Pending US home sales drop to lowest levels since Biden* took office amid scarcity, h (2024)

Post: #21

Post: #22

I look at what I bought my house for, what I can sell it for today, what my mortgage rate is, and what the rates are now...

I'd be a fool to sell and either buy a new house or rent another one. I can't rent one for the price I'm paying and I'd lose money with the higher rate.

Post: #23

(06-04-2024 07:54 AM)UofMstateU Wrote: So Bidenomics is so great that we have a plethora of banks on the verge of failing.

And it sounds like we've had a lot of libturd dumbasses who took out adjustable loans back when the interest rates were at all time lows just to save $20 a month on their mortgage, and are getting burned. They likely need to change the financing rules to ensure the ratio's are in place for the maximum interest rate possible under the loan, and not the starting rates.

lol, that's not what the FDIC reported, at all.

Post: #24

Yeah we are basically stuck in Louisiana in a 2.8% mortgage. We desperately want to leave and move to South Carolina, but even a house similarly priced to ours has double the mortgage payment.

I blame Joe Biden directly.

(This post was last modified: 06-04-2024 09:24 AM by ECUGrad07.)

Post: #25

(06-04-2024 09:24 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Yeah we are basically stuck in Louisiana in a 2.8% mortgage. We desperately want to leave and move to South Carolina, but even a house similarly priced to ours has double the mortgage payment.

I blame Joe Biden directly.

How dare you.. You need a TikTok account and listen to what they say about how this is Trump's fault.

Post: #26

(06-04-2024 09:24 AM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: Yeah we are basically stuck in Louisiana in a 2.8% mortgage. We desperately want to leave and move to South Carolina, but even a house similarly priced to ours has double the mortgage payment.

I blame Joe Biden directly.

I too blame Joe Biden for free market capitalism

Post: #27

Its still at least 24 to 36 months before we come close to seeing anything like 2008. It's not just the rates and home prices over the past 3 years. Just like leading up to 2008 (6 to 8 years) the low rates allowed people to buy more than they needed. So while the rates where great the payment by buying 25% more house than you would have is still on the high side. So a ton of homes bought with 2.4 to 3.3 rates are still in danger of going under if the job market crashes or if we continue to see prices of good, oil, insurance, property tax, goes up.

I could see some of these same mistakes of people buying more home than they used or needed leading up to 2008. Low rates are great but if you are maxing out your DTI to buy a larger home....

you are in just as bad of shape as those doing the same paying 7% with less sq ft. I think the biggest difference this time. Once prices drops 10 to 15% the hedge funds will start eating up a lot of the market. The one thing that is not going to drop even if homes prices do is rent. It will only go higher because if people start to walk away from their home loans they become renters in a already tight market that has not shown any signs of letting up.

Lost of jobs and price increases of goods over the next 36 months is about the only way we get anywhere close to 2008. Watch the car market closely because that is the first thing most people will let go of before they walk away from their home loans.

(This post was last modified: 06-04-2024 02:34 PM by WKUYG.)

Post: #28

(06-03-2024 07:13 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:

(06-03-2024 06:47 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote: Throw Trump out their with a tool belt and he will make it all better!

You’re 12 aren’t you

Hate looking in the mirror do ya? What happened to being able to take a joke?

Post: #29

(06-03-2024 12:43 PM)bearcatfan Wrote: My daughter and her fiancée are looking now but it's an awful time to be doing so. Home prices are ridiculously high and the interest rates certainly don't help.

Yeah it sucks. We had to bite the bullet unfortunately. I plan on refinancing at some point. Truth be known what we experienced from the early 00's through the Trump was an historical anomaly. Prior to that it was 7% and above so we're pretty much at the historical average.

Post: #30

(06-04-2024 07:54 AM)UofMstateU Wrote: So Bidenomics is so great that we have a plethora of banks on the verge of failing.

And it sounds like we've had a lot of libturd dumbasses who took out adjustable loans back when the interest rates were at all time lows just to save $20 a month on their mortgage, and are getting burned. They likely need to change the financing rules to ensure the ratio's are in place for the maximum interest rate possible under the loan, and not the starting rates.

This perhaps marks the first time I have seen RESIDENTIAL mortgages flagged as significant factor undermining bank balance sheet health. We've long know their low interest rate bonds from the Covid period---as well as Collatoralized Commercial Mortgage backed istruments were major sources of potential bank instability. Its worth noting that the current FHA delinquency rate is closing in on 10%---which is kinda stunning considering thats almost 4 times the overall current residential mortgage delinquency rate at 2.8% (per Core Logic). If you eliminate FHA refinance loans and just look at FHA purchase loans---the current delinquency rate is almost 15%. I cant imagine thats a good thing.

(This post was last modified: 06-05-2024 11:50 AM by Attackcoog.)

Post: #31

(06-04-2024 02:32 PM)WKUYG Wrote: Its still at least 24 to 36 months before we come close to seeing anything like 2008. It's not just the rates and home prices over the past 3 years. Just like leading up to 2008 (6 to 8 years) the low rates allowed people to buy more than they needed. So while the rates where great the payment by buying 25% more house than you would have is still on the high side. So a ton of homes bought with 2.4 to 3.3 rates are still in danger of going under if the job market crashes or if we continue to see prices of good, oil, insurance, property tax, goes up.

I could see some of these same mistakes of people buying more home than they used or needed leading up to 2008. Low rates are great but if you are maxing out your DTI to buy a larger home....

you are in just as bad of shape as those doing the same paying 7% with less sq ft. I think the biggest difference this time. Once prices drops 10 to 15% the hedge funds will start eating up a lot of the market. The one thing that is not going to drop even if homes prices do is rent. It will only go higher because if people start to walk away from their home loans they become renters in a already tight market that has not shown any signs of letting up.

Lost of jobs and price increases of goods over the next 36 months is about the only way we get anywhere close to 2008. Watch the car market closely because that is the first thing most people will let go of before they walk away from their home loans.

HUGE difference between now and 2008 is the credit underwriting. Yes, people may have more home than they need, but those homes were underwritten using much more stringent underwriting than what we saw in 2008. Added to that is banks are required to hold more capital today as well. I don't see credit problems being as big an issue now as they were in 2008.

Post: #32

(06-05-2024 11:51 AM)VA49er Wrote: HUGE difference between now and 2008 is the credit underwriting. Yes, people may have more home than they need, but those homes were underwritten using much more stringent underwriting than what we saw in 2008. Added to that is banks are required to hold more capital today as well. I don't see credit problems being as big an issue now as they were in 2008.

You are correct on two things.... Underwriting is much more stringent that is was in 2006-2008; and the regulator imposed capital guidelines will also allow for more support if things go south.

The problems that face banks when these things happen are a little less tangible than simple "Loan Losses". Most properly run banks can handle downturns and absorb losses, the problem is the public reaction to those events. Many are stock banks, bad news erodes value quickly, then public opinion can easily and quickly cause a run on deposits which puts real stress on liquidity and can force banks to restrict withdrawal of funds and/or take on some very costly borrowing positions.

It is human nature to overreact to things and that will always make any problem worse. See Covid.... The 2008-2011 run was bad enough without the public panic.

Post: #33

(06-06-2024 07:03 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:

(06-05-2024 11:51 AM)VA49er Wrote: HUGE difference between now and 2008 is the credit underwriting. Yes, people may have more home than they need, but those homes were underwritten using much more stringent underwriting than what we saw in 2008. Added to that is banks are required to hold more capital today as well. I don't see credit problems being as big an issue now as they were in 2008.

You are correct on two things.... Underwriting is much more stringent that is was in 2006-2008; and the regulator imposed capital guidelines will also allow for more support if things go south.

The problems that face banks when these things happen are a little less tangible than simple "Loan Losses". Most properly run banks can handle downturns and absorb losses, the problem is the public reaction to those events. Many are stock banks, bad news erodes value quickly, then public opinion can easily and quickly cause a run on deposits which puts real stress on liquidity and can force banks to restrict withdrawal of funds and/or take on some very costly borrowing positions.

It is human nature to overreact to things and that will always make any problem worse. See Covid.... The 2008-2011 run was bad enough without the public panic.

True, although I'm not really concerned if some bank such as SVB goes under simply because they have/had a terrible business strategy and deserved to fail. People seem to forget that several banks fail every year, even in good times. A bank going under isn't the end of the world, imo. The news this week focused on large unrealized losses but glossed over the fact that most of those unrealized losses are from Treasury Notes, which are guaranteed by the US govt resulting in basically zero credit risk. It was more click bait news than anything, imo.

Post: #34

(06-06-2024 07:46 AM)VA49er Wrote:

(06-06-2024 07:03 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:

(06-05-2024 11:51 AM)VA49er Wrote: HUGE difference between now and 2008 is the credit underwriting. Yes, people may have more home than they need, but those homes were underwritten using much more stringent underwriting than what we saw in 2008. Added to that is banks are required to hold more capital today as well. I don't see credit problems being as big an issue now as they were in 2008.

You are correct on two things.... Underwriting is much more stringent that is was in 2006-2008; and the regulator imposed capital guidelines will also allow for more support if things go south.

The problems that face banks when these things happen are a little less tangible than simple "Loan Losses". Most properly run banks can handle downturns and absorb losses, the problem is the public reaction to those events. Many are stock banks, bad news erodes value quickly, then public opinion can easily and quickly cause a run on deposits which puts real stress on liquidity and can force banks to restrict withdrawal of funds and/or take on some very costly borrowing positions.

It is human nature to overreact to things and that will always make any problem worse. See Covid.... The 2008-2011 run was bad enough without the public panic.

True, although I'm not really concerned if some bank such as SVB goes under simply because they have/had a terrible business strategy and deserved to fail. People seem to forget that several banks fail every year, even in good times. A bank going under isn't the end of the world, imo. The news this week focused on large unrealized losses but glossed over the fact that most of those unrealized losses are from Treasury Notes, which are guaranteed by the US govt resulting in basically zero credit risk. It was more click bait news than anything, imo.

True, and agreed.