Rep. Barney Frank has done oversight for Fannie Mae for nearly 20 years. He took $40,000 in campaign cash and his former ‘lover’ was a Fannie Mae executive. Where is the media coverage?

He is totally a LOSER!! THe Liberal Media is so corrupt. But, below is an article that explain why the Democrats are at fault and that President Bush tried to do things but was stopped. And it is was written by the NY Times… they actually used to do there job, well somewhat!!

The transition would not be pleasant, since the current illusion of prosperity is the result of the artificial bubbles and additional currency created by the Fed. At any time, the Fed could pull the plug on our entire economy, which is no power that should have ever been granted to private bankers in the first place. In their absence, things will get worse before they get better, and the bankers and elitists will be sure to blame it on the absence of the Fed, but I assure you it will have been the result of the long-term damage done by the Fed while it existed!

The IRS never had a right to exist in the first place, and it would not be missed. Since The Fed was disbanded too, there would be no need for the Income Tax OR the IRS, since the IRS collects income tax in order to pay private bankers for the interest charged to the Treasury on currency created by the Federal Reserve. If the Treasury issued its own currency, the income tax would not be necessary.

All other government programs would continue being funded, as they always have been, through other sources (state and local taxes, apportioned taxes, commodity taxes etc.), and now that the Fed and IRS are gone, the taxpayers would have a lot more $$$ leftover to pay into extra programs for their own communities, if they chose to. Not only that, but in the absence of the Fed, the government could return to a sound monetary policy instead of our current fractional reserve system which causes inflation and inevitable devaluation of currency.

The Treasury would regain its rightful Constitutional authority to issue its own currency, without any interest, and hope would be restored to America.

The economy would begin to stabilize, and the middle class would begin to flourish again like it once did.

Each time I remortgage, it costs about £200 for the fees. Which works out a lot cheaper than the higher interest rates that I would have paid. That £200 just gets added to the mortgage.

Lets take this scenario: $620000 home. $400000 mortgage for 30 years @ 6.5%. After ten years the home increases to $1000000 and balance on mortgage is $340000. Lets say after the refinance the rate is 5%. I know the new payment for another 30 years would be $1825/mo but "how and what would they be able to pull out"?

Can anyone explain (in lamens terms)? thanks so much!

Well. There are a few questions that I think you are trying to figure out here. 1-what a refinance is and what they talk about when they mention the word refinance 2-what will you be able and how to pull out of the re-fi.
*A refinance is essentially a re-structuring or if you wish, taking on a brand new mortgage arrangement different from your present one. Typically, people refinance for getting MORE money out of their house through the HIGHER mortgage due to increase in the value of their property. In you case, you are at ~66% loan to value of your house (forgive decimals…), that is you ALREADY have 100-66%=34% of equity in your house. With your house price going up to 1Mill and the mortgage balance being at 340,000, your equity increases to 66%, i.e. reverse of what you have now except that you now "OWN MORE" of your house than before. Here we are logically arriving at answering question number 2, i.e.
**Should you property increase in value to 1 Mill and your mrtg balance being at 340K, you can go back up to the Loan to Value that you currently have, that is to 34% of equity in the house. So, doing simple arithmetic: A/34%*1Mill=340,000. B/1 Mill-340,000=660,000. This is the amount you can refinance to and "pull out" 660,000-340,000(mrtg balance then)=320,000. Your 320,000 will be your new money you could potentially invest into another property. The only caveat that you should be carefuly here is the potentially (!) lower rate on a re-fi. Yes, if rates go down in the market and you are able to fetch an awesome broker's deal, then possibly you might end up with 5%. Again, typically, on an INcrease to your mortgage balance (remember: you were at 340K and now at 660K), the rate may be blended between what you have NOW and what the new rate on a new mrtg term and balance gonna be. It is highly probable your rate will be either:
A/ lower than 6.5% now IF rates go down and you are able to find a better deal at the lower rate then
B/blended HIGHER if the new rate on the new funds to be added is generally higher due to market conditions
C/ blended LOWER if the new rate on the new funds to be added is generally lower due to market conditions
Anyhow, you need to do some shopping and what I call "thorough explanation meetings" with those people you are going to talk to regarding your new 660K mortgage then. Who knows, eh?
You pull the money out on the new 660K mortgage by simply getting a new type of a mortgage when the old one will be paid off (with a balance of 340K) and the DIFFERENCE will be simply deposited (by the new lender providing the new 660K mortgage) to your bank account.

Uff, I even got tired typing all of this fo ryou…Hope that helps…:-)

most important factor will be the equity in the property versus the note value of both the 1st and 2nd if you have at least 20% equity over the notes you should be OK with good credit

anything else without knowing the facts you may not be able to refinance the whole