Game Over

[dblack]

CRA simply said that location alone could not be used as a reason to deny loans or redlining, it had nothing to do with lowering any income standards. The problem with just letting the banks fail was that they held the bulk of pension plans and retirement savings hostage. Bailing them out was the right move but it should have come with a reform or be broken up condition.

And that's where our primary point of disagreement lies. The notion that banks failing would have taken down the entire system was a scare tactic (employed because that banks didn't want to take their medicine). We have a sane mechanism in place for handling bank failures that would have protected most smaller investors and pensioneers. But the fat cats would have taken a hit - and we can't have that!

 

[WatertheTree]

You are saying libertarians are going to regulate the banking industry and prosecute fraud? doesn't that run counter to their often quoted philosophy of hands off private business?

Well, 'regulate' is a loaded term - but libertarians are adamantly in favor of prosecuting fraud.

The thing is, the larger portion of the problem isn't fraud. It's the moral hazard created by the assumption that the regulatory state has 'got you covered'. Add to that, government policies that actively encourage debt and its easy to see how so many people got in over their heads.

The banksters that indulged in risky loans (whether they were goaded by government policy or not) should be held accountable for their idiocy. And the best way to do that is to let them fail. Unfortunately, the corporate collusion of both Bush and Obama prevented that from happening, instead pushing off the banks losses on the rest of us.

The point of regulation is to provide a legal framework under which fraud can be prosecuted in the first place. Our regulatory framework is spread over a half dozen agencies with differing jurisdictions. They are undermanned and outgunned, on purpose. The charge that we have too much regulation is silly when you look at just how much of a paper tiger our government is to fight these people at their own fixed game.

That is a lie. The intent of regulation is, as almost anything government does, to give protection. In this case who they want to protect is investors. Both investors who invest in banks, and investors who invest in real estate. However, as with anything else more rules, more regulation, more red tape etc, always results in less commerce, less freedom, and a weakened economy. Even the most basic economic courses teach this.

As usual it comes down to the lazynes of liberal ideology. Liberals think they can write enough laws that the state can take care of everything from cradle to grave. They think that they can make government 'foolproof' and that with enough laws there is no need for the population to provide oversight. The reality is the investors should regulate the banks and the real estate market themselves.

You can add the people who rated the derivatives and the bad loans as good in with the federal reserve as far as being able to hold accountable in the court of law. Or atleast I would think so.

 

[WatertheTree]

The other fallacy that ignorant people adopt is the new Consumer whatever obama did as not costing the taxpayer money because the federal reserve is going to pay for it. The reality is they are going to pay for it by printing the money from thin air, which will then be paid for with higher prices for everything. Its gonna be the hard workers and the savers that foot the bill for yet another bureaucracy.

 

[boilermaker55]

You are saying libertarians are going to regulate the banking industry and prosecute fraud? doesn't that run counter to their often quoted philosophy of hands off private business?

Absolutely correct. They want and desire less regulation. Less regulation = more corruption. They, however, have not understood that in any manner.

The banking industry doesnt need regulated, except by the investors who invest in those banks. The federal reserve however needs regulated/abolished.

People who want more regulation are simply ignorant to the fact that regulation suffocates commerce, and freedom. They are same people who think the solution to any problem is to expand government, when in reality they need to get off there ass regulate the industry themselves.

Justice will come in the form of bankruptcy, and all the investors aswell. It is only just that it is this way, as they have profited immensely in the past by there greed. Greedy home buyers who neglected common sense will recieve justice in the form of 'being underwater'

It is impossable to send people to jail for this fiasco, atleast for common people. However there is a need for accountability on the government side of things that encourage more and more lending. Government that protects the banks, and the federal reserve.

I hope that clears the confusion up. Occupy's original post is rather vague, and I think thats where I misunderstood what he was saying, if he even knew.

Your understanding can be no further from the truth.
How many times has some like Donald Trump filed for bankruptcy? Who does he hurt. Not himself, the ones holding the credit who pass it on to those who pay their bills in a trustworthy manner.
Credit card debt! Who pays for those who file bankruptcy?
You believe so much drool that the banking industry wants you are drowning in it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Every time someone gives the CRA as the primary cause of the mortgage bubble it lets the banking industry off the hook to do it again.

The primary cause of the mortgage bubble is debatable. But bailing them out is what lets them off the hook to do it again.

No...the cause is NOT debatable..The cause is known and documented.
The federal government is the chicken that laid the egg. Period. Done End of story.
People looking for a political demon should stop listening to the liberal hackery of class envy and class warfare.

 

[thereisnospoon]

An investment industry free to inflate bubble after bubble is a tyranny that you would call freedom, a people with faith in our investments by strict fraud oversight is a freedom you call tyranny. You have it backwards, these corporate persons must be held accountable for their deliberate ruination of the mortgage industry or we will never again have the confidence to risk our hard earned money with those thieves.

Had the federal government not involved itself in the real estate/home buying market, none of this would have happened.
I will admit that my original loan was FHA...But I was held to the same high credit standards with verifiable income and of course a high credit score in order to be approved. Plus we had to make a minimum 3% down payment.
IMO the Community Reinvestment Act was horrible legislation. Laws and regulations that allowed previously unqualified applicants to receive approval were a major part of the problem.
Those who approved Fannie/Freddie believed home ownership to be a "right".
Huge error!
The home market was fine the way it was before all this crap was forced upon it.
BTW, for comparison's sake, have a look at Canada. That nation did not experience a housing market crisis. That is because the Canadian federal government stayed out of the marketplace.

Every time someone gives the CRA as the primary cause of the mortgage bubble it lets the banking industry off the hook to do it again. The primary cause was the mountain of new gullible money coming from India and Asia hungry to invest in our already saturated mortgage securities market, the solution? Make more mortgages. Ask yourself, if the CRA was so culpable then why was the most damaging and expensive wave of foreclosures on short term 5 year notes on investment property?

There is no "letting off the hook"...
What a bunch of crap.
"Short term 5 year notes on investment property'?...What the hell are you talking about?
Let's stick with the facts , shall we?
The federal government stuck it's nose into the hosing market. It got involved because the DOJ could not prove it's accusations of "red lining"...So the Washington in it's infinite wisdom created regulations that directed banks and mortgage brokers to lend to what in the past were unqualified borrowers. The govt told the lenders and the investment banks that the loans would be backed the government.
To protect themselves and of course to make money, banks packaged the loans as "mortgage backed securities"...Of course the rest is history.
Bottom line is the federal government caused the mess because THEY started it. Government planted the seed.
If government had not injected itself into market by having a pity party for people with weak credit, none of this would have happened.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

An investment industry free to inflate bubble after bubble is a tyranny that you would call freedom, a people with faith in our investments by strict fraud oversight is a freedom you call tyranny. You have it backwards, these corporate persons must be held accountable for their deliberate ruination of the mortgage industry or we will never again have the confidence to risk our hard earned money with those thieves.

I agree. No more compromise. The rule of law and the constitution will be restored. Accountability is what the people demand, and it is what they are going to get.

You are saying libertarians are going to regulate the banking industry and prosecute fraud? doesn't that run counter to their often quoted philosophy of hands off private business?

Laissez Faire does not mean turn a blind eye to illegal behavior.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

It aint gonna be pretty. Whenever govt prolongs bubbles the end result will always be exponentially worse. We're about to experience the repercussions of a complete incompetent inept government.

 

[logical4u]

An investment industry free to inflate bubble after bubble is a tyranny that you would call freedom, a people with faith in our investments by strict fraud oversight is a freedom you call tyranny. You have it backwards, these corporate persons must be held accountable for their deliberate ruination of the mortgage industry or we will never again have the confidence to risk our hard earned money with those thieves.

"Regulation" is grabbing a tiger by the tail. The regulators are not paid like those that they are supposed to keep in check, bribery and owning congressmen allows the "regulated" to re-write the rules to reduce competition, and give themselves more power. Just sayin..... It ends up with the corporations running the politicians and the country. Less regulation, less chance of the corporations bribing for "corporate welfare".

 

[logical4u]

You are saying libertarians are going to regulate the banking industry and prosecute fraud? doesn't that run counter to their often quoted philosophy of hands off private business?

Well, 'regulate' is a loaded term - but libertarians are adamantly in favor of prosecuting fraud.

The thing is, the larger portion of the problem isn't fraud. It's the moral hazard created by the assumption that the regulatory state has 'got you covered'. Add to that, government policies that actively encourage debt and its easy to see how so many people got in over their heads.

The banksters that indulged in risky loans (whether they were goaded by government policy or not) should be held accountable for their idiocy. And the best way to do that is to let them fail. Unfortunately, the corporate collusion of both Bush and Obama prevented that from happening, instead pushing off the banks losses on the rest of us.

The point of regulation is to provide a legal framework under which fraud can be prosecuted in the first place. Our regulatory framework is spread over a half dozen agencies with differing jurisdictions. They are undermanned and outgunned, on purpose. The charge that we have too much regulation is silly when you look at just how much of a paper tiger our government is to fight these people at their own fixed game.

Why don't they use LAWS?????

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Well, 'regulate' is a loaded term - but libertarians are adamantly in favor of prosecuting fraud.

