Executive Order to forgive $50,000 in student debt

Giving mortgages to people who failed financial criteria and risk factors caused the recession.
.
Except that isn't what happened. It wasn't poor people buying houses that caused the 2008 crash, it was middle class people who thought they could buy a McMansion, hold on to it for a few years, and then watch it's value go up and sell out.

The “flip” side are those that felt entitled to a McMansion in the name of equality (class envy) and failed to keep up with payments. Don’t bite off more than you can chew. Same with college loans.

Except that much like the colleges who sell overpriced degrees, no one was interesting in building sensible bungalows in the Oughts or even now.

What did happen was that people - poor, middle class, rich, white, black, Latino, Asian, Indian, citizen, non-citizen- all had the opportunity to get into homes they could not afford because Democrats felt compelled to relax financial risk factors in the name of racial and economic equality..... even mandated banks to do so.
 
My youngest, she went to a big name school on a full athletic scholarship. When she got out she had actually saved several thousand and put it in the bank! She is so cheap. Not only do athletes get everything paid for but they are given a small amount of cash for expenses too. She banked it. The perks she got were ridiculous.
My oldest daughter got her MBA from one of the countries best business schools. She just bought a million dollar home on her own so the debt incurred was well worth it.

Well okay then. Your kids did it the right way. Why would you be for bailing out kids that did it the wrong way. Something doesn't make sense here. You should be on our side.

only the first time you sign in and use a new device
dude, you just don't want to change. You have all kinds of reasons to not change that are just not valid.

I did change. My personal bills I pay online. I write checks for my tax deductible items unless I pay cash and get a receipt like the new furnace for one of my rental units. I shop at Amazon for most of the items I buy. There are no stores nearby. However to manually deduct a debit card receipt is the least inconvenience. I bet if we were to have a race, I could deduct my bill faster than it would take you to sign on, find the debit, and get the balance.

For extra security, the bank I use (New York Community Bank) doesn't recognize your computer any longer. I called to complain about it after they changed their internet format. The other format had a check mark box to do that, but their new format doesn't. I asked the person on the phone how to get it to recognize my computer, and she said they don't do that anymore. I will get those security codes all the time no matter what I use. Look for this to spread to other banks as time goes on.

Like I said, I have had my card numbers stolen a couple times and it took less than two minutes for me to get it squared away with the bank calling me and asking me to verify what were my charges and what were bogus.
Bam, over. No questions no charges, no problem.

Like I said, when we lived in a cash sociaty I was all in. Now, that just makes you old before your time.

Maybe, but I'm assured security that way unless somebody robs me out in the parking lot. Anything with my name or account number on it goes in the shredder.

I would never live in a red state, that is true. NEVER, NEVER, NEVER.

You are a nice guy, just stuck in the past. We are probably the same age but you are definitely old enough to be my father.

I never said you should live in a red state. What I said is everything is cheaper in non-blue states. My state of Ohio is considered purple. If you want to see the true cost of living difference, watch HGTV. Take note of what you can get for the same money when it comes to buying or renovating a house. An 800K house where you live you could buy here for 400K.

I never said I was old enough to be your father. I'm 60 years old right now.
 
Giving mortgages to people who failed financial criteria and risk factors caused the recession.
.
Except that isn't what happened. It wasn't poor people buying houses that caused the 2008 crash, it was middle class people who thought they could buy a McMansion, hold on to it for a few years, and then watch it's value go up and sell out.

The “flip” side are those that felt entitled to a McMansion in the name of equality (class envy) and failed to keep up with payments. Don’t bite off more than you can chew. Same with college loans.

Except that much like the colleges who sell overpriced degrees, no one was interesting in building sensible bungalows in the Oughts or even now.

Colleges - or Big Education- is largely dominated by Liberals who vote Democrat and who feel entitled to no longer being held accountable for this thing called “tenure”. Yet, you wonder why colleges are overpriced.
 
I never said I was old enough to be your father. I'm 60 years old right now.


lol, you did not understand me. I meant your reluctant to change makes you much older than you are.



I could never live in OH but I have the upmost respect for it's residents. I always considered it one of the healthiest states in the country as far as wholesomeness, values.

I am a NYer through and through. I need the sophistication of NYC.

Peace
 
Why would you be for bailing out kids that did it the wrong way.

I never said I was.

However, I do think the system is bad and should be changed. Kids should not enter the workplace with the investor class not only profiting off their toil but collecting interest on the loans they had to take to train themselves for the profits for the non working investor class. It's an immoral system.
 
I never said I was.

However, I do think the system is bad and should be changed. Kids should not enter the workplace with the investor class not only profiting off their toil but collecting interest on the loans they had to take to train themselves for the profits for the non working investor class. It's an immoral system.

Okay, then what do you suggest that we can do in a free country protected by a Constitution?
 
Bill Clinton wanted to address the poor and blacks not being able to get home loans due to bad credit, not large enough down payment, or both. So they lowered the federal guidelines that banks use to issue loans. You can't have one set of standards for blacks and poor, and another standard for everybody else, so they lowered the standards for everybody.

Except the CRA loans weren't the root of the problem, it was middle class people buying McMansions that caused the losses, and the banks were happy to go along with it, because they could repossess the home after collecting interest payments, and then flip the house for even more money. The idea that the banks were "made" to do this is just silly on it's face. No one made them give a loan to a middle class person who couldn't afford the monthly payments. No one made them take these loans, exaggerate their value and sell them as investments.

Blame who you like because there is a lot of blame to go around, but the truth of the matter is this all started because the blacks and the poor were complaining to their politicians they couldn't get loans.

Tell us again how you aren't racist, Ray, that shit never gets old.
 
Giving mortgages to people who failed financial criteria and risk factors caused the recession.
.
Except that isn't what happened. It wasn't poor people buying houses that caused the 2008 crash, it was middle class people who thought they could buy a McMansion, hold on to it for a few years, and then watch it's value go up and sell out.

The “flip” side are those that felt entitled to a McMansion in the name of equality (class envy) and failed to keep up with payments. Don’t bite off more than you can chew. Same with college loans.

Except that much like the colleges who sell overpriced degrees, no one was interesting in building sensible bungalows in the Oughts or even now.

What did happen was that people - poor, middle class, rich, white, black, Latino, Asian, Indian, citizen, non-citizen- all had the opportunity to get into homes they could not afford because Democrats felt compelled to relax financial risk factors in the name of racial and economic equality..... even mandated banks to do so.

The relaxation of financial rules were as bipartisan as things get.
 
What did happen was that people - poor, middle class, rich, white, black, Latino, Asian, Indian, citizen, non-citizen- all had the opportunity to get into homes they could not afford because Democrats felt compelled to relax financial risk factors in the name of racial and economic equality..... even mandated banks to do so.

Okay, let's look at that.

Why do homes cost what they cost? Because of the labor and materials put into them? or because their value is artificially set by the real estate market?

I inherited a property in Northern Wisconsin from my parents my father initially paid $800.00 for the land and built the structure on it himself. Today that property is worth Probably $600,000 dollars. It was probably worth more before the Crash.

The problem was the banks were told they couldn't discriminate due to someone's race or where they lived. That's all the CRA did. The banks didn't go bust because poor black folks were buying sensible bungalows in the city. The banks went bust because White People were buying McMansions in the Exurbs until they had more McMansions than they had people willing to buy them.

There was a whole row of Half Built McMansions near where I live, all work stopped on them in 2008 and no one took them up again until 2012.
 
What did happen was that people - poor, middle class, rich, white, black, Latino, Asian, Indian, citizen, non-citizen- all had the opportunity to get into homes they could not afford because Democrats felt compelled to relax financial risk factors in the name of racial and economic equality..... even mandated banks to do so.

Okay, let's look at that.

Why do homes cost what they cost? Because of the labor and materials put into them? or because their value is artificially set by the real estate market?

I inherited a property in Northern Wisconsin from my parents my father initially paid $800.00 for the land and built the structure on it himself. Today that property is worth Probably $600,000 dollars. It was probably worth more before the Crash.

The problem was the banks were told they couldn't discriminate due to someone's race or where they lived. That's all the CRA did. The banks didn't go bust because poor black folks were buying sensible bungalows in the city. The banks went bust because White People were buying McMansions in the Exurbs until they had more McMansions than they had people willing to buy them.

There was a whole row of Half Built McMansions near where I live, all work stopped on them in 2008 and no one took them up again until 2012.

You insist on saying the core reason for the Financial crisis of 2008 was the years leading up to that, white people bought McMansions until there was a glut. What is your source(s) to back up that statement?
 
Giving mortgages to people who failed financial criteria and risk factors caused the recession.
.
Except that isn't what happened. It wasn't poor people buying houses that caused the 2008 crash, it was middle class people who thought they could buy a McMansion, hold on to it for a few years, and then watch it's value go up and sell out.

The “flip” side are those that felt entitled to a McMansion in the name of equality (class envy) and failed to keep up with payments. Don’t bite off more than you can chew. Same with college loans.

