Lie-awatha is at it again

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Actually she was buying them for family to renovate and resell because they apparently couldn't get the loans on their own. I'm not sure she even really made much money doing it.


SHE DID NOT

Please Jim, if you're so objective as you say do a little homework.

Christ you are laughably wrong on this one...

"Actually she was buying them for family to renovate and resell because they apparently couldn't get the loans on their own. I'm not sure she even really made much money doing it."

From the article below...

One such property she bought for $30,000, then sold for $145,000 five months later, a 383 per cent mark-up.

Sooo, either you are ignorant, or lying, or you don't consider a 383% return in 5 months to be "much".

That's one of many properties.

"SHE DID NOT"

Well, you have it in CAPS, and that bestows instant credibility on any falsehood, right?

She called the mortgage industry a "deregulated credit industry (that) squeezed families harder, hawking dangerous mortgages"

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...sed-homes.html

Here, poor Warren claims that the foreclosures "threaten our economy".

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/...ryId=101611260

So those "dangerous mortgages" were swell when they benefitted her.

SHE DID DO. NYAH, NYAH, NYAH.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Sooo, either you are ignorant, or lying, or you don't consider a 383% return in 5 months to be "much".

I'm astounded you're trusted with numbers at work. It's not a 383% return. Take out the lending feeds, materials, labor and insurance to do the work and the net return is a fraction of this. As most of these houses were bought to family to renovate it's worth assuming they enjoyed most if not all of the profit.

She called the mortgage industry a "deregulated credit industry (that) squeezed families harder, hawking dangerous mortgages"

Which they were.

Here, poor Warren claims that the foreclosures "threaten our economy".

So those "dangerous mortgages" were swell when they benefitted

My last post on this, the banks were making predatory loans then aggressively foreclosing on people who couldn't afford it. This is nothing like what Warren was doing.

If you can't grasp this I'm astounded, again.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I'm astounded you're trusted with numbers at work. It's not a 383% return. Take out the lending feeds, materials, labor and insurance to do the work and the net return is a fraction of this. As most of these houses were bought to family to renovate it's worth assuming they enjoyed most if not all of the profit.


Which they were.


My last post on this, the banks were making predatory loans then aggressively foreclosing on people who couldn't afford it. This is nothing like what Warren was doing.

If you can't grasp this I'm astounded, again.

i totally understand why you announced you’re not posting here again.

when banks profit from foreclosures, they also have expenses, legal fees, real estate broker fees, etc.

as always with liberals, it’s ok when she does it, heartless when anyone else does it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device