Page 4 of 4 [ 53 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,541
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

19 Sep 2014, 9:40 am

sonofghandi wrote:
Just for the record, Fannie and Freddie do not provide mortgages to anyone.


Okay, I just assumed LoveNoHate knew what he was talking about in that respect.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

19 Sep 2014, 10:02 am

sonofghandi wrote:
Just for the record, Fannie and Freddie do not provide mortgages to anyone.


Where are you getting this from ? I got my mortgage in 2004 and it has always been owned by Freddie. The bank that managed it for Freddie would always have to call them, and get permission for anything. Also, before I got the house I had to get approved by Freddie based on showing my income and credit.

This was a huge problem initially with the HAMP (Home Affordability Program) that it only covered mortgages owned by Freddie and Fannie, so they later expanded it to include bank mortgages.

"From 1938 to 1968, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) was the sole institution that bought mortgages from depository institutions, principally savings and loan associations, which encouraged more mortgage lending and effectively insured the value of mortgages by the US government. In 1968, Fannie Mae split into a private corporation and a publicly financed institution. The private corporation was still called Fannie Mae and its charter continued to support the purchase of mortgages from savings and loan associations and other depository institutions, but without an explicit insurance policy that guaranteed the value of the mortgages".

"The charter of Freddie Mac was essentially the same as Fannie Mae's newly private charter: to expand the secondary market for mortgages and mortgage backed securities by buying mortgages made by savings and loan associations and other depository institutions".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freddie_Mac



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

20 Sep 2014, 3:26 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
I was not really referring specifically to Detroit, more your line of thinking here and why it disgusts me. Keeping the poor out of neighborhoods does not reduce crime....


Based on what? Because you say so ?

You appear to believe that poverty and crime are not linked ? However, it is obvious that the poor are the ones committing most of the property crimes. Why do rich people need to break into people's homes and steal their tvs and PS3s ? Why do rich people need to mug people on the street for say the money in a woman's purse ? Why do rich people need to murder people for a few hundred bucks?

Statistically, you are much more likely to be victim of a property crime being near a poor person than a rich person, probably more likely to be a victim of murder too. So, statistically, you are safer moving away from these people.

Also, say you buy a new car then you don't have to worry that it will stand out in the neighborhood. You don't have to worry about additions to your home being stripped when you are away. You will connect more with your neighbors being at the same income level. No bars on your windows! Feel safe if you leave your door unlocked!



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,541
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

20 Sep 2014, 8:16 pm

As a great many poor people are of color, there is definitely a racial component to keeping "those people" out of the neighborhood.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 31,279
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

21 Sep 2014, 1:21 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
I was not really referring specifically to Detroit, more your line of thinking here and why it disgusts me. Keeping the poor out of neighborhoods does not reduce crime....


Based on what? Because you say so ?

You appear to believe that poverty and crime are not linked ? However, it is obvious that the poor are the ones committing most of the property crimes. Why do rich people need to break into people's homes and steal their tvs and PS3s ? Why do rich people need to mug people on the street for say the money in a woman's purse ? Why do rich people need to murder people for a few hundred bucks?

Statistically, you are much more likely to be victim of a property crime being near a poor person than a rich person, probably more likely to be a victim of murder too. So, statistically, you are safer moving away from these people.

Also, say you buy a new car then you don't have to worry that it will stand out in the neighborhood. You don't have to worry about additions to your home being stripped when you are away. You will connect more with your neighbors being at the same income level. No bars on your windows! Feel safe if you leave your door unlocked!


Reducing poverty might reduce crime...but simply pushing the problem away to elsewhere, out of sight and out of mind from the 'upper class' citizens does nothing to solve the problem.

Of course poverty and crime are linked, hence why poverty should be addressed since most crimes committed due to poverty have a lot to do with desperation to survive, needing a way to get by...not to mention if you're poor good luck getting the legal system to consider that, they side with the people with the money even if you haven't actually comitted the crime...or the penalty doesn't even fit the crime so there is reason for it to be brought down. Addressing poverty would reduce crime, just moving it around doesn't solve anything just changes what areas are harder hit by crime and what not.

Also yes much of the time rich people are more into fraud and more subtle crimes, doesn't mean most crimes are actually committed by poor people....Also I have been near lots of poor people, usually feel safer around them than the snobs. I once had someone put something in my drink and it was in a more upper class area with nice upper class people and someone drugged my drink....never once had anything like that happen around 'poor' people.

Most 'poor' people I know don't like thieves, and hate getting their sh*t stolen....poor people don't like having stuff stolen any more than wealthy people....stealing from individuals is usually looked down on, yes even by the poor though no ones going to hate someone if they say they once got caught stealing a sandwich from wal-mart or something corporate america steals so don't care about people stealing from that so much.