New study confirms economy was destroyed by Democrat policies

[bripat9643]

There was no overt practice of denying mortgages based on race and enthnicity

That's like saying there was no policy of "separate but equal"..........

Not at all.... just because minorities were denied mortgages in higher numbers than non-minorities does not mean there is racial bias. To assume there I/was is to not look at the problem honestly.

People in certain areas were denied mortgages based on where they lived not based on their credit worthiness. This was institutional until 1968. After 1968 bank continues the practice until Congress passed the CRA which forced banks to stop redlining entire neighborhoods.

Prove it.

Already did. It was overt and it was widespread.

You proved nothing aside from the fact that blacks have poor credit.

 

[ClosedCaption]

There was no overt practice of denying mortgages based on race and enthnicity

That's like saying there was no policy of "separate but equal"..........

Not at all.... just because minorities were denied mortgages in higher numbers than non-minorities does not mean there is racial bias. To assume there I/was is to not look at the problem honestly.

People in certain areas were denied mortgages based on where they lived not based on their credit worthiness. This was institutional until 1968. After 1968 bank continues the practice until Congress passed the CRA which forced banks to stop redlining entire neighborhoods.

And just so happens that those certain areas were all black....but hey, just because there is a pattern here doesnt mean anything. Its just an accumulation of similar events thats a coincidence.

But let one white guy be out of work and you'll hear all about Racism where the "maybe its not" gang role reverse

It's not a coincidence. Blacks have poor credit. That isn't the fault of banks. If you want blacks to get mortgages more easily, then work on showing them how to improve their credit and make more money. Looting the banks is not a solution.

Wait so the study needs to compare credit scores but you dont because "blacks have poor credit". Did you forget to add the part where you found that is the reason they were denied? No you didnt, you just made it up Stephen Spielturd

 

[bripat9643]

That's like saying there was no policy of "separate but equal"..........

Not at all.... just because minorities were denied mortgages in higher numbers than non-minorities does not mean there is racial bias. To assume there I/was is to not look at the problem honestly.

People in certain areas were denied mortgages based on where they lived not based on their credit worthiness. This was institutional until 1968. After 1968 bank continues the practice until Congress passed the CRA which forced banks to stop redlining entire neighborhoods.

And just so happens that those certain areas were all black....but hey, just because there is a pattern here doesnt mean anything. Its just an accumulation of similar events thats a coincidence.

But let one white guy be out of work and you'll hear all about Racism where the "maybe its not" gang role reverse

It's not a coincidence. Blacks have poor credit. That isn't the fault of banks. If you want blacks to get mortgages more easily, then work on showing them how to improve their credit and make more money. Looting the banks is not a solution.

Wait so the study needs to compare credit scores but you dont because "blacks have poor credit". Did you forget to add the part where you found that is the reason they were denied? No you didnt, you just made it up Stephen Spielturd

I haven't, but someone else did. They found that the denial rate for people with the same credit score was the same, no matter what their race or ethnicity. It had to because there were already laws on the books that prevented banks from discriminating based on race and ethnicity. However, that wasn't good enough for the people agitating about "red-lining." That's why they invented the scam. They wanted to force banks to give mortgages to people with bad credit.

 

[BlindBoo]

That's like saying there was no policy of "separate but equal"..........

Not at all.... just because minorities were denied mortgages in higher numbers than non-minorities does not mean there is racial bias. To assume there I/was is to not look at the problem honestly.

People in certain areas were denied mortgages based on where they lived not based on their credit worthiness. This was institutional until 1968. After 1968 bank continues the practice until Congress passed the CRA which forced banks to stop redlining entire neighborhoods.

Prove it.

Already did. It was overt and it was widespread.

You proved nothing aside from the fact that blacks have poor credit.

The racism in the housing market was systemic. I know you're doing your best to ignore this chapter in American History but there it is.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Not at all.... just because minorities were denied mortgages in higher numbers than non-minorities does not mean there is racial bias. To assume there I/was is to not look at the problem honestly.

People in certain areas were denied mortgages based on where they lived not based on their credit worthiness. This was institutional until 1968. After 1968 bank continues the practice until Congress passed the CRA which forced banks to stop redlining entire neighborhoods.

And just so happens that those certain areas were all black....but hey, just because there is a pattern here doesnt mean anything. Its just an accumulation of similar events thats a coincidence.

But let one white guy be out of work and you'll hear all about Racism where the "maybe its not" gang role reverse

It's not a coincidence. Blacks have poor credit. That isn't the fault of banks. If you want blacks to get mortgages more easily, then work on showing them how to improve their credit and make more money. Looting the banks is not a solution.

Wait so the study needs to compare credit scores but you dont because "blacks have poor credit". Did you forget to add the part where you found that is the reason they were denied? No you didnt, you just made it up Stephen Spielturd

I haven't, but someone else did. They found that the denial rate for people with the same credit score was the same, no matter what their race or ethnicity. It had to because there were already laws on the books that prevented banks from discriminating based on race and ethnicity. However, that wasn't good enough for the people agitating about "red-lining." That's why they invented the scam. They wanted to force banks to give mortgages to people with bad credit.

Link?

 

[bripat9643]

Not at all.... just because minorities were denied mortgages in higher numbers than non-minorities does not mean there is racial bias. To assume there I/was is to not look at the problem honestly.

People in certain areas were denied mortgages based on where they lived not based on their credit worthiness. This was institutional until 1968. After 1968 bank continues the practice until Congress passed the CRA which forced banks to stop redlining entire neighborhoods.

Prove it.

Already did. It was overt and it was widespread.

You proved nothing aside from the fact that blacks have poor credit.

The racism in the housing market was systemic. I know you're doing your best to ignore this chapter in American History but there it is.

Racism in the banking industry was "systemic" in 1977? You have some proof of this, I suppose? "Everybody knows it was" is only proof of the fact that you're a douche.

 

[bripat9643]

People in certain areas were denied mortgages based on where they lived not based on their credit worthiness. This was institutional until 1968. After 1968 bank continues the practice until Congress passed the CRA which forced banks to stop redlining entire neighborhoods.

And just so happens that those certain areas were all black....but hey, just because there is a pattern here doesnt mean anything. Its just an accumulation of similar events thats a coincidence.

But let one white guy be out of work and you'll hear all about Racism where the "maybe its not" gang role reverse

It's not a coincidence. Blacks have poor credit. That isn't the fault of banks. If you want blacks to get mortgages more easily, then work on showing them how to improve their credit and make more money. Looting the banks is not a solution.

Wait so the study needs to compare credit scores but you dont because "blacks have poor credit". Did you forget to add the part where you found that is the reason they were denied? No you didnt, you just made it up Stephen Spielturd

I haven't, but someone else did. They found that the denial rate for people with the same credit score was the same, no matter what their race or ethnicity. It had to because there were already laws on the books that prevented banks from discriminating based on race and ethnicity. However, that wasn't good enough for the people agitating about "red-lining." That's why they invented the scam. They wanted to force banks to give mortgages to people with bad credit.

Link?

https://cei.org/sites/default/files/Michelle Minton - CRA - FINAL_WEB.pdf

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

ROFLMNAO!

16 Pages filled with Leftist running from the irrefutable... wherein for 30 years, the Ideological Left conspired in on-going coercion of the Financial Industry, to set aside sound, actuarial lending principle in favor of their patented perversion of 'Fairness in Housing', with the foundational premise being that "Everyone Deserves to Own their own Home".

Over the years, banks and non-governmental variations of such, consistently lowered lending standards, until there was no effective standard at all separating those who wanted to borrow HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS to buy a HUGE HOUSE and getting it.

As was obvious to anyone with the slightest means to reason and which was repeatedly explained, ad nauseum, by Financial Experts on Fox News and Fox Business... when the standard to secure a highly sought after commodity is removed, the only potential result is that those conditions will cause a run on that commodity.

This is a fundamental law of nature... which is most often known in the natural world as "BAIT".

In the mortgage business, the run is on the underlying HOUSING... which means that the DEMAND for housing SPIKES to INFINITY, and given the limited nature of the supply of housing, this drives the value of housing THROUGH THE ROOF, and directly to the unknown, but otherwise precise point where the market can no longer sustain those values at which point the market CRASHES.

There is, literally, NO OTHER possible alternative... because, again... the principles in play are laws of nature.

Similar laws govern every facet of human behavior... and where those laws are rejected, without regard to what the behavior is, the same catastrophic results will be realized by whatever individual or groups of individuals rejects them and by extension whatever culture those pitiful fools are connected to.

You should know that the same perverse species of reasoning which advised you to believe that "everyone deserves to own their own home", is presently advising you to believe that sexual abnormality is perfectly normal... and all there asking is that the standards defining the cultural nucleus... be lowered.

Now you saw what damage they did to the International Financial Markets through decades of erosion to lending standards... until they finally removed all standards, crashing the worlds markets, putting a hundred million people out of work, destroying millions of businesses around the world.

Understand that the Financial Markets are LEGOs compared to the potential for the damage they're about to cause by stripping the culture of the last defining standard of marriage; from which all citizens stem... .

 

[hipeter924]

Both parties crashed the economy together, any analysis that claims that the Democrats or Republicans are solely responsible must have been written in a cave by a partisan hack.

 

[bripat9643]

Both parties crashed the economy together, any analysis that claims that the Democrats or Republicans are solely responsible must have been written in a cave by a partisan hack.

That's a claim lacking any visible means of support. Democrats have been the party that has consistently worked at lowering lending standards, not Republicans. The CRA was Democrat legislation.

 

[g5000]

And just so happens that those certain areas were all black....but hey, just because there is a pattern here doesnt mean anything. Its just an accumulation of similar events thats a coincidence.

But let one white guy be out of work and you'll hear all about Racism where the "maybe its not" gang role reverse

It's not a coincidence. Blacks have poor credit. That isn't the fault of banks. If you want blacks to get mortgages more easily, then work on showing them how to improve their credit and make more money. Looting the banks is not a solution.

Wait so the study needs to compare credit scores but you dont because "blacks have poor credit". Did you forget to add the part where you found that is the reason they were denied? No you didnt, you just made it up Stephen Spielturd

I haven't, but someone else did. They found that the denial rate for people with the same credit score was the same, no matter what their race or ethnicity. It had to because there were already laws on the books that prevented banks from discriminating based on race and ethnicity. However, that wasn't good enough for the people agitating about "red-lining." That's why they invented the scam. They wanted to force banks to give mortgages to people with bad credit.

Link?

https://cei.org/sites/default/files/Michelle Minton - CRA - FINAL_WEB.pdf

Can you quote the part that says "the denial rate for people with the same credit score was the same, no matter what their race or ethnicity"?

 

[g5000]

The CRA was Democrat legislation.

Yes, but it has never been proven it was a significant cause of the global derivatives crash, which is the subject of this thread.

 

[g5000]

As I mentioned earlier, neither Bear Stearns nor Merrill Lynch nor Lehman Brothers were subject to the CRA.

Nor were the banks of Ireland or Iceland or Spain or England or Germany or Scotland.

And neither was AIG FP.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Deregulation of the financial sector caused the mortgage/real estate meltdown. Deregulation empowers greed. Greed fuels excesses. Excesses lead to bubbles. Bubbles burst.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The CRA was Democrat legislation.

Yes, but it has never been proven it was a significant cause of the global derivatives crash, which is the subject of this thread.

It's been well established, including on this forum, that the CRA had virtually nothing to do with the real estate meltdown,

but as always, rightwingers will never stop digging up their old dead myths and trying to revive them.

 

[g5000]

Both parties crashed the economy together, any analysis that claims that the Democrats or Republicans are solely responsible must have been written in a cave by a partisan hack.

That's a claim lacking any visible means of support. Democrats have been the party that has consistently worked at lowering lending standards, not Republicans. The CRA was Democrat legislation.

Your continued linkage of the CRA to the crash is the only thing here which has no visible means of support.

The Republicans were the ones who consistently worked at deregulating the financial services industry. And the Democrats went along with it in the late 90s.

 

[bripat9643]

As I mentioned earlier, neither Bear Stearns nor Merrill Lynch nor Lehman Brothers were subject to the CRA.

Nor were the banks of Ireland or Iceland or Spain or England or Germany or Scotland.

And neither was AIG FP.

The all bought packages of securitized mortgages that were packed full of sub-prime mortgages.

 

[g5000]

As I mentioned earlier, neither Bear Stearns nor Merrill Lynch nor Lehman Brothers were subject to the CRA.

Nor were the banks of Ireland or Iceland or Spain or England or Germany or Scotland.

And neither was AIG FP.

The all bought packages of securitized mortgages that were packed full of sub-prime mortgages.

AIG did not buy CDOs, but the others I mentioned did create, buy, and sell CDOs packed with sub-primes. Yep.

AIG insured those CDOs.

Nothing to do with the CRA.

In fact, Lehman, for one, bought its own supply chain of mortgage brokers to ensure their CDO making machine kept being fed.

 

[g5000]

In 2003 and 2004, with the U.S. housing boom (read, bubble) well under way, Lehman acquired five mortgage lenders, including subprime lender BNC Mortgage and Aurora Loan Services, which specialized in Alt-A loans (made to borrowers without full documentation). Lehman's acquisitions at first seemed prescient; record revenues from Lehman's real estate businesses enabled revenues in the capital markets unit to surge 56% from 2004 to 2006, a faster rate of growth than other businesses in investment banking or asset management. The firm securitized $146 billion of mortgages in 2006, a 10% increase from 2005. Lehman reported record profits every year from 2005 to 2007. In 2007, the firm reported net income of a record $4.2 billion on revenueof $19.3 billion.

Case Study The Collapse of Lehman Brothers

 

[g5000]

So, you see, it was not the government pushing the financial services industry to make more loans. It was the other way around. Wall Street demanded deregulation so they could make more loans to cram into their CDOs. They wanted the rules relaxed.