Stop It Before It Starts

| July 3, 2020

It seems that A the OC and her bestie Ilhan Omar have banded together to find a way to relieve property owners of their real estate, through a proposed bill that, on first read, seems innocuous enough. However, it’s real purpose is to confiscate property from legitimate owners through a federal law. That it is proposed during the current pandemic, which is having a second go-round right now, is an opportunistic attempt to appear to sympathize with people living in rental property who are having a hard time paying the rent, or homeowners who have gone into mortgage forbearance.

It is no such thing.

If you read the pdf (below) of the bill as presented, it appears to be innocuous enough, but it is not. These two individuals know nothing about mortgage banking (yes, I DO know more than they do, and you probably do, too) or financing of any kind. We all know that mortgages and other kinds of financing can be renegotiated at any time; that property taxes can be reduced, if necessary, by a legal petition from the property owner; and that rental agreements can also be renegotiated. Some landlords are willing to forego a rental increase when things are tough, just to keep a rental property such as an apartment building occupied and paying for itself.

https://newsthud.com/aoc-attacks-home-owners-squad-pushes-bill-to-strip-property-from-owners-to-make-things-fair/

Fair? Taking someone’s property away from him/her/it is fair? Hos is it fair? And how is it fair for the federal government to seize someone’s real estate, when it is the county’s job to negotiate property taxes and the bank’s job to negotiate with the property owner to reduce mortgage payments?  That’s called refinancing, in case anyone doesn’t know about it. I have yet to find anyone in danger anywhere of being turned out of their homes, or any news stories about people being evicted for having difficulty paying the rent for their apartment.

From the Newsthud article::

The bill would constitute a full payment forgiveness, with no accumulation of debt for renters or homeowners and no negative impact on their credit rating or rental history,” a news release from Omar’s office says.

A fund would be created “to fully finance the purchase of private rental properties by non-profits, public housing authorities, cooperatives, community land trusts, and states or local governments — in order to increase the availability of affordable housing during this downturn.” 

This means private property owners would be undermined and the power of government entities would be greatly increased.

If enacted, the Rent and Mortgage Cancellation Act would come dangerously close to the socialist dream of stripping people of the right to control their property and would allow for another massive government expansion.

This bill, introduced April 17, would cancel all rent and mortgage payments, regardless of income or employment, for the duration of the coronavirus pandemic.

This means private property owners would be undermined and the power of government entities would be greatly increased.

Landlords and mortgage companies could apply for lost income to a relief fund that would be established for this purpose. Only primary residences would qualify, not investment properties or vacation homes. – article

Response to AOC and Omar’s boneheaded idea on Twitter:  https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1255565261492703232

Another view of it is here at this link:  https://www.westernjournal.com/squad-proposes-bill-allowing-feds-literally-cancel-property-rights-pandemic/

The pdf of the bill is here: https://omar.house.gov/sites/omar.house.gov/files/Omar%20-%20Rent%20%26%20Mortgage%20Cancellation%20Act%20-One%20Pager%20and%20Legislative%20Framework.pdf

When you’ve waded through it, it seems innocuous enough, but it allows the federal government to seize property, which is NOT the government’s job. A foreclosure on real estate/real property is handled at the local level. The federal government has never, ever had any hand in that.

The Hill addresses the obvious in this article:  https://thehill.com/policy/finance/495160-housing-advocates-sound-alarm-as-may-rents-collide-with-coronavirus

From The Hill article:  In Piskorski’s economic modeling, the worst-case scenario from the pandemic would result in 30 percent of homeowners defaulting on their loans, meaning government support for the other 70 percent would be unnecessary.

Both Piskorski and Fratantoni say the approach taken in the $2.2 trillion emergency relief CARES Act is better. The bipartisan law, which President Trump signed on March 27, offered homeowners forbearance on mortgage payments, meaning they could put them off if they were affected by the crisis. Evictions were temporarily banned.

Seven percent of mortgages are already in forbearance, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.

