Completely sympathetic to your position. Mortgages have never been underwritten against assets but rather against income streams the way banks approach it.
One of the reasons why Ric Edelman makes the argument that having a mortgage plus assets is better than just being debt free with less assets.
I don't know about that-- several years ago Fidelity was offering home mortgages against brokerage assets.Completely sympathetic to your position. Mortgages have never been underwritten against assets but rather against income streams the way banks approach it.
I don't know about that-- several years ago Fidelity was offering home mortgages against brokerage assets.
This last time we were told "Oh, your brokerage account could vaporize overnight; we won't loan against assets."
... This last time we were told "Oh, your brokerage account could vaporize overnight; we won't loan against assets." Our history of dividend income was barely enough to swing the application but after that "vaporize" comment I certainly wasn't going to discuss our heavy allocation to "dividend-paying" financial stocks...
Heh, heh, heh. These bankers are getting wised up, aren't they?
Shoot. Without a job, I guess I will have to pay cash for everything from now on, including houses. If we ever move, will have to sell the house first, put furniture in storage and move to an RV for a while before getting another house.
Arghh... Too much hassle... I'll just wait to die in my house and ask Janet to change my screen-name to accept defeat that I will not be going to the Puget Sound after all.
... This is absolutely bizarre in my opinion. On my last few tax returns, I have "income" from converting trad. IRAs to Roths. Viola! INCOME! (It's the income, stupid!) AND, it wouldn't have mattered whether I had burned the cash or moved it to another asset (which is what I did)!
In what alternate universe would it make sense that (apparently) using your assets to live on translates to a favorable impression by a bank? If it were me, I'd count it AGAINST a client who had to take money from assets - not the other way around. Oh, well. It was this sort of reasoning that got us into the current mess, I suppose. Nice to know some things never change, eh?
Found another banker who is (hopefully) a bit more creative. While they have virtually identical requirements to look at income rather than assets, they are creative in how I might show income. This is absolutely bizarre in my opinion. On my last few tax returns, I have "income" from converting trad. IRAs to Roths. Viola! INCOME! (It's the income, stupid!) AND, it wouldn't have mattered whether I had burned the cash or moved it to another asset (which is what I did)!
In what alternate universe would it make sense that (apparently) using your assets to live on translates to a favorable impression by a bank? If it were me, I'd count it AGAINST a client who had to take money from assets - not the other way around. Oh, well. It was this sort of reasoning that got us into the current mess, I suppose. Nice to know some things never change, eh?
And unless banks like that are allowed to fail, they never will change. No reason to.
The more bailouts we have, the worse this is gonna get.
-ERD50
This is one of the clearest examples I have seen yet as to what happens when govt regulation gets involved, and a "one size fits all" approach is taken to finance.
....
I can remember walking into a pizza place once and wanting half mushroom and half peperoni. There was no price set up for a half and half pizza. They were completely baffled as to what to do. Obviously charge me for a one topping pizza! They flat out would not do it, and seemed to be OK with loosing a sale over it.
We are becomming a nation where no one can... or wants... to think for themselves anymore. I think it is sad....
I can remember walking into a pizza place once and wanting half mushroom and half peperoni. There was no price set up for a half and half pizza. They were completely baffled as to what to do. Obviously charge me for a one topping pizza! They flat out would not do it, and seemed to be OK with loosing a sale over it.
Our pizza places always charge for two toppings for ordering what you describe, Armor99. Don't ask me how I know