# Could be the biggest news story so far this decade.



## iamwhatiseem

Let's hope they actually do something with what they find.
It is still, I think, the biggest money fraud story in the history of mankind as well as the most corrupt institutions in the history of America.

Let's hope:

NY probe seeks mortgage records, official says - Forbes.com


----------



## uscitizen

I will bet Fox is all over this.


----------



## California Girl

iamwhatiseem said:


> Let's hope they actually do something with what they find.
> It is still, I think, the biggest money fraud story in the history of mankind as well as the most corrupt institutions in the history of America.
> 
> Let's hope:
> 
> NY probe seeks mortgage records, official says - Forbes.com



I'm curious as to how it'll play out globally.


----------



## Truthmatters

I surely hope it ferrets out the real thieves.

If it can manage that then maybe the people will completely understand why we need to regulate this industry and in what way.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

The other day I wrote this in another thread...



> Ask any market defender (there are a few on this forum) to explain two things to you...and standby and watch them mumble and walk away.
> 
> 1) *"Originate and sell"*. Sounds simple and is categorically the absolute top reason why the markets went from the 3,000's to beyond 10,000 in just 10 years. And is also why the markets went from 10,000 to 14,000 in the next 3 years after that. And is also an infinite lie that every single wall street firm gleefully took advantage of while the SEC and the FED and the entire world government bodies stood by and watched it happen, and never said a word because they too were making a sizeable fortune partaking of. (and consequently is how "AAA" rated multi-$billion firms went bankrupt overnite)
> 2) *Shelving or bond underwriting*. Tell them to explain how it is this was done by every wall street firm (particularly Goldman Sacs) and no one went to jail, in fact several of the founders of this idea have and are advisors to the past two Presidents (yes fans Obama walks with the corrupt on a daily basis)
> 
> There - that is it.
> Learn about these two things - and you will learn what the Stock Market really is


----------



## California Girl

Truthmatters said:


> I surely hope it ferrets out the real thieves.
> 
> If it can manage that then maybe the people will completely understand why we need to regulate this industry and in what way.



Thieves, not theifs, you ignorant septic tank. Here is a little helpful tip for you... 'I before E, except after C'. Got that? Good. 

And... there is no value in the US regulating banking if other countries do not. All that will happen is that the banks will move their HQs overseas, and carry on. If we are to address the whole banking system, it must be a global regulation or it will not help.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

All we can hope is that the media doesn't allow this to get buried.
I am VERY confident that the FED and the SEC, as well as several congress/senate members *AND* the White House will push hard for this guy and his team to stifle the investigation.
As it would certainly also reveal that the FED and the SEC were complicit in the fraud at minimum. At the same time it would also show the public that the for last 20 years the stock market, and the entire financial system in America was a mirage. Indeed, this investigation if fulfilled could send the markets in a suicide fall.


----------



## Trajan

didn't we go thru this with GS bundling and welling what they knew was crap via e mails etc.? Its legal, I am sorry but there it is, unless I am missing something from this article......

the real culprits, imho are S&P, Moodys and Dun & Bradstreet, they awarded the ratings...


----------



## kwc57

My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.


----------



## Caroljo

kwc57 said:


> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.



And all this started back in the Clinton administration...i'm so surprised!


----------



## Truthmatters

What a pack of lies.

Only an idiot would belive that this was caused by what you claim.


Ask an unbiased economics proff and you have your answer.


The sub primes that were written had very little to do with the amount the gov required to be handed out.


Why would they write so many more than the gov required?


Becuase they repackaged them off and sold them as triple A investiments and made a shit load of money.


----------



## California Girl

kwc57 said:


> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.



I've raised both those facts time and again. The Democrats have a hard time dealing with the fact that they were the ones who forced banks to provide sub-primes. 

National regulations did not and will not help the banking industry. We either bring in global agreements and legislation or we accept that shit will happen. Not rocket science.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

kwc57 said:


> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.



Not saying you personally, but that is a cop-out.
Indeed the Federal Government strong-armed banks into giving loans to people who likely would not pay them back. Thank Clinton and Frank for this.
However - wall street in concert with banks took this notion to the nth degree.
They sold these mortgages, or should I say...HID...these mortgages in overly complicated bond vehicles and made enormous profits putting the entire system at great risk.  
It is like... say you are a car dealer...and I told you that you need to give s few loans to people who can't really afford it. And you complied. Buuuut...realizing you can make a lot of money originating these loans and then selling them - you open 15 more car lots across the country and made $millions.  This...is not what I originally encouraged you to do.


----------



## editec

kwc57 said:


> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now. What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country. The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back. If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks. When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative. They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments. When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.


 

I don't doubt that you sincerely believe that hogwash you just posted, but you have been rather clearly and cleverly misinformed.

Read a book.


----------



## spectrumc01

The bottom line is this...

Democrat or Republican, Liberal or conservative it doesn't matter because that is not where the blame goes.  It is all a matter of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.  All the regulation in the world will not matter because the it is the crooks and thieves themselves that are making the regulations.  This isn't even about class warfare, or greed.  This is all about selfishness and lack of care for your neighbor.  This is the belief that, "I got mine and screw everyone else, so what if everyone else is suffering, and who cares the market tanked, I got mine and am now living large."


----------



## kwc57

editec said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now. What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country. The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back. If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks. When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative. They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments. When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't doubt that you sincerely believe that hogwash you just posted, but you have been rather clearly and cleverly misinformed.
> 
> Read a book.
Click to expand...


Don't need to.......I'm part of the book.  I've lived it.


----------



## kwc57

iamwhatiseem said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not saying you personally, but that is a cop-out.
> Indeed the Federal Government strong-armed banks into giving loans to people who likely would not pay them back. Thank Clinton and Frank for this.
> However - wall street in concert with banks took this notion to the nth degree.
> They sold these mortgages, or should I say...HID...these mortgages in overly complicated bond vehicles and made enormous profits putting the entire system at great risk.
> It is like... say you are a car dealer...and I told you that you need to give s few loans to people who can't really afford it. And you complied. Buuuut...realizing you can make a lot of money originating these loans and then selling them - you open 15 more car lots across the country and made $millions.  This...is not what I originally encouraged you to do.
Click to expand...


But when you follow the trail to the trailhead, who set the whole thing in motion?


----------



## iamwhatiseem

kwc57 said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not saying you personally, but that is a cop-out.
> Indeed the Federal Government strong-armed banks into giving loans to people who likely would not pay them back. Thank Clinton and Frank for this.
> However - wall street in concert with banks took this notion to the nth degree.
> They sold these mortgages, or should I say...HID...these mortgages in overly complicated bond vehicles and made enormous profits putting the entire system at great risk.
> It is like... say you are a car dealer...and I told you that you need to give s few loans to people who can't really afford it. And you complied. Buuuut...realizing you can make a lot of money originating these loans and then selling them - you open 15 more car lots across the country and made $millions.  This...is not what I originally encouraged you to do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But when you follow the trail to the trailhead, who set the whole thing in motion?
Click to expand...


Pheh...it's like if the nazi soldiers took no blame for mass murdering people with an extraordinary efficiency saying "Hitler made me do it".
Indeed the Democrats in the 80's set this all in motion, but it was the banks and the entire financial system that took that ball and created an entire industry that grew to such and extent that the *ENTIRE* nations economy stood on it's crumbling foundation.


----------



## editec

kwc57 said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now. What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country. The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back. If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks. When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative. They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments. When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't doubt that you sincerely believe that hogwash you just posted, but you have been rather clearly and cleverly misinformed.
> 
> Read a book.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book. I've lived it.
Click to expand...

 
In what capacity of banking did you live that gives you that vantage to make such specious claims?

I ask since you CLAIM to have inside information. What are your _bono fides?_



> mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.


 

The above is simply not remotely true.

*No government regulation* made banks give liars loans, NINJA loans, 110% loans, or exploing in your face adjustible rate morgage loans, either.  Those were the invention of the bnksters themselves.

If you doubt that, please do feel free to cite the bnaking givenment regulation which you "lived for 30 years" that forced bansters to make those loans

Tain't there, sport. 

I don't say this lightly, I seldom bother, but in your case, it so obviously fits.

You, sir, are a liar.


