100 to 120% mortgages

by Mortgage your life and family Mon Aug 01, 2005 17:42

is it not immoral and totally undemocratic for the banks to be deciding how much the price of houses rise by?

I thought shelter was a basic human right? not a commodity to speculate on!

Should the government as a "social partner" not step in and regulate so that people can afford to buy a place rather than having to commit the rest of their working life to a bank.

One thing is for sure: Once the banks have invented the money they lend you they shouldnt be able to charge you interest on it - what a scam!! They invent enough money without having the right to charge interest on it!

The unions and labour are very quiet about all this - economic fundamentalism prevails, we all plod brainwashed into slavery thinking we are free.

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their  currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks...will deprive the people of  all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -Thomas Jefferson


"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by  controlling money and its issuance." -James Madison


"If congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was  given them to use themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations". -Andrew Jackson


"The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity". -Abraham  Lincoln

http://www.themoneymasters.com/presiden.htm

by Al Mon Aug 01, 2005 14:19

The clause of repo for failing to pay has always been there for mortgages and any loan secured against property but its either very small print of rushed through at the very end.
100% mortgages have pros and cons, on the one side they give people a chance to get a foot on the ladder as for many getting that valuable 8 or 10% was a huge obstacle however with mortgages every euro you borrow you pay back multiple times (1st 10 years of a mortgage is almost pure interest) so while its easier to buy a home its costing you a lot more.
120% mortgages are plain dangerous, your borrowing more than you can secure, I fail to see how this can work as an early repo will not clear the debt for the bank and its costing a fortune. If people struggle to pay a 90% mortgage how the hell can they pay 120% one?
100% I dont have a problem with but 120% is playing with fire. Instead of using a mortgage to clear other debts or get a car, etc. just get a normal loan, a hell of a lot less in interest.

by eeekkkk Sun Jul 31, 2005 12:37

.

by Mortgage your life and family Sun Jul 31, 2005 03:35

Up till a few years ago banks were quite comfortable in lending money against the value of property but now perhaps they might be wondering if property is worth all its hyped up to be.

Property values now are based on speculation - the market is full of people buying because they think the value of the property will rise - its no longer about "I need a house to live in" like it might have been in the 60s, 70s and 80s.

What if that speculation stops? What if there is a slow down?
The banks are screwed thats what, as are a lot of people.

Even if the banks can reposses property they know that what they will be repossessing will be worth less and will be plumetting each day in value and the banks are going to have a hard time selling it to someone. And in terms of end of year accounts it will appear that the bank lent 1 million but repossessed a house that was only worth 750,000 - not good for the profit statement or the share price.

So the banks have been sitting around thinking how can we keep the party going. How can we make a market that is stretched to the limit go even further.

The solution: Invent more money

And in practical terms that means 100 to 120 % mortgage = throwing petrol on the fire.

The boom we are seeing in Ireland is not that we are producing wealth but more from the fact that most people are borrowing money now, mortgaging their future(commiting to x number of years work in the future for money now. Debt slavery) - but those loans are going to come home to roost very soon.

When the fall happens you want to cash in your chips before the value falls, get rid of loans, sell other investments if you were lucky enough to have any - become liquid and dont invest till things pick up.

Perhaps enough people will be pissed off by the time the cycle goes into depression to demand that the banks are nationalised and that the issuance of currency is controlled by the government and spent into the economy rather than having a debt based money controlled by private banks and a population of debt slaves.

One of Tony Gregory's demands (when he was negotiating the terms of his involvement with the government Charlie Haughey wanted to form) was to Nationalise the banks. Haughey said no way. Its also said that one of the main reasons that Kennedy was shot was because he wanted to nationalise the american banks and take away the power to issue new currency from the private bankers and put it into the hands of the government so the people would benefit directly and have to pay less tax.

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money ." - Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England (in the 1920s); reputed to be the 2nd wealthiest man in England at that time

    "Their secret is that they have annexed from governments, monarchies, and republics the power to create the world's money on debt-terms requiring tribute both in principal and interest." - Prof. Carroll Quigley, renowned Georgetown historian

http://www.themoneymasters.com/

Educate yourselves - I dare you!

by david mc williams Sun Jul 31, 2005 02:33

"Rather than making houses more affordable, this type of product simply pushes the price of Irish houses up further, forcing the banks to lend even more cash against the same asset this time next year. Friday's central bank figures showed more than €2 billion was extended in mortgage credit in June, the highest ever monthly total.
Let's examine how the credit system works, how loose credit reinforces the upward pressure on house prices and how the banks ultimately become the slaves, rather than the masters, of the housing monster. It might also be helpful to entertain what could happen and who might pick up the tab when things go pear shaped.
The key to the system is collateral, and this is also where the systemic fault lies. When it comes to collateral, the Irish banks have always had faith in the housing market. In recent years, this faith has intensified to blind faith, and now, with a 100 per cent mortgage culture, we are observing new levels of Moonie-style devotion.
Moonie economics is quite straightforward and it works as follows. Take an average person, doing what thousands of Irish people have done in the past few years - buying an investment property."

by :-) Sat Jul 30, 2005 16:17

you can read so much more press with glee.

by jsr Sat Jul 30, 2005 00:45

During the Galway races I say offers for 100% ones on the beer mats! I kid you not. Banks are really pushing to get as many people signed up as possible before intrest rates rise in any big way(ruining sooooooo many people). If you think the banks wont repo. you dont remember the 80s

by Mortgage your life and family Sat Jul 30, 2005 00:11

"failure to keep up payments may result in your home being repossessed"

this is the caveat at the end of one of the ads on newstalk106 I have just heard

I have never heard this before on a financial ad - usually they have someone saying "subject to terms and conditions, X is regulated by the financial regulatory authority"

why the change in ending ?

are they anticipating a lot of repossessions in the near future and they just want to cover their asses in case they are accused of missleading customers?

by Mortgage your life and family Fri Jul 29, 2005 22:06

that I have never been able to afford a house and have been waiting for a housing crash for a long time.

I would also like to warn people not to be suckered into taking out massive loans they will not have a hope in hell of paying back when interest rates go up.

It would be terrible to see banks taking back people's houses just because they cant pay back the money the bank invented in the first place.

by iosaf Fri Jul 29, 2005 20:55

It means you read sections of the media with such interest.