in message ... There's a lot more people looking to rent now that their credit is trashed... nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel Actually a lot of them never had "credit". The moronic loan companies loaned money to people I would not rent to. And we wonder how the "crisis" came about? Not all of us wonder. Some of us know. The international pool of investment money doubled in a few short years, while the supply of investments didn't. American real estate was about the best investment around. The people with the money demanded more loans to buy. The loan companies, far from being "moronic," supplied the loans. And they got filthy rich in the process, knowing damn well that they were selling worthless paper to people who were even greedier than they were. |
#7
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
Smitty Two wrote:
"Colbyt" wrote: Actually a lot of them never had "credit". The moronic loan companies loaned money to people I would not rent to. And we wonder how the "crisis" came about? The people with the money demanded more loans to buy. The loan companies, far from being "moronic," supplied the loans. More like the guidelines for loaning money for homes were relaxed due to the incessant whining from groups such as Acorn and idiots such as Ted Kennedy. You see, to those individuals, it just wasn't "fair" that people who were too risky to loan money to didn't own their own homes. That is what started this whole ball rolling. Jon |
#8
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:22:13 -0700, Jon Danniken wrote:
Smitty Two wrote: "Colbyt" wrote: Actually a lot of them never had "credit". The moronic loan companies loaned money to people I would not rent to. And we wonder how the "crisis" came about? The people with the money demanded more loans to buy. The loan companies, far from being "moronic," supplied the loans. More like the guidelines for loaning money for homes were relaxed due to the incessant whining from groups such as Acorn and idiots such as Ted Kennedy. You see, to those individuals, it just wasn't "fair" that people who were too risky to loan money to didn't own their own homes. That is what started this whole ball rolling. Bull****. Nobody forced the lenders to make risky loans. They did it to make a quick buck and to toss the loan like a hot potato. |
#9
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
AZ Nomad wrote: On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:22:13 -0700, Jon Danniken wrote: Smitty Two wrote: "Colbyt" wrote: Actually a lot of them never had "credit". The moronic loan companies loaned money to people I would not rent to. And we wonder how the "crisis" came about? The people with the money demanded more loans to buy. The loan companies, far from being "moronic," supplied the loans. More like the guidelines for loaning money for homes were relaxed due to the incessant whining from groups such as Acorn and idiots such as Ted Kennedy. You see, to those individuals, it just wasn't "fair" that people who were too risky to loan money to didn't own their own homes. That is what started this whole ball rolling. Bull****. Nobody forced the lenders to make risky loans. They did it to make a quick buck and to toss the loan like a hot potato. Perhaps you need to research the various "community reinvestment act" type laws that forced lenders to lower standards. |
#10
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:39:17 -0500, Pete C. wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote: On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:22:13 -0700, Jon Danniken wrote: Smitty Two wrote: "Colbyt" wrote: Actually a lot of them never had "credit". The moronic loan companies loaned money to people I would not rent to. And we wonder how the "crisis" came about? The people with the money demanded more loans to buy. The loan companies, far from being "moronic," supplied the loans. More like the guidelines for loaning money for homes were relaxed due to the incessant whining from groups such as Acorn and idiots such as Ted Kennedy. You see, to those individuals, it just wasn't "fair" that people who were too risky to loan money to didn't own their own homes. That is what started this whole ball rolling. Bull****. Nobody forced the lenders to make risky loans. They did it to make a quick buck and to toss the loan like a hot potato. Perhaps you need to research the various "community reinvestment act" type laws that forced lenders to lower standards. Perhaps you need to get your news from sources other than right wing radio shows. |
#11
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:22:13 -0700, Jon Danniken wrote: Smitty Two wrote: "Colbyt" wrote: Actually a lot of them never had "credit". The moronic loan companies loaned money to people I would not rent to. And we wonder how the "crisis" came about? The people with the money demanded more loans to buy. The loan companies, far from being "moronic," supplied the loans. More like the guidelines for loaning money for homes were relaxed due to the incessant whining from groups such as Acorn and idiots such as Ted Kennedy. You see, to those individuals, it just wasn't "fair" that people who were too risky to loan money to didn't own their own homes. That is what started this whole ball rolling. Bull****. Nobody forced the lenders to make risky loans. They did it to make a quick buck and to toss the loan like a hot potato. No, they were forced. Banking regulators evaluated how much investment the financial institutions were making in "underserved" areas and that proportion weighed heavily on the regulator's decisions regarding expansion, mergers, etc. If you doubt this, take a spin through the most disreputable parts of your town. You'll find a Wells Fargo branch next to the pawn shop, a Bank of America store front adjacent to a bodega. Heck, you'll find branch banks on streets where the only retail businesses are hookers and dope dealers. Some of these banks go for DAYS without a bona-fide customer. Believe me, these banks didn't open where they are out of either a profit motive or altruism. Specifically, from Wikipedia: "The Community Reinvestment Act is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Congress passed the Act in 1977 to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining. The Act requires the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound operation. To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act This all started under Carter in 1977, but the regulatory insistence was put in under Clinton in 1995. You are correct in that the banks tossed this loan as soon as they could - banks may from stupid regulations but they're not stupid themselves. |
#12
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
In article ,