----------



## kwc57

editec said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't doubt that you sincerely believe that hogwash you just posted, but you have been rather clearly and cleverly misinformed.
> 
> Read a book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book. I've lived it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In what capacity of banking did you live that gives you that vantage to make such specious claims?
> 
> I ask since you CLAIM to have inside information. What are your _bono fides?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The above is simply not remotely true.
> 
> *No government regulation* made banks give liars loans, NINJA loans, 110% loans, or exploing in your face adjustible rate morgage loans, either.  Those were the invention of the bnksters themselves.
> 
> If you doubt that, please do feel free to cite the bnaking givenment regulation which you "lived for 30 years" that forced bansters to make those loans
> 
> Tain't there, sport.
> 
> I don't say this lightly, I seldom bother, but in your case, it so obviously fits.
> 
> You, sir, are a liar.
Click to expand...


Would you like my SSN, birth date and street address too?  Whether you believe me or not doesn't bother me a bit.  This is an interwebz bulletin board.  You get what you pay for.  That being said, I assure you that my wife and I have both worked in the industry since 1979.  There is another side to this story that isn't being told by the media.


----------



## Ernie S.

Truthmatters said:


> What a pack of lies.
> 
> Only an idiot would belive that this was caused by what you claim.
> 
> 
> Ask an unbiased economics proff and you have your answer.
> 
> 
> The sub primes that were written had very little to do with the amount the gov required to be handed out.
> 
> 
> Why would they write so many more than the gov required?
> 
> 
> Becuase they repackaged them off and sold them as triple A investiments and made a shit load of money.



Maybe you should read Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams, 2 very notable and respected economics Professors.
Hint: You'll have to look somewhere other than HuffPo for their essays, but if truth does matter to you, I'm sure you can find their writings on the subject.


----------



## CrusaderFrank

Truthmatters said:


> What a pack of lies.
> 
> Only an idiot would belive that this was caused by what you claim.
> 
> 
> Ask an unbiased economics proff and you have your answer.
> 
> 
> The sub primes that were written had very little to do with the amount the gov required to be handed out.
> 
> 
> Why would they write so many more than the gov required?
> 
> 
> Becuase they repackaged them off and sold them as triple A investiments and made a shit load of money.



"These two entitiesFannie Mae and Freddie Macare not facing any kind of financial crisis," -- Representative Barney Frank (D) 

Freddie $45B and Fannie $15B = $60B we'll never see back in 100 life times


----------



## Toro

kwc57 said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book. I've lived it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In what capacity of banking did you live that gives you that vantage to make such specious claims?
> 
> I ask since you CLAIM to have inside information. What are your _bono fides?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The above is simply not remotely true.
> 
> *No government regulation* made banks give liars loans, NINJA loans, 110% loans, or exploing in your face adjustible rate morgage loans, either.  Those were the invention of the bnksters themselves.
> 
> If you doubt that, please do feel free to cite the bnaking givenment regulation which you "lived for 30 years" that forced bansters to make those loans
> 
> Tain't there, sport.
> 
> I don't say this lightly, I seldom bother, but in your case, it so obviously fits.
> 
> You, sir, are a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you like my SSN, birth date and street address too?  Whether you believe me or not doesn't bother me a bit.  This is an interwebz bulletin board.  You get what you pay for.  That being said, I assure you that my wife and I have both worked in the industry since 1979.  There is another side to this story that isn't being told by the media.
Click to expand...


I believe you.  And I have no doubt that what you have said is true.  But I am sorry, I've worked in the financial industry for nearly 20 years, and I strongly disagree with the assertion that the CRA was the primary cause of this disaster. I came out of university as a diehard fire-breathing Ayn Rand / libertarian / Austrian School adherent. But after spending most of my career in financial markets making capital allocation decisions primarily in stocks but also into commodities, currencies, bonds and derivatives, and seeing two spectacular bubbles in a decade that dogmatic free market ideologues said should never theoretically happen, the idea that this one small program caused the global financial crisis precipitating the worst economy since the Depression boggles my mind. Yes, I get the Chaos Theory explanation akin to the butterfly in Brazil flapping it's wings causing a hurricane in Florida, but there have been so many changes in banking laws and regulations which loosened credit over the past 40 years, to boil it down to this one change is just a tad too convenient for those pushing a political narrative.


----------



## Care4all

kwc57 said:


> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.



you and the wifey obviously work in a small bank verses a Bank of America...

banks are not FORCED to loan to anyone not qualified.

less than 10% of the loans foreclosed were NOT to the poor in CRA areas with CRA loans....that means over 90% of the foreclosures have absolutely nothing to do with loaning money for Community Reinvestment Act purposes....

the banks and others, did this to themselves, at the citizen's expense


----------



## Dante

California Girl said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's hope they actually do something with what they find.
> It is still, I think, the biggest money fraud story in the history of mankind as well as the most corrupt institutions in the history of America.
> 
> Let's hope:
> 
> NY probe seeks mortgage records, official says - Forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious as to how it'll play out globally.
Click to expand...


New York state, NY Attorney General, you ignorant septic tank. Here is a little helpful tip for you... 'Local political story.... Got that? Good. 

ALBANY, N.Y. -- New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is seeking records from three major Wall Street banks as part of a broad investigation into the mortgage crisis that fueled the recession, an official familiar with the issue said Tuesday.


----------



## Care4all

Dante said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's hope they actually do something with what they find.
> It is still, I think, the biggest money fraud story in the history of mankind as well as the most corrupt institutions in the history of America.
> 
> Let's hope:
> 
> NY probe seeks mortgage records, official says - Forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious as to how it'll play out globally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> New York state, NY Attorney General, you ignorant septic tank. Here is a little helpful tip for you... 'Local political story.... Got that? Good.
> 
> ALBANY, N.Y. -- New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is seeking records from three major Wall Street banks as part of a broad investigation into the mortgage crisis that fueled the recession, an official familiar with the issue said Tuesday.
Click to expand...


oh for goodness sakes Dante!  

caligirl is right on this one.....she was talking about regulation changes....only if there is global reforms, will reforms help us with these banks....if they are regulated here in the usa and not elsewhere, they will just move to another country....

i have seen articles discussing changes worldwide, so this won't happen again.


----------



## Dante

Care4all said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious as to how it'll play out globally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New York state, NY Attorney General, you ignorant septic tank. Here is a little helpful tip for you... 'Local political story.... Got that? Good.
> 
> ALBANY, N.Y. -- New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is seeking records from three major Wall Street banks as part of a broad investigation into the mortgage crisis that fueled the recession, an official familiar with the issue said Tuesday.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> oh for goodness sakes Dante!
> 
> caligirl is right on this one.....she was talking about regulation changes....only if there is global reforms, will reforms help us with these banks....if they are regulated here in the usa and not elsewhere, they will just move to another country....
> 
> i have seen articles discussing changes worldwide, so this won't happen again.
Click to expand...


Other countries have their own regulations. Regulations which keep things in check. 

Look at Iceland before conservative economic philosophy got people there drunk...


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

editec said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't doubt that you sincerely believe that hogwash you just posted, but you have been rather clearly and cleverly misinformed.
> 
> Read a book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book. I've lived it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In what capacity of banking did you live that gives you that vantage to make such specious claims?
> 
> I ask since you CLAIM to have inside information. What are your _bono fides?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The above is simply not remotely true.
> 
> *No government regulation* made banks give liars loans, NINJA loans, 110% loans, or exploing in your face adjustible rate morgage loans, either.  Those were the invention of the bnksters themselves.
> 
> If you doubt that, please do feel free to cite the bnaking givenment regulation which you "lived for 30 years" that forced bansters to make those loans
> 
> Tain't there, sport.
> 
> I don't say this lightly, I seldom bother, but in your case, it so obviously fits.
> 
> You, sir, are a liar.
Click to expand...


What makes you more credible than him?  You haven't offered anything other than your own words either.


----------



## Dante

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book. I've lived it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In what capacity of banking did you live that gives you that vantage to make such specious claims?
> 
> I ask since you CLAIM to have inside information. What are your _bono fides?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The above is simply not remotely true.
> 
> *No government regulation* made banks give liars loans, NINJA loans, 110% loans, or exploing in your face adjustible rate morgage loans, either.  Those were the invention of the bnksters themselves.
> 
> If you doubt that, please do feel free to cite the bnaking givenment regulation which you "lived for 30 years" that forced bansters to make those loans
> 
> Tain't there, sport.
> 
> I don't say this lightly, I seldom bother, but in your case, it so obviously fits.
> 
> You, sir, are a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What makes you more credible than him?  You haven't offered anything other than your own words either.
Click to expand...


WTF?  another maude-wannabe?


say it ain't so spaz-lisper, say it ain't so...


----------



## rdean

Caroljo said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And all this started back in the Clinton administration...i'm so surprised!
Click to expand...


