Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 40 to 52 of 90
  1. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by Elfshadow View Post
    And this is how I see it. Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum have the exact same positions. I wanta a none of the above option.
    No Joke!

  2. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Keokuk, IA
    Posts
    5,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Six View Post
    Your understanding of our economy and the 2008 collapse is woefully inadequate.

    Usually its the case when someone broad brushes "greed" and the "evil banks" as the reason why we're in the mess we're in.

    Fannie and Freddie have been around since the 30's and Wall Street has been trading morgage backed securities for decades.

    Derivitives are nothing new

    So what changed ? And no it wasnt "regulations". I'll give you a hint.

    Google "The Affordable Housing Act" and its relation to the housing bubble.

    Also the banks under threat of fines really were forced to participate and Fannie and Freddie were bundling these worthless securities and selling them to the investment banks to fund the subprime market.

    Look into why Wells Fargo just got fined 175,000,000 by the justice Dept.

    They refused to participate.

    Govt policies and specifically Democrat policies caused the bubble and perpetuated all of the "greeed" you speak of
    IF you do yoru reasearch, you'll find that most subprime loans were not made by CRA instituations. ARM's to exurban locations, ie.e more affulent areas with higher value loans, had by far the greatest impact.

    All my Googling did not point me towards CRA and HUD programs as being the root cause of hte lending crisis. My wife's expereince as a broker in San Diego during that time also supports this. She saw this comming. Lenders were hungry for subprime loans on the private market. The governemnt wasn't forcing these down their throats. They were making a fortune bundling crap together with good loans and loan originators were pushed hard to make their numbers and stretch guidelines... push product.

    It's a nice conservative theory and plausible since the government has poor track record in the finacnial markets, but those "in the trenches" and hard data don't support it.

  3. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    7,845
    Yes, private banks saw $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ signs and were climbing all over one another to get in on that action.

    Anywho......

    Debate tonight I think..... Romney might pick up some steam being as Obams wont have his teleprompter handy.... or at least is the theory of the local talk radio host.
    YOU SHALL REAP WHAT YOU HAVE _______ SOWN

  4. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Keokuk, IA
    Posts
    5,520
    I forgot to mention that ultimately the greatest blame has to be placed on borrowers. It was all there in black and white what they were getting if they bothered to read the paperwork and do a little research. Its' almost like blaming guns, motorcycles or sports cars for killing people. Guns don't shoot themselves, motorcycles need a rider and cars don't drive themselves.


    Who cares about the debates. THey are both full of it.... I already voted this weekend and mailed it in

  5. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Florida Panhandle
    Posts
    4,390
    Ok now for the opinion that needs to be asked.....
    What if instead of..


    Obama vs Romney

    It was....

    Obama vs Ron Paul



    What do you think the polls would be saying now ???


    Roy
    "The perfect Totalitarian State is one where the political bosses, and their army of managers, control a population of slaves, who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude"

  6. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Paper Street Soap Company
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by motoguy128 View Post
    IF you do yoru reasearch, you'll find that most subprime loans were not made


    by CRA instituations. ARM's to exurban locations, ie.e more affulent areas with higher value loans, had by far the greatest impact.

    All my Googling did not point me towards CRA and HUD programs as being the root cause of hte lending crisis. My wife's expereince as a broker in San Diego during that time also supports this. She saw this comming. Lenders were hungry for subprime loans on the private market. The governemnt wasn't forcing these down their throats. They were making a fortune bundling crap together with good loans and loan originators were pushed hard to make their numbers and stretch guidelines... push product.

    It's a nice conservative theory and plausible since the government has poor track record in the finacnial markets, but those "in the trenches" and hard data don't support it.
    Sorry but you're wrong and those in the trenches were isolated to their part and parcel in what ultimately was caused by govt mandated lowering underwriting standards.

    I've been studdying the 2008 collapse for years.

    Truth is certain Democrat Politicians had been arguing for the lowering of lending standards for years and eventually got their wish when in 1992 Fannie and Freddie were MANDATED by the housing act to make 30% of their loans sub prime.

    By 1995 HUD had the power to mandate those purchases to 55%.

    By 2002 Fannie and Freddie offered loans with no money down at 105% of the purchase value.

    By 2007 Fanni and Freddie were resppnsible for 5 trillion in sub prime debt and backed 70 % of all sub prime morgages.

    Sub prime morgages have been around for years but usually only 10% of the total market.

    Add to that Fannie and Freddie bundled those with good morgages and sold them off to investment banks to FUND the secondary market.

    Thats all fact and there is more to it but Im out of time.
    Not sure what you researched but stay clear of subjective liberal sites.

    Sure the derivitives were bought and resold but their value could never be assesed.. A trader that cant move securities at a profit doesn't keep his job and sure lenders were crazy about sub prime morgages because they were not risking ANYTHING.

    Just the middle men and they SHOULD have trouble sleeping at night.

    WE paid for them because the govt backed them.

    I dont understand how ANYONE could come away with your assertion after honest research concerning the collapse.

  7. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Losantiville
    Posts
    1,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Six View Post
    Sorry but you're wrong and those in the trenches were isolated to their part and parcel in what ultimately was caused by govt mandated lowering underwriting standards.

    I've been studdying the 2008 collapse for years.

    Truth is certain Democrat Politicians had been arguing for the lowering of lending standards for years and eventually got their wish when in 1992 Fannie and Freddie were MANDATED by the housing act to make 30% of their loans sub prime.

    By 1995 HUD had the power to mandate those purchases to 55%.

    By 2002 Fannie and Freddie offered loans with no money down at 105% of the purchase value.

    By 2007 Fanni and Freddie were resppnsible for 5 trillion in sub prime debt and backed 70 % of all sub prime morgages.

    Sub prime morgages have been around for years but usually only 10% of the total market.

    Add to that Fannie and Freddie bundled those with good morgages and sold them off to investment banks to FUND the secondary market.

    Thats all fact and there is more to it but Im out of time.
    Not sure what you researched but stay clear of subjective liberal sites.

    Sure the derivitives were bought and resold but their value could never be assesed.. A trader that cant move securities at a profit doesn't keep his job and sure lenders were crazy about sub prime morgages because they were not risking ANYTHING.

    Just the middle men and they SHOULD have trouble sleeping at night.

    WE paid for them because the govt backed them.

    I dont understand how ANYONE could come away with your assertion after honest research concerning the collapse.
    This would make sense if you ignore the ratings agencies, the fraud involved in the repackaging, the frenzied search for more "product". I won't even begin with the fraudulant MERS system that destroyed the title histories of most homes in the US. Just keep believing it was just Barney if that helps you pigeon hole and reconcile the problem in your own mind.

  8. #47
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Paper Street Soap Company
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by netsalt View Post
    This would make sense if you ignore the ratings
    agencies, the fraud involved in the repackaging, the frenzied search for more "product". I won't even begin with the fraudulant MERS system that destroyed the title histories of most homes in the US. Just keep believing it was just Barney if that helps you pigeon hole and reconcile the problem in your own mind.
    Sure there was fraud down the line. From lenders to traders to brokers who all knew that house of cards was eventually going to fall with devastating results.

    Its what happens when you free up trilions in free and easy credit and make no one accountable. ( except us )

    Brokers and lenders were killing it by middle manning govt backed loans on to lendees who had no money to put down, questionable credit and questionable information.

    They were undercutting their own industry for a profit TODAY. Kind of stupid if you ask me but millions did it.

    The beggining, what allowed all that free and easy credit, what and whos policies enabled it and why none of those politicians have been held accountble and why our media ignored it is what gets me.

    If not for Franks pushing and mandating for lowering lending standards we wouldnt be having this conversation.

    Frank among others should be lifing it in Rikers but the narrative was it was Wall Streets fault and thats not true.

    You should be mad as hell. I didnt want to burden my grandchildren with the debt from other peoples bad decisions.

  9. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SW MO.
    Posts
    5,212
    Quote Originally Posted by netsalt View Post
    This would make sense if you ignore the ratings agencies, the fraud involved in the repackaging, the frenzied search for more "product". I won't even begin with the fraudulant MERS system that destroyed the title histories of most homes in the US. Just keep believing it was just Barney if that helps you pigeon hole and reconcile the problem in your own mind.
    It wasn't just Barney. But he ignored the evidence and allowed Fannie and Freddie to keep spiraling out of control, which led to thousands of un qualified borrowers take out loans they couldn't afford. Just cause someone didn't cause the mess doesn't mean they shouldn't be held unaccountable for not intervening when the writing was on the wall.

  10. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Paper Street Soap Company
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by chaard View Post
    It wasn't just Barney. But he ignored the evidence and allowed Fannie and
    Freddie to keep spiraling out of control, which led to thousands of un qualified borrowers take out loans they couldn't afford. Just cause someone didn't cause the mess doesn't mean they shouldn't be held unaccountable for not intervening when the writing was on the wall.
    Millions ignored the writing on the wall from the lenders to brokers to lendees that lied on their contracts to traders.

    My point is the overall politics of redistrubition and their effect on our free market economy.

    MBSs have been traded since the 70s, derivatives have been around for decades and so have credit default swaps.

    Yes you can narrow down the ultimate blame to a few politicians who pushed redristributive policies by mandating the lowering of lending standards.

    Its why our current economy is in free fall. Liberal policies of redistrubition to fix the economy that crashed from redistributive policies.

  11. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    885
    There is fault for the 2008 for all. Lets be blunt. Bush pushed for max home ownership. Barney pushed for easy credit. The banks took advantage to make tons of money cause they found a way to exploit the situation. Saying this mess, and I say this mess because we never got out of it, was the fault of one side or another is crap. All should be blamed. All we really did in 08 was turn a drastic catastoraphy into a long drawn out disaster. The bad debt has still not cleared and we are heading towards the student loan bubble bursting next. It does not matter whom is at the helm. They aren't going to be able to save it this time. There is to much debt and no savings.

  12. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SW MO.
    Posts
    5,212
    And yet Washington still after how many years, has not learned that you can't keep borrowing and spending, borrowing and spending.
    We are broke.
    Washington hasn't learned a gosh darn thing.
    I should have wrote this in all caps. Cause I'm pissed.

  13. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    885
    Quote Originally Posted by chaard View Post
    And yet Washington still after how many years, has not learned that you can't keep borrowing and spending, borrowing and spending.
    We are broke.
    Washington hasn't learned a gosh darn thing.
    I should have wrote this in all caps. Cause I'm pissed.
    Of course they haven't, there are always someone that is going to say the borrowing of the other guy is wrong, but the borrowing my side does is just fine.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event