the 3.5% plan

I’ve seen this posted on a couple of blogs and it was posted on a message board for the white house. It seems like a terrible idea to me, for a few reasons. I posted my reasons at the bottom and I’m curious to see what y’all think about it.

Back to me. Here’s what I think: This plan would work if over 75% of troubled people are guaranteed to buy homes and put in 20% down. I have to say that I think that is a long shot. Because of the last couple of years of financial crisis, people have become hesitant to buying homes or purchasing new properties, or even getting new loans. So this plan eliminates a large percentage of new buyers. Also, people are struggling enough with basic needs, and barely have the money to get by, how are they expected to come up with 20% down? This eliminates another large percentage of buyers. This plan may work for a small minority of people which means it doesnt work at all. The plan has to be universal that covers all middle class people. Either it covers everyone or it covers no one.

It also has the added benefit of handing over control of property to the gov’t, something that is strictly a constitutional problem…and while the SCOTUS in the last few years has stepped all over property rights, it sounds like a devious sleight of hand move to me. If banks don’t buy then who owns the property? Don’t say “the People” because we all know thats not true. If the gov’t takes over the bank on top of that…

How can you even talk about “Refinancing” when the actual property doesn’t have any equity, it’s basically negative equity for most of these homes that are being affected by the market. This would seem to be going backwards…to me at least.

We should be issued debit cards with unlimited cash reserves. Anytime we have a need, we use it. Our needs are met. The end.

Where is the government going to get the up-front cash to make the initial outlay? Its rediculous to think that the taxpayer is going to profit by being the recipient of 3.5% of a devalued dollar. I’d have to check an ammortization schedule, but the gubment would be cash flow negative (on borrowed dollars) for several years before the “profit.”

And a bank “competing” against the government is a silly thought all together. When you have a bank with rational descision makers in it “competing” against the bottomless money pit of the Fed, it sounds like a recipe to both ruin all the banks and hyper-inflate the currency.

Not a good idea, and it doen’t even pass the common sense test (but neither does anything else we’re doing right now, either).

3.5% interest rates

6% inflation+

EPIC FAIL

every loan should be made as if the profit from that loan will feed your family. No profit - no eating.

State banks don’t need such a business model. They can eat others’ food.

But I like this version of point 1: “Print money to pay all debts at once”!

Yes, just create the amount of nominal dollars that the government owes and give it to the lenders. Problem solved! At least for the taxpayers.

Lenders and people owning dollars might be less happy by the fact that this action makes the dollar (and hence all dollar debts) worthless. But they chose to take a huge political risk when they made their choice to use a fiat currency. The governement hasn’t promised to not do this, so there is no way for anyone to complain. Better luck next time…

See my “avatar”, it is a hundered billion dollar bill. As much as the president can carry of that kind of paper’ pieces would certainly cover all imaginable debts that the US government has gotten itself into. It only takes an hour for a good printing shop to liberate the government from all debts. And completely legal.

The idea that we can/should spend/loan our way out of a recession is bogus. See the following about how interest rates should be HIGHER not lower. http://mises.org/daily/3327

Wouldn’t it be a great idea if the government took 3.5% of our income to pay for a secure retirement for everyone…? Oops, we know where that led.

Even if this was a good idea, once the bill was voted on and passed it would be hundreds of thousands of pages long, ten times more expensive, and would include all sorts of favors to special interest groups like people wanting to pay to cleanup billboards in some town in . It wouldn’t deliver as promised so they would come back in a few years and increase the cost (raise taxes/lower benefits) and probably create the Federal Department of 3.5% Financing to oversee the mess they’ve created. This in turn would cause cost to increase…