The crisis happened in 2008, but it was "Clinton"?  Hilarious.  8 years of Republican deregulation that moved 70% of the mortgage market to Wall Street had nothing to do with it.  Ever heard the term, "derivatives"?  What are they?


----------



## Dante

rdean said:


> Caroljo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And all this started back in the Clinton administration...i'm so surprised!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The crisis happened in 2008, but it was "Clinton"?  Hilarious.
Click to expand...


Actually, it all started under Ronald Reagan. 
_

true story_


----------



## Flopper

iamwhatiseem said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not saying you personally, but that is a cop-out.
> Indeed the Federal Government strong-armed banks into giving loans to people who likely would not pay them back. Thank Clinton and Frank for this.
> However - wall street in concert with banks took this notion to the nth degree.
> They sold these mortgages, or should I say...HID...these mortgages in overly complicated bond vehicles and made enormous profits putting the entire system at great risk.
> It is like... say you are a car dealer...and I told you that you need to give s few loans to people who can't really afford it. And you complied. Buuuut...realizing you can make a lot of money originating these loans and then selling them - you open 15 more car lots across the country and made $millions.  This...is not what I originally encouraged you to do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But when you follow the trail to the trailhead, who set the whole thing in motion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pheh...it's like if the nazi soldiers took no blame for mass murdering people with an extraordinary efficiency saying "Hitler made me do it".
> Indeed the Democrats in the 80's set this all in motion, but it was the banks and the entire financial system that took that ball and created an entire industry that grew to such and extent that the *ENTIRE* nations economy stood on it's crumbling foundation.
Click to expand...

The government has been encouraging home ownership for 70 years.  This is not something that started  with Clinton or Reagan.  The tax breaks for home owners, establishment of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Home Loan Bank, and  the Community Reinvestment Act which has been enhanced by every president since it's passage in 1977, have encouraged home ownership particular,  low income earners.  Did this over-inflate the market and create homeowners that could not survive a serious downturn. Absolutely.

However, Wall Street's part in this should not be overlooked.  Wall Street's creation of sub-prime mortgages and shenanigans with mortgage backed bonds turned a would be slump in the real estate market into a worldwide financial disaster.  It took an over bought real estate market and Wall Street to cause the greatest recession since the Great Depression.

And to make matter worse, the government and the Fed were in no position to fight a major recession.  With a deficit nearing 800 billion, low interest rates, and record low tax rates the government was limited in what it could do.  Government responded with the only available tool, spending.  Thus we end up with a sluggish economy and a huge deficit.

A perfect storm.


----------



## Annie

California Girl said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've raised both those facts time and again. The Democrats have a hard time dealing with the fact that they were the ones who forced banks to provide sub-primes.
> 
> National regulations did not and will not help the banking industry. We either bring in global agreements and legislation or we accept that shit will happen. Not rocket science.
Click to expand...


and they are still trying to force banks to continue:

Holder's Anti-Bank Witch Hunt - Investors.com



> Holder's Anti-Bank Witch Hunt
> 
> Posted 05/12/2011 07:02 PM ET
> 
> Housing: The last time Washington launched a crusade to close the racial mortgage gap, it created a credit bubble that crashed the economy. If you think those days are over, think again.
> 
> The Justice Department is conducting an anti-discrimination witch hunt against banks for simultaneously lending too much and not lending enough to minorities. It would be comical if the consequences weren't so serious...


----------



## California Girl

Care4all said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curious as to how it'll play out globally.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New York state, NY Attorney General, you ignorant septic tank. Here is a little helpful tip for you... 'Local political story.... Got that? Good.
> 
> ALBANY, N.Y. -- New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is seeking records from three major Wall Street banks as part of a broad investigation into the mortgage crisis that fueled the recession, an official familiar with the issue said Tuesday.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> oh for goodness sakes Dante!
> 
> caligirl is right on this one.....she was talking about regulation changes....only if there is global reforms, will reforms help us with these banks....if they are regulated here in the usa and not elsewhere, they will just move to another country....
> 
> i have seen articles discussing changes worldwide, so this won't happen again.
Click to expand...


Cut him some slack, Care. He's not very smart. He's probably one of those Americans who thinks the world doesn't affect us, and we don't affect the world. 

Stupid people see only what is written in the article. The intelligent take that information and look at the bigger picture.


----------



## California Girl

Flopper said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> But when you follow the trail to the trailhead, who set the whole thing in motion?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pheh...it's like if the nazi soldiers took no blame for mass murdering people with an extraordinary efficiency saying "Hitler made me do it".
> Indeed the Democrats in the 80's set this all in motion, but it was the banks and the entire financial system that took that ball and created an entire industry that grew to such and extent that the *ENTIRE* nations economy stood on it's crumbling foundation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The government has been encouraging home ownership for 70 years.  This is not something that started  with Clinton or Reagan.  The tax breaks for home owners, establishment of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Home Loan Bank, and  the Community Reinvestment Act which has been enhanced by every president since it's passage in 1977, have encouraged home ownership particular,  low income earners.  Did this over-inflate the market and create homeowners that could not survive a serious downturn. Absolutely.
> 
> However, Wall Street's part in this should not be overlooked.  Wall Street's creation of sub-prime mortgages and shenanigans with mortgage backed bonds turned a would be slump in the real estate market into a worldwide financial disaster.  It took an over bought real estate market and Wall Street to cause the greatest recession since the Great Depression.
> 
> And to make matter worse, the government and the Fed were in no position to fight a major recession.  With a deficit nearing 800 billion, low interest rates, and record low tax rates the government was limited in what it could do.  Government responded with the only available tool, spending.  Thus we end up with a sluggish economy and a huge deficit.
> 
> A perfect storm.
Click to expand...


Indeed. A perfect storm. One predicted for decades by many economists - not those advising governments, but real economists.... those who spend their lives studying economic history and events around the world and applying those circumstances to today's systems and events.


----------



## Trajan

Dante said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caroljo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And all this started back in the Clinton administration...i'm so surprised!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The crisis happened in 2008, but it was "Clinton"?  Hilarious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, it all started under Ronald Reagan.
> _
> 
> true story_
Click to expand...


actually the CRA was created in ...drumroll please.....go look ity up.. it wasn't reagan.


----------



## California Girl

Dante said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caroljo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And all this started back in the Clinton administration...i'm so surprised!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The crisis happened in 2008, but it was "Clinton"?  Hilarious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, it all started under Ronald Reagan.
> _
> 
> true story_
Click to expand...


Maybe, maybe not. The truth is that who was President is of absolutely no importance. It was, and remains, flaws in the entire system. You want to play partisan politics with it, that's cool. But those of us with an actual brain know that it didn't matter who the President was, it was decade after decade of bad government, crap oversight, piss poor regulation, stupidity, and pure fucking greed that brought us to the brink of ruin. I would rather solve the problem than assign blame. Because there is a HUGE list of people to blame for this mess.


----------



## Steve Hanson

Trajan said:


> didn't we go thru this with GS bundling and welling what they knew was crap via e mails etc.? Its legal, I am sorry but there it is, unless I am missing something from this article......
> 
> the real culprits, imho are S&P, Moodys and Dun & Bradstreet, they awarded the ratings...



Right on Trajan, because that is how people invest, on the ratings.


----------



## Steve Hanson

California Girl said:


> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> The crisis happened in 2008, but it was "Clinton"?  Hilarious.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it all started under Ronald Reagan.
> _
> 
> true story_
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe, maybe not. The truth is that who was President is of absolutely no importance. It was, and remains, flaws in the entire system. You want to play partisan politics with it, that's cool. But those of us with an actual brain know that it didn't matter who the President was, it was decade after decade of bad government, crap oversight, piss poor regulation, stupidity, and pure fucking greed that brought us to the brink of ruin. I would rather solve the problem than assign blame. Because there is a HUGE list of people to blame for this mess.
Click to expand...

The President is not the lawmaker, Congress is. You are right, the president is inconsequential for the most part in these decisions. Sure they have the right to veto but they rely on Congress to make the regulations for the most part.


----------



## ogibillm

kwc57 said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now. What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country. The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back. If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks. When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative. They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments. When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't doubt that you sincerely believe that hogwash you just posted, but you have been rather clearly and cleverly misinformed.
> 
> Read a book.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book.  I've lived it.
Click to expand...


being a bank teller doesn't make you an expert on banking practices and regulations.


----------



## kwc57

Care4all said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you and the wifey obviously work in a small bank verses a Bank of America...
Click to expand...


Actually.......you'd be surprised.


