On Mar 23, 6:49=A0am, "sinister" <sinis...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> <ruethe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
news:f2e673fd-e06b-4e54-885e-160584ecb915@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mar 22, 6:53 am, "sinister" <sinis...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>http://www.wa****ngtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/20/AR200...
>
> > "But the former Fed chairman said that the subprime boom would boost
hom=
e
> > owner****p and was 'worth the risk.' Greenspan said that 'protection of
> > property rights, so critical to a market economy, requires a critical
ma=
ss
> > of owners to sustain political sup****t.' "
>
> > Of course, what would you expect from a Randoid?
> > I always considered the homeowner****p rate statistic and the drive to
> > boost it, a little flaky. =A0Particularly with the rise of negative
> > amortization and interest only loans. =A0The "homeowner" is
essentially
> > a renter who pays his rent in the form of mortgage interest and pays
> > it to a bank rather than a landlord. =A0The only real owner****p going
on=
> > here is the bank's owner****p of the mortgage holder.
>
> I assume you saw the re****ts that % of equity in homes has dropped to a
lo=
w.
That was the reason for my last sentence. With equity falling and the
market values of homes falling, even the bank doesn't own
much.......except for the person obligated to pay the mortgage.
|
