Paying my neighbors bills.

[Care4all]

Try reading the whole fucking thing you goddamn imbecile

1) It is a goddamn message board you ignorant slut
2) "Cases tied to individual bankruptcies and foreclosures are generally excluded from the report."
3) "lawsuits filed by shareholders against mortgage firms"
4) FY2008 FY2007 FY2006

Investigations Initiated 349 337 309
5) The types of investigations by the IRS revolve around wire fraud, money laundering, etc... and this is not showing that people were forced or duped into signing mortgages with fraudulent information or illegal lending acts, resulting in the foreclosure of their houses


You just randomly put up shit you find on Google without reading and comprehending what you just linked... you ignorant piece of shit... and the whole reason I am calling you out on it and not ignoring it is to show a new poster on this board the exact type of lying, manipulating, piece of shit that you are... you are a bastion of horseshit...

You are pwned

Illinois To Sue Countrywide Over "Unfair And Deceptive" Mortgages


Yes I thought that link stated the kind of fraud I was talking about and did read it only briefly.

This link provides the proof I was attempting to provide. Both loan recipiennts and investors are suing the lenders.

The fact remains that the loan companies duped people into loans.

the dupees are responsible, not the dupers

so the victim should be blamed and not the predator? BS skull....pure bs....

that's like saying it was the woman's fault, for being raped.....because she was pretty or a blonde

 

[GHook93]

Rachael,

Don't get me wrong I usually lean right on things and in any other era you would be right. However, this is an unique time we live in.

 

[Skull Pilot]

like what skull?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/congress/70143-governors-v-congress.html#post1060316

those governors are doing some political posturing....

the article DOES NOT STATE how they will be forced to continue these programs...it doesn't even say how it is forcing them to put more people in to these programs....

it gives them more money for medicaid because more people will be on medicaid if they are earning less or unemployed?

as far as paying a portion of cobra for those that are unemployed and the governors being afraid to end this program 2 years from now seems DAMN SILLY.....so what if the program ends 2 years from now....hopefully, unemployment won't be as big an issue 2 years from now....?

they even said in the article they DID NOT KNOW how the stimulus was worded on these programs and are crying wolf before the wolf arrived imo.

wonder why the other 45 governors did not see it the same as these loons?

care

better to cry wolf before it eats your flock and not after.

It seems to me that playing fiscal defense is the more prudent course. and prudence and government don't inhabit the same space very often which is why more governors don't see the "looniness" of being prudent.

But hey maybe you're right. We don't know if expenses will increase and we don't know if revenues will increase so let's just gamble. Is winning the lottery part of your retirement plans as well?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Illinois To Sue Countrywide Over "Unfair And Deceptive" Mortgages


Yes I thought that link stated the kind of fraud I was talking about and did read it only briefly.

This link provides the proof I was attempting to provide. Both loan recipiennts and investors are suing the lenders.

The fact remains that the loan companies duped people into loans.

the dupees are responsible, not the dupers

so the victim should be blamed and not the predator? BS skull....pure bs....

that's like saying it was the woman's fault, for being raped.....because she was pretty or a blonde

very poor analogy and you should be ashamed for using it.

no one was under threat of bodily harm when signing a mortgage.

Now i can make an argument that the government confiscation of my money is akin to rape because the government uses the threat of violence against me to collect my taxes.

 

[Annie]

I was wondering about all this today. So, the government, not the 'loan companies' are going to 'bailout' the hapless folks that borrowed amounts they could not afford, for terms they couldn't handle. Umm, the 'government' is you and me, the over 90% of us that do plan, sacrifice, and pay for the 'stuff' we want. We say 'no' to ourselves and our family when we need to.

So let's set up Mr & Mrs. X, in that less than 10% category. Times got harder than they thought, one or both of them have lost their jobs or taken pay cuts/less hours. They can't make their payments. How is a 'bailout' going to help them? They'll be in the same swamp in a few months.

What about the fact that the housing market really has lost value? By keeping the loans going to folks that can't afford them, the affordable housing now is not available to those that can afford it, at the reduced prices and with the correct terms. Seems to me that this is a ponzi scam, where the older folks who acted irresponsibly and didn't plan for any bad times, are being rewarded for their acts; while the young and the responsible get to pay for it. They young now and forever.

 

[manu1959]

I have behaved completely resposibly throughput my life. I have positioned myself as best as anyone could for this mess. I told people all through the Bush housing inflation that they cause to NOT take money out of their home, to not buy expensive cars and to save, save, save. That being said I am willing to do what is nessessary to fix this problem for many reasons.

1. I care about my fellow Americans.
2. I care about the long term viability of my country.
3. I care that childern will be living on the streets.
4. I care about the economy being pushed to a point that we will remain a weak third world type country while Countries like China and Russia will emerge before we do and OWN the world markets because they were willing to invest back in their own countries and we werent.
5. I care about the infrastructure of this country crumbling to the extent that we are not able to compete when the world economy does emerge.
6. I care that many of these people (fellow Americans) you chose to hate were actually lied to by their lending institution.

When will you people stop hating your fellow American long enough to pull together and do what NEEDS to be done to fix this country?

i have a question.....

did all of this start in 2001.....

did housing prices and home sales not increase under clinton...

did clinton do anything to prevent this or were all those policies in place and bush undid them all....

 

[Truthmatters]

Clinton signed the GLBact 1999 which was Phil Gramms baby for over a decade.

Clinton shares the blame for it being law.

Bush and team get all the blame for NOT changing the laws back after the effects were obvious.

 

[Truthmatters]

the dupees are responsible, not the dupers

This is what he said.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/25/illinois-to-sue-countrywi_n_109071.html The law does not agree that the loan companies should get off scott free.

 

[Care4all]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/congress/70143-governors-v-congress.html#post1060316

those governors are doing some political posturing....

the article DOES NOT STATE how they will be forced to continue these programs...it doesn't even say how it is forcing them to put more people in to these programs....

it gives them more money for medicaid because more people will be on medicaid if they are earning less or unemployed?

as far as paying a portion of cobra for those that are unemployed and the governors being afraid to end this program 2 years from now seems DAMN SILLY.....so what if the program ends 2 years from now....hopefully, unemployment won't be as big an issue 2 years from now....?

they even said in the article they DID NOT KNOW how the stimulus was worded on these programs and are crying wolf before the wolf arrived imo.

wonder why the other 45 governors did not see it the same as these loons?

care

better to cry wolf before it eats your flock and not after.

It seems to me that playing fiscal defense is the more prudent course. and prudence and government don't inhabit the same space very often which is why more governors don't see the "looniness" of being prudent.

But hey maybe you're right. We don't know if expenses will increase and we don't know if revenues will increase so let's just gamble. Is winning the lottery part of your retirement plans as well?

Actually, I was not for this stimulus, nor the bailouts, nor the printing of money, nor the over spending of the last 8 years....

Mainly because I did not think any of things would actually help with this crisis because I feel that there is alot going on that we are not being told, or just not understanding the depth of it and i hate spending money blindly.

The one thing I was for doing, and this was starting over a year ago and up to this last stimulus....and that is to help the majority of people that can afford it....refinance their homes in to fixed rate mortgages...

and to give SUNSHINE to the derivative, hedge and MBS markets/funds/paper etc.

maybe it is better to cry wolf before the wolf arrives, but i don't see the benefit of them doing that, other than political posturing....this could be beneficial to that....

But where we stand now is that the bailout was done, the printing of money was done, the stimulus was done....

So now is NOT THE TIME to continue to bash it, BRINGING CONFIDENCE down, which will make things even worse....we need confidence more than ever.

now is THE TIME for all of us to be the little train that could and say...I know I can, I know I can, I know I can make it....when looking at that huge mountain that our country is going to have to climb to get out of this ditch.

