Logan's Roadhouse files for bankruptcy; 18 restaurants closing

You used your tax return to fund a $50,000 down payment on a 250k house and closing costs on top of that?

Yeah, I think we have established the fact there was a housing surplus. But that has nothing to do with your alleged ability to get a mortgage during the height of the crisis when banks weren't lending to anyone but those with the best credit i.e. credit scores of 800+. Yet you had a credit rating of 640 and claim to have received a low interest mortgage during that time. Your story doesn't add up. It's just not consistent with reality.

Paying more than your required payment every month doesn't change any of the relevant facts either. Paying more than required may help you repay your loan faster - assuming no prepayment penalties. In paying more than required every month you pay less in interest but you don't reduce your interest rate. Paying more than required doesn't change the terms of your mortgage.

Your story still doesn't add up.

 

The fact that restaurants will have to pay $15 an hour so they will not be able to afford to stay in business has obviously never occurred to you.

 

yes, it has. unlike the right; i am trying to learn how to merely and simply use capitalism, for all of its worth. structural unemployment happens, (not enough corporate raiding in it for you to make it seem "worthwhile").

Only more efficient Firms, better able compete in our modern and Global economy; will get "stronger". Are you claiming small business is also, "too big to fail" under the capitalism alleged by the fantastical, right wing?

 

Complete nonsense. Perfect example of liberal ignorance. The reason that fast food has exploded over the past 50 years is that it's cheap. That's why decent restaurants close and crappy McDonald's etc. thrive. Once fast food restaurants have to double salaries their prices will soar and people will stop going. Local restaurants don't compete in the 'global economy' other than possibly purchasing some food ingredients. McDonald's in Baltimore are not shipping to Guam. Liberals have forgotten that they're the cheapest people in existence. Republicans go to quality restaurants and support the economy.

 

Haha...
You've never bought a home in the US, I see. Prior to late 2000's you could easily finance a home with no money down. Today most people have to put 3.5% down. Our home now cost $169,900. Our rate is 4.5, Wells Fargo holds the mortgage. Voluntarily paying more monthly toward your principle can reduce the months on your mortgage. Most folks finance for 30 years/fixed. Every onth we pay principle, interest, PMI, and we pay into Escrow. Once a year our property tax and home owners insurance come out of Escrow.
640 presently will get you a 30 year fixed rate under 5%. Interest rates on homes have stayed under 5% sine late 2000's. They used to be between 7-8%....huge difference in your monthly payment.

 

SOME folks got a 5 sec attention span so- Uh.. What?

 

BUNK..... Repubs are cheap. They POSE as high rollers but.. CHEAP.

 

pure right wing fantasy. y'all make it seem like you never heard of economics. with more disposable income, more Persons will be spending more money and increasing demand for goods and services. why does capitalism Only seem so useless, to the right.

 

LOL...and where is the basis for that conclusion? Have you not been paying attention?

That's not the issue. We are talking about 2007 and your assertion that you walked out on your mortgage in 2007 only to buy a another home 4 years later with a bad credit rating (640) and a tax refund as a down payment...remember?

Again, today isn't 4 years after 2007, the time which you said you got a low interest loan with a low interest rate. As previously pointed out to you, after the Great Recession, banks weren't loaning money to people with your credit rating much less a low interest mortgage. Your story doesn't add up.

It doesn't matter what the interest rates are now, because that's not the period under discussion. Are you now going to tell me, that you rented for longer than 3 years? Are you now changing your story? Your story doesn't add up. It's not consistent with the facts. It's not consistent with history, hence all this obfuscation.

 

Nobody in the US calls it The Great Recession...haha. We call it the housing crash.
We stayed in our house until 2009. We had negative equity. We could walk away and rent a comparable home for $1200/mo instead of over $1800/mo. When you bankrupt or foreclose you have to wait exactly 3 years to finance another home.
Anyone with a 640-it may be 642 will get around 4.5% with 3.5% down. Interest rates have stayed under 5% for years.
You have to take a certified check to closing and you have to get a home owner's insurance policy before that and pay it in advance. You prepay the year and then pay into Escrow for the next. You usually close at a lawyer's office with your realtor. You have until the 14th to make your mortgage payment, on the 15th you're assessed a late fee.
You've never purchased a home in the US. I've bought three and have refinanced and taken on second mortgages and had equity credit lines.
Do you have anything informative to say?

 

This myth has been thoroughly debunked. All it does is change who spends it. The rich would be stupid to simply stuff cash under the mattress, which is why none of them do it. They either spend it, or invest it, both of which create employment.

What people are really saying when they make MPC arguments is that you have no real right to property. If you do not use your property in a way which pleases the state, you must be thieved from and that property must be put to work efficiently for the state.

 

Which will be completely consumed by the higher prices which are the result of higher wages. Economic elasticity inures those at the bottom will alawys be at the bottom - especially when well-meaning persons such as yourself mistakenly believe artificially inlflating the value of unskilled labor throuhh higher minimum wages actually helps people.

 

Oh, so no one calls it the Great Recession? ....except for all the people who know what they are talking about. And that doesn't include you Amy.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/great-recession.asp

As I previously wrote, you are changing your story. As discrepancies are pointed out, you keep changing your story.,So now it's 2 years later. That still doesn't help you.

Except that's not true and that is the crux of the matter. Since the Great Recession credit has been tight. Contrary to your assertion "anyone with a 640" credit rating i.e. subprime couldn't get a mortgage much less a mortgage with less than 5% down - especially for someone who has defaulted on a previous mortgage just a few years earlier. Even now people cannot do that. Just how dumb to think people are? How dumb to you think lenders are? I've got news for you they aren't that dumb, with regulators breathing down their backs, and struggling to recover, they aren't that dumb.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...re-probably-not-getting-a-mortgage-these-days

Yeah, and none of that is relevant. What you describe is a common method to purchase a home. But it's not the only way. Instead of a certified check, you can wire funds. And you only need insurance policy if your lender insists upon it. Similarly, escrow requirements and payment dates vary by lender. People can meet where ever they wish to meet to close a transaction. And yeah, if you are late on making payments you will get hit with late fees. But, as previously pointed out to you , all of that really isn't relevant to this discussion.

As previously pointed out to you, you have no basis for that claim. You are desperately pulling (*)(*)(*)(*) out of your derriere by making an ad hominem argument. It ain't working.

I guess you missed the part where I wrote about my house. I didn't get my house without buying it. I have purchased several homes. I have build commercial structures. I have built a custom home for myself. There was a time when I borrowed money to purchase a home. But now I buy homes with cash. I don't borrow money to buy homes. For the last home I purchased, I wasn't even in the state when the deal closed. My attorney acted for me. I signed the purchase agreements and sent them to her. I wasn't even in the friggin state when I closed on the property. But I paid with cash. I didn't borrow money. So I didn't have to go thorough all the hoops mortgage lenders require of borrowers. There were no certified checks. The money was wired from my bank account directly to a title company trust account, and it was used to pay off the previous owner's mortgage, accrued property taxes, closing costs, and pay the owner the remainder.

There are other ways of buying property than the one you outlined, and I haven't even touched on all the ways property can be purchased and financed e.g. land contracts, carrybacks, lease options, etc. But they are not without drawbacks. And what you described isn't consistent with any of them.

When have I not had something informative to say? The bottom line is your story doesn't add up for all the reasons I have previously and repeatedly stated. Your story just isn't consistent with reality. It's not consistent with history. You can't just walk away from your mortgage unscathed. Moral arguments aside, there are some very heavy costs associated with walking away from your mortgage. And I think most people understand those costs. and that's why they don't do it.

 

You can believe anything ya want. Anyone in America can pick up a phone and call Keller Williams and ask an agent what rates are and what standard qualifications are.
A car you own has a title. Property has a deed.
Oh, the seller almost always pays most of the closing costs.
And we don't call it the great recession....haha....pull up Youtube and find a video of an American news anchor or politician calling it that....haha

 

Indeed, but that really isn't relevant, is it?

