• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

If you own a home this will make you sick

Faster horses

Well-known member
I received this email; the links are at the end as proof this is true.

Something every home owner should be made aware of!



>>

>>

>> Don't want to be bothered with "Political stuff?" You'd better read

>> this one. It will come as a huge shock to you if you aren't informed as

>> to what Obama is up to, and apparently it has already passed one hurdle.

>> It will take very little now to put it into actual law!! YOU'D BETTER

>> WAKE UP AMERICA !!!! So you think you live in a free country, boy have

>> you got a surprise coming.

>>

>> A License Required for your HOUSE?

>>

>> If you own your home you really need to check this out. At the end of

>> this email is the Google link to verify. If the country thinks the

>> housing market is depressed now, wait until everyone sees this; no one

>> will be buying homes in the future.

>>

>> We encourage you to read the provisions of the Cap and Trade Bill that

>> has passed the House of Representatives and being considered by the

>> Senate. We are ready to join the next march on Washington ! This Congress

>> and whoever on their staffs that write this junk are truly out to destroy

>> the middle class of the U.S.A ....

>>

>> A License will be required for your house...no longer just for cars and

>> mobile homes....Thinking about selling your house. Take a look at H.R.

>> 2454 (Cap and Trade bill). This is unbelievable! Only the beginning

>> from this administration! Home owners take note & tell your friends and

>> relatives who are home owners!

>>

>> Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Cap and Trade Act, you won't be

>> able to sell your home unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy

>> and water efficiency standards of this Act. H.R. 2454, the "Cap & Trade"

>> bill passed by the House of Representatives, if it is also passed by the

>> Senate, will be the largest tax increase any of us has ever experienced.

>>

>> The Congressional Budget Office (supposedly non-partisan) estimates that

>> in just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be

>> $6,800 per year. No one is excluded. However, once the lower classes

>> feel the pinch in their wallets, you can be sure these voters get a tax

>> refund (even if they pay no taxes at all) to offset this new cost. Thus,

>> you Mr. And Mrs. Middle Class have to pay even more since additional tax

>> dollars will be needed to bail out everyone else..

>>

>> But wait. This awful bill (that no one in Congress has actually read) has

>> many more surprises in it. Probably the worst one is this: A year from

>> now you won't be able to sell your house. Yes, you read that right.

>>

>> The caveat is (there always is a caveat) that if you have enough money to

>> make required major upgrades to your home, then you can sell it. But, if

>> not, then forget it. Even pre-fabricated homes ("mobile homes") are

>> included. In effect, this bill prevents you from selling your home

>> without the permission of the EPA administrator.

>>

>> To get this permission,you will have to have the energy efficiency of

>> your home measured. Then the government will tell you what your new

>> energy efficiency requirement is and you will be forced to make

>> modifications to your home under the retrofit provisions of this Act to

>> comply with the new energy and water efficiency requirements.

>>

>> Then you will have to get your home measured again and get a license

>> (called a "label" in the Act) that must be posted on your property to

>> show what your efficiency rating is; sort of like the Energy Star

>> efficiency rating label on your

>> refrigerator or air conditioner. If you don't get a high enough rating,

>> you can't sell.

>>

>> And, the EPA administrator is authorized to raise the standards every

>> year, even above the automatic energy efficiency increases built into the

>> Act. The EPA administrator, appointed by the President, will run the Cap

>> & Trade program (AKA the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of

>> 2009") and is authorized to make any future changes to the regulations

>> and standards he/she alone determines to be in the government's best

>> interest. Requirements are set low initially so the bill will pass

>> Congress; then the Administrator can set much tougher new standards every

>> year.

>>

>> The Act itself contains annual required increases in energy efficiency

>> for private and commercial residences and buildings. However, the EPA

>> administrator can set higher standards at any time. Sect. 202 Building

>> Retrofit Program mandates a national retrofit program to increase the

>> energy efficiency of all existing homes across America .

>>

>> Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Act, you won't be able to sell

>> your home unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy and water

>> efficiency standards of this Act. You had better sell soon, because the

>> standards will be raised each year and will be really hard (I.e.,

>> ex$pen$ive) to meet in a few years. Oh, goody!

>>

>> The Act allows the government to give you a grant of several thousand

>> dollars to comply with the retrofit program requirements IF you meet

>> certain energy efficiency levels. But, wait, the State can set additional

>> requirements on who qualifies to receive the grants. You should expect

>> requirements such as "can't have an income of more than $50K per year",

>> "home selling price can't be more than $125K", or anything else to target

>> the upper middle class (and that's YOU) and prevent them from qualifying

>> for the grants.

>>

>> Most of us won't get a dime and will have to pay the entire cost of the

>> retrofit out of our own pockets. More transfer of wealth, more "change

>> you can believe in." Sect. 204 Building Energy Performance Labeling

>> Program establishes a labeling program that for each individual residence

>> will

>> identify the achieved energy efficiency performance for "at least 90

>> percent of the residential market within 5 years after the date of the

>> enactment of this Act."

>>

>> This means that within 5 years 90% of all residential homes in the U.S.

>> must be measured and labeled. The EPA administrator will get $50M each

>> year to enforce the labeling program. The Secretary of the Department of

>> Energy will get an additional $20M each year to help enforce the labeling

>> program. Some of this money will, of course, be spent on coming up with

>> tougher standards each year...

>>

>> Oh, the label will be like a license for your car. You will be required

>> to post the label in a conspicuous location in your home and will not be

>> allowed to sell your home without having this label. And, just like your

>> car license, you will probably be required to get a new label every so

>> often - maybe every year.

>>

>> But, the government estimates the cost of measuring the energy efficiency

>> of your home should only cost about $200 each time. Remember what they

>> said about the auto smog inspections when they first started: that in

>> California it would only cost $15.

>>

>> That was when the program started. Now the cost is about $50 for the

>> inspection and certificate; a 333% increase. Expect the same from the

>> home labeling program. Sect. 304 Greater Energy Efficiency in Building

>> Codes establishes new energy efficiency guidelines for the National

>> Building Code and mandates at 304(d) that 1 year after enactment of this

>> Act, all state and local jurisdictions must adopt the National Building

>> Code energy efficiency provisions or must obtain a certification from the

>> federal government that their state and/or local codes have been brought

>> into full compliance with the National Building Code energy efficiency

>> standards.

>>

>> CHECK OUT Just a few of the sites;

>>

>> Cap and Trade: A License Required for your Home

>> http://www.nachi.org/forum/f14/cap-and-trade-license-required-your-home-44750/

>>

>> HR2454 American Clean Energy & Security Act:

>> http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454

>>

>> Cap & Trade A license required for your home:

>> http://www.prisonplanet.com/cap-and-trade-a-license-required-for-your-home.html

>>

>> Cap and trade is a license to cheat and steal:

>> http://www.sfexaminer.com/opinion/columns/oped_contributors/Cap-and-trade-is-a-license-to-cheat-and-steal-45371937.html

>>

>> Cap and Trade: A License Required for your Home:

>> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2393940/posts

>>

>> Thinking about selling you House? Look at HR 2454:

>> http://www.federalobserver.com/2009/10/01/thinking-about-selling-your-house-a-look-at-h-r-2454-cap-and-trade-bill/

>>

>>

>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=A+License+required+for+your+home-+Cap+and+Trade&btnG=Google+Search

>>

>> This is bad.....real bad....these guys MUST be stopped, stopped now, and

>> stopped HARD!!!!
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Yeap but really do we think we can stop this? I thought there might be a chance with Health Care BUT ..........


You want to hear a real live example of Obama's help LOL
There is a "grant" to help bring rual homes up to date ...ie central heating, double pane windows, indoor plumbing, ect. Since I dont have central heat I thought I would apply HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
In order to even apply I had to have central heat and air with the duct work done, sheetrock walls finished, double pane windows, and a crawl space under the house. Well I dont have central heat or duct work which is why I was applying :roll: sorry I am NOT taking out my wood walls. Which leaves to to wonder whom is this for?
I guess as long as you can "say" there is help even if its not real help for anyone it is proof you are helping LOL
 

TSR

Well-known member
Although this seems to be adding quite a few more restrictions on selling a house, aren't there quite a few restrictions in place now? I believe almost every state has guidelines a house has to meet before it can be sold.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
TSR said:
Although this seems to be adding quite a few more restrictions on selling a house, aren't there quite a few restrictions in place now? I believe almost every state has guidelines a house has to meet before it can be sold.

Generally the only restrictions that come into play is if you are getting a VA or other direct governmental loan. Otherwise, there are no restrictions.

These other proposed regulations should be rejected, along with the socialist idiots who wrote them.
 

Mike

Well-known member
TSR said:
Although this seems to be adding quite a few more restrictions on selling a house, aren't there quite a few restrictions in place now? I believe almost every state has guidelines a house has to meet before it can be sold.

The only restrictions here are put forth by the mortgage companies. If you don't like those restrictions, you can find another mortgage company.

I can sell a house with dirt floors and the roof falling in if someone comes up with the money.

How can you possibly defend this? :roll:
 

TSR

Well-known member
Mike said:
TSR said:
Although this seems to be adding quite a few more restrictions on selling a house, aren't there quite a few restrictions in place now? I believe almost every state has guidelines a house has to meet before it can be sold.

The only restrictions here are put forth by the mortgage companies. If you don't like those restrictions, you can find another mortgage company.

I can sell a house with dirt floors and the roof falling in if someone comes up with the money.

How can you possibly defend this? :roll:

Didn't defend anything necessarily, just making a comment about current restrictions which I believe/thought existed in my state. I still don't think you can sell a house here if it has to be financed, as most are, unless it passes certain guidelines. What brought this about was in the past houses were sold to unsuspecting buyers that had a lot of termite damage. The buyers didn't find out until after the sale. Now you might say "dumb buyers" but nevertheless lawsuits were filed once again helping the lawyers. Now I believe there are guidelines to prevent such things from happening.
 

Mike

Well-known member
TSR said:
Mike said:
TSR said:
Although this seems to be adding quite a few more restrictions on selling a house, aren't there quite a few restrictions in place now? I believe almost every state has guidelines a house has to meet before it can be sold.

The only restrictions here are put forth by the mortgage companies. If you don't like those restrictions, you can find another mortgage company.

I can sell a house with dirt floors and the roof falling in if someone comes up with the money.

How can you possibly defend this? :roll:

Didn't defend anything necessarily, just making a comment about current restrictions which I believe/thought existed in my state. I still don't think you can sell a house here if it has to be financed, as most are, unless it passes certain guidelines. What brought this about was in the past houses were sold to unsuspecting buyers that had a lot of termite damage. The buyers didn't find out until after the sale. Now you might say "dumb buyers" but nevertheless lawsuits were filed once again helping the lawyers. Now I believe there are guidelines to prevent such things from happening.

I guess if you can't debate................divert? :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Steve

Well-known member
TSR said:
Although this seems to be adding quite a few more restrictions on selling a house, aren't there quite a few restrictions in place now? I believe almost every state has guidelines a house has to meet before it can be sold.

most current restrictions including certificates of occupancy and code requirements can be passed to the new owner, even if it is a distressed property in NJ,

what this regulation would do is bar transfer thus making "walking away" the only option for distressed properties..

who then "owns the responsibility to upgrade the home?, the bank? if they foreclose?

the township if they take it over for tax liens? or if they sell the lien is the new lien holder responsible?

often distressed sales is the last option for many in tough times.. but this regulation seems to shackle the home owners with little to no options in tough times.

it leaves alot of questions on how to deal with forced sales.
 

TSR

Well-known member
Steve said:
TSR said:
Although this seems to be adding quite a few more restrictions on selling a house, aren't there quite a few restrictions in place now? I believe almost every state has guidelines a house has to meet before it can be sold.

most current restrictions including certificates of occupancy and code requirements can be passed to the new owner, even if it is a distressed property in NJ,

what this regulation would do is bar transfer thus making "walking away" the only option for distressed properties..

who then "owns the responsibility to upgrade the home?, the bank? if they foreclose?

the township if they take it over for tax liens? or if they sell the lien is the new lien holder responsible?

often distressed sales is the last option for many in tough times.. but this regulation seems to shackle the home owners with little to no options in tough times.

it leaves alot of questions on how to deal with forced sales.

I see where you're coming from hopefully, as with any legislation, some of these questions will be answered before passage. It seems to me that upgrading energy codes on new construction would be a pretty good idea providing its cost-effective. And with energy prices as they are I feel like most energy saving practices would be worth it. What would it be like w/out any guidelines?? I think most of us have seen contractors that would take some "short cuts" to make more money.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
That is OUR business to watch the contractors, and maybe the city or state's business, but why do we have to be regulated in EVERYTHING by the government? They do a poor job at best...which has been proven over and over. Do you know of anything they have done that has been successful?

Oh, yeah, there are a couple of things, they've been very successful in giving us too much government AND spending way too much of OUR money.
 

TSR

Well-known member
Faster horses said:
That is OUR business to watch the contractors, and maybe the city or state's business, but why do we have to be regulated in EVERYTHING by the government? They do a poor job at best...which has been proven over and over. Do you know of anything they have done that has been successful?

Oh, yeah, there are a couple of things, they've been very successful in giving us too much government AND spending way too much of OUR money.

F Horses an example for you. You just got offered a better job in Colorado and you are going to have to relocate from Florida. You weren't there to see the contractors build the new house you are interested in.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Let the private sector sort it out. Guvment should have no role in laying restrictions on homes............ NONE!!!!!!

http://www.natresnet.org/ratings/overview/default.htm
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
TSR said:
Faster horses said:
That is OUR business to watch the contractors, and maybe the city or state's business, but why do we have to be regulated in EVERYTHING by the government? They do a poor job at best...which has been proven over and over. Do you know of anything they have done that has been successful?

Oh, yeah, there are a couple of things, they've been very successful in giving us too much government AND spending way too much of OUR money.

F Horses an example for you. You just got offered a better job in Colorado and you are going to have to relocate from Florida. You weren't there to see the contractors build the new house you are interested in.

TSR, this has more to do with the cap and trade bill and the energy/water efficiency of your home when selling it. You would be required to retrofit the house, if it does not meet the standards.

It should be done on a more local level, if need be, but not legislated by the Federal Government.

Building codes are already enacted, and more local.

Some of the contractors that built these homes are long gone. This would cover the oldest homes as well as the new. This isn't about shoddy workmanship.

It would be a bill that is based on the faulty science and scam of Man made Global Warming.
 

Steve

Well-known member
TSR said:
What would it be like w/out any guidelines??

I am all for guidelines... as a person can decide for themselves if the cost is worth the results...

and I am totally against more laws and fed control.. especially when the law will tie up a primary asset of most Americans..
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
TSR said:
Faster horses said:
That is OUR business to watch the contractors, and maybe the city or state's business, but why do we have to be regulated in EVERYTHING by the government? They do a poor job at best...which has been proven over and over. Do you know of anything they have done that has been successful?

Oh, yeah, there are a couple of things, they've been very successful in giving us too much government AND spending way too much of OUR money.

F Horses an example for you. You just got offered a better job in Colorado and you are going to have to relocate from Florida. You weren't there to see the contractors build the new house you are interested in.

So FH- why did you go running and screaming for "government help" when your contractor took your money and left you holding the bag :???:

I always chuckle- because in my 40 years involved with the law- it was usually the ones that moaned and groaned about too many laws and rules-or too much "government"- that yiped and whined the loudest when it was them that got took- and then really dribbled in their pants when they found out there wasn't any laws against it and it was a civil case .... :wink: :lol:

How many times then did I hear them say- "there should be a law against that"-- or "why isn't the authorities stopping that from happening".... :lol:

Without laws and rules requiring certain standards to be met when they do a job-and enforcement- the contractors/real estate folks could pull more scams/ripoffs than they already do....
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
You are confused, OT. There is a difference between local and state government and FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. The local sheriff went after the contractor (because of your help, for sure) and he was brought to justice court in this county; state vs contractor.

So, I must have missed something...what did the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
have to do with that?????

And I take it from your post that you're ok with the government issuing
all these housing laws?
 

Steve

Well-known member
I always chuckle- because in my 40 years involved with the law- it was usually the ones that moaned and groaned about too many laws and rules-or too much "government"- that yiped and whined the loudest when it was them that got took-

there is a huge difference between a person getting "took", and a new set of regulations requiring homeowners to upgrade their homes, or be unable to sell or transfer the property. and I would never think a sheriff would laugh and be amused because a person was a victim of a crime.

and then really dribbled in their pants when they found out there wasn't any laws against it and it was a civil case ....

with out a law there would be no civil case... :roll: I think you might have your criminal/common/civil "laws" mixed up a bit...

The principle of civil law is to provide all citizens with an accessible and written collection of the laws which apply to them and which judges must follow.
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Steve, please refrain from confusing Sheriff/Judge Krupt. The whiskey fumes have already taken more brain cells than he can spare..... :drink:
 

Steve

Well-known member
loomixguy said:
Steve, please refrain from confusing Sheriff/Judge Krupt. The whiskey fumes have already taken more brain cells than he can spare..... :drink:

there is no need to accuse him of having a few, we all make mistakes,

I just hope he hasn't "really dribbled in his pants", over the confrontation.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Faster horses said:
You are confused, OT. There is a difference between local and state government and FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. The local sheriff went after the contractor (because of your help, for sure) and he was brought to justice court in this county; state vs contractor.

So, I must have missed something...what did the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
have to do with that?????

And I take it from your post that you're ok with the government issuing
all these housing laws?

OK- so State government laws, state government officials, and state government is good-- but federal government laws, federal government officials, and federal government is bad.... :???:

So if the value had met their requirements- or your contractor had fled the state- and I'd have gotten the FBI or US Marshals involved- you would have refused their help :???:

Does this ideal change with who or what cult is in office? :wink:
 
Top