----------



## California Girl

Steve Hanson said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dante said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it all started under Ronald Reagan.
> _
> 
> true story_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, maybe not. The truth is that who was President is of absolutely no importance. It was, and remains, flaws in the entire system. You want to play partisan politics with it, that's cool. But those of us with an actual brain know that it didn't matter who the President was, it was decade after decade of bad government, crap oversight, piss poor regulation, stupidity, and pure fucking greed that brought us to the brink of ruin. I would rather solve the problem than assign blame. Because there is a HUGE list of people to blame for this mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The President is not the lawmaker, Congress is. You are right, the president is inconsequential for the most part in these decisions. Sure they have the right to veto but they rely on Congress to make the regulations for the most part.
Click to expand...


Apportioning 'blame' in this fuck up is actually really funny. I find it just hysterical that the Democrats try and blame the GOP and the GOP blame the Democrats. They were ALL responsible. Both sides, the banks, and the American people all have a chunk of mea culpa in this clusterfuck.


----------



## Steve Hanson

California Girl said:


> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, maybe not. The truth is that who was President is of absolutely no importance. It was, and remains, flaws in the entire system. You want to play partisan politics with it, that's cool. But those of us with an actual brain know that it didn't matter who the President was, it was decade after decade of bad government, crap oversight, piss poor regulation, stupidity, and pure fucking greed that brought us to the brink of ruin. I would rather solve the problem than assign blame. Because there is a HUGE list of people to blame for this mess.
> 
> 
> 
> The President is not the lawmaker, Congress is. You are right, the president is inconsequential for the most part in these decisions. Sure they have the right to veto but they rely on Congress to make the regulations for the most part.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apportioning 'blame' in this fuck up is actually really funny. I find it just hysterical that the Democrats try and blame the GOP and the GOP blame the Democrats. They were ALL responsible. Both sides, the banks, and the American people all have a chunk of mea culpa in this clusterfuck.
Click to expand...


I made more money off of AIG these last few years than I did working.  A real good friend told me to bet the farm on AIG when they were under $10 and appearing like they were going under.  It was a gamble, but I trusted him and did.  He told me it was safe because of pending gov't investments. More than safe, a sure thing.  So I put in everything I had and sold at over $50, making over 5 times my investment.  It just shows you exactly how invested in them government is.  Both sides.


----------



## daveman

"Sub-prime lending started off as a good idea -- helping Americans buy homes, who previously couldn't afford to."

-- Barack Obama

Under the Clinton administration, federal regulators began using the act to combat red-lining, a practice by which banks loaned money to some communities but not to others, based on economic status. No loan is exempt, no bank is immune, warned then-Attorney General Janet Reno. For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement.

The Clinton-Reno threat of vigorous enforcement pushed banks to make the now infamous loans that many blame for the current meltdown, Richman said. Banks, in order to not get in trouble with the regulators, had to make loans to people who shouldnt have been getting mortgage loans.

This threat combined with the government backing of Fannie and Freddie set the stage for the current uncertainty, because the banks could just sell the loans off to Fannie or Freddie, who could buy them with little regard for negative financial outcomes, Richman said.​
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFlYmLAMbrw]YouTube - Andrew Cuomo: CRA Should be Abused to Force Banks to Give Risky Loans[/ame]

CUOMO: To take a greater risk on these mortgages, yes. To give families mortgages that they would not have given otherwise, yes.

Q: [unintellible]  that they would not have given the loans at all?

CUOMO: They would not have qualified but for this affirmative action on the part of the bank, yes.

Q: Are minorities represented in that low and moderate income group?

CUOMO: It is by income, and is it also by minorities? Yes.

CUOMO: With the 2.1 billion, lending that amount in mortgages  which will be a higher risk, and Im sure there will be a higher default rate on those mortgages than on the rest of the portfolio ​
Is there anyone who can explain rationally why ability to repay should not be the ONLY determining factor for making loan decisions?


----------



## Steve Hanson

daveman said:


> "Sub-prime lending started off as a good idea -- helping Americans buy homes, who previously couldn't afford to."
> 
> -- Barack Obama
> 
> Under the Clinton administration, federal regulators began using the act to combat red-lining, a practice by which banks loaned money to some communities but not to others, based on economic status. No loan is exempt, no bank is immune, warned then-Attorney General Janet Reno. For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement.
> 
> The Clinton-Reno threat of vigorous enforcement pushed banks to make the now infamous loans that many blame for the current meltdown, Richman said. Banks, in order to not get in trouble with the regulators, had to make loans to people who shouldnt have been getting mortgage loans.
> 
> This threat combined with the government backing of Fannie and Freddie set the stage for the current uncertainty, because the banks could just sell the loans off to Fannie or Freddie, who could buy them with little regard for negative financial outcomes, Richman said.​
> YouTube - Andrew Cuomo: CRA Should be Abused to Force Banks to Give Risky Loans
> 
> CUOMO: To take a greater risk on these mortgages, yes. To give families mortgages that they would not have given otherwise, yes.
> 
> Q: [unintellible]  that they would not have given the loans at all?
> 
> CUOMO: They would not have qualified but for this affirmative action on the part of the bank, yes.
> 
> Q: Are minorities represented in that low and moderate income group?
> 
> CUOMO: It is by income, and is it also by minorities? Yes.
> 
> CUOMO: With the 2.1 billion, lending that amount in mortgages  which will be a higher risk, and Im sure there will be a higher default rate on those mortgages than on the rest of the portfolio ​
> Is there anyone who can explain rationally why ability to repay should not be the ONLY determining factor for making loan decisions?



It was a good idea until it was abused.


----------



## daveman

Steve Hanson said:


> It was a good idea until it was abused.



Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?


----------



## Care4all

daveman said:


> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was a good idea until it was abused.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?
Click to expand...


you should ask the Banks that question!  NONE of those banks or mortgage companies were FORCED to give ANYONE a loan that they could not afford..........yet they sold loans to millions of people without even a reference.

most homes foreclosed were to middle class people...  btw.


----------



## Steve Hanson

daveman said:


> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was a good idea until it was abused.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?
Click to expand...


As i said before it was abused. Originially the loans were high risk and the ratings listed as poor.  Investors put money in, with the understanding the risk was high, but theu had the opportunity for gain. Under this scenario theses type of loans were not wide spread. Government pressure forced loans to be offered to minorities and other high risks on a much larger scale. To attract investors and fund the increase they became falsely rated as lower risks and became a very high percentage of their portfolio. Banks and firms had to hi a percentage of high risk loans. When they defaulted they had more vacant properties than they could afford.


----------



## daveman

Care4all said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was a good idea until it was abused.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you should ask the Banks that question!  NONE of those banks or mortgage companies were FORCED to give ANYONE a loan that they could not afford..........yet they sold loans to millions of people without even a reference.
> 
> most homes foreclosed were to middle class people...  btw.
Click to expand...

From my earlier link:
Do you remember how we told you that the Democrats and groups associated with them leaned on banks and even sued to get them to make bad loans by abusing the Community Reinvestment Act (see HERE and HERE)? The abuse of this act by ACORN and officials like Janet Reno was a factor in causing the economic crisis. The harassment suits filed under this act were used to get banks to lower credit standards and hand out high risk loans. We have dug up the lawsuit below while researching Obamas legal career. It is a typical example of an ACORN harassment lawsuit.

In these lawsuits, ACORN makes a bogus claim of Redlining (denying poor people loans because of their ethnic heritage). They protest and get the local media to raise a big stink. This stink means that the bank faces thousands of people closing their accounts and get local politicians to lobby to stop the bank from doing some future business, expansions and mergers. If the bank goes to court, they will win, but the damage is already done because who is going to launch a big campaign to get the banks reputation back?

It is important to understand the nature of these lawsuits and what their purpose is. ACORN filed, or threatened to file, tons of these lawsuits and ALL CRA suits allege racism (usually the press involved and such with the threat of the CRA lawsuit is enough to get the bank to give in and put them in a catch 22, they also had a willing Janet Reno Justice Department to work with  see below for more on Reno). As we have said in our series or articles analyzing every aspect of this story (links at the very bottom of this post), the series of ACORN harassment lawsuits and intimidation against banks to lower credit standards was not the sole reason for the mortgage crisis, it was one important layer of many that brought us to the mortgage crisis and the largest financial scandal in the history of the world.

Case Name
Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011
State/Territory Illinois
Case Summary
Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.

U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-banks loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).​So, yes, they were forced to by bullshit lawsuits brought by ACORN and "community organizer" lawyers...including Barack Obama.


----------



## daveman

Steve Hanson said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was a good idea until it was abused.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As i said before it was abused. Originially the loans were high risk and the ratings listed as poor.  Investors put money in, with the understanding the risk was high, but theu had the opportunity for gain. Under this scenario theses type of loans were not wide spread. Government pressure forced loans to be offered to minorities and other high risks on a much larger scale. To attract investors and fund the increase they became falsely rated as lower risks and became a very high percentage of their portfolio. Banks and firms had to hi a percentage of high risk loans. When they defaulted they had more vacant properties than they could afford.
Click to expand...


So the answer to my question is "It's NOT a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back -- so the government should force institutions to do so."


----------



## Steve Hanson

daveman said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you should ask the Banks that question!  NONE of those banks or mortgage companies were FORCED to give ANYONE a loan that they could not afford..........yet they sold loans to millions of people without even a reference.
> 
> most homes foreclosed were to middle class people...  btw.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> From my earlier link:
> Do you remember how we told you that the Democrats and groups associated with them leaned on banks and even sued to get them to make bad loans by abusing the Community Reinvestment Act (see HERE and HERE)? The abuse of this act by ACORN and officials like Janet Reno was a factor in causing the economic crisis. The harassment suits filed under this act were used to get banks to lower credit standards and hand out high risk loans. We have dug up the lawsuit below while researching Obamas legal career. It is a typical example of an ACORN harassment lawsuit.
> 
> In these lawsuits, ACORN makes a bogus claim of Redlining (denying poor people loans because of their ethnic heritage). They protest and get the local media to raise a big stink. This stink means that the bank faces thousands of people closing their accounts and get local politicians to lobby to stop the bank from doing some future business, expansions and mergers. If the bank goes to court, they will win, but the damage is already done because who is going to launch a big campaign to get the banks reputation back?
> 
> It is important to understand the nature of these lawsuits and what their purpose is. ACORN filed, or threatened to file, tons of these lawsuits and ALL CRA suits allege racism (usually the press involved and such with the threat of the CRA lawsuit is enough to get the bank to give in and put them in a catch 22, they also had a willing Janet Reno Justice Department to work with  see below for more on Reno). As we have said in our series or articles analyzing every aspect of this story (links at the very bottom of this post), the series of ACORN harassment lawsuits and intimidation against banks to lower credit standards was not the sole reason for the mortgage crisis, it was one important layer of many that brought us to the mortgage crisis and the largest financial scandal in the history of the world.
> 
> Case Name
> Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
> Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011
> State/Territory Illinois
> Case Summary
> Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.
> 
> U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-banks loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).​So, yes, they were forced to by bullshit lawsuits brought by ACORN and "community organizer" lawyers...including Barack Obama.
Click to expand...


Part of the point I was making about abuses that made the practice poor.


----------



## California Girl

Care4all said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was a good idea until it was abused.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you should ask the Banks that question!  NONE of those banks or mortgage companies were FORCED to give ANYONE a loan that they could not afford..........yet they sold loans to millions of people without even a reference.
> 
> most homes foreclosed were to middle class people...  btw.
Click to expand...


The whole point is that the banks WERE forced to loan money to people they couldn't afford. This clusterfuck goes waaaay deeper than bad banking practices, Care. Really, it does.


----------



## daveman

Steve Hanson said:


> Part of the point I was making about abuses that made the practice poor.


----------



## Steve Hanson

California Girl said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you should ask the Banks that question!  NONE of those banks or mortgage companies were FORCED to give ANYONE a loan that they could not afford..........yet they sold loans to millions of people without even a reference.
> 
> most homes foreclosed were to middle class people...  btw.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The whole point is that the banks WERE forced to loan money to people they couldn't afford. This clusterfuck goes waaaay deeper than bad banking practices, Care. Really, it does.
Click to expand...


And the result was an extremely high percentage of high risk loans that crippled banks when they faulted.  What was happening prior to the crash was smaller, weaker banks were failing. They were the precursors to the larger mess. Their assest, along with the bad debt were purchased by solvent entities. These solvent entities aquired more and more bad debt with their aquisitions to compund the ones they had issued on their own. They got stuk woth the hot potatoes when the market crashed.


----------



## Flopper

Steve Hanson said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> didn't we go thru this with GS bundling and welling what they knew was crap via e mails etc.? Its legal, I am sorry but there it is, unless I am missing something from this article......
> 
> the real culprits, imho are S&P, Moodys and Dun & Bradstreet, they awarded the ratings...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right on Trajan, because that is how people invest, on the ratings.
Click to expand...

All the major bond rating services blew it.  They didn't take into account the risks in real estate and like the investors that bought mortgage backed bonds, the rating services didn't know what they were worth.

When the rating services rate municipal bonds, they automatically assign their highest rating to bonds that are insured.  Most of the AAA bonds are insured by just a few companies.  If we have another deep recession before state and local governments recover from the current recession, there could be a lot of  defaults.  If one of those insurers goes under, it could be really messy.  The services are publishing the underlying ratings which is helpful for risk averse investors.

I think the services are bit more conservative since the recession which is good.


----------



## newpolitics

California Girl said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> I surely hope it ferrets out the real theifs.
> 
> If it can manage that then maybe the people will completely understand why we need to regulate this industry and in what way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thieves, not theifs, you ignorant septic tank. Here is a little helpful tip for you... 'I before E, except after C'. Got that? Good.
> 
> And... there is no value in the US regulating banking if other countries do not. All that will happen is that the banks will move their HQs overseas, and carry on. If we are to address the whole banking system, it must be a global regulation or it will not help.
Click to expand...


seeing as there is no one world government,yet...you're notion is pointless... and seeing how our economy is so significant in the global economy, regulating our own industry to prevent another collapse is very prudent, but apparently, to you, its not enough. You want the whole world... what hypocrisy you pose


----------



## newpolitics

California Girl said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you should ask the Banks that question!  NONE of those banks or mortgage companies were FORCED to give ANYONE a loan that they could not afford..........yet they sold loans to millions of people without even a reference.
> 
> most homes foreclosed were to middle class people...  btw.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The whole point is that the banks WERE forced to loan money to people they couldn't afford. This clusterfuck goes waaaay deeper than bad banking practices, Care. Really, it does.
Click to expand...


Haha... the banks were victims... you've got to be kidding me


----------



## Flopper

Steve Hanson said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> you should ask the Banks that question!  NONE of those banks or mortgage companies were FORCED to give ANYONE a loan that they could not afford..........yet they sold loans to millions of people without even a reference.
> 
> most homes foreclosed were to middle class people...  btw.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The whole point is that the banks WERE forced to loan money to people they couldn't afford. This clusterfuck goes waaaay deeper than bad banking practices, Care. Really, it does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And the result was an extremely high percentage of high risk loans that crippled banks when they faulted.  What was happening prior to the crash was smaller, weaker banks were failing. They were the precursors to the larger mess. Their assest, along with the bad debt were purchased by solvent entities. These solvent entities aquired more and more bad debt with their aquisitions to compund the ones they had issued on their own. They got stuk woth the hot potatoes when the market crashed.
Click to expand...

Actually, most small community banks were not not hurt as bad as big ones.  In general, the small community banks are more conservative.  They didn't buy into the sub prime mortgage fiasco.  I bank with a small community bank.  Most of their home mortgages are 30 and 15 year fixed rate with 20% down.  They also hold their mortgages so they are much more interested in the credit worthiness of the customer.


----------



## Steve Hanson

Flopper said:


> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> didn't we go thru this with GS bundling and welling what they knew was crap via e mails etc.? Its legal, I am sorry but there it is, unless I am missing something from this article......
> 
> the real culprits, imho are S&P, Moodys and Dun & Bradstreet, they awarded the ratings...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right on Trajan, because that is how people invest, on the ratings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All the major bond rating services blew it.  They didn't take into account the risks in real estate and like the investors that bought mortgage backed bonds, the rating services didn't know what they were worth.
> 
> When the rating services rate municipal bonds, they automatically assign their highest rating to bonds that are insured.  Most of the AAA bonds are insured by just a few companies.  If we have another deep recession before state and local governments recover from the current recession, there could be a lot of  defaults.  If one of those insurers goes under, it could be really messy.  The services are publishing the underlying ratings which is helpful for risk averse investors.
> 
> I think the services are bit more conservative since the recession which is good.
Click to expand...


I'm in total agreement.


----------



## Steve Hanson

newpolitics said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> I surely hope it ferrets out the real theifs.
> 
> If it can manage that then maybe the people will completely understand why we need to regulate this industry and in what way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thieves, not theifs, you ignorant septic tank. Here is a little helpful tip for you... 'I before E, except after C'. Got that? Good.
> 
> And... there is no value in the US regulating banking if other countries do not. All that will happen is that the banks will move their HQs overseas, and carry on. If we are to address the whole banking system, it must be a global regulation or it will not help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> seeing as there is no one world government,yet...you're notion is pointless... and seeing how our economy is so significant in the global economy, regulating our own industry to prevent another collapse is very prudent, but apparently, to you, its not enough. You want the whole world... what hypocrisy you pose
Click to expand...

 She made a very valid point there. I don't think she was saying there is a single world government. What she was saying was pressure from foreign lending institutions forced US banks to be in the game. And that is exactly what happened. Foriegn banks were giving high risk loans and cutting heavily into more secure loans as a result. US banks had to compete. And that's the reason so many foriegn banks took a hit when the US housing market collapsed. They were the frontrunners over here.


----------



## Truthmatters

Like UBS bank?

You know the one that hired Phil Gramm after he passed the Gram Leach Bialey act which killed Glass Steagal?


----------



## Steve Hanson

Truthmatters said:


> Like UBS bank?
> 
> You know the one that hired Phil Gramm after he passed the Gram Leach Bialey act which killed Glass Steagal?



The one signed into law by Bill Clinton?  

But let me ask you this you mangy mutt. How does the repeal of Glass Steagal have anything to do with high risk loans? 

Or are you just talking more shit here?


----------



## Paulie

Toro said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> In what capacity of banking did you live that gives you that vantage to make such specious claims?
> 
> I ask since you CLAIM to have inside information. What are your _bono fides?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The above is simply not remotely true.
> 
> *No government regulation* made banks give liars loans, NINJA loans, 110% loans, or exploing in your face adjustible rate morgage loans, either.  Those were the invention of the bnksters themselves.
> 
> If you doubt that, please do feel free to cite the bnaking givenment regulation which you "lived for 30 years" that forced bansters to make those loans
> 
> Tain't there, sport.
> 
> I don't say this lightly, I seldom bother, but in your case, it so obviously fits.
> 
> You, sir, are a liar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you like my SSN, birth date and street address too?  Whether you believe me or not doesn't bother me a bit.  This is an interwebz bulletin board.  You get what you pay for.  That being said, I assure you that my wife and I have both worked in the industry since 1979.  There is another side to this story that isn't being told by the media.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I believe you.  And I have no doubt that what you have said is true.  But I am sorry, I've worked in the financial industry for nearly 20 years, and I strongly disagree with the assertion that the CRA was the primary cause of this disaster. I came out of university as a diehard fire-breathing Ayn Rand / libertarian / Austrian School adherent. But after spending most of my career in financial markets making capital allocation decisions primarily in stocks but also into commodities, currencies, bonds and derivatives, and seeing two spectacular bubbles in a decade that dogmatic free market ideologues said should never theoretically happen, the idea that this one small program caused the global financial crisis precipitating the worst economy since the Depression boggles my mind. Yes, I get the Chaos Theory explanation akin to the butterfly in Brazil flapping it's wings causing a hurricane in Florida, but there have been so many changes in banking laws and regulations which loosened credit over the past 40 years, to boil it down to this one change is just a tad too convenient for those pushing a political narrative.
Click to expand...


But Toro, you do know that Austrian advocates recognize the Fed as the main culprit in causing the bubbles, and even you yourself have said that.

We don't believe the Fed is conducive to a true free market, and that's why we're not surprised at all that the bubbles happened.


----------



## Toro

Flopper said:


> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> The whole point is that the banks WERE forced to loan money to people they couldn't afford. This clusterfuck goes waaaay deeper than bad banking practices, Care. Really, it does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the result was an extremely high percentage of high risk loans that crippled banks when they faulted.  What was happening prior to the crash was smaller, weaker banks were failing. They were the precursors to the larger mess. Their assest, along with the bad debt were purchased by solvent entities. These solvent entities aquired more and more bad debt with their aquisitions to compund the ones they had issued on their own. They got stuk woth the hot potatoes when the market crashed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, most small community banks were not not hurt as bad as big ones.  In general, the small community banks are more conservative.  They didn't buy into the sub prime mortgage fiasco.  I bank with a small community bank.  Most of their home mortgages are 30 and 15 year fixed rate with 20% down.  They also hold their mortgages so they are much more interested in the credit worthiness of the customer.
Click to expand...


I track the performance of over 500 publicly traded banks. The majority of banks were profitable in both 2008 and 2009, which is pretty surprising when you think about it. In aggregate, the banking system was insolvent in 2008 but that's because the losses were concentrated in roughly 20 large banks.


----------



## Intense

Truthmatters said:


> What a pack of lies.
> 
> Only an idiot would belive that this was caused by what you claim.
> 
> 
> Ask an unbiased economics proff and you have your answer.
> 
> 
> The sub primes that were written had very little to do with the amount the gov required to be handed out.
> 
> 
> Why would they write so many more than the gov required?
> 
> 
> Becuase they repackaged them off and sold them as triple A investiments and made a shit load of money.



You need to recheck your premise.


----------



## Toro

Paulie said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would you like my SSN, birth date and street address too?  Whether you believe me or not doesn't bother me a bit.  This is an interwebz bulletin board.  You get what you pay for.  That being said, I assure you that my wife and I have both worked in the industry since 1979.  There is another side to this story that isn't being told by the media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I believe you.  And I have no doubt that what you have said is true.  But I am sorry, I've worked in the financial industry for nearly 20 years, and I strongly disagree with the assertion that the CRA was the primary cause of this disaster. I came out of university as a diehard fire-breathing Ayn Rand / libertarian / Austrian School adherent. But after spending most of my career in financial markets making capital allocation decisions primarily in stocks but also into commodities, currencies, bonds and derivatives, and seeing two spectacular bubbles in a decade that dogmatic free market ideologues said should never theoretically happen, the idea that this one small program caused the global financial crisis precipitating the worst economy since the Depression boggles my mind. Yes, I get the Chaos Theory explanation akin to the butterfly in Brazil flapping it's wings causing a hurricane in Florida, but there have been so many changes in banking laws and regulations which loosened credit over the past 40 years, to boil it down to this one change is just a tad too convenient for those pushing a political narrative.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But Toro, you do know that Austrian advocates recognize the Fed as the main culprit in causing the bubbles, and even you yourself have said that.
> 
> We don't believe the Fed is conducive to a true free market, and that's why we're not surprised at all that the bubbles happened.
Click to expand...


Yeah I do. And I think the Austrians are closest in accurately describing the sources of our problems. 

Having said that, the dogmatic free marketeers - including the Austrians - argue that markets are self-regulating and are always trending towards equilibrium. This implies that there are no positive feedback loops. All feedback loops are negative. IOW, when prices get too far out of line, rational arbitragers will force prices back to equilibrium. As an iron law of economics, I think this is nonsense, and it is the main reason why I have turned away from dogmatic free market ideology. Markets often exhibit positive feedback loops, a concept most economists reject but one that psychologists and sociologists would view as blatantly obvious. A positive feedback loop is when people get caught up in a mania. People hear about their neighbor getting rich in Internet stocks or condos or silver, and rather than taking the opposite position and arbitraging the price back to equilibrium when prices get out of whack, they jump on the bandwagon, pushing prices higher still. General equilibrium economists will argue that bubbles cannot happen, or rarely happen, and if they happen, it is impossible to identify bubbles beforehand. Austrians are more willing to accept positive feedback loops - this is implied in their acceptance of "malinvestment" caused by government interference in the market. However, even there, if individuals were as rational as advertised, investors would be able to adjust for government interference and arbitrage prices back to equilibrium anyways.


----------



## Trajan

Care4all said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was a good idea until it was abused.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it a good idea to loan money to people who can't afford to pay it back?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you should ask the Banks that question!  NONE of those banks or mortgage companies were FORCED to give ANYONE a loan that they could not afford..........yet they sold loans to millions of people without even a reference.
> 
> most homes foreclosed were to middle class people...  btw.
Click to expand...



its really simple the more the gov. got involved ala F&F the greater the bubble grew, they dropped regs so banks would lend more and reach down further into the income brackets, they didn''t like the fact that a family making 40K a year in an inner city could not branch out to the suburbs, they made it a class and minority issue  when in fact it always was a RISK issue,  the old school 20% down disappeared, documented income etc etc gone ...who underwrote a alot of those loans? ....the gov. wanted them to loan to folks who here to fore, if the sensible rules that had been in place were in effect would never have gotten a loan. 


The lending institutions were pressured , this is not even a question and in the end, these guys k new there was little chance they would get their money back unless the full faith and credit of the UAS gov. would secure them.......and they are 5 times smarter then any politician even on their best day, there were not going to be left holding the bag, so they did what they did to protect themselves and make themselves rich. *shrugs* this is what comes of the gov. getting involved in markets........

at the end of the day, someone making,  with 2 incomes 60K a year gets a no doc. adjustable rate  mortgage for a 450K house, well, please don't tell me that they are to dumb to figure out that their $1000 mortgage a month for 3 years is going to turn into a $2000 payment, its right there with the HUD 1 and in the packet, they have to tell them and spell it ou at the singing,  what the new % would be and the payment amount, if you have bought a home you KNOW they had to have seen it, but they didn't care. 


Care- if there was a time to protect people against themselves it wasn't when they  are sitting there with the chance to own a home that they wolud never have dreamed of in front them just 20  signatures away,  the time to protect them was by  NOT giving them the chance becasue, frankly they never ever should have even been allowed to conjure the fact that as a family with only an income of 60K is going to float a payment for a 450k house over the long term, they were teased and they bit, with the gov's eager help, caveat emptor.


----------



## Trajan

I remember reading a sob story of a family, the husband and wife were school bus drivers in Las Vegas, combined income 65K a year and they were crying and moaning because, they were being foreclosed, they were actually crying because their ARM had adjusted as their 5 years was up, and  could not understand why they could not get help to stay in their&#8230;&#8230;get ready for this&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; 850K home&#8230;&#8230;.unreal. 

I am sorry but as I said, I am more than wiling to help the helpless, but I aint helping the clueless.


----------



## Steve Hanson

Intense said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a pack of lies.
> 
> Only an idiot would belive that this was caused by what you claim.
> 
> 
> Ask an unbiased economics proff and you have your answer.
> 
> 
> The sub primes that were written had very little to do with the amount the gov required to be handed out.
> 
> 
> Why would they write so many more than the gov required?
> 
> 
> Becuase they repackaged them off and sold them as triple A investiments and made a shit load of money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to recheck your premise.
Click to expand...


Truth of the matter is, she has no premise


----------



## Toro

FTR I spent the day at the beach looking at properties that are foreclosed or about to be. Woowee!  There are some good deals out there. Things are starting to move but I think the good deals are going to get better.


----------



## Toro

Trajan said:


> I remember reading a sob story of a family, the husband and wife were school bus drivers in Las Vegas, combined income 65K a year and they were crying and moaning because, they were being foreclosed, they were actually crying because their ARM had adjusted as their 5 years was up, and  could not understand why they could not get help to stay in their&hellip;&hellip;get ready for this&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip; 850K home&hellip;&hellip;.unreal.
> 
> I am sorry but as I said, I am more than wiling to help the helpless, but I aint helping the clueless.



The best story I read was of a homeless guy in Tampa found dead who was broke but had five deeds to houses in his pocket. Four had been foreclosed upon but one had yet to be. I wish I kept the link because I wouldn't blame people for saying I made this up!


----------



## Steve Hanson

Toro said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I remember reading a sob story of a family, the husband and wife were school bus drivers in Las Vegas, combined income 65K a year and they were crying and moaning because, they were being foreclosed, they were actually crying because their ARM had adjusted as their 5 years was up, and  could not understand why they could not get help to stay in their&hellip;&hellip;get ready for this&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip; 850K home&hellip;&hellip;.unreal.
> 
> I am sorry but as I said, I am more than wiling to help the helpless, but I aint helping the clueless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The best story I read was of a homeless guy in Tampa found dead who was broke but had five deeds to houses in his pocket. Four had been foreclosed upon but one had yet to be. I wish I kept the link because I wouldn't blame people for saying I made this up!
Click to expand...


You made that up


----------



## editec

kwc57 said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book. I've lived it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In what capacity of banking did you live that gives you that vantage to make such specious claims?
> 
> I ask since you CLAIM to have inside information. What are your _bono fides?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The above is simply not remotely true.
> 
> *No government regulation* made banks give liars loans, NINJA loans, 110% loans, or exploing in your face adjustible rate morgage loans, either. Those were the invention of the bnksters themselves.
> 
> If you doubt that, please do feel free to cite the bnaking givenment regulation which you "lived for 30 years" that forced bansters to make those loans
> 
> Tain't there, sport.
> 
> I don't say this lightly, I seldom bother, but in your case, it so obviously fits.
> 
> You, sir, are a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you like my SSN, birth date and street address too?  Whether you believe me or not doesn't bother me a bit. This is an interwebz bulletin board. You get what you pay for. That being said, I assure you that my wife and I have both worked in the industry since 1979. There is another side to this story that isn't being told by the media.
Click to expand...

 
Spare me your protests.

Show me the REGULATIONS.

You sir, are a liar.


----------



## editec

Steve Hanson said:


> California Girl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Steve Hanson said:
> 
> 
> 
> The President is not the lawmaker, Congress is. You are right, the president is inconsequential for the most part in these decisions. Sure they have the right to veto but they rely on Congress to make the regulations for the most part.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apportioning 'blame' in this fuck up is actually really funny. I find it just hysterical that the Democrats try and blame the GOP and the GOP blame the Democrats. They were ALL responsible. Both sides, the banks, and the American people all have a chunk of mea culpa in this clusterfuck.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I made more money off of AIG these last few years than I did working. A real good friend told me to bet the farm on AIG when they were under $10 and appearing like they were going under. It was a gamble, but I trusted him and did. He told me it was safe because of pending gov't investments. More than safe, a sure thing. So I put in everything I had and sold at over $50, making over 5 times my investment. It just shows you exactly how invested in them government is. Both sides.
Click to expand...

 
Of course I don't really blame you for taking advantage of that situation, but...

Last accounting I heard about the cost to the taxpayer to save the stockholders and bond holders of AIG, the amount was up to $158 BILLION.

The company _ought to have gone into recievership_, the stockholders _ought to have lost every cent_, and then, the bondholders would have become the owners of the tattered remains of that company since they'd have been first in line after the restucturing.

The fact that the government stood behind AIG is evidence of just how much control the BANSTERS have over it.

What happend was NOT capitalism...*it was gangsterism*


----------



## iamwhatiseem

Trajan said:


> I remember reading a sob story of a family, the husband and wife were school bus drivers in Las Vegas, combined income 65K a year and they were crying and moaning because, they were being foreclosed, they were actually crying because their ARM had adjusted as their 5 years was up, and  could not understand why they could not get help to stay in theirget ready for this 850K home.unreal.
> 
> I am sorry but as I said, I am more than wiling to help the helpless, but I aint helping the clueless.



Thanks to your government...you _*have*_ been helping them for 20 years.
And you will help them again...and again.
As long as we have a system that is willing to finance a broken economy with your tax dollars - you have no choice.


----------



## kwc57

ogibillm said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't doubt that you sincerely believe that hogwash you just posted, but you have been rather clearly and cleverly misinformed.
> 
> Read a book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book.  I've lived it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> being a bank teller doesn't make you an expert on banking practices and regulations.
Click to expand...


You're absolutely correct brainiac......but this isn't 1979 when I started as a bank teller is it?

32 years later in 2011, I'm a Senior Business Analyst for one of the world's top-ranked technology providers to the banking industry. We have more than 30,000 experts in 100 countries and deliver the most comprehensive range of solutions for the broadest range of financial markets.  We are part of the S&P 500 and have been named the number one overall financial technology provider in the world by American Banker and Financial Insights.


----------



## kwc57

editec said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> editec said:
> 
> 
> 
> In what capacity of banking did you live that gives you that vantage to make such specious claims?
> 
> I ask since you CLAIM to have inside information. What are your _bono fides?_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The above is simply not remotely true.
> 
> *No government regulation* made banks give liars loans, NINJA loans, 110% loans, or exploing in your face adjustible rate morgage loans, either. Those were the invention of the bnksters themselves.
> 
> If you doubt that, please do feel free to cite the bnaking givenment regulation which you "lived for 30 years" that forced bansters to make those loans
> 
> Tain't there, sport.
> 
> I don't say this lightly, I seldom bother, but in your case, it so obviously fits.
> 
> You, sir, are a liar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would you like my SSN, birth date and street address too?  Whether you believe me or not doesn't bother me a bit. This is an interwebz bulletin board. You get what you pay for. That being said, I assure you that my wife and I have both worked in the industry since 1979. There is another side to this story that isn't being told by the media.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Spare me your protests.
> 
> Show me the REGULATIONS.
> 
> You sir, are a liar.
Click to expand...


And you're a moron.  Fuck you.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

kwc57 said:


> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book.  I've lived it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> being a bank teller doesn't make you an expert on banking practices and regulations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're absolutely correct brainiac......but this isn't 1979 when I started as a bank teller is it?
> 
> 32 years later in 2011, I'm a Senior Business Analyst for one of the world's top-ranked technology providers to the banking industry. We have more than 30,000 experts in 100 countries and deliver the most comprehensive range of solutions for the broadest range of financial markets.  We are part of the S&P 500 and have been named the number one overall financial technology provider in the world by American Banker and Financial Insights.
Click to expand...


Then you just ousted yourself.
If you know this much information, then you intimately know about "originate and sell" bond shelving etc. It would be impossible to be so involved with Wall Street firms, and not be aware of the massive corruption in what comprises of $billions in profits for 20 years.


----------



## Truthmatters

Intense said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a pack of lies.
> 
> Only an idiot would belive that this was caused by what you claim.
> 
> 
> Ask an unbiased economics proff and you have your answer.
> 
> 
> The sub primes that were written had very little to do with the amount the gov required to be handed out.
> 
> 
> Why would they write so many more than the gov required?
> 
> 
> Becuase they repackaged them off and sold them as triple A investiments and made a shit load of money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to recheck your premise.
Click to expand...


How many of these loans were written and how many of these loans were required to be written by the gov?

The lie is a great big fail for anyone with half a brain


----------



## Sunshine

iamwhatiseem said:


> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My wife and I have both worked in the banking industry for over 30 years now.  What few people realize is that banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country.  The other thing that people don't realize about the mortgage side of banking is that banks were forced by the government to make loans to people who didn't qualify and couldn't pay them back.  If you want to get to the root cause of the mortgage crisis, it is the government and not the banks.  When it comes to lending money, the vast majority of banks are very conservative.  They want to make loans to people and businesses that will actually pay the loans back as they make money off the interest payments.  When forced to loan some high school dropout who is flipping burgers the money to buy a two bedroom house, they know they will most likely never get paid and the property will wind up in foreclosure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not saying you personally, but that is a cop-out.
> Indeed the Federal Government strong-armed banks into giving loans to people who likely would not pay them back. Thank Clinton and Frank for this.
> However - wall street in concert with banks took this notion to the nth degree.
> They sold these mortgages, or should I say...HID...these mortgages in overly complicated bond vehicles and made enormous profits putting the entire system at great risk.
> It is like... say you are a car dealer...and I told you that you need to give s few loans to people who can't really afford it. And you complied. Buuuut...realizing you can make a lot of money originating these loans and then selling them - you open 15 more car lots across the country and made $millions.  This...is not what I originally encouraged you to do.
Click to expand...


When I lived in TN, there were multiple bankruptcies in my subdivision.  Banks were giving 100% loans to people who_ might_ have been able to make payments if they had been required to come up with a substantial down payment the way we had to 40 years ago.


----------



## Steve Hanson

Truthmatters said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a pack of lies.
> 
> Only an idiot would belive that this was caused by what you claim.
> 
> 
> Ask an unbiased economics proff and you have your answer.
> 
> 
> The sub primes that were written had very little to do with the amount the gov required to be handed out.
> 
> 
> Why would they write so many more than the gov required?
> 
> 
> Becuase they repackaged them off and sold them as triple A investiments and made a shit load of money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to recheck your premise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many of these loans were written and how many of these loans were required to be written by the gov?
> 
> The lie is a great big fail for anyone with half a brain
Click to expand...


Who let this stupid little dog back in here?


----------



## Steve Hanson

Truthmatters said:


> Like UBS bank?
> 
> You know the one that hired Phil Gramm after he passed the Gram Leach Bialey act which killed Glass Steagal?



But let me ask you this you mangy mutt. How does the repeal of Glass Steagal have anything to do with high risk loans? 

Or are you just talking more shit here?


----------



## Intense

Truthmatters said:


> Intense said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a pack of lies.
> 
> Only an idiot would belive that this was caused by what you claim.
> 
> 
> Ask an unbiased economics proff and you have your answer.
> 
> 
> The sub primes that were written had very little to do with the amount the gov required to be handed out.
> 
> 
> Why would they write so many more than the gov required?
> 
> 
> Becuase they repackaged them off and sold them as triple A investiments and made a shit load of money.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to recheck your premise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many of these loans were written and how many of these loans were required to be written by the gov?
> 
> The lie is a great big fail for anyone with half a brain
Click to expand...


Wherever you have Government Mandates and Incompetence, you attract Sharks TM. Sometimes Government mismanagement creates a feeding ground for Predators, intentionally or unintentionally. That's part of the reason that good intentions are not enough.


----------



## Truthmatters

You dont get it do you.

They wrote TONS more of these loans than the government required they do.

They made money coming and going off of them.


That is what caussed the huge world wide economic collapse.

If they had stuck to only what they wer reqiured to write there would have not been enough of them to crash the market.


----------



## Trajan

Toro said:


> FTR I spent the day at the beach loong at properties that are foreclosed or about to be. Woowee!  There are some good deals out there. Things are starting to move but I think the good deals are going to get better.



this was supposed to be the year we bought a house in  Sicily....good luck though...take their lungs out


----------



## Trajan

Toro said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I remember reading a sob story of a family, the husband and wife were school bus drivers in Las Vegas, combined income 65K a year and they were crying and moaning because, they were being foreclosed, they were actually crying because their ARM had adjusted as their 5 years was up, and  could not understand why they could not get help to stay in their&hellip;&hellip;get ready for this&hellip;&hellip;&hellip;&hellip; 850K home&hellip;&hellip;.unreal.
> 
> I am sorry but as I said, I am more than wiling to help the helpless, but I aint helping the clueless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The best story I read was of a homeless guy in Tampa found dead who was broke but had five deeds to houses in his pocket. Four had been foreclosed upon but one had yet to be. I wish I kept the link because I wouldn't blame people for saying I made this up!
Click to expand...


thats friggin classic, I beleive you so I gotta rep that...


----------



## william the wie

It amazes me how much people much more the people outside the financial markets know about banking and finance than the people in the industry.


----------



## kwc57

Truthmatters said:


> You dont get it do you.
> 
> They wrote TONS more of these loans than the government required they do.
> 
> They made money coming and going off of them.
> 
> 
> That is what caussed the huge world wide economic collapse.
> 
> If they had stuck to only what they wer reqiured to write there would have not been enough of them to crash the market.



Dude, fries are up. Get the salt shaker and get back to work.


----------



## Dante

Dante said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caroljo said:
> 
> 
> 
> And all this started back in the Clinton administration...i'm so surprised!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The crisis happened in 2008, but it was "Clinton"?  Hilarious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, it all started under Ronald Reagan.
> _
> 
> true story_
Click to expand...


Reagan appointed Alan Greenspan and backed the deregulation that continued to a disastrous culmination with Clinton getting rid of Glass-Steagall act..  which led to the 2008 crisis.


_true story and fuck you Trajan you ill-educated slob_


----------



## william the wie

kwc57 said:


> Dude, fries are up. Get the salt shaker and get back to work.


Amend that to dudette, Chicks are sensitive to that stuff particularly the ones with gender neutral handles. Hope that saved you from negative rep.


----------



## Dante

kwc57 said:


> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kwc57 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need to.......I'm part of the book.  I've lived it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> being a bank teller doesn't make you an expert on banking practices and regulations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're absolutely correct brainiac......but this isn't 1979 when I started as a bank teller is it?
> 
> 32 years later in 2011, I'm a Senior Business Analyst for one of the world's top-ranked technology providers to the banking industry. We have more than 30,000 experts in 100 countries and deliver the most comprehensive range of solutions for the broadest range of financial markets.  We are part of the S&P 500 and have been named the number one overall financial technology provider in the world by American Banker and Financial Insights.
Click to expand...


On all issues, a true conservative defaults to the status quo.

On all issues, a liberal defaults to liberty.


----------



## daveman

Dante said:


> On all issues, a true conservative defaults to the status quo.
> 
> On all issues, a liberal defaults to liberty.



On all issues, Dante defaults to bumper-sticker slogans.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

And the saga begins playing out......
Goldman Sachs Expects U.S. Subpoenas Soon - FoxBusiness.com


----------



## mnbasketball

Hyperdynamics Corporation: My Favorite Speculative Pick - Seeking Alpha

Take a chance, and maybe make big rewards while investing little.  why put your money to work in a casino where your chances are slim if any of a return of your money let alone profit.

this a is a baby GIANT just waiting to grow up.


----------