Care

 

[manu1959]

Clinton signed the GLBact 1999 which was Phil Gramms baby for over a decade.

Clinton shares the blame for it being law.

Bush and team get all the blame for NOT changing the laws back after the effects were obvious.

no one held a gun to clintons head....

the effects were obvious from the start.....it was the intent of the bill....

no elected official in his right mind would kill the gravy train......

so none did.....

now they are scrambling for the moral high ground.....

one 6 year term and you are out.....i don't care which office you run for.....

 

[Care4all]

the dupees are responsible, not the dupers

so the victim should be blamed and not the predator? BS skull....pure bs....

that's like saying it was the woman's fault, for being raped.....because she was pretty or a blonde

very poor analogy and you should be ashamed for using it.

no one was under threat of bodily harm when signing a mortgage.

Now i can make an argument that the government confiscation of my money is akin to rape because the government uses the threat of violence against me to collect my taxes.

Okay, you are right, bad analogy....with rape.

It is like you blaming the little old lady for being scammed, by the scam artist.

 

[Care4all]

or you blaming the man that got pick pocketed, for being robbed by the gentleman that bumped in to him.

 

[Skull Pilot]

so the victim should be blamed and not the predator? BS skull....pure bs....

that's like saying it was the woman's fault, for being raped.....because she was pretty or a blonde

very poor analogy and you should be ashamed for using it.

no one was under threat of bodily harm when signing a mortgage.

Now i can make an argument that the government confiscation of my money is akin to rape because the government uses the threat of violence against me to collect my taxes.

Okay, you are right, bad analogy....with rape.

It is like you blaming the little old lady for being scammed, by the scam artist.

If one actually reads what they sign or has a legal professional read it for him, one cannot be scammed.

And a little old lady should have heard the saying, "Let the buyer beware."

 

[Skull Pilot]

or you blaming the man that got pick pocketed, for being robbed by the gentleman that bumped in to him.

again no. there was no consent thus it was theft and therefore a crime.

No one signs a mortgage without realizing they are signing a mortgage.

 

[Care4all]

Clinton signed the GLBact 1999 which was Phil Gramms baby for over a decade.

Clinton shares the blame for it being law.

Bush and team get all the blame for NOT changing the laws back after the effects were obvious.

no one held a gun to clintons head....

the effects were obvious from the start.....it was the intent of the bill....

no elected official in his right mind would kill the gravy train......

so none did.....

now they are scrambling for the moral high ground.....

one 6 year term and you are out.....i don't care which office you run for.....

manu.
less than 6% of these subprime loans were loans issued due to CRA or even covered by the CRA, the regulation you are wrongly blaming clinton for and no one was a bigger pusher of getting lower income people in to homes, than your own president bush the past 8 years....

have you seen all the things he did on his home initiative programs?

none the less, this only involved 6% of these subprimes....none of them in CRA involved NINA loans either... these are the things that Financial / mortgage institutions created and DID all on their own with no pressure WHAT SO EVER from The Community Reinvestment Act.....NONE.....none.

This is total deflection from all the things that happened in this mess and it does us no good to spout it, because it simplifies the colossal failings of the banks themselves, our regulators and regulations, our corrupt rating agencies, and the virtual casino we have with the stock market and how people place their bets, unseen by most, behind closed doors.....let alone the Fed's failings with making money too cheap...it put it at risk...to a degree as well...

care

 

[Alpha1]

Clinton signed the GLBact 1999 which was Phil Gramms baby for over a decade.

Clinton shares the blame for it being law.