OK...is there a point buried in there somewhere?

Who pays for what closing costs depends upon the sales agreement. However, it's customary for the seller to pay some, but not all closing costs e.g. sales commission, tittle insurance, etc.. The buyer pays the agreed upon price to the seller and the title company uses those funds to pay off the obligations of the seller, e.g. mortgage, title insurance, and other closing costs so that a clear title can be passed to the purchaser. But none of that is relevant to our discussion, is it?

Well it really doesn't matter what you call it, does it? Just because a news anchor or politician says something, it doesn't mean it's truthful or honest. You should have learned that by now. Republicans i.e. so called conservatives and Republican entertainers like to make misrepresent the Great Recession in order to gloss over some very inconvenient facts and ideological problems.

The fact is it is commonly referred to as the Great Recession among professionals, perhaps you and those around you don't refer to it as such. But you are not the world or even an economists or financier and whether you recognize it as such really isn't relevant either, is it? You can call it whatever you want. But the fact remains, it was a great recession, the worst recession since the Great Depression.

Well, before you took us down the rabbit hole, I asked were is this tax you claim is levied on small business owner revenues? It doesn't exist, hence all this obfuscation. You should admit your error. The fact is a tax credit is a good way to raise overall income. It's much better than the minimum wage as it minimizes adverse supply impacts.

 

Ya know what? I honestly didn't fully appreciate being American until I started participating on this forum. I didn't fully appreciate being southern until I spent 9 months in Colorado.

 

You do know that those down south look for Northerners to fill jobs right?

AA

 

Or perhaps poor marketing decisions by the Executives, who by the way, most likely have personal service agreements which call for very generous severance payments/golden parachutes.

 

Haha...
Naw darlin'.
Experience, education, and qualifications are usually criteria. Southeners find most folks from New England abrasive.

 

Debunked with what? All y'all have is fallacy to work with. Price inflation for fuel already happened. Where was your fantastical, right wing propaganda then.

In any Case, since the right cannot be bothered to understand fiscal policies any more than economics; supply side economics is about controlling inflation.

You make my case for me; the minimum wage should be increased, or we should have wartime tax rates even for a War on Drugs; if the wealthiest are not creating Jobs Booms with their wealth under our form of Capitalism.

- - - Updated - - -

Only the clueless and Causeless about economics believe that. Why do you believe inflation would happen with a minimum wage hike; and not quantitative easing?

 

i routinely, give some propaganda and rhetoric for free, to Persons from a federal Republic to our immediate South; for being more "southern" than the South, if any hospitality issues should arise.

 

Haha... FOS says whaaaaat?

 

It should increase and decrease with the market not some machinations by government bureaucrats. Want the wages of the lower income groups to go up, then stop making employing so expensive on the tax and regulatory side and institute policies to GROW the economy and get employment numbers back where they were in the mid 2000's when wages were rising and we had full employment AND higher labor participation rates.

You can't just mandate it, as someone noted the broken window theory. Let's go around a break all the windows in the restraurants and then they will have to buy new windows employing people in the glass industry, and then have to hire window installers, just think of all that money that would be flowing into the economy...........oh yeah it would have anyway and now we have a loss as the windows had to be replaced.

 

By clueless you refer, of course, to yourself. Only the clueless would deny the correlation between wages and consumer prices. Consumers set prices for all goods and services bought and sold in a market economy. They do this by expending their disposable income. As consumer demand increases, so does the general price index of goods and services. As wages drive demand, the average price of most goods and services track that demand: higher demand = higher prices; lower demand = lower prices. Raising the minimum wage will have a short-term effect of creating a nominal increase in disposable income for those at the bottom, but those gains will be short-lived as the economy adjusts itself to catch up to the artificial increase in the money supply caused by wages tracking upward.

 

nothing but diversion as that form of fallacy?

Why do you believe inflation would happen with a minimum wage hike; and not quantitative easing?

Your point, but for your lack of attention surpluses to your own point of view, is that it is merely and Only more money that causes inflation.