Can any American of integrity honestly be against regulation?

[jasonnfree]

Were any lenders forced to make unsafe loans?

regulations were increased and increased until millions and millions of unsafe loans were made and the entire economy almost imploded!!

So what's the solution, let the market self regulate? How about china and the pollution? Their free market regulation can't provide food and clean air?

 

[buckeye45_73]

Were any lenders forced to make unsafe loans?

regulations were increased and increased until millions and millions of unsafe loans were made and the entire economy almost imploded!!

So what's the solution, let the market self regulate? How about china and the pollution? Their free market regulation can't provide food and clean air?

Well they were commies and still are right, you sure they dont have regulation on that? Or does a commie govt just not care about it?

 

[jasonnfree]

Andrew Cuomo and Fannie and Freddie - Page 1 - News - New York - Village Voice

He took actions that—in combination with many other factors—helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments

Basically, according to the article, Mr. Cuomo, now New York State attorney general, drove efforts by HUD to increase minority homeownership


but he even predicted it......here it is....
This was from descrimination in housing speech......he wanted to lend to minorities even though they couldnt pay....and he knew default rates would be higher...


1998: Sec. Andrew Cuomo Defends Affirmative Action Mortgage Policy - YouTube

I think I was right in stating that lenders weren't forced to make bad loans althought yes requirements were lessened. I knew a couple of people that worked for banks making risky loans and were just told to push the loans through, the loans would change hands a month later and they did.

yeah but they had to or they would be considered descriminatory......they were blackmailed into it.......Cuomo said as much

here is the longer video....2.1 Billion dollar descrimination settlement.....a.k.a blackmail...now those people with shitty credit can get a loan....uh oh!!!!!!!!!!!!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314"]How The Democrats Caused The Financial Crisis: Starring Bill Clinton's HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo And Barack Obama; With Special Guest Appearances By Bill Clinton And Jimmy Carter - YouTube[/ame]

But $2.1 billion and 15000 people didn't bring the system down. Lenders were getting in on the action everywhere, even screwing creditworthy people with equity. It happened to my ex wife, an airhead when it came to finances. She refinanced a house with good equity and ended up with a loan with variable interest rates, a loan that was going to almost double eventually and she would've lost the place if I hadn't helped her in a modification deal.

 

[jasonnfree]

dear, thats why Fanny Freddie, to pick 2, were created!! to make loans that the free market would not have made!! Did you think they were created to stop so many loans?????

Were any lenders forced to make unsafe loans?

dear, obviously the liberal government created an environment wherein they made millions and millions of unsafe loans. Fanny Freddie, for example, had an implied government guarantee as a GSE that seemingly meant all loans appeared safe so they dropped their standards and made the loans thanks to government intervention.

Similiarly, as Bernanke now says he plans to keep rates low for years it was assumed the very liberal "Greenspan put" was in place and so any significant problems would be quickly bailed out. Take all the liberal regulations like that away that were designed to get enough loans made to fit liberal objectives, not market objectives and there would have been no crisis and no 22 million unemployed today.

Reagan deregulated in the 80's and we had an S&L crisis. And the fed chief raised interest rates back then. A good case of what happens with deregulation. I don't want Monsanto or the nuclear industry to self regulate either.

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL. Ask the people in the town of West in Texas about regulations that are ignored.

 

[buckeye45_73]

LOL. Ask the people in the town of West in Texas about regulations that are ignored.

Yeah and go bitch about that to an anarchist, I dont see any here.....

 

[FA_Q2]

I think I was right in stating that lenders weren't forced to make bad loans althought yes requirements were lessened. I knew a couple of people that worked for banks making risky loans and were just told to push the loans through, the loans would change hands a month later and they did.

yeah but they had to or they would be considered descriminatory......they were blackmailed into it.......Cuomo said as much

here is the longer video....2.1 Billion dollar descrimination settlement.....a.k.a blackmail...now those people with shitty credit can get a loan....uh oh!!!!!!!!!!!!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314"]How The Democrats Caused The Financial Crisis: Starring Bill Clinton's HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo And Barack Obama; With Special Guest Appearances By Bill Clinton And Jimmy Carter - YouTube[/ame]

But $2.1 billion and 15000 people didn't bring the system down. Lenders were getting in on the action everywhere, even screwing creditworthy people with equity. It happened to my ex wife, an airhead when it came to finances. She refinanced a house with good equity and ended up with a loan with variable interest rates, a loan that was going to almost double eventually and she would've lost the place if I hadn't helped her in a modification deal.

It started it though. Those loans were bundled with others. The massive increase on inventory also fed the machine. Enough happened to create a domino effect that took out not only bad loans but also the good ones and it just created a terrible feedback loop.

 

[beagle9]

dear, thats why Fanny Freddie, to pick 2, were created!! to make loans that the free market would not have made!! Did you think they were created to stop so many loans?????

Were any lenders forced to make unsafe loans?

dear, obviously the liberal government created an environment wherein they made millions and millions of unsafe loans. Fanny Freddie, for example, had an implied government guarantee as a GSE that seemingly meant all loans appeared safe so they dropped their standards and made the loans thanks to government intervention.

Similiarly, as Bernanke now says he plans to keep rates low for years it was assumed the very liberal "Greenspan put" was in place and so any significant problems would be quickly bailed out. Take all the liberal regulations like that away that were designed to get enough loans made to fit liberal objectives, not market objectives and there would have been no crisis and no 22 million unemployed today.

Are they liberal "regulations" or extreme liberal fallacies that were found during their leadership role, in which were forced upon a banking system that wouldn't do it unless guarantee's were given, and wasn't it that they were so readily given at first (these guarantee's) until the bubble grew so big that it burst with a bang that could be heard around the world? Then came all the finger pointing and next the bail outs ? The thing is, who benefitted from all the activity the most in which was being found in all of this fallacy ? I saw private contractors become so filthy rich that it was unimaginable as the bubble grew and grew.. Why were the flag's held down for so long about it all ? Was almost everyone caught up in the action, and having a good time until the ax fell ? Is this how corruption ensnares so many, until finally that bad day does come eventually upon them ?

I see so many still struggling badly after the rug was pulled out from under it all, I mean this thing rocked us to the core, then we still have these wars in which is even more tragic on top of it all still.. wow

 

[editec]

Can any American of integrity honestly be against regulation?

ALL regulation?

 

[numan]

where are the liberals telling us who will regulate the regulators?

Well, I am no liberal, of course -- but unlike many so-called "conservatives", I do have the intelligence to understand good ideas, no matter what country they come from.

The pathetically ill-designed and antiquated US Constitution encourages pay-offs, shenanigans, and rule by those with money.

It has no provisions at all by which corruption and malfeasance can be controlled. The legislative branch is composed of unprincipled wheeler-dealers ; the executive branch is essentially ruled by those interests it is supposed to control ; the judicial branch all too often bends to accommodate money and influence rather than justice or law. But what can you expect from judges who either are appointed by untrustworthy politicians, or (even worse) are elected to office by a populace which it is flattery to call childish.

QUIS CUSTODIET CUSTODES?

No one!! And that is a fundamental failure of the US Constitution.

I favor a fourth branch of government which, from the glorious Chinese example, I call a Censorate.

The Imperial Chinese Censorate dates back more than 2200 years, and had an official duty to criticize the acts of the Emperor and investigate official corruption and misgovernment.

Imagine Julian Assange in charge of the FBI and the CIA.... · ·

By the Ming Dynasty, it had become a major government bureau controlled by two chief censors and comprising four subdivisions.

The censors checked important documents, supervised construction projects, reviewed judicial proceedings and kept watch over state property. Agents of the Censorate travelled the Empire, ferreting out cases of subversion and corruption in the State Administration.

The United States has always been a paradise for corruption. It desperately needs an analogue of the Chinese Censorate, independent and uninfluenced by the present three branches of the US government.

I stopped reading after the first five words... I knew the rest of it had to be BS too.

Ah, how many Words of Wisdom you must have missed in your life !!
.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The pathetically ill-designed and antiquated US Constitution encourages pay-offs, shenanigans, and rule by those with money.

of course you're a treasonous perfect idiot. But, why not give us your best example of this or admit as a liberal you lack the IQ to do so.

 

[numan]

The pathetically ill-designed and antiquated US Constitution encourages pay-offs, shenanigans, and rule by those with money.

of course you're a treasonous perfect idiot. But, why not give us your best example of this or admit as a liberal you lack the IQ to do so.

If it be treason to see through "patriotic" lies, to rebel against totalitarian brainwashing, against the monstrous perversions of the mind which you uneducated, jingoistic zombies insist on forcing on others who see through the evil, idolatrous cult of "Constitution-worship," then yes, I proudly acknowledge your charges!!

I utterly reject and despise that antiquated, sclerotic tissue of incompetence and folly which the Living Dead of the 18th century use to crush the life out of those who live in the 21st century.

If we are to survive, we must start over again from first principles, employing all the wisdom and knowledge which have been painfully won in the intervening two-and-a-half centuries. Into the fire with that outmoded scrap of parchment called the Constitution and burn it to ashes! Take the ashes and put them in with other radioactive waste and encase it all in blocks of glass, bury them in the deepest caverns in geologically stable regions where they may lie undisturbed for millions of years, causing no further trouble to the human race!

I would be surprised if anyone on this forum of illiterates and hysteriacs knew anything about Arrow's Impossibility Theorem, about the intelligent use of lobbies in government, even about "fractional voting", which your rulers use all the time in their own economic decisions, but deny to you, their slaves.
.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The pathetically ill-designed and antiquated US Constitution encourages pay-offs, shenanigans, and rule by those with money.

of course you're a treasonous perfect idiot. But, why not give us your best example of this or admit as a liberal you lack the IQ to do so.

If it be treason to see through "patriotic" lies, to rebel against totalitarian brainwashing, against the monstrous perversions of the mind which you uneducated, jingoistic zombies insist on forcing on others who see through the evil, idolatrous cult of "Constitution-worship," then yes, I proudly acknowledge your charges!!

I utterly reject and despise that antiquated, sclerotic tissue of incompetence and folly which the Living Dead of the 18th century use to crush the life out of those who live in the 21st century.

If we are to survive, we must start over again from first principles, employing all the wisdom and knowledge which have been painfully won in the intervening two-and-a-half centuries. Into the fire with that outmoded scrap of parchment called the Constitution and burn it to ashes! Take the ashes and put them in with other radioactive waste and encase it all in blocks of glass, bury them in the deepest caverns in geologically stable regions where they may lie undisturbed for millions of years, causing no further trouble to the human race!

I would be surprised if anyone on this forum of illiterates and hysteriacs knew anything about Arrow's Impossibility Theorem, about the intelligent use of lobbies in government, even about "fractional voting", which your rulers use all the time in their own economic decisions, but deny to you, their slaves.
.

Second request!!!
of course you're a treasonous and perfect idiot. Why not give us your best example of the "ill designed and pathetic" Constitution or admit as a liberal you lack the IQ to do so and have no business being here.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I don't want Monsanto or the nuclear industry to self regulate either.

And you want the government to regulate-right? Is this because Hitler Stalin Mao and George 3 were such good regulators? Is it because in America we have only good regulators who don't need to be regulated themselves? Is it because regulation of housing by Fed Fannny Freddie FDIC SEC FHA worked so well??

A liberal's IQ allows him to have faith in regulators the way a child has faith in Santa Claus.


Who had a greater need for a power plant to be safe, the owners or a bureaucrat regulator who has no skin in the game?

 

[FA_Q2]

I don't want Monsanto or the nuclear industry to self regulate either.

And you want the government to regulate-right? Is this because Hitler Stalin Mao and George 3 were such good regulators? Is it because in America we have only good regulators who don't need to be regulated themselves? Is it because regulation of housing by Fed Fannny Freddie FDIC SEC FHA worked so well??

A liberal's IQ allows him to have faith in regulators the way a child has faith in Santa Claus.


Who had a greater need for a power plant to be safe, the owners or a bureaucrat regulator who has no skin in the game?

Well, there is a counter to that though – who gains more with safety gambles from said power plant: the owner or the bureaucrat?

That’s why SOME regulations are needed, because the owner should not be allowed to gamble the lives of those around him with his business on the chance that he can make out big. The one with no skin in the game is also the one that can ignore profit.

On your side though, the quality of the product and the service delivered are none of the governments business (outside of safety) so while the regulations that require safety need to exist all those regulations that concern other things need to be done away with. Unfortunately, that is the vast majority of regulations as most now exist in order to give the government more power or influence and have nothing to do with safety at all.

 

[nitroz]

 

[Agit8r]

That there has to be some regulation is so common sense, even some libertarians had a high enough IQ to recognize it:

"The successful use of competition does not preclude some types of government interference. For instance, to limit working hours or to require certain sanitary arrangements. An extensive system of social services is fully compatible with the preservation of competition. There are, too, certain fields where the system of competition is impracticable. For example, the harmful effects of deforestation or of the smoke of factories cannot be confined to the owner of the property in question. But a few exceptions do not prove that we should suppress competition where it can be made to function. To create conditions in which competition will be as effective as possible, to prevent fraud and deception, to break up monopolies - these tasks provide a wide and unquestioned field for state activity."

-- Friedrich August Von Hayek; from 'Road to Serfdom'

 

[beagle9]

A prime example here, of a dem not letting a good crisis go to waste... Duly noted..

 

[editec]

Who among us is a proponent of BAD regulations?

Nobody right?

Who here among us is a proponent of NO LAWS whatever?

Nobody again, right?

But to read the posts of our resident simpletons (you guys know who your are) those are the only two choices any of us can make.

 

[numan]

And you want the government to regulate-right? Is this because Hitler Stalin Mao and George 3 were such good regulators?

Either you are pitifully ignorant of history, or you enjoy lying -- or both.

The Evil Terrorists of 1776 were rebelling against Parliament, not against the powerless figurehead George III -- though in order to sway the ignorant dolts of America they mendaciously claimed that poor Farmer George was a tyrant!

It would be a modern libertarian's wet dream if they were as loosely regulated as the American Colonies were by Parliament -- before those colonial ingrates destroyed their prospects for future happiness under the aegis of a civilized Empire !!
.