$ 15,000 Gift to home buyer!!

BoyGenius

Cyber Bully Victim

I mean seriously, this was sent out yesterday from the National Association of Realtors:

Dear Fellow REALTOR®,

Here's our take on the Stimulis Bill and Treasury announcements made this week. We look at the Stimulis package AND the Treasury's package holistically, in compliment with each other - mostly because that's how the Obama team is looking at it. Your representatives, the NAR Board of Directors, asked us in November to do 4 things (with an unspoken but clearly understood mandate to PRESERVE what we already have). Here they are: 1) get loan limits raised for high cost areas, 2) make the $7,500 tax credit NOT a loan, 3) try to find ways to push interest rates down (which are higher than they should be due to systemic risk right now) by 200 basis points, and 4) help provide solutions to the foreclosure/short sale problem.

So here's what we have achieved: 1) the loan limits will be raised to $727,000 in high cost areas, 2) the tax credit will be raised to $8,000 with NO payback [a true credit], 3) interest rates have come down 125-150 basis points, and 4) the bill has over $50 billion in it for foreclosure mitigation, with Geitners Treasury plan signaling that the second half of TARP and TALF will be used to mitigate foreclosures through a government guarantee, drive down interest rates by buying another $200-300 billion of mortgage paper from the GSES's thereby freeing them up to do the same with new mortgages, and Fannie has just agreed to lift the cap of 4 investment properties eligible for loans and raise it to 10.

In addition, we preserved what we have - which some tend to forget is always on the table when these negotiations start up again - mortgage interest deductability, real estate tax deductability, and the $250,000/$500,000 cap gains exclusion (an overall package worth more than $100 billion and for some a very attractive funding source for their pet projects).

We did make a run at the $15,000 credit -- and we would have loved to have gotten that or the Homebuilders $22,000 credit idea as well as their 5 year loss carryback deal, but they were considered too rich for this program. What it did do though is totally take the debate off of whether a tax credit should be reinstated at all (it expired last year) and whether it was a true credit or a repayable loan, and kept the conversation on how much it should be. It also kept the debate off of 'what we are willing to give up to get a $15,000 tax credit' and kept the debate again, on how much it should be. It's pretty hard to complain when they give you what you ask for and you lose something you never had.

While we study the Treasury specifics on their major role in providing the rest of the housing solution -- there is much more to come and we are working diligently with the Administration to help 'unclog the pipeline' and get capital flowing into housing again.
 

I'm not going to go into detail, because I've done it many times already. I understand the impulse to want to create a bottom in the housing market. The problem is, as with most markets, bottoms aren't created - they are found. When you artificially try to create one, it will be fundamentally unsound and likely to lead to more intense problems later. That's how we got here to begin with - by creating markets that weren't real and thinking we we're all more prosperous than we actually were.

Just let the market find its bottom - I understand that means significant pain for some who vastly overestimated their own prosperity - but that pain cannot be avoided - it can only be delayed (at significant cost). More than anything, what this economic machine needs, in order to start operating efficiently again, is visibility. And in this case, that means are firm, reliable bottom, that everyone believes is real. The people that will make the economic engine start turning again will be smart enough to recognize that the bottoms we are trying to create aren't real - and they will remain skeptical about putting their capital back in the game.

I know everyone wants a quick, pretty answer. I know everyone thinks we deserve to avoid the pain we have created for ourselves by living beyond our means for 2 decades. But, trying to avoid that pain equates to setting up deeper and longer lasting pain in the future. We made mistakes - now we must pay for them, so that we can put them behind us.

So, the short answer is that I think it's a bad idea (especially since it's only for first time homebuyers). However, if we are set on going further in debt in order to artificially jump start the economy - it will be a much more effective measure than the majority of what is in the stimulus package.
 
Last edited:

kayakangler

FISH OR DIE
I'm not going to go into detail, because I've done it many times already. I understand the impulse to want to create a bottom in the housing market. The problem is, as with most markets, bottoms aren't created - they are found. When you artificially try to create one, it will be fundamentally unsound and likely to lead to more intense problems later. That's how we got here to begin with - by creating markets that weren't real and thinking we we're all more prosperous than we actually were.

