$25K in down-payment support for 1st-time homebuyers

[Anonymous]

Is there any info on who would qualify for this? What are the requirements?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Idiotic.

Democrats never learn. Free money drives up prices.

If everyone is given free $25,000 you know what I'll logically do in return? Automatically raise the price of my house by $25,000.

+1 Damn straight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any info on who would qualify for this? What are the requirements?

Specifics from Harris? You’re joking, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lest we forget, it was this very type of thing . . .inducing lower income people to buy houses they could not afford, that landed us in quite a mess in 2008.

The sort of manipulation of the market is and has been a bipartisan vote purchasing tool since the early 1970s. It has rarely had a lasting positive effect.

This! I can’t believe that more people don’t immediately see this. If people can’t afford to buy a house, it’s literally cruel to get them to buy a house. They’ll just end up in deep financial trouble - unable to make payments or pay taxes or necessary maintenance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lest we forget, it was this very type of thing . . .inducing lower income people to buy houses they could not afford, that landed us in quite a mess in 2008.

The sort of manipulation of the market is and has been a bipartisan vote purchasing tool since the early 1970s. It has rarely had a lasting positive effect.

This! I can’t believe that more people don’t immediately see this. If people can’t afford to buy a house, it’s literally cruel to get them to buy a house. They’ll just end up in deep financial trouble - unable to make payments or pay taxes or necessary maintenance.

You guys are being ridiculous. They still have to have the income and credit to qualify for the mortgage. That doesn’t change. The only difference is that a qualified first time buyer could get $25k for the down payment instead of being short of a 20% payment and borrowing another $25k plus having to pay for private mortgage insurance because the down payment is less than 20%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idiotic.

Democrats never learn. Free money drives up prices.

If everyone is given free $25,000 you know what I'll logically do in return? Automatically raise the price of my house by $25,000.

Everyone is not being given $25,000 so you would be doing something stupid. OTOH, your Trump and MAGA signs probably take at least $50k off the value of your house and all your neighbor’s houses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lest we forget, it was this very type of thing . . .inducing lower income people to buy houses they could not afford, that landed us in quite a mess in 2008.

The sort of manipulation of the market is and has been a bipartisan vote purchasing tool since the early 1970s. It has rarely had a lasting positive effect.

This! I can’t believe that more people don’t immediately see this. If people can’t afford to buy a house, it’s literally cruel to get them to buy a house. They’ll just end up in deep financial trouble - unable to make payments or pay taxes or necessary maintenance.

You guys are being ridiculous. They still have to have the income and credit to qualify for the mortgage. That doesn’t change. The only difference is that a qualified first time buyer could get $25k for the down payment instead of being short of a 20% payment and borrowing another $25k plus having to pay for private mortgage insurance because the down payment is less than 20%.

Didn’t Biden/Democrats already try to do something sketchy with credit ratings so that people with high scores need to pay some of the costs for those with low credit scores?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lest we forget, it was this very type of thing . . .inducing lower income people to buy houses they could not afford, that landed us in quite a mess in 2008.

The sort of manipulation of the market is and has been a bipartisan vote purchasing tool since the early 1970s. It has rarely had a lasting positive effect.

This! I can’t believe that more people don’t immediately see this. If people can’t afford to buy a house, it’s literally cruel to get them to buy a house. They’ll just end up in deep financial trouble - unable to make payments or pay taxes or necessary maintenance.

You guys are being ridiculous. They still have to have the income and credit to qualify for the mortgage. That doesn’t change. The only difference is that a qualified first time buyer could get $25k for the down payment instead of being short of a 20% payment and borrowing another $25k plus having to pay for private mortgage insurance because the down payment is less than 20%.

Didn’t Biden/Democrats already try to do something sketchy with credit ratings so that people with high scores need to pay some of the costs for those with low credit scores?

WASHINGTON -- If you're looking to buy a home, new federal rules may impact how much you pay for a mortgage.