AZ Nomad wrote: Perhaps you need to get your news from sources other than right wing radio shows. You mean like Economist Stan Liebowitz who wrote in the New York Post that a strengthening of the CRA in the 1990s encouraged a loosening of lending standards throughout the banking industry. He also charges the Federal Reserve with ignoring the negative impact of the CRA. You mean like Jeffrey A. Miron, a senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University, in an opinion piece for CNN, calls for "getting rid" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as policies like the Community Reinvestment Act that "pressure banks into subprime lending." However, it should also be noted that a Fed study showed approximately 50% of the subprime loans were made by independent mortgage companies that were not regulated by the CRA, and another 25% to 30% came from only partially CRA regulated bank subsidiaries and affiliates. (My main problem with this study is that they did not (or were not) able to tease out how much of these loans were from the CRA-regulated part. . Another study showed one in four subprime loans came from CRA-related banks. (Which sorta backs up the The upstart is that there is still quite a bit of confusion as to what (if any) part the CRA played in this mess. Not a big surprise since we still haven't really been able to get a good handle yet on how big the mess really is let alone cause(s). -- "I found what I thought was a REALLY good book, called _Girl to Grab_. Imagine my surprise when I found out it was volume 6 of the *Encyclopedia Britanica*!" -Martin Mull |
#13
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:27:52 -0400, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , AZ Nomad wrote: Perhaps you need to get your news from sources other than right wing radio shows. You mean like Economist Stan Liebowitz who wrote in the New York Post that a strengthening of the CRA in the 1990s encouraged a loosening of lending standards throughout the banking industry. He also charges the Federal Reserve with ignoring the negative impact of the CRA. You mean like Jeffrey A. Miron, a senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University, in an opinion piece for CNN, calls for "getting rid" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as policies like the Community Reinvestment Act that "pressure banks into subprime lending." However, it should also be noted that a Fed study showed approximately 50% of the subprime loans were made by independent mortgage companies that were not regulated by the CRA, and another 25% to 30% came from only partially CRA regulated bank subsidiaries and affiliates. (My main problem with this study is that they did not (or were not) able to tease out how much of these loans were from the CRA-regulated part. . Another study showed one in four subprime loans came from CRA-related banks. (Which sorta backs up the The upstart is that there is still quite a bit of confusion as to what (if any) part the CRA played in this mess. Not a big surprise since we still haven't really been able to get a good handle yet on how big the mess really is let alone cause(s). I'd be interested in hearing a list of actions taken against lenders who were "too strict" in their lending policies. All zero of those actions. Just because the restrictions were relaxed doesn't mean that lenders were forced to hand out money without checking qualifications. It should be obvious that it was in their best interest not to make bad loans. However it was possible to write bad loans, take a quick profit, and then boot the loans to another victim by packaging them in a bundle of other loans. |
#14
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
AZ Nomad wrote: On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:39:17 -0500, Pete C. wrote: AZ Nomad wrote: On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:22:13 -0700, Jon Danniken wrote: Smitty Two wrote: "Colbyt" wrote: Actually a lot of them never had "credit". The moronic loan companies loaned money to people I would not rent to. And we wonder how the "crisis" came about? The people with the money demanded more loans to buy. The loan companies, far from being "moronic," supplied the loans. More like the guidelines for loaning money for homes were relaxed due to the incessant whining from groups such as Acorn and idiots such as Ted Kennedy. You see, to those individuals, it just wasn't "fair" that people who were too risky to loan money to didn't own their own homes. That is what started this whole ball rolling. Bull****. Nobody forced the lenders to make risky loans. They did it to make a quick buck and to toss the loan like a hot potato. Perhaps you need to research the various "community reinvestment act" type laws that forced lenders to lower standards. Perhaps you need to get your news from sources other than right wing radio shows. Funny, the only radio I listen to is NPR. Odd that you should call NPR right wing. |
#15
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Not a Peep From the Landlord
In article ,
AZ Nomad wrote: O I'd be interested in hearing a list of actions taken against lenders who were "too strict" in their lending policies. All zero of those actions. Stan Liebowitz wrote that community activists intervention at yearly bank reviews resulted in their obtaining large amounts of money from banks, since poor reviews could lead to frustrated merger plans and even legal challenges by the Justice Department. Michelle Minton noted that Chase Manhattan and J.P. Morgan donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to ACORN at about the same time they were to apply for permission to merge and needed to comply with CRA regulations. In the 1990s Bill Clinton had Attorney General Janet Reno threaten banks under red lining rules into giving loans of questionable value. Just because the restrictions were relaxed doesn't mean that lenders were forced to hand out money without checking qualifications. It should be obvious that it was in their best interest not to make bad loans. However it was possible to write bad loans, take a quick profit, and then boot the loans to another victim by packaging them in a bundle of other loans. No, but it would mean that those qualifications being checked on might be altered and lessened. Sorta what "relaxed" means. Also the CRA set up (some say actual, other say de facto) quotas because you had to get enough into an area to prove you weren't redlining. Thus there was probably a certain amount of underwriting to the quota. I think CRA will eventually have a part to play in this fiasco. The bigger part will be when the Congress and Fed mandated Fannie and Freddie to start securitizing mortgages so the other banks could sell them and get some mortgages off their books and make more. The advent of all the rocket scientists and their methods to "eliminate risk" and thus mean that this time is different and not part of the paradigm (this is the one consistent part of every bubble from Tulips forward) The biggest "uncredited" part will be changes in the tax laws under OBRA 2003. -- "I found what I thought was a REALLY good book, called _Girl to Grab_. Imagine my surprise when I found out it was volume 6 of the *Encyclopedia Britanica*!" -Martin Mull |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Landlord&Tenant | UK diy | |||
Advice for New Landlord? | Home Repair | |||
I'm suprised the landlord sold any ale. :-) | UK diy |