Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (26057)	12/5/2007 7:26:48 PM
From: Cogito Ergo Sum	Respond to of 218449

Now I stepped into it... My first house was only 5% down as I recall, maybe 10... geez I cannot remember.. but it was insured by CMHC (like the US mac siblings) in Canada since the down payment was too small (high ratio they called it). I kept my debt service ratio sub 25% though and we had two incomes.. I think the regulations are way too loose... some folks merit a shot but obviously loose rules let too much of Mq's grey ooze in the door.. :O) Our interest rate was 10.5 initially and went up to 12 something 2 years later.. We paid weekly (monthly payment / 4, called accelerated) so effectively cut our amortisation to under 20 years from the nominal 25.. because we made the equivalent of one extra monthly payment each year.. We increased the weekly overpayment as we went along and had allowed for quite a heftier interest rate if need be. Our interest rates were fixed for only a couple of years.. When they started dropping we still upped our weekly payment at the end of each year by the allowed % which meant even extra principle being paid from the interest savings... I guess we did it all backwards for this day and age.. We actually did refinance once to pay off student loans and our car loan once the interest rates dropped... The Black Swan

To: KyrosL who wrote (26057)	12/5/2007 8:09:14 PM
From: blind-geezer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218449

<<People should be living in inexpensive rentals until they accumulate a sizable down payment, just like the old times.>> unfortunately rentals are not inexpensive unless you have been living in the same rental for the last 50 years, by then, you probably can cite some obscure law to claim the rental is your own ...

To: KyrosL who wrote (26057)	12/6/2007 12:17:44 AM
From: elmatador	Respond to of 218449

"All this shows that we not only have a problem interpreting what the mullahs in Tehran are up to..." This is the task of Elmat: Intreprete the mullahs for this thread. sk TJ, eplay or MQ if they have doubts interpreting the mullahs. This nuclear thing here is a job scheme. I already wrote many times: It must find a way to give some jobs for the researchers in other areas and this whole thing is defused. The article continues: "but also a more fundamental problem: Too much of the intelligence community is engaging in policy formulation rather than "intelligence" analysis, and too many in Congress and the media are happy about it." Precisely! Intelligence is slated to give evidence for the status quo. That's why my analysis differs so much of the published. Continuing "President Bush may not be able to repair his Iran policy (which was not rigorous enough to begin with) in his last year, but he would leave a lasting legacy by returning the intelligence world to its proper function." If Bush wants to leave a lasting legacy, he needs to end the Iranian imbroglio immeditaley! Rice should fly to Dubai, meet Ahmadinejad there and end this political imbroglio. It is very easy.