Beginning May 1, upfront fees for loans backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be adjusted because of changes in the Loan Level Price Adjustments (LLPAs). Those fees are based on things including the borrower's credit score, size of the down payment, type of home and more. In some cases, people with better credit scores may pay more in fees, while those with lower credit scores will pay less.
…
The rule changes are part of the Federal Housing Finance Agency's (FHFA) efforts to provide "equitable and sustainable access to homeownership" and to strengthen capital at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

"The [Biden] administration's stated purpose behind making these changes is to help make it easier for borrowers who have historically been disadvantaged and have had a hard time accessing credit," Realtor.com chief economist Danielle Hale told ABC News.

https://abc7ny.com/high-credit-scores-will-mean-higher-mortage-rates-executive-order-homebuyers-with-good-to-pay-mortgage/13198638/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lest we forget, it was this very type of thing . . .inducing lower income people to buy houses they could not afford, that landed us in quite a mess in 2008.

The sort of manipulation of the market is and has been a bipartisan vote purchasing tool since the early 1970s. It has rarely had a lasting positive effect.

This! I can’t believe that more people don’t immediately see this. If people can’t afford to buy a house, it’s literally cruel to get them to buy a house. They’ll just end up in deep financial trouble - unable to make payments or pay taxes or necessary maintenance.

You guys are being ridiculous. They still have to have the income and credit to qualify for the mortgage. That doesn’t change. The only difference is that a qualified first time buyer could get $25k for the down payment instead of being short of a 20% payment and borrowing another $25k plus having to pay for private mortgage insurance because the down payment is less than 20%.

PMI exists for a reason.
Maybe we should make it easier for owners to get rid of it once they gain equity, without refinancing, sure. But it serves a purpose. Buyers should be personally invested. Not invested with other people’s money.

I swear all of you must be 16 years old and have no memory of 2008-2009.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will just lead to homes costing $25k more. People can’t be this stupid, right?

- lifelong Dem who will never vote for Trump

+100

This is basic logic. I think people truly do not comprehend this very basic point.

It isn’t that simple. $25k down payment assistance for a subset of moderate income homebuyers who would still have to qualify for a mortgage would not add $25k to the cost of homes. It would have less effect on housing prices than a Fed cut in interest rates would.

You’re right…it would focus the pricing effect specifically on the most affordable entry level homes. Good job guys.

It would incentive the construction of more entry level homes, which is the only way to fix the housing crunch. The traditional way to do this has been to give financing and tax subsidies to developers and investors to build affordable housing, because that’s the only way to get a housing assistance bill through the Senate. That has been a terrible and wasteful way to do it.

It would be much much better to give a subsidy to moderate income buyers and then make the builders and investors build to their housing demand to get their hands on the money.

It would do this how?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lest we forget, it was this very type of thing . . .inducing lower income people to buy houses they could not afford, that landed us in quite a mess in 2008.

The sort of manipulation of the market is and has been a bipartisan vote purchasing tool since the early 1970s. It has rarely had a lasting positive effect.

This! I can’t believe that more people don’t immediately see this. If people can’t afford to buy a house, it’s literally cruel to get them to buy a house. They’ll just end up in deep financial trouble - unable to make payments or pay taxes or necessary maintenance.

You guys are being ridiculous. They still have to have the income and credit to qualify for the mortgage. That doesn’t change. The only difference is that a qualified first time buyer could get $25k for the down payment instead of being short of a 20% payment and borrowing another $25k plus having to pay for private mortgage insurance because the down payment is less than 20%.

Why stop at $25,000? Surely, we can offer more money for more votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This will just lead to homes costing $25k more. People can’t be this stupid, right?

- lifelong Dem who will never vote for Trump

+100

This is basic logic. I think people truly do not comprehend this very basic point.

It isn’t that simple. $25k down payment assistance for a subset of moderate income homebuyers who would still have to qualify for a mortgage would not add $25k to the cost of homes. It would have less effect on housing prices than a Fed cut in interest rates would.

