1
5

[–] Morbo 1 point 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

This sounds like a protective move to prevent more people who cannot truly afford to get into a huge mortgage they can't handle. Sure it does take away from existing homeowners with FHA loans, but this is a way to start releasing some of the pressure from the new mortgage bubble without bursting it. Long term this looks like a beneficial strategy but the spin is already showing as the MSM makes this look like Trump is helping the rich at the poor's expense. A healthy economy benefits everyone and if it can be attained by reducing some of the bad that came from handing out home loans with little concern for who can afford them then we are on the road to improvement. Some may suffer but many will be saved by not getting into a loan that they can't afford.

0
2

[–] YourDumbWhat [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

but this is a way to start releasing some of the pressure from the new mortgage bubble without bursting it.

True.

This doesn't seem like a devastating move against a vulnerable demographic by any means, but it'll be interesting to see if a trend emerges over time for who is benefiting most from cuts and who will be footing the bill for other things. I'm personally skeptical regarding who Trump is planning on keeping his promises to long term, but he hasn't thrown up any more red flags than I'd expect him to, and today's antics seem like your standard partisan back-and-forth over relatively minor budget decisions so I'm not dour about it or anything.

0
3

[–] ABACABB 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Is a small rate increase on your mortgage insurance is the difference between you being able to afford buying a house or not then you shouldn't be buying a house

4
1

[–] Scrapco 4 points 1 point (+5|-4) ago 

Good for banks, bad for non-rich homeowners. What a surprise.