Just let the market find its bottom - I understand that means significant pain for some who vastly overestimated their own prosperity - but that pain cannot be avoided - it can only be delayed (at significant cost). More than anything, what this economic machine needs, in order to start operating efficiently again, is visibility. And in this case, that means are firm, reliable bottom, that everyone believes is real. The people that will make the economic engine start turning again will be smart enough to recognize that the bottoms we are trying to create aren't real - and they will remain skeptical about putting their capital back in the game.

I know everyone wants a quick, pretty answer. I know everyone thinks we deserve to avoid the pain we have created for ourselves by living beyond our means for 2 decades. But, trying to avoid that pain equates to setting up deeper and longer lasting pain in the future. We made mistakes - now we must pay for them, so that we can put them behind us.

So, the short answer is that I think it's a bad idea (especially since it's only for first time homebuyers). However, if we are set on going further in debt in order to artificially jump start the economy - it will be a much more effective measure than the majority of what is in the stimulus package.

That’s interesting... I feel a little worried to tell you the truth. No doubt having a bunch of eager first time home buyers out there would be great for me, but at what cost. I remember a few years back when the fed kept dropping and dropping the interest rates to boost the economy... It worked great everyone was buying houses and refinancing and taking equity out of their homes living it up...That drove prices through the roof, now look at us... Maybe they should let things take their natural course and let the economy correct its self... just a thought… Maybe we are near enough to the bottom that corrective action will work?
 
That’s interesting... I feel a little worried to tell you the truth. No doubt having a bunch of eager first time home buyers out there would be great for me, but at what cost. I remember a few years back when the fed kept dropping and dropping the interest rates to boost the economy... It worked great everyone was buying houses and refinancing and taking equity out of their homes living it up...That drove prices through the roof, now look at us... Maybe they should let things take their natural course and let the economy correct its self... just a thought… Maybe we are near enough to the bottom that corrective action will work?

Yeah, the market is a very efficient mechanism. It would quickly find the bottom if we would just leave it alone. How can we expect it to find the bottom if we keep doing things to interfere with its ability to do so? The problem is, a lot of people don't want to let it find a bottom where it really needs to - they want to keep pretending that we are more prosperous than we really are - they want to keep pretending that our policies aren't hurting us.
 

CrashTest

Well-Known Member
They took that out of the final version that passed. Now, there's an $8,000 credit for first time homebuyers, which phases out for individuals with an AGI over $75,000 and couples with an AGI over $150,000.

As usual, folks like me who are truly capable of stimulating the ecomony because they piss money away like there's no tomorrow, get zip, nada, zilch.
 

chernmax

NOT Politically Correct!!
The real smoke and mirrors comes from the cuts the Democrats made to the stimulus bill. Obama wanted to give $500 (single) $1000 (family) and since the bill looked so bloated at $919B, they reduced the size to about $780B but they left all the fat on the bone for Americans to swallow and cut all the real stimulus meat out that actually would have benefited taxpayers in the form of higher stimulus checks, home and auto rebates, tax deductions, etc!!!

So now the democrats are saying hey America, we cut the size down so lets sign it before anyone has a chance to read it!!! Now special interest groups, pet projects, and big fat pork will sail through and oh by the way, Americans started complaining about the size so we'll cut your money first!!!
 

BoyGenius

Cyber Bully Victim
The real smoke and mirrors comes from the cuts the Democrats made to the stimulus bill. Obama wanted to give $500 (single) $1000 (family) and since the bill looked so bloated at $919B, they reduced the size to about $780B but they left all the fat on the bone for Americans to swallow and cut all the real stimulus meat out that actually would have benefited taxpayers in the form of higher stimulus checks, home and auto rebates, tax deductions, etc!!!

So now the democrats are saying hey America, we cut the size down so lets sign it before anyone has a chance to read it!!! Now special interest groups, pet projects, and big fat pork will sail through and oh by the way, Americans started complaining about the size so we'll cut your money first!!!

I love a good tard smackdown.

Roughly $282 billion of the stimulus package, or about 35 percent, is made up of tax cuts for individuals and businesses, including tax breaks for buyers of homes and cars.

The centerpiece is President Obama’s “Making Work Pay” income tax credit of up to $400 for individuals and $800 for couples in 2009 and 2010. The money will mostly be distributed through reduced paycheck tax withholdings, adding $8 or so a week that officials hope will be spent not saved. Individuals earning up to $75,000 and couples up to $150,000 will qualify for a full credit.

The bill also spares millions of middle-income Americans from the alternative minimum tax in 2009, raising the exemption to $46,700 for individuals and $70,950 for couples.

First-time homebuyers will be able to claim a tax credit of up to $8,000, for purchases made by Dec. 1, 2009.

Individuals earning up to $125,000 and couples up to $250,000 will be able to deduct the sales tax paid on a new car costing up to $49,500. And the bill creates a new $2,500 higher education tax credit, partly refundable for tax-filers who do not pay that much in taxes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/14/us/politics/14stimintro.ready.html

:whistle:
 
C

czygvtwkr

Guest
OMG $8 a week, that's a Whopper Value Meal in the king size. That has to help the economy.
 

BoyGenius

Cyber Bully Victim
OMG $8 a week, that's a Whopper Value Meal in the king size. That has to help the economy.

You know I've been watching with much amusement how the same die-hard Republicans in here that preach all the tough love, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, you don't deserve chit from the Government, go work for it crowd, have been salivating over the thought of getting the $15 tax money and other goodies.

It seems when the timing is right for them it's OK to bankrupt the country, and when not, you're a lazy piece of chit welfare queen.

:popcorn:
 

chernmax

NOT Politically Correct!!
Last edited:

chernmax

NOT Politically Correct!!
You know I've been watching with much amusement how the same die-hard Republicans in here that preach all the tough love, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, you don't deserve chit from the Government, go work for it crowd, have been salivating over the thought of getting the $15 tax money and other goodies.

It seems when the timing is right for them it's OK to bankrupt the country, and when not, you're a lazy piece of chit welfare queen.

:popcorn:

Sounds like you speak from experience, well at least the lazy piece of chit welfare queen part!!! :whistle:
 

BoyGenius

Cyber Bully Victim
You're a bigger idiot to believe anything about this stimulus bill is going to help this economy verse grow more government by starting new programs that will then have to be funded again year after year, so go smack your parents for having you, boyidiot and polish that turd somewhere else!!!
:smack:

:blahblah:, :blahblah:, :blahblah:, enjoy your next eight years.

:popcorn:
 
C

czygvtwkr

Guest
You know I've been watching with much amusement how the same die-hard Republicans in here that preach all the tough love, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, you don't deserve chit from the Government, go work for it crowd, have been salivating over the thought of getting the $15 tax money and other goodies.

It seems when the timing is right for them it's OK to bankrupt the country, and when not, you're a lazy piece of chit welfare queen.

:popcorn:

Seriously, how is this going to help anybody?

I am not going to change my spending habits.

I was against the $300 rebate checks a few years ago, I was against the $600 stimulus check last year. Congress and the Senate need to learn to live within a budget and realize that eventually somebody has to pay the bill.

I believe in government spending when
1) the government actually gets something for it such as a road, bridge or weapon system

2) when it is actually going to do something (such as low interest student loans) and is not some feel good bull####

3) it must be within the powers of the federal government, stuff such as providing condoms or abstinence education is a total waste of money and the federal government was never granted the power to do this
 

chernmax

NOT Politically Correct!!
NY Times article says that increasing welfare benefits qualifies as stimulitive spending.

Boyidiot doesn't copy and paste these parts of his own source!!!

If nothing else, the plan is a striking return of big government. It also symbolizes continuing partisanship, despite Mr. Obama’s promise of new cooperation. No House Republican voted for the measure, and the three in the Senate who did are viewed as renegades by their party’s leadership.

Whatever the result, future generations will get the bill.
 
Top