^Your custom user title suits you well.
So full of stupid I cant even believe I am replying… ever hear of the Community Reinvestment Act?
“The Act requires the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound operation (Section 802.) To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions (Section 804.)[6]”
The banks werent forced?
The CRA forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?
According to one enforcement agency, “discrimination exists when a lender’s underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants.” Note that these “arbitrary or outdated criteria” include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history–the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring.
Motto for some in here should be … Go live life some and learn something from experience.
Edit…ok, that was harsh, some things you said ring true about some lenders, no doubt… but most did it with the law… but still knew it was robbery deep down. Of course there are hundreds of examples of downright thieves that robbed the systemand took advantage… but in the end, it was the act that caused and allowed for it.
All this overlooks a crucial fact: There has been no free market in housing or finance. Government has long exercised massive control over the housing and financial markets–including its creation of Fannie Mae (nyse: FNM - news - people ) and Freddie Mac (nyse: FRE - news - people ) (which have now amassed $5 trillion in liabilities)–leading to many of the problems being blamed on the free market today.
Consider the low lending standards that were a significant component of the mortgage crisis. Lenders made millions of loans to borrowers who, under normal market conditions, weren’t able to pay them off. These decisions have cost lenders, especially leading financial institutions, tens of billions of dollars.
It is popular to take low lending standards as proof that the free market has failed, that the system that is supposed to reward productive behavior and punish unproductive behavior has failed to do so. Yet this claim ignores that for years irrational lending standards have been forced on lenders by the federal Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and rewarded (at taxpayers’ expense) by multiple government bodies.
The CRA forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?
According to one enforcement agency, “discrimination exists when a lender’s underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants.” Note that these “arbitrary or outdated criteria” include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history–the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring.
The government has promoted bad loans not just through the stick of the CRA but through the carrot of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which purchase, securitize and guarantee loans made by lenders and whose debt is itself implicitly guaranteed by the federal government. This setup created an easy, artificial profit opportunity for lenders to wrap up bundles of subprime loans and sell them to a government-backed buyer whose primary mandate was to “promote homeownership,” not to apply sound lending standards.
Yeah, this was a win win for banks… really really? Really! Over 500 banks have closed and the bail out was bullshit, but this was NOT a WIN WIN for banks… Really? Wow
Wait, the CRA was there to right hundreds of years of wrongs??? Really? That was the solution? Give people with no money…mortgages… yup, liberal solution. Started with carter, pushed on and mandated with Clinton. REALLY? Houses are considered an asset that will never depreciate (that type of thinking helped get us here…who says that as if its a guarantee)… I suppose you would say that about Gold too. Its an investment. Know the risks.
Of course whites origionated most loans… they were more likely to be educated enough to become a loan officer or in banking unfortunately, and, umm, there are more whites.
Your closing statement shows your utter ignorance on the subject. Predatory lending was not the cause of the failure. Sub-Prime lending was probably the leading cause. It was there, it was wrong, but without it, there still would have been the crash. Many people were given loans that shouldnt have had them. But, ummm, the LAW said they must or pay the consequences. The LIBERAL driven bill and Law. This wasnt a suggestion. Given loans by non-predators. Only a small percentage were unscrupilous in the big picture. It sucks there are misinformed loudmouths that just continue to talk the liberal talking points.
In the future I suggest your form your opines from experience rather than teachers, parents or left wing commentary. Read the bills, laws, talk to business owners (u must hate them).
Lets be real, the securities market robbed america by packaging shit mortgages and selling them for big money, knowing they may well fail. The government backed the loans so the win was to securities markets. Look to a few key packagers for the move… but do not blame this on anyone but the government that not only allowed this, but nearly forced it on banks. The government needed to stay the fuck out of regulating private banking practices. Gov’t has no business in business when it comes to how they should choose their customers.
BLAME 1: Liberal Gov’t
Wifey and I love you Jason :tongue
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrPGoPFRUdc[/ame]
Singh1
October 17, 2011, 8:49pm
146
:facepalm worse than i thought
My wife sent me the link to that video a few days ago. Wouldn’t surprise me in the least to find that 100% of the people there think in that manner :banghead
Yeah I watched a handful of other similar videos. They just want everything for free
Yo_Rita
October 18, 2011, 9:23am
150
I guess Occupy Albany begins Friday at Lafayette Park. Should be interesing.
What a bunch of waterheads.
Oleg
October 19, 2011, 8:51pm
152
I wonder what his degree is. Probably liberal arts, something like a philosophy degree would at least require a modicum of reasoning ability.
What?
What legit news sources?
Where
Name one u think is legit?
