Corporation vs Government: Who Do You Trust?

Okay Urkie, educate me. If I have 50k and I 'loan' you 25k and I don't get it back where is my profit exactly?

Issuing loans to "unqualified" people was immensely profitable, partly because the mortgage lending companies could earn higher fees on the riskier mortgages.

There also is evidence that the mortgage lenders steered "qualified" people to bad mortgage loans that were likely to blow up -- e.g. reset at enormously higher interest rates -- because again the lenders earned higher fees on these mortgages than they would have on "non-toxic" 30 year fixed rate mortgages.

Another factor that promoted the writing of bad loans was the "securitization" process, which partly was a product of government and partly a clever invention by smart traders in the private financial industry.

"Securitization" of mortgage loans meant that bad mortgages could be combined in large numbers in "mortgage backed obligations," which were then chopped up in countless little pieces and the pieces sold to investors. The idea was that if the financial industry could combine hundreds or thousands of individual mortgages into one pot, the risk of any one mortgage going bad wouldn't be so serious, because the average risk of the entire pot going bad would be low. Then the pot could be "securitized" or chopped up into pieces that the average Wall Street investor could buy.

It isn't black and white my friend. Banks came up with these elaborate schemes.

I dont' really see that as all that unreasonable. Part of how your mortgage is structured is going to be how much you can afford on a monthly basis. You can't change how much you owe, but you can change how much you have to pay per month by extending the lenght of the mortgage. Maybe your friend couldnt' afford 1000 a month (or whatever) but maybe they could afford $750. If that's what you can afford per month it wold stand to reason the payment time of your mortgage will be longer. That is something, as my Physics teacher used to say, that should be intuitively obvious to the most casual observer.

No shit Sherlock. I'm well aware of that fact.

Excellent, Urkie. As the laws of physics are immutable, so is the capacity for human greed. Regulation can prevent an excess of greed from nearly bringing down the system as happened in 1893, 1929, and 2008.
 
Issuing loans to "unqualified" people was immensely profitable, partly because the mortgage lending companies could earn higher fees on the riskier mortgages.

There also is evidence that the mortgage lenders steered "qualified" people to bad mortgage loans that were likely to blow up -- e.g. reset at enormously higher interest rates -- because again the lenders earned higher fees on these mortgages than they would have on "non-toxic" 30 year fixed rate mortgages.


It is black and white. I ask again, If I loan you money and you don't pay it back regardless of what the interest rate is, the term of the loan, the fees you pay, etc. how is that profitable for me? Do you not get that how much I can get you to owe me back is irrelevant if you don't pay me back anything in the first place? It doesn't matter if I make you owe me back a million dollars for 100k using all the crooked tools in the book if you're never go to pay it back.

Another factor that promoted the writing of bad loans was the "securitization" process, which partly was a product of government and partly a clever invention by smart traders in the private financial industry.

"Securitization" of mortgage loans meant that bad mortgages could be combined in large numbers in "mortgage backed obligations," which were then chopped up in countless little pieces and the pieces sold to investors. The idea was that if the financial industry could combine hundreds or thousands of individual mortgages into one pot, the risk of any one mortgage going bad wouldn't be so serious, because the average risk of the entire pot going bad would be low. Then the pot could be "securitized" or chopped up into pieces that the average Wall Street investor could buy.

It isn't black and white my friend. Banks came up with these elaborate schemes.

All securitization did was allow banks to make more loans. It didn't insure that anyone was going to get their money back.

No shit Sherlock. I'm well aware of that fact.

So why are you claiming this person who was offered a 30 year mortgage instead of a 20 got swindeled?
 
Last edited:
It is black and white. I ask again, If I loan you money and you don't pay it back regardless of what the interest rate is, the term of the loan, the fees you pay, etc. how is that profitable for me? Do you not get that how much I can get you to owe me back is irrelevant if you don't pay me back anything in the first place? It doesn't matter if I make you owe me back a million dollars for 100k using all the crooked tools in the book if you're never go to pay it back.

Okay, lets look at it this way then. Say there's an apple tree. I start off by taking one apple, I observe them and take the best one but I get tired of going back there all the time so I begin to take multiple apples. Eventually I put all my apples in 1 basket. I don't really care if a couple of them are bad because there's still more then enough good apples in my basket to make up for that. That's essentially what banks did. They made up a fictional profit margin by grouping up their loans and making it appear as though business was better then ever. Meanwhile, the people unfortunate enough to take out those bad loans went into debt and the bank made out like bandits. At least until their little scheme caught up with them.


So why are you claiming this person who was offered a 30 year mortgage instead of a 20 got swindeled?

Because the bank told him he could afford the 30 year loan and not the 20 year loan even though he couldn't anyway. That's swindeling somebody I would say.

And this never happened to anybody I know. I've just heard that it happened and I don't doubt that it did.
 
Last edited:
Stop being an ass, Bern80. If it is black and white for Urkie on evidence, then by heavens it is the same for you, you little swindler. You are going to have to accept the fact that you cannot carry an affirmative argument to conclusion that unrequlated capitalism is good for modern America.

And my pet continues to feed on Bern80's arguments.

1103612937.jpg
 
I have seen what corporations do to people, and what government does to people, and I would side with trusting government before I would ever trust a corporation.

Corporations don't care if people die. Whether it be a Katrina disaster or shutting off the electric power to families in the winter so they die of exposure. They want relaxed regulations so they can murder more people with their products cheaper. They have no use for repairing America, just raping it of its resources. The corporate way has made us a third world country.


Government on the other hand has regulated the corporate enemys, built and maintained America, taken care of its people to keep them safe from the harm of corporations & greed. They are the ones that made it possible for electricity, for sanitzed water sources, dams, freeways, space travel, internet, and support many of these corporations so you can buy almost anything your want from anywhere in the world.

So what is your take & reasoning?
yeah, because corporations have the power to take away your children, your livlihood, imprison you and take your life from you. Governments are so benevolent. Why, history alone tells us that governments are the best things since....

Oh, wait.....Thats right. I can chose to not do business with corporations. I can't chose to not do business with government.

Any buffoon who trusts government over anything deserves what they get.
 
I have seen what corporations do to people, and what government does to people, and I would side with trusting government before I would ever trust a corporation.

Corporations don't care if people die. Whether it be a Katrina disaster or shutting off the electric power to families in the winter so they die of exposure. They want relaxed regulations so they can murder more people with their products cheaper. They have no use for repairing America, just raping it of its resources. The corporate way has made us a third world country.


Government on the other hand has regulated the corporate enemys, built and maintained America, taken care of its people to keep them safe from the harm of corporations & greed. They are the ones that made it possible for electricity, for sanitzed water sources, dams, freeways, space travel, internet, and support many of these corporations so you can buy almost anything your want from anywhere in the world.

So what is your take & reasoning?
yeah, because corporations have the power to take away your children, your livlihood, imprison you and take your life from you. Governments are so benevolent. Why, history alone tells us that governments are the best things since....

Oh, wait.....Thats right. I can chose to not do business with corporations. I can't chose to not do business with government.

Any buffoon who trusts government over anything deserves what they get.

LostWind, stop being emotional for a moment.

If the voters are doing their jobs, then so will the government.

However, the lords of evil in their Big Business Tower are almost untouchable by thee and me, sweetpea.

Think on this, hmmm?
 
I have seen what corporations do to people, and what government does to people, and I would side with trusting government before I would ever trust a corporation.

Corporations don't care if people die. Whether it be a Katrina disaster or shutting off the electric power to families in the winter so they die of exposure. They want relaxed regulations so they can murder more people with their products cheaper. They have no use for repairing America, just raping it of its resources. The corporate way has made us a third world country.


Government on the other hand has regulated the corporate enemys, built and maintained America, taken care of its people to keep them safe from the harm of corporations & greed. They are the ones that made it possible for electricity, for sanitzed water sources, dams, freeways, space travel, internet, and support many of these corporations so you can buy almost anything your want from anywhere in the world.

So what is your take & reasoning?
yeah, because corporations have the power to take away your children, your livlihood, imprison you and take your life from you. Governments are so benevolent. Why, history alone tells us that governments are the best things since....

Oh, wait.....Thats right. I can chose to not do business with corporations. I can't chose to not do business with government.

Any buffoon who trusts government over anything deserves what they get.

LostWind, stop being emotional for a moment.

If the voters are doing their jobs, then so will the government.

However, the lords of evil in their Big Business Tower are almost untouchable by thee and me, sweetpea.

Think on this, hmmm?
You are clearly clueless. Not surprising. I think it comes from never having the umbilical cut as a child. y'All get so afraid of being in the big bad world all alone.

Have to admit, the imagery of evil in their big bad business towers are good. Come to you in a coke dream, did it?

Without corporations, businesses and capitalism, the world would have a lot more dead or dying people in it. Without government the world would have a lot more freedom.

You take your slavery to government. I'll keep My freedom. mm...k, sweetpea?
 
I have no quibble, LostWind, with your third paragraph, with the first part of it. The second part is flat wrong, and history contravenes your argument.

If you are a slave to wealth and the making of it, then you are a slave to your own weaknesses.
 
Okay, lets look at it this way then. Say there's an apple tree. I start off by taking one apple, I observe them and take the best one but I get tired of going back there all the time so I begin to take multiple apples. Eventually I put all my apples in 1 basket. I don't really care if a couple of them are bad because there's still more then enough good apples in my basket to make up for that. That's essentially what banks did. They made up a fictional profit margin by grouping up their loans and making it appear as though business was better then ever. Meanwhile, the people unfortunate enough to take out those bad loans went into debt and the bank made out like bandits. At least until their little scheme caught up with them.

Yes I understand that. So I'm still the bank and I have lived you and 9 other people 50k now. Maybe I wanted to make 25% on that. But I know guy 2 and 3 aren't going to pay all of that back. So to get my money I decide to sell that debt to someone else for 675k. You see where this is going right? How did the people that bought 675k of debt, some of it bad, expect to get their money back


Because the bank told him he could afford the 30 year loan and not the 20 year loan even though he couldn't anyway. That's swindeling somebody I would say.

Maybe he could at that time given cash flow at the time and something happend later. I know one thing about human nature though that gets people into trouble. They are generally certain they will have more money tomorrow than they do today. I don't care if the banker convinced him he could make the payments. The question is why didn't HE know he couldn't make the payments? That's the problem I have with this whole situation. All of the blame is going on the banks and none of it on the individuals conciously or otherwise essentially spending money they didn't have.
 
One primary difference:

I can sue the hell out of corporations -- and even try to armtwist a DA into criminal charges to throw their worthless butts into a dark hole somewhere else.

Try that with a government and see how far you get.

BTW: governments are as greedy for profits as any other org -- because without money, they can't pay their bills == and then they get thrown to the guillotine, which is actually a bit worse than bankruptcy, revolutionaries being as revolting as they are.
 
One primary difference:

I can sue the hell out of corporations -- and even try to armtwist a DA into criminal charges to throw their worthless butts into a dark hole somewhere else.

Try that with a government and see how far you get.

BTW: governments are as greedy for profits as any other org -- because without money, they can't pay their bills == and then they get thrown to the guillotine, which is actually a bit worse than bankruptcy, revolutionaries being as revolting as they are.

Rhet, you are suggesting a government remedy when you are condemning it does not make a whole lot of sense, does it?

If the citizens are that apathetic, rhet, then they get what they deserve. We can throw the so and so's out, and that is what the Tea Party is about, and I will give them credit for that. Now if they will throw the racists and birthers and truthers out, and if they are really about smaller government and less taxes, let's see where that goes.

A business just crushes you.
 
One primary difference:

I can sue the hell out of corporations -- and even try to armtwist a DA into criminal charges to throw their worthless butts into a dark hole somewhere else.

Try that with a government and see how far you get.

BTW: governments are as greedy for profits as any other org -- because without money, they can't pay their bills == and then they get thrown to the guillotine, which is actually a bit worse than bankruptcy, revolutionaries being as revolting as they are.

Rhet, you are suggesting a government remedy when you are condemning it does not make a whole lot of sense, does it?

If the citizens are that apathetic, rhet, then they get what they deserve. We can throw the so and so's out, and that is what the Tea Party is about, and I will give them credit for that. Now if they will throw the racists and birthers and truthers out, and if they are really about smaller government and less taxes, let's see where that goes.

A business just crushes you.

Yeah, it does presume honest judges who actually give a shit about people, doesn't it?

Now, I wonder how we get honest court rulings, given government's perversion of the judiciary to serve Political Weasel games? Oh, yeah, juries.

I am humbled by your correction, Mr. Smart Business Person. (satire intended with all common civility, of course)
 
Oh, wait.....Thats right. I can chose to not do business with corporations. I can't chose to not do business with government.


Au contraire, you most certainly can. You are free to renounce your citizenship at anytime and apply for citizenship in a low government country. It's not like we have a Berlin wall to keep people in.
 
One primary difference:

I can sue the hell out of corporations -- and even try to armtwist a DA into criminal charges to throw their worthless butts into a dark hole somewhere else.

Try that with a government and see how far you get.

BTW: governments are as greedy for profits as any other org -- because without money, they can't pay their bills == and then they get thrown to the guillotine, which is actually a bit worse than bankruptcy, revolutionaries being as revolting as they are.

Rhet, you are suggesting a government remedy when you are condemning it does not make a whole lot of sense, does it?

If the citizens are that apathetic, rhet, then they get what they deserve. We can throw the so and so's out, and that is what the Tea Party is about, and I will give them credit for that. Now if they will throw the racists and birthers and truthers out, and if they are really about smaller government and less taxes, let's see where that goes.

A business just crushes you.

Yeah, it does presume honest judges who actually give a shit about people, doesn't it?

Now, I wonder how we get honest court rulings, given government's perversion of the judiciary to serve Political Weasel games? Oh, yeah, juries.

I am humbled by your correction, Mr. Smart Business Person. (satire intended with all common civility, of course)

Rhet, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but that does not mean its right. In fact, it's not.
 
Oh, wait.....Thats right. I can chose to not do business with corporations. I can't chose to not do business with government.


Au contraire, you most certainly can. You are free to renounce your citizenship at anytime and apply for citizenship in a low government country. It's not like we have a Berlin wall to keep people in.

failboatid2.jpg
 
'Perfect' and 'best' are two very different things. No the U.S. is not perfect, but it is the best.

I disagree. I think NZ is the best.

Yes, because New Zealand has taken home many Nobel Prizes in science and art.
Oh, maybe they didnt. Three. And one was over 100 years ago.

It's because New Zealand ranks top in economic growth.
OK, it ranks 131, below average for the world, btw.

OK, it's because NZ enjoys top life expectancy.
Well, not really. They rank behind France and Israel.

It's because those generous New Zealanders contribute so much to under-priveleged countries in the third World.
Well, all right. Ya got me. They don't contribute anything, at least not in the top 26.

All right. Here it is. The reason why New Zealand is so great:
They have more sheep per capita than any other country. This is why the people are so happy, ranking #18 in satisfaction.
A nation of sheep-fuckers. That's what they are.
Hey, leave Bah-Bah alone and get to work, ya slackers. Your tax rates are among the highest in the world, higher than Bulgaria and Serbia.
 

Forum List

Back
Top