Except that much like the colleges who sell overpriced degrees, no one was interesting in building sensible bungalows in the Oughts or even now.

What did happen was that people - poor, middle class, rich, white, black, Latino, Asian, Indian, citizen, non-citizen- all had the opportunity to get into homes they could not afford because Democrats felt compelled to relax financial risk factors in the name of racial and economic equality..... even mandated banks to do so.

The relaxation of financial rules were as bipartisan as things get.

In order for financial institutions to be able to comply with the Community Reinvestment Act, regulators at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had to back subprime loans that were more risky because credit worthiness criteria was relaxed. This was pushed primarily by Democrats like Barney Frank and Jamie Gorelick. Who weee the Republicans pushing this alongside them? Because the Community Reinvestment Act reduced credit worthiness criteria and included potential punishment from regulators for non-compliance, it opened the door across the board for all taxes and all economic classes to take advantage regardless of their credit worthiness.
 
I never said I was.

However, I do think the system is bad and should be changed. Kids should not enter the workplace with the investor class not only profiting off their toil but collecting interest on the loans they had to take to train themselves for the profits for the non working investor class. It's an immoral system.

Okay, then what do you suggest that we can do in a free country protected by a Constitution?

ROTFLMAO! What a bone head post.

You are an idiot.
 
Giving mortgages to people who failed financial criteria and risk factors caused the recession.
.
Except that isn't what happened. It wasn't poor people buying houses that caused the 2008 crash, it was middle class people who thought they could buy a McMansion, hold on to it for a few years, and then watch it's value go up and sell out.

The “flip” side are those that felt entitled to a McMansion in the name of equality (class envy) and failed to keep up with payments. Don’t bite off more than you can chew. Same with college loans.

Except that much like the colleges who sell overpriced degrees, no one was interesting in building sensible bungalows in the Oughts or even now.

What did happen was that people - poor, middle class, rich, white, black, Latino, Asian, Indian, citizen, non-citizen- all had the opportunity to get into homes they could not afford because Democrats felt compelled to relax financial risk factors in the name of racial and economic equality..... even mandated banks to do so.

The relaxation of financial rules were as bipartisan as things get.

In order for financial institutions to be able to comply with the Community Reinvestment Act, regulators at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had to back subprime loans that were more risky because credit worthiness criteria was relaxed. This was pushed primarily by Democrats like Barney Frank and Jamie Gorelick. Who weee the Republicans pushing this alongside them? Because the Community Reinvestment Act reduced credit worthiness criteria and included potential punishment from regulators for non-compliance, it opened the door across the board for all taxes and all economic classes to take advantage regardless of their credit worthiness.

Bush pushes home ownership opportunities for minorities - The Boston Globe
 
I'm an idiot because you can't answer my question

you are an idiot for many reasons, don't sell yourself short

(btw, your question made no sense, what does one have to do with the other... to a reasoned mind?)

to an idiot, maybe an association can be drawn.
 
Except the CRA loans weren't the root of the problem, it was middle class people buying McMansions that caused the losses, and the banks were happy to go along with it, because they could repossess the home after collecting interest payments, and then flip the house for even more money. The idea that the banks were "made" to do this is just silly on it's face. No one made them give a loan to a middle class person who couldn't afford the monthly payments. No one made them take these loans, exaggerate their value and sell them as investments.

I didn't say anything about CRA's. They've been around since Carter. What I said is they lowered the home loan requirements which they did. I'd post links on it but I know you can't stand reading the truth. You like to live in your own little world.

Look.......I lost a few really good tenants when this took place. They both were over extended on their credit, and both got home loans with 0% down. One of them was actually renting his big screen because he couldn't afford to buy one. Banks didn't make any money on the interest. Banks made money by processing the loans, and then selling them off. It was less risk to them because even they knew those loans weren't secure. But government changed the rules, so what bank didn't get in on the action? They all did.

Tell us again how you aren't racist, Ray, that shit never gets old.

How is truth racist? You can Google it if you like. Blacks were claiming discrimination because they couldn't get home loans due to their credit history and lack of income. There was no other reason for the feds to lower qualifiers for home loans. But the banks had a higher standard for everybody, it's just that blacks didn't meet those standards. Clinton came up with the idea to lower those standards to boost black home ownership. There was no other way to do it.
 
you are an idiot for many reasons, don't sell yourself short

(btw, your question made no sense, what does one have to do with the other... to a reasoned mind?)

to an idiot, maybe an association can be drawn.

Typical commie. When you can't explain yourself, resort to personal insults. If you can't explain your stupidity, then don't post stupidity.
 

Forum List

Back
Top