DarrellsMyHero28 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 I said I was glad you aren't one of them. Do you think that there are those that believe that?And some people will think this is a "big deal" or 1 of the thousand papercuts. I think it is neither. My fault, I read sarcasm in that. I don't think anyone will see this as a big deal, the GOP can't paint Obama as a rich elitist (though they'll try and paint him as an elitist) because McCain and his sugar-mommy are loaded. So I think this will die with some of the other stupid things that people try to throw at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Woo hoo... common sense prevails and partisanship venom is not a part of this thread!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 There is nothing shady about that at all. The company gave him a great loan to keep a valuable client when faced with competition. It's not a special favor it's how business works. You fight to hold onto your better clients if you want to stay in business. The LO also got to keep a nice commission on a $million+ loan. When super jumbo loans came across my desk, i won everytime. Even 1/4% yield on that is a nice payday for very little work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarrellsMyHero28 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 I heard the LO was muslim... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 What does this thread have to do with McCain and Iraq? I responded to a comment about :pooh: in the media. That is another example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Woo hoo... common sense prevails and partisanship venom is not a part of this thread!!! Yeah, but you still think Obama gives a **** about the "little man". :nana: :nana: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 The LO also got to keep a nice commission on a $million+ loan.When super jumbo loans came across my desk, i won everytime. Even 1/4% yield on that is a nice payday for very little work. Don't tell them that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 I responded to a comment about :pooh: in the media. That is another example "From the looks of the title of the thread we were talking about" Obama's mortgage loan. "WE could certainly start a new thread about" the media making something out of nothing or McCain/Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarrellsMyHero28 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Barack Obama doesn't care about little people... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarrellsMyHero28 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 No I'm pretty sure the thread is about Obama's home loan. Try to stay on tpoic (and live up to your own standards.) Dude read the thread. Its very much about how this bull**** is common in the media, they try and make a story out of nothing. He make a very relevant comment in response to my post, which was on topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 No I'm pretty sure the thread is about Obama's home loan. Try to stay on tpoic (and live up to your own standards.) Did you see the comment about crap in the media that I responded to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heidenreich Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Yeah, but you still think Obama gives a **** about the "little man". :nana: :nana: He does until November 5th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artmonkforHOF Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Nothing wrong with taht as far as I can see. On a loan that size, rates are lowered since the bank will still be making a ton of money. Add to that the $3mill he has in investments with that bank, I completely understand why they would do that. Is the bank going to piss off a good customer over $100,000 over the span of 30 years and risk losing probably $300,000 per year in fees from all his other holdings? I know it sucks for average joes like me, but I see it all the time even smaller scales. My Boss and I have the same bank, but since he has more assets with them than I do, he gets better rates without having to haggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Yeah, but you still think Obama gives a **** about the "little man". :nana: :nana: Sigh... the Spaceman always comes through... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headexplode Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 That's ****ed up. When I bought my house I actually requested higher interest rates on my mortgage. The banks need that money more than I do. Why the hell should I try to save any money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 So did I on my homes, I don't get it. Also on my cars, electronics, furniture, insurance, even gas when I go to BJ's. I really don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 When my 401k savings reached a certain threshold Vanguard started charging me a lower percentage fee to manage the investment. I'm glad I'm not running for President because that for sure would end my campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 When my 401k savings reached a certain threshold Vanguard started charging me a lower percentage fee to manage the investment.I'm glad I'm not running for President because that for sure would end my campaign. Sounds like McCain's tax policy actually. Now ive gone and confused myself. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Why is this a big deal? Seems downright capitalistic to me. Negotiating, what a novel concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 So many of you are missing the basic point. From the article: In Obama's case, he received a lower rate than the average offered at the time in Chicago for similarly structured jumbo loans. So all the comparison of bigger loans and when you crossed certain thresholds do not apply here. The difference is related to similar loans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 So many of you are missing the basic point.From the article: In Obama's case, he received a lower rate than the average offered at the time in Chicago for similarly structured jumbo loans. So all the comparison of bigger loans and when you crossed certain thresholds do not apply here. The difference is related to similar loans. Like i said before, if Obama shopped rates (and he said that he did) then that accounts for why he got a lower rate than the average. Real simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 So many of you are missing the basic point.From the article: In Obama's case, he received a lower rate than the average offered at the time in Chicago for similarly structured jumbo loans. So all the comparison of bigger loans and when you crossed certain thresholds do not apply here. The difference is related to similar loans. Apparently some people don't understand what the RED word means. How do we define average ? In mathematics, an average, or central tendency of a data set refers to a measure of the "middle" or "expected" value of the data set. So who are the ****s that got an even better deal than Obama ? :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 So many of you are missing the basic point.From the article: In Obama's case, he received a lower rate than the average offered at the time in Chicago for similarly structured jumbo loans. So all the comparison of bigger loans and when you crossed certain thresholds do not apply here. The difference is related to similar loans. Well, by definition, 1/2 of all money loaned in that structure was below the average. He actually get's points from me for getting a good deal. That's downright 'Murican, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 Like i said before, if Obama shopped rates (and he said that he did) then that accounts for why he got a lower rate than the average. Real simple. I hear you and understand that. That post is in response to the "my boss has more money and gets better rates" and "once i crossed a level i got better rates" crowd. They are missing a fundamental tenet of what happened. His loan wasn't good relative to smaller loans..it was good relative to similar loans. As long as he wasn't "bought" with that difference(and there is no evidence that he was) then there is no problem Also from the article: "The real question is: Were congressmen getting unique treatment that others weren't getting?" associate law professor Adam J. Levitin, a credit specialist at Georgetown University Law Center, said about the Countrywide loans. "Do they do business like that for people who are not congressmen? If they don't, that's a problem." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted July 2, 2008 Share Posted July 2, 2008 I hear you and understand that. That post is in response to the "my boss has more money and gets better rates" and "once i crossed a level i got better rates" crowd. They are missing a fundamental tenet of what happened. His loan wasn't good relative to smaller loans..it was good relative to similar loans. As long as he wasn't "bought" with that difference(and there is no evidence that he was) then there is no problemAlso from the article: "The real question is: Were congressmen getting unique treatment that others weren't getting?" associate law professor Adam J. Levitin, a credit specialist at Georgetown University Law Center, said about the Countrywide loans. "Do they do business like that for people who are not congressmen? If they don't, that's a problem." Ok, sorry, i read that like you were saying that because he got a lower rate than the average on similar loans, he did something wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.