Comments on: http://jarheadonline.com/2009/02/12/546/ Because Jarheads are everywhere Fri, 02 Jul 2010 21:21:17 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Kate Kashman http://jarheadonline.com/2009/02/12/546/comment-page-1/#comment-1226 Kate Kashman Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:17:28 +0000 http://jarheadonline.com/?p=546#comment-1226 I'm curious what you (and others) think about this. I'm delighted to give some relief to military families who have been truly impacted by base closures and other extraordinary situations, but I do wonder about providing relief to homeowners who purchased with the intent to flip the house for a profit a few years later. For those buyers, it was a gamble. The government wouldn't have shared in their winnings if the gamble had paid off, so why should the government cover their losses? Anytime a military member chooses to purchase a home, they know that they may be transferred and that the sales value of the house could go up, or it could go down. My isn't intended to be against this benefit, rather, to see what other people think. I’m curious what you (and others) think about this. I’m delighted to give some relief to military families who have been truly impacted by base closures and other extraordinary situations, but I do wonder about providing relief to homeowners who purchased with the intent to flip the house for a profit a few years later. For those buyers, it was a gamble. The government wouldn’t have shared in their winnings if the gamble had paid off, so why should the government cover their losses? Anytime a military member chooses to purchase a home, they know that they may be transferred and that the sales value of the house could go up, or it could go down.

My isn’t intended to be against this benefit, rather, to see what other people think.

]]>