Opinions should not be formed from news sources more often than not,when the topic is politics.
What was Steve Jobs great quote again? You cant connect the dots looking forward… you can only connect them looking backwords…
It doesn\\\'t take a rocket scientist to see how all major news sources are full of inadequate and sometimes just reshaped information.
Either you get it or you don\\\'t. Those that don\\\'t , often complain. Sometimes its most fun to complain a group or mob, and misery likes company, just as much as love does.
You can spell forward but you can't spell backwards :rofl
In times of need you have to use whatever you can to fight. They are using the companies technology against them.
It doesn’t matter what they are protesting, especially what they are doing are far more peaceful and much less crazy than what some Tea-Party people did. Did you see any people in a Tea-Party protest got randomly attacked and pepper spary by the police?
They got attacked bascially because they are recording video and you know how law enforcement hate being taped.
Funny how we lecture other countries about how their government should not attack their protesting citizens and then the world saw videos like NY police attacking peaceful protesters here. :rofl
You’re dumb.
So you’re saying the police waited to be videotaped and then started beating people down for no reason? Interesting and well thought out point which is clearly not based on any bias towards police.
Occupy albany starts at noon…
And back out cause I’m sure I can conclude everything that’s been said in this thread.
I wouldn’t take a 20,000 dollar raise with a 75 percent tax rate because you don’t just get that raise. You either work more hours, or you have more responsibilities. Magic land is the only place you just randomly get a huge raise with no increase in time/responsibility so using that as an example to make your tax logic look good is irrelevant because its not based on any sort of real world possibility.
I have a sweet tax proposal, everyone gets a million dollars, with no inflation and no negative effects on the economy. That would be nice, but it isn’t possible just like your example and is therefor irrelevant.
Big business provides jobs. Jobs are good. Jobs provide at the very least income taxes, they allow people to buy, save, invest, which allows banks to loan ect. There are some shady dealings sure but there is no denying I’ve just listed one benefit of an evil corporation.
Name one benefit the welfare state brings to the table. The millions of people who are able to work, but don’t becuase they don’t want to, not only receive a check for doing nothing and providing nothing…they are put under no pressure to better themselves becuase everything is paid for them for free. They provide 0 benefit to society, or the economy.
I may be more willing to listen to conspiracy theories liberals have about corporations and how evil rich people need to pay more when they first focus on the group which provides nothing to economy exept detriment and gets the publics money, instead of people who do provide benefit and make their own profits.
Get a job.
I wouldn’t take a 20,000 dollar raise with a 75 percent tax rate because you don’t just get that raise. You either work more hours, or you have more responsibilities. Magic land is the only place you just randomly get a huge raise with no increase in time/responsibility so using that as an example to make your tax logic look good is irrelevant because its not based on any sort of real world possibility.
I have a sweet tax proposal, everyone gets a million dollars, with no inflation and no negative effects on the economy. That would be nice, but it isn’t possible just like your example and is therefor irrelevant.
Big business provides jobs. Jobs are good. Jobs provide at the very least income taxes, they allow people to buy, save, invest, which allows banks to loan ect. There are some shady dealings sure but there is no denying I’ve just listed one benefit of an evil corporation.
Name one benefit the welfare state brings to the table. The millions of people who are able to work, but don’t becuase they don’t want to, not only receive a check for doing nothing and providing nothing…they are put under no pressure to better themselves becuase everything is paid for them for free. They provide 0 benefit to society, or the economy.
I may be more willing to listen to conspiracy theories liberals have about corporations and how evil rich people need to pay more when they first focus on the group which provides nothing to economy exept detriment and gets the publics money, instead of people who do provide benefit and make their own profits.
Get a job.
Magic land? Welcome to corporate America.
The higher up you go, the less you do physically.
Look at the recent CEO’s who got laid off for not doing their job and driving companies into the ground and getting multi million dollar severance packages.
Look at any supervisor position who gets paid more than the workers he or she supervises but does typically nothing but boss people around for stupid shit to make themselves seem useful.
Besides it was simply an example, it’s not based on real world numbers :facepalm
Big business provides jobs. Jobs are good. Jobs provide at the very least income taxes, they allow people to buy, save, invest, which allows banks to loan ect.
Get a job.
You know why charity/welfare still exists? Do you? It’s because there are plenty of people out there who make good money of running the programs, providing to them and laundring the money.
If nobody was making money off the thing or had an interest in it, it would be long gone.
If you remove welfare all it will do is raise the crime rates and cost of prisons everywhere as you will still be providing food and shelter to the people in jail, granted it may be a better option.
Jammer
October 24, 2011, 11:33pm
160
Worker bees always think those positioned above them dont do anything
rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl