• @Twentytwodividedby7
    link
    711 days ago

    Right, it is a loan, which means the principle is spent to buy a house for someone and they pay you back over 30 years. That is a huge capital investment with a long repayment period.

    California also has low supply of housing for citizens, so why specifically help undocumented immigrants get housing when their claim is far less solid than a resident with proper standing?

    • Jesus
      link
      011 days ago

      The argument for it is probably similar to the argument for allowing dreamers to attend university and get white collar jobs. Some people were brought to the states when they were young, and America is all they know.

      Do you send someone to a place like Mexico even though they might not really speak fluent Spanish and or know the country well?

      • @Twentytwodividedby7
        link
        110 days ago

        But if this scenario were the case, then they likely would have visa sponsorship to work a white collar job. That would thus make them documented. Many banks have lending guidelines for this scenario, which again makes this law even more useless

        • Jesus
          link
          110 days ago

          Makes me wonder if being a dreamer makes you a riskier loan applicant. Those folks don’t have permanent residency, they’re here under deferred action. If they have to leave, they’d be at increased risk of foreclosure.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        110 days ago

        It probably could’ve gotten more support if it was specifically for dreamers, for the reasons you point out.

        • Jesus
          link
          010 days ago

          Yeah, it wasn’t written in a way that would help with public perception or limit opportunities for political spin. Also, it was put on the governor’s desk during a general election year when immigration is a top issue.

          Even if the bill wouldn’t impact the housing market or state budget, it wasn’t crafted well.