Comments on: Your Take: Isakson’s $15,000 Homebuyer’s Credit

By: Sharon

Sharon — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:30:45 +0000

Want to adopt an illegal alien, excust me, an undocumented citizen? We have lots of then on the west coast and along all the border states. Also some people are not “US” but “Me”. With only one person making an income, things might be different if you or your husband lost a job.

By: Sharon

Sharon — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:27:27 +0000

Dear Anonymous,

You obviously don’t live in the Western States. EVERYTHING is way underwater considering what it should sell for. You only have to look at replacement cost for insurance purposes to see just how bad it really is.

By: Sharon

Sharon — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:13:24 +0000

Unfortunately, I think you have hit the nail on the head. People who could not afford to buy a home before, still won’t be able to make payments after the $8,000, and many of the homes will be foreclosed on again next year. So it will be similar to the sub-prime meltdown. The only good thing is that the price of the home will go down and get closer to actual value.

By: Sharon

Sharon — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:08:03 +0000

The bad outweighs the good. Bank are not going to lend money to anyone with a previous foreclosure due to the economy. These are people who WERE homebuyers before the recession. Now they have to get private financing or rent a house for 10 or more years.
Where’s their help? There are no loan programs for self employed people either. The money should be available to anyone regardless of how they get a loan or from whom. Actually those people who suggested that the government give every American adult a large stipend, which they in turn would have to pay tax on, was the best idea. They could have saved their home, paid off credit cards, bought a new house, car or other goods and services, which would have done a lot more for the economy than the Stimulus programs have done, which is nothing.

By: Chelsea

Chelsea — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 01:00:42 +0000

You can’t use the $8,000 as an additional down payment unless you are getting a conventional loan. People who are putting down 3.5% on an FHA are not able to use the credit as additional downpayment money.

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:17:48 +0000

The $8000 helps in a way that the extra $7000 isn’t likely to help. If you’re a first time home buyer looking to get an FHA loan then $8000 for a down payment puts you right in line for an entry level house in most areas of the country. If the number were much bigger it either wouldn’t help much (i.e. just add a few thousand onto the budget) or it would encourage irresponsible behavior (i.e. taking on a mortgage you can’t afford). I think $8000 is the high water mark. Beyond that you’re helping people into houses they can’t afford or don’t need. We don’t want to prop up the “move up” market. It was that very market that created this mess.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:41:50 +0000

They will have to add it because the home sellers will raise their prices by $15,000.

By: Kosmo @ The Casual Observer

Kosmo @ The Casual Observer — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:40:50 +0000

“I say short term because eventually someone is going to have to pay for that 15 grand, i.e, the taxpayers, including that new home owner”

Right – but the entire base of taxpayers will pay for it, whereas only a small portion are benefitting. If I can get you to give me $100, and you charge all the readers of bargaineering $1 in order to get your $100 back, I come out ahead – in the short AND long term.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:18:30 +0000

I am mixed on this bill as well. I like the fact that it will help stimulate the economy, but at the same time it’s more spending. We can’t continue to keep spending in this manner. Eventually we are going to have to stop spending like this unless we want the next generations to have huge tax rates.

By: DDFD at DivorcedDadFrugalDad

DDFD at DivorcedDadFrugalDad — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:38:43 +0000

$32 billion– Spending is spending. The bill is going to come due for all this spending and we will all pay higher taxes– mark my words!

Out of the frying pan and into the fire . . .

By: Aron

Aron — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 15:39:33 +0000

I think this is a great idea for first time home buyers. The Obama Administration and the Congress has not done enough with tax credits that will actually stimulate the economy or more specifically the housing market. They should definitely consider doing more for all recent home buyers.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 14:59:36 +0000

Hi everyone! New member here, and just wanted to say I love the blog!

Now as far as the $15k credit, if you are a first-time home buyer, this is a great short-term opportunity. I say short term because eventually someone is going to have to pay for that 15 grand, i.e, the taxpayers, including that new home owner. Then again that is how most things work – pay now or pay later, just like a Roth IRA compared to a traditional.

I have heard remarks about the housing market being devalued. I say it is still overvalued. You look at some markets and a home that was $150,000 six years ago, is now $325,000 or more. That’s ridiculous! No way that home is “worth” that much money. Before 2002-2003, it took 15 – 20 years to get that kind of equity on a home. The housing bubble spoiled many homeowners into thinking that if their home didn’t gained $30k to $50k a year they were being “devalued”.

OK, I got way off topic there.

In the long term, the $8k or $15k credit is not a good idea. The government is just supporting another attempt at getting someone in a home that really can’t afford it in the first place. Thus creating another cycle of foreclosures, in my opinion.

By: jared

jared — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 03:45:28 +0000

Personally, I’m buying a house right now and closing next week. The $8,000 credit didn’t make me buy a house for 8K more, and a 15K credit wouldn’t make me do it either. I’m buying because I can afford it and found a great deal, the credit just means I can fix up the house sooner rather than later. The goal was to spend as little as possible and if someone hands me a check then I can get a house for that much less out of pocket. If they increase it to 15k before it’s too late, that just means I can fix the whole place up in the first year and bring the value up further. As it is I’m paying $80,000 below market value on a foreclosure, to repair it now will bring it up over $100,000 in equity and secure my financial state that much faster.

By: Funny about Money

Funny about Money — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:50:45 +0000

Bothersome, very bothersome.

From a selfish point of view, why of COURSE I’d like the taxpayer to fork over 15 grand (please!) and ignore the question of whether I could afford to buy the palace of my choice on my own.

But from the no-man-is-an-island viewpoint: I don’t like it.

In the first place, sooner or later the economy is going to get better. That’s the way of the world. At that time, most people who can afford to buy real estate will be able to buy it without a government handout. Gut instinct suggests that maybe, just MAYBE, the real estate market would be better served over the long run by waiting until the overall economy turns around to the point where buyers feel confident enough to buy.

By: Gwen

Gwen — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:09:29 +0000

Give the American Public more than pennies to stimulate the economy and not big cimpanies. Since the taxpayers are supporting car and housing companies, let them decide where to spend the monwy the taxpayers must pay back anyway.