• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

What section 8 tenant can do to a house

Wow, $53 a month. They could of recycled cans of soda, that they could of bought with welfare. It's not hard to come up with that. Some people are slobs damn!
 
MoodyBlues said:
OMG. :eek:

Just wanted to note that while THIS particular house was trashed by section 8 tenants, non-section 8 tenants trash houses, too.
Click to expand...
This is an excellent point. The stress of a weak housing market has caused heartache for homeowners, renters, and landlords across the country.
 
Yeah, note the video mentioned mortgage fraud brought on by the banks. The upfront fees to the bank were so profitable and they would just package them and sell packaged mortgages to unwitting victims, i.e. pension funds, etc.

The incentives for fraud were built into CDO swaps and SCDO, which is how Goldman Sachs and Paulson made a billion plus on one deal alone.

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) said as much in its February 2011 report to Congress. According to the FCIC, the
 
OutofDate1980 said:
Yeah, note the video mentioned mortgage fraud brought on by the banks. The upfront fees to the bank were so profitable and they would just package them and sell packaged mortgages to unwitting victims, i.e. pension funds, etc.

The incentives for fraud were built into CDO swaps and SCDO, which is how Goldman Sachs and Paulson made a billion plus on one deal alone.

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) said as much in its February 2011 report to Congress. According to the FCIC, the “mortgage crisis” was not primarily the result of “reckless” lending to subprime borrowers. It was, rather, largely the result of the 2007 collapse in the market for collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). And the CDO market collapsed because more than half of all CDOs issued in 2006 and 2007 were so-called “synthetic” CDOs.

Regular CDOs are packages of mortgages that trade like securities. So-called “synthetic” CDOs do not contain mortgages themselves. They contain bets against mortgages, usually in the form of credit default swaps. That is, the sellers of these “synthetic” CDOs (more than half of the overall CDO market in 2007) were people who were betting against mortgages and therefore wanted the mortgage markets to collapse.

As the FCIC also made clear, just a few specialist firms (working with no more than fifty short sellers) created all of the “synthetic” CDOs that came to comprise more than half of the overall CDO market. Importantly, those specialist firms did not package these “synthetic” CDOs with bets against average subprime mortgages. They and their short selling clients packaged them with bets against the worst possible mortgages in the nation—a select number of handpicked mortgages that seemed certain to default.

Thus, over half the market was actually comprised of securities that had been designed to implode by people who were betting that they would.

This was discussed http://androidforums.com/politics-current-affairs/145843-u-s-falling-apart.html#post3187105
Click to expand...




and this is the problem EXACTLY with what people think

had typed out a lengthy answer to why idiocy is the true problem....... but I decided not to let the nazis edit it

if you are curious please feel free to PM
 
The lenders were not on the hook, they received fees upfront and Wall Street packaged the mortgages and sold them then bet against them. A great deal of incentive to take anybody with a heartbeat or not to be approved for a loan. Once criminals realized the scam, guess what it became a business model, just as long as those fees keep on coming and the CDO could be sold.

It of course drove up the price for home ownership, as the demand was manipulated.
 
Why didn't the owner/landlord do a monthly check on the house? No matter if it was a Section 8 or not, the owner/landlord should have done some type of check on the house to make sure it stay up to par! I know I would if I was renting property.
 
Jesus, look at the comments. Lovely people out there eh?

Anyway, subsidised accommodation is generally necessary in order to ensure decent housing provision for all.
 
I can't see the video (work blocks Youtube) but as a former Section 8 tenant in the Austin area, I can tell you not everyone trashes where they live(d). The complex I lived in for 9 years was a mix of "regular" and Section 8. The "regular" people were just as bad as the few (very few) bad Section 8ers.

/Carry on
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom