Obama Urges Banks to Make Home Loans to People With Weak Credit... Again??

[Crackerjaxon]

The banks would not have written SO MUCH subprime which was NOT covered by CRA becuase they could use thier self hired and trained brokers to sell ANYTHING they told them to sell.

No Broker license to get in the way.


The only people these brokers were beholden to were the banks.


IF they had been licensed like in the opast they would have told the Banks "I cant sell that becuase I will lose my license and in turn lose my carreer".


The Bush SEC gave the banks all the parts of GLBact 1999 that they wanted and held back all the shit the banks hated.

You have absolutely no grasp of how things work.

I'm in a good mood, so I'll clue you.

The government went into the mortgage business with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These quasi-government entities exist to relieve banks of the risk associated with mortgages.

You see, banks make money by assuming risk. That's why they qualify loans. With the government assuming the risk, it was free money for the banks. All they had to do was the paperwork.

Since that paper was backed by the government, they felt perfectly safe forming derivatives and other financial instruments based on the virtually risk-free (to them) mortgages.

Gee, guess what happened? The government-backed mortgages failed costing the tax payers billions and billions (Yeah, just like Carl Sagan.) of dollars.

How can you be stupid enough to think that licenses would've made any difference at all? If they'd been licensed, they still would've sold the instruments. There was nothing illegal about it.

Barney Frank, his cronies, and lots and lots of bankers got rich from that debacle.

Try to get in touch with reality.

 

[edthecynic]

No doubt Bush was a useless hack in this and any other fiscal issue. As an MBA myself (Michigan), I say he's an embarrassment to MBA's. He should sue Harvard for his money back.

However, a Wiki lookup will show you that Clinton was President before W. The Clinton Administration began the policies of threatening financial institutions to make more loans to riskier borrowers or they would haul their asses into congress, investigate them and make every effort to crush them. It worked. Those borrowers were ... sub-prime.

W came in, said wow, that's a bad idea, then to your point kept doing it. The moral of the story is that yeah, the Republicans suck. To blame them is fair. To blame only them is a re-writing of history. Not that liberals are hesitant to do that or will even acknowledge it. It's for those of us who don't drink the partisan kool-aid to correct you.

That claim is based on the racist principle that no minority is ever qualified for a loan and is by definition a "riskier borrower." So anything that helps qualified minorities get a loan forces banks to make riskier loans and justifies banks doing anything, no matter how crooked, to offset the minority loans.

December 07, 2011
RUSH: Practically all of the mortgage-backed securities they've bought from other people -- remember, now, the government made people in the lending industry lend money, mortgages to people that couldn't pay it back. Those mortgages were worthless from the get-go! You loan money, enough money for a schlub who is either not working or makes 20 grand a year to buy a house, you know you're not gonna be paid back, but you're the only one who knows it.
So what do you do? You pack those mortgages.

December 07, 2011
RUSH: Okay, you package this worthless paper. You sell it to some unsuspecting financial house, client list or whatever. You're lying to them about, "Yeah, there's an income stream here, these are mortgages."
You keep selling worthless paper. The people who buy it, they figure out it's worthless; they sell it to another unsuspecting group, and that goes on until there's nobody left to buy it

December 07, 2011
RUSH: But these financial houses were selling what they knew was worthless because they had been forced to make these loans by government in the first place, and they were selling worthless paper for high prices

Bam. When liberals start calling you a racist out of the blue, you know that they know they lost. I accept your admission you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion and will further no longer embarrass you. Well, I'll try not to...

When racists can't back their racist claim that Clinton forced banks to make loans to "riskier borrowers" simply because they were minorities, they play the VICTIM CARD. Nowhere did Clinton require banks to make loans to "riskier borrowers," but he did require banks to make loans to qualified minorities. It is the racist who equates qualified minority with "riskier borrower."

 

[kaz]

That claim is based on the racist principle that no minority is ever qualified for a loan and is by definition a "riskier borrower." So anything that helps qualified minorities get a loan forces banks to make riskier loans and justifies banks doing anything, no matter how crooked, to offset the minority loans.

December 07, 2011
RUSH: Practically all of the mortgage-backed securities they've bought from other people -- remember, now, the government made people in the lending industry lend money, mortgages to people that couldn't pay it back. Those mortgages were worthless from the get-go! You loan money, enough money for a schlub who is either not working or makes 20 grand a year to buy a house, you know you're not gonna be paid back, but you're the only one who knows it.
So what do you do? You pack those mortgages.

December 07, 2011
RUSH: Okay, you package this worthless paper. You sell it to some unsuspecting financial house, client list or whatever. You're lying to them about, "Yeah, there's an income stream here, these are mortgages."
You keep selling worthless paper. The people who buy it, they figure out it's worthless; they sell it to another unsuspecting group, and that goes on until there's nobody left to buy it

December 07, 2011
RUSH: But these financial houses were selling what they knew was worthless because they had been forced to make these loans by government in the first place, and they were selling worthless paper for high prices

Bam. When liberals start calling you a racist out of the blue, you know that they know they lost. I accept your admission you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion and will further no longer embarrass you. Well, I'll try not to...

When racists can't back their racist claim that Clinton forced banks to make loans to "riskier borrowers" simply because they were minorities, they play the VICTIM CARD. Nowhere did Clinton require banks to make loans to "riskier borrowers," but he did require banks to make loans to qualified minorities. It is the racist who equates qualified minority with "riskier borrower."

Fair enough my friend. I said I would strive to no longer embarrass you. You are not under that constraint.

 

[Avatar4321]

The first financial collapse wasnt big enough.

 

[WillowTree]

Apparently Obama wants banks to do exactly the same thing that cause the housing crash in the first place.

Can you Democrats spin this into a positive light?

Obama administration pushes banks to make home loans to people with weaker credit - The Washington Post

The Obama administration is engaged in a broad push to make more home loans available to people with weaker credit, an effort that officials say will help power the economic recovery but that skeptics say could open the door to the risky lending that caused the housing crash in the first place.

All I can tell you is the more he can get to buy houses they can't pay for the more he can hook the taxpayer for. That's the game.

 

[Skull Pilot]

CRA did not cause this you fool.

So tell me is it a good idea to offer loans to people who cannot pay them back and then use tax payer money to offer guarantee to the banks?

 

[kwc57]

TM still can't explain why O is pushing home loans to weaker credit individuals.

Now you're just being........raccccccccisssssst.

 

[zeke]

The banks would not have written SO MUCH subprime which was NOT covered by CRA becuase they could use thier self hired and trained brokers to sell ANYTHING they told them to sell.

No Broker license to get in the way.


The only people these brokers were beholden to were the banks.


IF they had been licensed like in the opast they would have told the Banks "I cant sell that becuase I will lose my license and in turn lose my carreer".


The Bush SEC gave the banks all the parts of GLBact 1999 that they wanted and held back all the shit the banks hated.

You have absolutely no grasp of how things work.

I'm in a good mood, so I'll clue you.

The government went into the mortgage business with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These quasi-government entities exist to relieve banks of the risk associated with mortgages.

You see, banks make money by assuming risk. That's why they qualify loans. With the government assuming the risk, it was free money for the banks. All they had to do was the paperwork.

Since that paper was backed by the government, they felt perfectly safe forming derivatives and other financial instruments based on the virtually risk-free (to them) mortgages.

Gee, guess what happened? The government-backed mortgages failed costing the tax payers billions and billions (Yeah, just like Carl Sagan.) of dollars.

How can you be stupid enough to think that licenses would've made any difference at all? If they'd been licensed, they still would've sold the instruments. There was nothing illegal about it.

Barney Frank, his cronies, and lots and lots of bankers got rich from that debacle.

Try to get in touch with reality.

I really like good fiction. How many FHA loans defaulted? VA loans? How about Fannie and Freddie A paper loans held by regional banks? How many of those defaulted. You do know that there were quite a few regional banks that continued to write and service loans to Fannie and Freddie A paper guidelines and those loans never defaulted. And those banks didn't need bailed out. And because the were true bankers they never entered into the crazy sub prime mess the investment/brokeragre houses made.

I'll say it again; it wasn't untill the brokers and investment houses came to the housing finance market (by tradition, bankers only) that the really crazy loans started being sold.

But those sub prime, crazy, no ones gonna lend money on no guideline loans HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH fannie, freddie or gnma loans.

That's the truth. But hell, go ahead and make up some more fiction.

 

[kwc57]

you licked Bush butt so hard he had to stop running and ride a bike.


Now you pretend you KNEW he was a clown

And the meltdown begins. Will it lead to yet another cooling off ban? One can only hope.

 

[Wry Catcher]

CRA did not cause this you fool.

So tell me is it a good idea to offer loans to people who cannot pay them back and then use tax payer money to offer guarantee to the banks?

Of course not, but this is not what Obama is advocating. Read, think and then make a post.

 

[zeke]

CRA did not cause this you fool.

So tell me is it a good idea to offer loans to people who cannot pay them back and then use tax payer money to offer guarantee to the banks?

IF that was what happened. But it wasn't.

 

[Wry Catcher]

TM still can't explain why O is pushing home loans to weaker credit individuals.

Now you're just being........raccccccccisssssst.

Read the news article, think, then ... Oh, forget it.

 

[Oldstyle]

What TM conveniently forgets is that it was George W. Bush that warned Congress that the housing bubble and specifically Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in dire danger of triggering an economic collapse and that we should take steps to keep that from happening.

Canada didn't have half the problems with it's housing market that we did. The difference between us and them? Banks in Canada required a substantial down payment and good credit before they would issue a loan...banks here were pressured by the Federal Government to make loans to people with zero down payments and lousy credit. We "legislated" bad banking practices and we paid the price. It's what HAPPENS when the government intercedes in the private sector.

 

[Meister]

I guess you missed that part, tooAlive!!​

You missed this part:

"The Obama administration is engaged in a broad push to make more home loans available to people with weaker credit....."

"......who have the financial wherewithal to pay."​

​

"Who have the wherewithal to pay" today does not equate to that in the future when interest rates rise.

 

[kwc57]

ADDI funds may be used for downpayment, closing costs and, if necessary, rehabilitation in conjunction with home purchase. ADDI funds used for rehabilitation may not exceed twenty percent of the participating jurisdiction's total ADDI allocation. The rehabilitation assisted with ADDI funds must be completed within one year of the home purchase.

No doubt Bush was a useless hack in this and any other fiscal issue. As an MBA myself (Michigan), I say he's an embarrassment to MBA's. He should sue Harvard for his money back.

However, a Wiki lookup will show you that Clinton was President before W. The Clinton Administration began the policies of threatening financial institutions to make more loans to riskier borrowers or they would haul their asses into congress, investigate them and make every effort to crush them. It worked. Those borrowers were ... sub-prime.

W came in, said wow, that's a bad idea, then to your point kept doing it. The moral of the story is that yeah, the Republicans suck. To blame them is fair. To blame only them is a re-writing of history. Not that liberals are hesitant to do that or will even acknowledge it. It's for those of us who don't drink the partisan kool-aid to correct you.

That claim is based on the racist principle that no minority is ever qualified for a loan and is by definition a "riskier borrower." So anything that helps qualified minorities get a loan forces banks to make riskier loans and justifies banks doing anything, no matter how crooked, to offset the minority loans.

December 07, 2011
RUSH: Practically all of the mortgage-backed securities they've bought from other people -- remember, now, the government made people in the lending industry lend money, mortgages to people that couldn't pay it back. Those mortgages were worthless from the get-go! You loan money, enough money for a schlub who is either not working or makes 20 grand a year to buy a house, you know you're not gonna be paid back, but you're the only one who knows it.
So what do you do? You pack those mortgages.

December 07, 2011
RUSH: Okay, you package this worthless paper. You sell it to some unsuspecting financial house, client list or whatever. You're lying to them about, "Yeah, there's an income stream here, these are mortgages."
You keep selling worthless paper. The people who buy it, they figure out it's worthless; they sell it to another unsuspecting group, and that goes on until there's nobody left to buy it

December 07, 2011
RUSH: But these financial houses were selling what they knew was worthless because they had been forced to make these loans by government in the first place, and they were selling worthless paper for high prices

Horse shit! Banks make a profit by making loans and collecting interest. If you qualify for the loan and have a good credit rating, your money is as good as anyone else's. They'll refuse a white guy with bad credit just as easily as a black guy.

 

[kwc57]

TM still can't explain why O is pushing home loans to weaker credit individuals.

Now you're just being........raccccccccisssssst.

Read the news article, think, then ... Oh, forget it.

You can't really be unaware that any criticism of Obama is usually met with an automaticic accussation of racis........oh, forget it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

CRA did not cause this you fool.

So tell me is it a good idea to offer loans to people who cannot pay them back and then use tax payer money to offer guarantee to the banks?

Of course not, but this is not what Obama is advocating. Read, think and then make a post.

People with poor credit have poor credit for a reason and that reason usually is that they don't pay their fucking bills.

People who don't pay their fucking bills should not be given loans and taxpayer money should not be used to guarantee loans to people who don't pay their fucking bills.

It's a very simple concept.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Now you're just being........raccccccccisssssst.

Read the news article, think, then ... Oh, forget it.

You can't really be unaware that any criticism of Obama is usually met with an automaticic accussation of racis........oh, forget it.

You're the one who used the term, I didn't. I simply suggested people read the article, think, then comment. You're brighter than I thought, you actually got my sarcasm. It was based however on my read of many of your posts (Polly want a talking point)

 

[edthecynic]

What TM conveniently forgets is that it was George W. Bush that warned Congress that the housing bubble and specifically Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in dire danger of triggering an economic collapse and that we should take steps to keep that from happening.

Canada didn't have half the problems with it's housing market that we did. The difference between us and them? Banks in Canada required a substantial down payment and good credit before they would issue a loan...banks here were pressured by the Federal Government [BUSH] to make loans to people with zero down payments and lousy credit. We "legislated" bad banking practices and we paid the price. It's what HAPPENS when the government intercedes in the private sector.

Actually he said it was a "modest" problem that he was "working" on. Obviously he didn't work hard enough to avoid his complete failure nip the "modest" problem in the bud.

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary


Statement by the President on Homeownership Financing Rose Garden

August 31, 2007
11:05 A.M. EDT

We also had a good discussion about the situation in America's financial markets. The markets are in a period of transition, as participants reassess and re-price risk. This process has been unfolding for some time, and it's going to take more time to fully play out. As it does, America's overall economy will remain strong enough to weather any turbulence.

One area that has shown particular strain is the mortgage market, especially what's known as the sub-prime sector of the mortgage market. This market has seen tremendous innovation in recent years, as new lending products make credit available to more people. For the most part, this has been a positive development, and the reason why is millions of families have taken out mortgages to buy their homes, and American homeownership is at a near all-time high.

Unfortunately, there's also been some excesses in the lending industry. One of the most troubling developments has been the increase in adjustable rate mortgages that start out with a very low interest rate and then reset to a higher rate after a few years. This has led some homeowners to take out loans larger than they could afford based on overly-optimistic assumptions about the future performance of the housing market. Others may have been confused by the terms of their loan, or misled by irresponsible lenders. Whatever the reason they chose this kind of mortgage, some borrowers are now unable to make their monthly payments, or facing foreclosure.

Complicating the situation for borrowers is the nature of today's mortgage market. In many cases, the neighborhood banker who issued a family's mortgage does not own that mortgage for long. Instead, mortgages are sold as securities on the global market. And that makes it harder for the lender and borrower to renegotiate.

The recent disturbances in the sub-prime mortgage industry are modest -- they're modest in relation to the size of our economy. But if you're a family -- if your family is one of those having trouble making the monthly payments, this problem doesn't seem modest at all. I understand these concerns, and therefore, I've made this a top priority to help our homeowners navigate these financial challenges, so that many families as possible can stay in their homes. That's what we've been working on, a plan to help homeowners.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugeqexHzVNQ]President Bush Discusses Homeownership Financing - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Wry Catcher]

So tell me is it a good idea to offer loans to people who cannot pay them back and then use tax payer money to offer guarantee to the banks?

Of course not, but this is not what Obama is advocating. Read, think and then make a post.

People with poor credit have poor credit for a reason and that reason usually is that they don't pay their fucking bills.

Some people are scafflaws, not all. Some lost their jobs and given the Bush Recession and the exportation of many jobs - white and blue collar - overseas they couldn't secure employment. They couldn't sell a home underwater, they had lost their equity; none of which was a result of their willfull default.

People who don't pay their fucking bills should not be given loans and taxpayer money should not be used to guarantee loans to people who don't pay their fucking bills.

Read the link. People underwater would be able to refinance, stay in their home and make the lower payment. The Banks, BTW, have come all the way back and can afford to lower their rates (take a look at what banks pay you on your savings and how much they will charge you to borrow).

It's a very simple concept.

It may be simple to those who don't think critically.