But while many mortgage service providers have allowed borrowers to tack on the missed payments to the end of their loan period, some lenders are insisting they be paid when the period of forbearance ends. – article

If, at the start of this pandemic, homeowners had contacted the mortgage department at their lending bank, they might have been able to negotiate either a lower and more affordable temporary payment until things are back to normal, or refinance the mortgage to something like a lower payment, with a clause for forgiveness if the money runs out.

I do understand the mindset that, in the beginning, the CV-19 problem would be as short term as the flu, however, it has not only shut down nearly the entire planet, but also is having a second go-round in this country. How that turns out remains to be seen. Since many people are deciding to work from home permanently anyway, especially with this second outbreak underway, the work place environment is going to change considerably.

This bill essentially proposes to confiscate property from legitimate owners. This should not happen anywhere in this country, period. Let’s not be complacent about this rather sneaky approach to destroy us.

Category: "Your Tax Dollars At Work", Congress sucks, Economy

Comments (15)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Doug says:

    These fucking pinheads know exactly what they’re doing. Their bill would decimate both the financial and real estate sectors of the economy. Ultimately, it’ll fuck over the very people it purports to help.

  2. David says:

    “some lenders are insisting they be paid when the period of forbearance ends” – well, I know two separate folks in Houston whose banks (one was Wells Fargo) said “sure, we’d be happy to let you defer payments for fours, no problems!” and the 5th month they are being hit with balloon payments for all the interim months. There is some predatory lending involved on the part of some lenders. The banking industry needs some serious re-regulation.

  3. 5th/77th FA says:

    Wow, too bad Mom and Dad have been dead all of these years, I could sue them for teaching me that whole morals, scruples, personal responsibility for my actions, pay your bills, be a productive member of society, act like you had some proper upbringing thing.

    To think I could be a member of the the Free Sh^t Army, with free food, free phone, free education, free housing, free air jordans, free from responsibility.

    Who do I sent my payment coupon book to?

    • Comm Center Rat says:

      “Who do I send my payment coupon book to?” Pick one of these institutions:

      JPMorgan Chase

      Bank of America

      Wells Fargo

      Citigroup

      The BIG 4 reportedly hold 45% of all deposits in the US (personal and business accounts). Each bank holds $1.84 Trillion to $2.53 Trillion in assets a/o 2018.

      The Free Shit Army couldn’t survive without generous donors like you KoB! LOL

  4. Roh-Dog says:

    “Seven percent of mortgages are already in forbearance, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association,” which equates to over $1T. A lot of these assets are going to be revalued to the downside. Even worse, the Fed stopped tracking the number of total mortgage debt outstanding.

    https://www.federalreserve.gov/data/mortoutstand/current.htm

    Add to this, those idiots on Wall(out) Street used the same schema to make financial IEDs in the form of Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities (CMBS). In the hopes of returning yield greater than traditional bonds, these products get into everywhere; pension funds, mutual funds, index funds, etc. (add: CalPERS just upped their leverage by $50B, I’d be willing to bet with the Fed buying junk bonds, they’ve taken this as a ‘green light’ to do the same)
    With 20-50% of restaurants that’ll go out of business, sundry mom-and-pops hangin’ up the spurs… commercial RE and the toxic products based there on are in the midst of going critical as we speak.

    There is going to be ‘creative destruction’ at some point but whatever those two morons are proposing is a misallocation of resources just like the dumb sh-t pulled by companies. I’m starting to think they work together at times like this, consolidate the bad/toxic/over-leveraged assets, have the gov buy them, one Red flag waving hand washing the other.

    TL;DR : buckle up, turbulence ahead.

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      We’ve already had news in my area that some of the restaurants shuttered at the start of the lockdown will not be reopening, period. The exact numbers weren’t given but it was reported as over 40$ of the total in the area. It may be more the next time it’s reported.

      I’m in agreement with you about ‘working together’. It popped up with me right away when I read that pdf of the proposed legislation. Scary as hell.

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      I forgot to repeat this: the federal government is NOT the entity that seizes privately owned property. That is the business of local companies, and has never been the venue of law enforcement at any level. Evicting rent paying tenants who stopped paying their rent from a rental property is the venue of local law enforcement – again, not the federal government.

      What those two dizzy broads are doing is taking that authority and responsibility away from local authorities and making it a federal business, which is not legal, as I understand it. It might be legal if this is about squatters on a military base, because that is federal property, but it is not legal at the local level, period.

      If this does NOT get shot down by both houses, I will want to know why. It violates the real laws at every level.

      These two broads need to have their grand schemes and their asses handed to them on a platter.

      • MI Ranger says:

        They are likely looking at how to improve their own pig sties. AOC just wants to rip the rent controlled housing away from landlords and make community owned property (not that they will take care of it). Similar to what she learned in her Economics classes at Boston U (I hear she did real well at the Communism chapters…not so well at free markets and capitalism).
        The two middle eastern religious types are doing something similar but with the intent of making their neighborhoods minority owned. That way, they can exclude anyone that does not fit their religious minority or at least hound them into proselytized submission. Since they will already own the police force (Community Policing) good luck showing they aren’t following the rules.

  5. Wireman611 says:

    Methinks we should send all of these yammering idiots in Congress and the Senate on a luxurious all expenses paid junket to the lush tropical paradise of Venezuela. One way.

  6. AW1Ed says:

    Every time I hear the Social Justice Warrior Howler Monkeys (SJWHMs) call for “fairness” I place a firm hand on my wallet.

    • 11B-Mailclerk says:

      More often than not, “Not fair!” =

      “give me other peoples’ money”

      “Protect me from the consequences of my bad decisions”

      “But I WANT it!”

    • timactual says:

      “I place a firm hand on my wallet”

      STOP RESISTING! *ZZAAP*!! Bang!

  7. timactual says:

    That ship has sailed. See Kelo v. City of New London. Basically, all property “owners” are actually only tenants at will;

    “Tenancy-at-will is a property tenure that can be terminated at any time by either the tenant or the owner or landlord.”:
    https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tenancy-at-will.asp

    Your friendly government can take your property for any reason at any time as long as they say the magic words; “public purpose”.

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      If you’re referring to civil asset forfeiture: Civil asset forfeiture laws let authorities, such as federal marshals or local sheriffs, seize property – cash, a house, a car, a cellphone – that they suspect is involved in criminal activity. Seizures run the gamut from 12 cans of peas to multi-million-dollar yachts. NOTE: “suspect is involved” in the clue there.

      In contrast to criminal forfeiture, which requires that the property owner be convicted of a crime beforehand, the civil variety doesn’t require that the suspect be charged with breaking the law.

      Tenancy at will is a leaseless agreement. Does not apply here. Furthermore, to attempt to seize real property, a/k/a real estate, if the property owner is living on/in his own property, there is no ‘tenancy at will’ involved. In addition, the property owner who lives on his own property has the right to pursue legal means to block attempts to seize property that is rightfully his.

      Foreclosing on a mortgagee who is up to date on or ahead of the mark on mortgage payments is a scare tactic that can be blocked legally.

      If someone such as a real estate developer wants your property so that he can turn it into a subdivision or something like that, and tries to foreclose on a legitimate homeowner, that is not the federal government’s business.

      Furthermore, if the developer is unable to buy out a property/home owner whose mortgage is paid off, he can put a lien on it to make it appear that the homeowner is in foreclosure. That, of course, can be removed by a court procedure.

      Bernath did that to Jonn Lilyea and a couple of other people. Bernath is dead, and Lilyea got it straightened out by getting the court to dismiss it.

      • timactual says:

        “If you’re referring to civil asset forfeiture…”

        Nope. That’s a whole different scam. Kelo was about eminent domain. In short, the court ruled that increasing tax revenues by taking your property and giving it to developers who will pay more in taxes is a “public purpose”. Real property is always available to the highest bidder.

        The part of “tenant at will” I was trying to communiocate is the part where the “owner” (in this case the gov’t.) can throw out the “tenant” (Mrs. Kelo) at will, and the “tenant” has no recourse.