#OWS Signs

[Rozman]

Are we ever gonna talk about the people running Fannie and Freddie were getting their bonus checkes based on how many mortgage's were given out...the more loans made the bigger the bonus.Wonder if they cared at all that a lot of people were barely making enough to live on much less afford a house.

 

[Zander]

It's incumbent upon the lender to determine if an applicant is qualified for a loan.

Ultimately, it is your responsibility to determine what you are capable of purchasing. Stop passing responsibility for your decisions off on other people.

If a person lacks enough common sense to know what he can or cannot afford, it's up to the lender to set him straight.

Afterall, it's the lender who is ultimately on the hook for the money.

Not under our system. Banks were told "lend money to people on the margins- they need to get a piece of the American dream- we'll make Freddie and Fanny buy the paper".

The government created the bubble, blamed the bankers, then took credit for "fixing" it. It's criminal.

 

[Cuyo]

Or

"The loan officer should have done his homework and checked my situation more carefully and found that I really couldn't afford the property based on my income and other obligations and turned me down."

Or...

"Politicians and Unions should not pressurize banks to lend to those who cannot afford it."

utter nonsense...

 

[Cuyo]

Ok, I made it to page 3 and that's it, so I apologize if this has been covered.

You guys, at least 10-12 of you, are utterly missing the point.

Whether or not it's the home buyers were practicing sufficient personal responsibility is utterly irrelevant. The institutions made the loans, dumped them on other institutions to clean their books, and proceeded to make more loans. Onward and upward it went under the guise of ever-rising housing prices; lo and behold, it reached critical mass and the whole thing exploded.

Aaaaand of course the rest is history. The taxpayer got stuck with the bill - Or in this case, the descendants of the taxpayer.

The big part of the outrage is how the banks and "Investment institutions" seemed to get off scott free.

 

[Rozman]

You sign a contract you better know wtf you signed.

 

[JoeB131]

Did everyone miss the point of this woman's sign?

The point was not that they sold mortgages to people who couldn't afford them?

It was that they took these mortgages, and sold them to other institutions!

We all deserve some of the blame for the housing bubble. The banks, the people who bought larger houses than they needed with the hope of flipping them at a profit in five years, the TV shows that told people that "house-flipping" was a get-rich quick scheme.

 

[Sunshine]

Did everyone miss the point of this woman's sign?

The point was not that they sold mortgages to people who couldn't afford them?

It was that they took these mortgages, and sold them to other institutions!

We all deserve some of the blame for the housing bubble. The banks, the people who bought larger houses than they needed with the hope of flipping them at a profit in five years, the TV shows that told people that "house-flipping" was a get-rich quick scheme.

I didn't do any of that. I don't deserve any of the blame.

 

[JoeB131]

Did everyone miss the point of this woman's sign?

The point was not that they sold mortgages to people who couldn't afford them?

It was that they took these mortgages, and sold them to other institutions!

We all deserve some of the blame for the housing bubble. The banks, the people who bought larger houses than they needed with the hope of flipping them at a profit in five years, the TV shows that told people that "house-flipping" was a get-rich quick scheme.

I didn't do any of that. I don't deserve any of the blame.

Nor did I, personally, but lots of Americans did.

And most people consider their home to be their most important investment, even though real estate prices are pretty fungible.

 

[Sunshine]

Did everyone miss the point of this woman's sign?

The point was not that they sold mortgages to people who couldn't afford them?

It was that they took these mortgages, and sold them to other institutions!

We all deserve some of the blame for the housing bubble. The banks, the people who bought larger houses than they needed with the hope of flipping them at a profit in five years, the TV shows that told people that "house-flipping" was a get-rich quick scheme.

I didn't do any of that. I don't deserve any of the blame.

Nor did I, personally, but lots of Americans did.

And most people consider their home to be their most important investment, even though real estate prices are pretty fungible.

Just because a lot of them did, doesn't make me in any way responsible for their stupidity.

 

[ClosedCaption]

No one blamed you for anything Sunshine, you're a victim in your own mind.

 

[flacaltenn]

Ok, I made it to page 3 and that's it, so I apologize if this has been covered.

You guys, at least 10-12 of you, are utterly missing the point.