You’re right…it would focus the pricing effect specifically on the most affordable entry level homes. Good job guys.

It would incentive the construction of more entry level homes, which is the only way to fix the housing crunch. The traditional way to do this has been to give financing and tax subsidies to developers and investors to build affordable housing, because that’s the only way to get a housing assistance bill through the Senate. That has been a terrible and wasteful way to do it.

It would be much much better to give a subsidy to moderate income buyers and then make the builders and investors build to their housing demand to get their hands on the money.

Developers don’t build affordable housing because they want to maximize the value of every sq ft that the market will allow them to cram into a given space. Why would they sell the same 4000 sq ft at an “affordable” price if there are people willing to pay more for minor adjustments to finish level?

As for subsidies, any money given to a developer to incentivize the construction of new housing units will have a downward effect on the retail price. If a developer can lower their building costs then they can offer more units at a lower cost and still make the same profit as they would have at a higher price point. Giving cash to consumers for a downpayment is even more inflationary than loan assistance and will create upward pressure on retail prices due to the consumer level increase in price tolerance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lest we forget, it was this very type of thing . . .inducing lower income people to buy houses they could not afford, that landed us in quite a mess in 2008.

The sort of manipulation of the market is and has been a bipartisan vote purchasing tool since the early 1970s. It has rarely had a lasting positive effect.

This! I can’t believe that more people don’t immediately see this. If people can’t afford to buy a house, it’s literally cruel to get them to buy a house. They’ll just end up in deep financial trouble - unable to make payments or pay taxes or necessary maintenance.

You guys are being ridiculous. They still have to have the income and credit to qualify for the mortgage. That doesn’t change. The only difference is that a qualified first time buyer could get $25k for the down payment instead of being short of a 20% payment and borrowing another $25k plus having to pay for private mortgage insurance because the down payment is less than 20%.

You don’t need a 20% downpayment to buy a house. You only need 5% if you want to get a non-FHA home loan. Literally, the minimum downpayment is only 5% for a normal mortgage. If someone cannot even save 5% of the house price they are purchasing, they are not in the financial position to buy a home. This seems like a repeat of 2008 and a very foolish policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lest we forget, it was this very type of thing . . .inducing lower income people to buy houses they could not afford, that landed us in quite a mess in 2008.

The sort of manipulation of the market is and has been a bipartisan vote purchasing tool since the early 1970s. It has rarely had a lasting positive effect.

This! I can’t believe that more people don’t immediately see this. If people can’t afford to buy a house, it’s literally cruel to get them to buy a house. They’ll just end up in deep financial trouble - unable to make payments or pay taxes or necessary maintenance.

You guys are being ridiculous. They still have to have the income and credit to qualify for the mortgage. That doesn’t change. The only difference is that a qualified first time buyer could get $25k for the down payment instead of being short of a 20% payment and borrowing another $25k plus having to pay for private mortgage insurance because the down payment is less than 20%.

PMI exists for a reason.
Maybe we should make it easier for owners to get rid of it once they gain equity, without refinancing, sure. But it serves a purpose. Buyers should be personally invested. Not invested with other people’s money.

I swear all of you must be 16 years old and have no memory of 2008-2009.

PMI automatically drops once you have accrued 22% equity.

But yes, this will cause another 2008 type mortgage crisis. And investors will make a killing again. When Harris begins taking serious interviews on her policies, it's going to be brutal for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Get over it, OP. You’re one of those who’s whining about women getting maternity leave now simply because you didn’t have it.

+1

I want my kids to have more opportunities than I do. Homeownership is increasingly elusive and the barrier to entry high. This gives people starting out a chance.

Tired of people not doing right by society and thinking only of themselves and/or mindlessly parroting corporate talking points. Whether it’s this kind of assistance or healthcare or maternity leave - these are all things that benefit working and middle class Americans.