Cohousing and THEY as is THEM | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: biow (biowcs.UMD.EDU) | |
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 94 10:37 CDT |
The "Alienation" thread seems to have jumped from good-natured grousing to wild and ignorant conspiracy-mongering. I know I'll never dissuade a True Believer in any conspiracy (see the sci.skeptic FAQ for details on why this can't be done), but perhaps I can provide some straight information for other readers, and direct conspiracy theorists to alt.conspiracy, where their insights will be truly appreciated. First, I'll say that I have worked in the "mortgage banking" industry as a mortgage loan officer. I now work for a company that writes software for loan officers and real estate agents. It is fair to say that this industry is very much structured to exploit the naive homebuyer. But the nature of this exploitation has nothing whatever to do with the popular perception of "bankers." In fact, I'm not sure that we could do much about this exploitation without making things worse--thus far almost every US government attempt to improve the situation has harmed the homebuyer. As with any other area of economic activity, there is no substitute for an informed buyer. Rather than rattle off on this tangent, I'll respond by addressing some recent articles from the list: On 3-Sept. "Craig D. Willis" <willic3 [at] rpi.edu> wrote: >But one thing that I >am very aware of is that cohousing has the potential to be a threat to >powerful vested interests in our society. I do *not* expect the >status quo elements of our society... those who profit from the >powerlessness and alienation that has been engineered for the masses >in terms of their living (e.g. housing) choices... to be supportive of >our efforts to find alternatives to the straightjacket we've been ever >more solidly confined in for the entirety of this century. Actually, without an identification of who THEY are, it's hard to directly refute this. At the least, it would seem that THEY have resources and aren't willing to devote them to cohousing as much as the poster would prefer. THEY as have resources usually choose to use them in as lucrative a manner as possible, with maximum return for a given level of risk. Cohousers who have done the (hard) work of assuring THEY of reasonable risk levels have received loans at the same market rates as other types of housing. To ask for anything more is to beg the goverment to force THEY to give you money. You're hardly the first in line for that sort of money. On 6-Sept. Bob Morrison <morrison [at] took.enet.dec.com> responded: > I think the powerful (bankers, town planning boards, etc.) DO often oppose >cohousing, but do so mainly due to fear of the new and unconventional, not due >to a deliberate scheme to create alienation. This is closer to reason, but still misses the point. Mr. Morrison asserts that bankers and town boards are somehow "powerful." Depending upon your definition of that word, they may be, but they retain their power only because and only for so long as they behave in ways that please their investors and constituents. Bankers hardly ever lend their own money. In fact, they rarely lend even the bank's money for residential real estate. Typically, your local bank merely fronts for a local mortgage company, which brokers the loan to a government chartered secondary market company. The money they lend today comes almost exclusively from insured, sliced, diced, and securitized mortgage debt instruments. Do you have any interest, direct or indirect, in a pension fund? If so, you probably have much of that money invested in mortgage backed securities. State retirement funds, which you as a taxpayer would be responsible for bailing out, invest very heavily in mortgage backed securities. [rant on--directed at Mr. Willis, not Mr. Morrison] THEY is YOU! Yes, there were at one time banks that lent their own money for residential real estate, with great flexibility. They were able to do this only because the US government helped them set a limit on savings account returns that exploited small-guy savers to subsidise this system. Once inflation forced the removal of these limits, these banks (called S&L's) went broke, forcing the taxpayer to make up the losses. (only slightly oversimplified) THEY was YOU! And YOU got upset that YOU had to cover these losses. As a result, YOU now have the mortgage backed security system that effectively limits residential lending today. If YOU want to risk YOUR money (personal, government, and pension) on different types of lending, feel free. But then don't whine when YOU don't have a pension because YOUR money was blown on real estate investments that weren't so wise after all. [rant off] >I think this alienation has occurred as a side effect of developers, >bankers, etc. considering housing a "commodity", not as a deliberate plan >of some sort. Commiditization puts products within the reach of people who otherwise couldn't hope to afford them. You may always choose to purchase outside the commodity market. Feel free to assemble your own computer from scratch. But if so, be prepared for the costs. [rant on--directed at Mr. Willis] We have a remarkable system in this country, in which people can purchase real estate worth as much as three times their annual income, with as little as three to five percent cash down payment. This is remarkable--you should hear the jealousy in my Turkish friend's letters when I tell him how easy it was for me to buy a house. Through most of history and in most of the world, this is impossible. Before rocking that boat, be very sure why your idea is better. Realize that investment economics is completely unforgiving of "neat ideas" and wishful thinking. Tour your choice of central African country for object lessons in this area. It is far easier to make wealth go away than to create it. [rant off]
-
Cohousing and THEY as is THEM biow, September 7 1994
- Re: Cohousing and THEY as is THEM Deborah Behrens, September 7 1994
- Re: Cohousing and THEY as is THEM Edward J OConnell, September 7 1994
- Re: Cohousing and THEY as is THEM Stuart Staniford-Chen, September 7 1994
- RE: Cohousing and THEY as is THEM mtracy, September 7 1994
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.