Whether or not it's the home buyers were practicing sufficient personal responsibility is utterly irrelevant. The institutions made the loans, dumped them on other institutions to clean their books, and proceeded to make more loans. Onward and upward it went under the guise of ever-rising housing prices; lo and behold, it reached critical mass and the whole thing exploded.

Aaaaand of course the rest is history. The taxpayer got stuck with the bill - Or in this case, the descendants of the taxpayer.

The big part of the outrage is how the banks and "Investment institutions" seemed to get off scott free.

You're right -- the protest sign was NOT about the lender-lendee relationship. It was about how mortgages were bundled and resold on the market. SUPPOSEDLY to sophisticated investors who demanded MORE of this stuff. The bundling generally was like making sausage. Essentially hiding the worse mortgages like bone, lips and tripe in sausage.

Actually -- Fannie Mae had invented a "RISK TRANSFORMATION FACILITY" that was an entire group dedicated to playing "hide the junk".

http://www.econ.tcu.edu/quinn/crisis/bubble/Fannie Subprime.pdf

Buying Alt-A and subprime mortgages was part of Fannie Mae's effort to meet the challenge. Fannie Mae sought to reap the rewards and protect itself from the downside of the investments through a feat of financial engineering it called its "Risk Transformation Facility," which was meant to transfer the riskiest elements to other investors."We engaged in the subprime market, for the first time closing deals to guarantee and securitize subprime loans, with help from the new facility that allows us to sell off the riskiest layers," Mudd wrote. By October, the company had signed $3 billion of such deals.
Although the deals discussed in Mudd's memos were small in relation to the overall scale of Fannie Mae's business, they reflected the company's appetite for subprime and Alt-A mortgages. The company had a long and deep involvement in this market through a different form of investment.

Now the deal is that banks PREFERRED to write Conforming Loans. The kind that Fannie could buy and rebundle. And contrary to the assertion of one poster -- SubPrimes COULD BE CONFORMING loans due to generous Federal policy. So MOST of the garbage that was rebundled by Fannie or Wall Street LOOKED to be good. And the word was that the GOVT would ALWAYS buy them. So it's no wonder that it was easy to misrepresent what toxic crap might be contained in an MBS...

 

[Gallagher]

More signs...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebvb319A_0Q]Occupy Wall Street - The Solution - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

The only issue I have with faulting the lendee is that I remember every homeowner advising me before I bought that 'you never think you can afford the pAyment, you make it work, in one year you won't even feel the payment'...and so we are culturally taught that a mortgage is a struggle but there is no better investment so you may as well dive in.

eta:yes i do hold the lenders practices accountable as. well

 

[Synthaholic]

Those OWS people make me think of the little retarded girl who went around all day saying, 'I want sumpin.' She didn't know WHAT she wanted. She just wanted.

Your posts remind me of a retarded girl.

 

[McDowell's]

Ok, I made it to page 3 and that's it, so I apologize if this has been covered.

You guys, at least 10-12 of you, are utterly missing the point.

Whether or not it's the home buyers were practicing sufficient personal responsibility is utterly irrelevant. The institutions made the loans, dumped them on other institutions to clean their books, and proceeded to make more loans. Onward and upward it went under the guise of ever-rising housing prices; lo and behold, it reached critical mass and the whole thing exploded.

Aaaaand of course the rest is history. The taxpayer got stuck with the bill - Or in this case, the descendants of the taxpayer.

The big part of the outrage is how the banks and "Investment institutions" seemed to get off scott free.

You're right -- the protest sign was NOT about the lender-lendee relationship. It was about how mortgages were bundled and resold on the market. SUPPOSEDLY to sophisticated investors who demanded MORE of this stuff. The bundling generally was like making sausage. Essentially hiding the worse mortgages like bone, lips and tripe in sausage.

Actually -- Fannie Mae had invented a "RISK TRANSFORMATION FACILITY" that was an entire group dedicated to playing "hide the junk".

http://www.econ.tcu.edu/quinn/crisis/bubble/Fannie Subprime.pdf

Buying Alt-A and subprime mortgages was part of Fannie Mae's effort to meet the challenge. Fannie Mae sought to reap the rewards and protect itself from the downside of the investments through a feat of financial engineering it called its "Risk Transformation Facility," which was meant to transfer the riskiest elements to other investors."We engaged in the subprime market, for the first time closing deals to guarantee and securitize subprime loans, with help from the new facility that allows us to sell off the riskiest layers," Mudd wrote. By October, the company had signed $3 billion of such deals.
Although the deals discussed in Mudd's memos were small in relation to the overall scale of Fannie Mae's business, they reflected the company's appetite for subprime and Alt-A mortgages. The company had a long and deep involvement in this market through a different form of investment.

Now the deal is that banks PREFERRED to write Conforming Loans. The kind that Fannie could buy and rebundle. And contrary to the assertion of one poster -- SubPrimes COULD BE CONFORMING loans due to generous Federal policy. So MOST of the garbage that was rebundled by Fannie or Wall Street LOOKED to be good. And the word was that the GOVT would ALWAYS buy them. So it's no wonder that it was easy to misrepresent what toxic crap might be contained in an MBS...

Another thing that people tend to over look is the fact that pretty much all of the banks creating and selling these securities were also heavily invested in them. That's why it was such a catastrophe when the economy and housing market started to go south. None of the banks knew which banks would or would not get caught holding the shitty end of the stick. So if the sign that lady is holding is accurate, the banks would have been intentionally defrauding themselves. There are a shit ton of dumb MBAs out there, but no one is that fucking stupid.

 

[Synthaholic]

No, they left that to the Unions who used blackmail (by organizing sit ins), racism (by threatening to ruin a banks reputation with unfounded allegations of racism), and good old fashioned intimidation.... with the help of Congress.

Credit where it's due. The politicians are as guilty as any bank.

where are your links?

We've been through this shit before... and I provided links... and I don't spoon feed people - I certainly don't do it more than once. Bush tried from 2003 to regulate Fanny & Freddie and the fucking Democrats stopped him. Bush spoke out about the need to rein in the banks several times... and each time, it was the Democrats who decried him. I disliked Bush as President, but he actually tried to do something and you fucking idiots blocked it... along with some of his own damned GOPers.

You people (and by 'you people', I mean fucking idiots who put party over country) are responsible for this clusterfuck, and instead of being honest about it, you continue to lie and blame someone else.

That's why I don't vote for either party. Both sides make me cringe.

It's a fucking message board. If you are going to spew opinion, fine. If you are going to present facts, then post links to back it up. I don't give a flying fuck if you've posted them in some other thread, in a galaxy far, far away. Post them here, now, in this thread, to back up your bullshit in this thread.

Got it?

 

[Synthaholic]

It's incumbent upon the lender to determine if an applicant is qualified for a loan.

Ultimately, it is your responsibility to determine what you are capable of purchasing. Stop passing responsibility for your decisions off on other people.

So if a doctor tells you you are fine, then you find out that he should have seen your cancer, it's your fault?

Aside from a few idiots wrongly saying this is apples and oranges, nobody has answered my question.

We rely on professionals for their expertise, whether it's a doctor, lawyer, contractor, plumber, financial planner, accountant, or mortgage lender.

 

[McDowell's]

Ultimately, it is your responsibility to determine what you are capable of purchasing. Stop passing responsibility for your decisions off on other people.

So if a doctor tells you you are fine, then you find out that he should have seen your cancer, it's your fault?

Aside from a few idiots wrongly saying this is apples and oranges, nobody has answered my question.

We rely on professionals for their expertise, whether it's a doctor, lawyer, contractor, plumber, financial planner, accountant, or mortgage lender.

There is not a fiduciary relationship between you and the lending agent. So it is apples and oranges.

 

[Synthaholic]

So if a doctor tells you you are fine, then you find out that he should have seen your cancer, it's your fault?

Aside from a few idiots wrongly saying this is apples and oranges, nobody has answered my question.

We rely on professionals for their expertise, whether it's a doctor, lawyer, contractor, plumber, financial planner, accountant, or mortgage lender.

There is not a fiduciary relationship between you and the lending agent. So it is apples and oranges.

You have a fiduciary relationship with your plumber? And why is that your yardstick? It's immaterial.

You go to a professional to guide you in areas where you have no expertise. They, in turn, have a responsibility to not mislead you, or lie by omission.

 

[JoeB131]

I didn't do any of that. I don't deserve any of the blame.

Nor did I, personally, but lots of Americans did.

And most people consider their home to be their most important investment, even though real estate prices are pretty fungible.

Just because a lot of them did, doesn't make me in any way responsible for their stupidity.

Okay, you can go off and feel morally superior..the rest of us will try to fix the problem.