Are We In a Housing Bubble? (And Will It Burst?!)

YellowSnow

doogie said:

Reverse mortgages are a scourge on society

Yes and no. It's complicated.

creepycoug

YellowSnow said:

doogie said:

Reverse mortgages are a scourge on society

Yes and no. It's complicated.

We? do "complicated" here in the Club. One our distinguishing features. Dive in Yella.

FireCohen

YellowSnow said:

doogie said:

Reverse mortgages are a scourge on society

Yes and no. It's complicated.

Not complicated. If you have a fucking asset that is worth something. Your ass should be able to leverage it. That is the beauty of this capital markets these days, not the during the fucktarted days of the past where markets were fucking inefficient.

YellowSnow

FireCohen said:

YellowSnow said:

doogie said:

Reverse mortgages are a scourge on society

Yes and no. It's complicated.

Not complicated. If you have a fucking asset that is worth something. Your ass should be able to leverage it. That is the beauty of this capital markets these days, not the during the fucktarted days of the past where markets were fucking inefficient.

I don't disagree and support oldes being able to leverage their homes if needed for retirement. I'd hypothesize, however, that reverse mortgages contribute to less churn in the housing markets, whereas in the fucktarded days of past more oldes had to sell and move on (i.e., more supply).

FireCohen

YellowSnow said:

FireCohen said:

YellowSnow said:

doogie said:

Reverse mortgages are a scourge on society

Yes and no. It's complicated.

Not complicated. If you have a fucking asset that is worth something. Your ass should be able to leverage it. That is the beauty of this capital markets these days, not the during the fucktarted days of the past where markets were fucking inefficient.

I don't disagree and support oldes being able to leverage their homes if needed for retirement. I'd hypothesize, however, that reverse mortgages contribute to less churn in the housing markets, whereas in the fucktarded days of past more oldes had to sell and move on (i.e., more supply).

Every jackass has the right to own shit as long as they can manage the leverage

BleachedAnusDawg

YellowSnow said:

FireCohen said:

YellowSnow said:

doogie said:

Reverse mortgages are a scourge on society

Yes and no. It's complicated.

Not complicated. If you have a fucking asset that is worth something. Your ass should be able to leverage it. That is the beauty of this capital markets these days, not the during the fucktarted days of the past where markets were fucking inefficient.

I don't disagree and support oldes being able to leverage their homes if needed for retirement. I'd hypothesize, however, that reverse mortgages contribute to less churn in the housing markets, whereas in the fucktarded days of past more oldes had to sell and move on (i.e., more supply).

This seems like the actual market solution. Can't afford to age in place? Sell your house and move somewhere else where you can. Not doing a bunch of financial gymnastics to leverage equity which can disappear at any time due to unforeseen circumstances. Cash out and move on.

YellowSnow

BleachedAnusDawg said:

YellowSnow said:

FireCohen said:

YellowSnow said:

doogie said:

Reverse mortgages are a scourge on society

Yes and no. It's complicated.

Not complicated. If you have a fucking asset that is worth something. Your ass should be able to leverage it. That is the beauty of this capital markets these days, not the during the fucktarted days of the past where markets were fucking inefficient.

I don't disagree and support oldes being able to leverage their homes if needed for retirement. I'd hypothesize, however, that reverse mortgages contribute to less churn in the housing markets, whereas in the fucktarded days of past more oldes had to sell and move on (i.e., more supply).

This seems like the actual market solution. Can't afford to age in place? Sell your house and move somewhere else where you can. Not doing a bunch of financial gymnastics to leverage equity which can disappear at any time due to unforeseen circumstances. Cash out and move on.

Reverse mortgage programs are heavily regulated and very conservative in terms of how much equity you can leverage. It's nothing close to 80% of the appraised value, like a conforming traditional 30 year mortgage.

But I agree, they distort the market somewhat for homes. But at the same time it's a free market solution to let people borrow money this way. So which capitalism do you want to go with here?

doogie

BleachedAnusDawg said:

YellowSnow said:

FireCohen said:

YellowSnow said:

doogie said:

Reverse mortgages are a scourge on society

Yes and no. It's complicated.

Not complicated. If you have a fucking asset that is worth something. Your ass should be able to leverage it. That is the beauty of this capital markets these days, not the during the fucktarted days of the past where markets were fucking inefficient.

I don't disagree and support oldes being able to leverage their homes if needed for retirement. I'd hypothesize, however, that reverse mortgages contribute to less churn in the housing markets, whereas in the fucktarded days of past more oldes had to sell and move on (i.e., more supply).

This seems like the actual market solution. Can't afford to age in place? Sell your house and move somewhere else where you can. Not doing a bunch of financial gymnastics to leverage equity which can disappear at any time due to unforeseen circumstances. Cash out and move on.

Wait, you mean I can’t just send in Political contributions to the Geriatrics in charge to Fuck over the Market to defend and enhance my “wealth” with complex financial tools?

doogie

Anyone pissed about affordable housing without Reverse Mortgages squarely in their sights is an idiot.

Sources

YellowSnow said:

FireCohen said:

YellowSnow said:

doogie said:

Reverse mortgages are a scourge on society

Yes and no. It's complicated.

Not complicated. If you have a fucking asset that is worth something. Your ass should be able to leverage it. That is the beauty of this capital markets these days, not the during the fucktarted days of the past where markets were fucking inefficient.

I don't disagree and support oldes being able to leverage their homes if needed for retirement. I'd hypothesize, however, that reverse mortgages contribute to less churn in the housing markets, whereas in the fucktarded days of past more oldes had to sell and move on (i.e., more supply).

Liquidity superiority guy