The thing is, the larger portion of the problem isn't fraud. It's the moral hazard created by the assumption that the regulatory state has 'got you covered'. Add to that, government policies that actively encourage debt and its easy to see how so many people got in over their heads.

The banksters that indulged in risky loans (whether they were goaded by government policy or not) should be held accountable for their idiocy. And the best way to do that is to let them fail. Unfortunately, the corporate collusion of both Bush and Obama prevented that from happening, instead pushing off the banks losses on the rest of us.

The point of regulation is to provide a legal framework under which fraud can be prosecuted in the first place. Our regulatory framework is spread over a half dozen agencies with differing jurisdictions. They are undermanned and outgunned, on purpose. The charge that we have too much regulation is silly when you look at just how much of a paper tiger our government is to fight these people at their own fixed game.

Why don't they use LAWS?????

Good question but one you will never get answered. They have to insist on passing millions upon millions of redundant laws that are never enforced.....so they can pass even more. Its all about perception and their followers eat it up.

 

[WatertheTree]

Absolutely correct. They want and desire less regulation. Less regulation = more corruption. They, however, have not understood that in any manner.

The banking industry doesnt need regulated, except by the investors who invest in those banks. The federal reserve however needs regulated/abolished.

People who want more regulation are simply ignorant to the fact that regulation suffocates commerce, and freedom. They are same people who think the solution to any problem is to expand government, when in reality they need to get off there ass regulate the industry themselves.

Justice will come in the form of bankruptcy, and all the investors aswell. It is only just that it is this way, as they have profited immensely in the past by there greed. Greedy home buyers who neglected common sense will recieve justice in the form of 'being underwater'

It is impossable to send people to jail for this fiasco, atleast for common people. However there is a need for accountability on the government side of things that encourage more and more lending. Government that protects the banks, and the federal reserve.

I hope that clears the confusion up. Occupy's original post is rather vague, and I think thats where I misunderstood what he was saying, if he even knew.

Your understanding can be no further from the truth.
How many times has some like Donald Trump filed for bankruptcy? Who does he hurt. Not himself, the ones holding the credit who pass it on to those who pay their bills in a trustworthy manner.
Credit card debt! Who pays for those who file bankruptcy?
You believe so much drool that the banking industry wants you are drowning in it.

Who Donald Trump hurts is the people foolish enough to invest in him. Leave it to a liberal to look to government to protect them from themselves, and still demand high returns.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Why are y'all going on and on about Paul? You're all gonna vote for Mitt who says he wants his wealthy buds to be able to profit from rampant and uncontrolled foreclosures and homelessness.

 

[dblack]

Why are y'all going on and on about Paul? You're all gonna vote for Mitt who says he wants his wealthy buds to be able to profit from rampant and uncontrolled foreclosures and homelessness.

Not me. You gonna vote for Obama to do the same thing?

 

[Douger]

George and I don't vote.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk]George Carlin Doesn't vote - YouTube[/ame]

 

[The Rabbi]

The narco libertarians rooting for the US to fail. Can't tell them apart from the Left.

 

[dblack]

The narco libertarians rooting for the US to fail. Can't tell them apart from the Left.

Rabbi, if the 'narco-liberterians' ever start talking to you, especially if they tell you to do things, talk to a professional, or a priest. Find help somewhere.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why are y'all going on and on about Paul? You're all gonna vote for Mitt who says he wants his wealthy buds to be able to profit from rampant and uncontrolled foreclosures and homelessness.

Stop making sense..(Sarcasm)

 

[The Rabbi]

The narco libertarians rooting for the US to fail. Can't tell them apart from the Left.

Rabbi, if the 'narco-liberterians' ever start talking to you, especially if they tell you to do things, talk to a professional, or a priest. Find help somewhere.

The narco-libertarians are everywhere on this board. You can them by the little Ron Paul signs all over their avatars.

 

[HUGGY]

An investment industry free to inflate bubble after bubble is a tyranny that you would call freedom, a people with faith in our investments by strict fraud oversight is a freedom you call tyranny. You have it backwards, these corporate persons must be held accountable for their deliberate ruination of the mortgage industry or we will never again have the confidence to risk our hard earned money with those thieves.

I agree. No more compromise. The rule of law and the constitution will be restored. Accountability is what the people demand, and it is what they are going to get.

Ha...Ha... You sound like a high school football coach at halftime with your team playing the professional superbowl champs and your team is down 200 to nothing. That's the spirit Sport! Send those kids back out there and show those mercenaries a lesson! Is it too late to wager on the outcome? My money says you/we will have the same success as the native Americans against the preditory white man. We will be lucky to end up with a reservation and some cheap whisky.