Bush and team get all the blame for NOT changing the laws back after the effects were obvious.

no one held a gun to clintons head....

the effects were obvious from the start.....it was the intent of the bill....

no elected official in his right mind would kill the gravy train......

so none did.....

now they are scrambling for the moral high ground.....

one 6 year term and you are out.....i don't care which office you run for.....

manu.
less than 6% of these subprime loans were loans issued due to CRA or even covered by the CRA, the regulation you are wrongly blaming clinton for and no one was a bigger pusher of getting lower income people in to homes, than your own president bush the past 8 years....

have you seen all the things he did on his home initiative programs?

none the less, this only involved 6% of these subprimes....none of them in CRA involved NINA loans either... these are the things that Financial / mortgage institutions created and DID all on their own with no pressure WHAT SO EVER from The Community Reinvestment Act.....NONE.....none.

This is total deflection from all the things that happened in this mess and it does us no good to spout it, because it simplifies the colossal failings of the banks themselves, our regulators and regulations, our corrupt rating agencies, and the virtual casino we have with the stock market and how people place their bets, unseen by most, behind closed doors.....let alone the Fed's failings with making money too cheap...it put it at risk...to a degree as well...

care

Subprime lending is the practice of lending, mainly in the form of mortgages for the purchase of residences, to borrowers who do not meet the usual criteria for borrowing at the lowest prevailing market interest rate. These criteria pertain to the borrower's credit score, credit history and other factors.

Lenders began to offer more and more loans to higher-risk borrowers,[64] including illegal immigrants.[65] Subprime mortgages amounted to $35 billion (5% of total originations) in 1994,[66] 9% in 1996,[67] $160 billion (13%) in 1999,[66] and $600 billion (20%) in 2006.

One high-risk option was the "No Income, No Job and no Assets" loans, sometimes referred to as Ninja loans. Another example is the interest-only adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM), which allows the homeowner to pay just the interest (not principal) during an initial period. Still another is a "payment option" loan, in which the homeowner can pay a variable amount, but any interest not paid is added to the principal. An estimated one-third of ARMs originated between 2004 and 2006 had "teaser" rates below 4%, which then increased significantly after some initial period, as much as doubling the monthly payment.

In 1995, the GSEs began receiving government incentive payments for purchasing mortgage backed securities which included loans to low income borrowers. Thus began the involvement of the GSE with the subprime market.[105] Subprime mortgage originations rose by 25% per year between 1994 and 2003, resulting in a nearly ten-fold increase in the volume of subprime mortgages in just nine years.

In 1996, HUD directed the GSE that at least 42% of the mortgages they purchased should have been issued to borrowers whose household income was below the median in their area. This target was increased to 50% in 2000

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPSDnGMzIdo]YouTube - Democrats were WARNED of Financial crisis and did NOTHING[/ame]

Subprime mortgage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
===============================

Yeah, it was the big hearted Conservatives that wanted all those illegals and poor people in general to own big homes. All those knotheads that agreed to $1200 a month mortgages and only made $2500 a month income...

...is that really the crap your trying to blame on those mean-spirited Conservatives...??? Well, that dog don't hunt folks.....
It started before Bush and he just didn't have his crystal ball dusted off to see the future....BUT HE DID WARN BARNEY AND THE BOYS

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1]YouTube - Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown[/ame]
Bush Admin Warnings

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCTxZa9kpSI]YouTube - Mortgage Crisis - Who is Responsible[/ame]

 

[manu1959]

Clinton signed the GLBact 1999 which was Phil Gramms baby for over a decade.

Clinton shares the blame for it being law.

Bush and team get all the blame for NOT changing the laws back after the effects were obvious.

no one held a gun to clintons head....

the effects were obvious from the start.....it was the intent of the bill....

no elected official in his right mind would kill the gravy train......

so none did.....

now they are scrambling for the moral high ground.....

one 6 year term and you are out.....i don't care which office you run for.....

manu.
less than 6% of these subprime loans were loans issued due to CRA or even covered by the CRA, the regulation you are wrongly blaming clinton for and no one was a bigger pusher of getting lower income people in to homes, than your own president bush the past 8 years....

have you seen all the things he did on his home initiative programs?

none the less, this only involved 6% of these subprimes....none of them in CRA involved NINA loans either... these are the things that Financial / mortgage institutions created and DID all on their own with no pressure WHAT SO EVER from The Community Reinvestment Act.....NONE.....none.

This is total deflection from all the things that happened in this mess and it does us no good to spout it, because it simplifies the colossal failings of the banks themselves, our regulators and regulations, our corrupt rating agencies, and the virtual casino we have with the stock market and how people place their bets, unseen by most, behind closed doors.....let alone the Fed's failings with making money too cheap...it put it at risk...to a degree as well...

care

couple of things....didn't vote for bush.....

so none of the bad loans were packaged sold or created during the clinton years......everything was great ... regulated and hunky dory right up till ........

then bush showed up and tricked the house and senate into making a bunch of bad decissions and told the banks to make bad loans and for people to take out loans they couldn't afford....

got it thanks for clearing that up.....

 

[Truthmatters]

Manu, the sub primes were NOT a threat until the GLBact of 1999 was passed and the financial industry was allowed to consolidate. They then could package off the loans and sell them in increasingly larger numbers compared to the other financial assets they were bundled with. If they had not owned the different aspects of the industry they would have not been able to sell them because they would not have been sellable. They just traded them on through their own corporations and then sold them to a market that was not aware of what they were truely buying. This is way Europe is pretty pissed at the Bush admin right now. The Bush admin could have stopped the mess and they didnt.


Yes Clinton is an asshole for signing the bill but those who wrote it, championed it and ignored its effects on the market are Most at fault.

 

[PoliticalChic]

did you have a problem paying for failed bankers who thought they were on a gravy train and didn't do their own risk assessment?

did you have a problem with predatory lenders?

Me? I don't think my tax money should have gone to pay for an unnecessary war in Iraq when they want to cut funding to my son's school.

But I'm kinda funny that way.

Greetings to our new right-thinking (pun intended) member. I'm surprised and pleased that one so young is so on target.

Now, the bankers: the Democrat party is responsible in large measure for the problems we now face, from Carter's Community Reinvestment Act, to Clinton, Dodd and Frank. This warped philosophy forced the banks to get on the train.

Now, "predatory lenders": There is one of those self-serving totally fabricated phrases, along the lines of "you better take this loan or else." It could only be of import if the borrower were brain-dead. Every aspect is always explained.

Now watch the lefty change the subject by bringing in something like, say, Iraq. Oops, there it is!

In 1992 the Fed released a study that said that blacks were twice as likely to be denied mortgages. The chairman of Freddic Mac said the industry must eliminate discriminatory lending practices...deliberate or inadvertent." (Washington Post, Oct. 28, 2008)

Arm-twisting of banks resulted in loans given to all minorities, credit-worthy or not. "Many lenders have a second review process in which applications from minority-group members that are denied are looked at a second time by superiors, who are charged with finding a way to approve the loan.” (NYTimes, Aug. 30, 1993)

See the Cuomo video on youtube, boasting of how he forced banks to lend: The Economist (Aug. 30, 1997) told how the Clinton Admin. "smells racism in the lending process." In the article, the DOJ used "tough enforcement..."

"Not surprisingly, the housing market enjoyed explosive growth during the last half of the 1990s and the first few years of this decade. And with practically everyone approved for a mortgage, the demand for homes skyrocketed, which simultaneously drove real-estate prices sky high." (Philadelphia Trumpet, Jan. 2009)

And this: Raines is quoted (Washington Post, March 16, 2000) "new, more flexible ways to assess the creditworthiness of borrowers, especially those who have had troubled credit histories,” and we could continue.

Corrupt politicians like Dodd and Barney Frank threw gasoline on the fire.

Speaking of "But I'm kinda funny that way," some people never learn.

 

[Care4all]

or you blaming the man that got pick pocketed, for being robbed by the gentleman that bumped in to him.

again no. there was no consent thus it was theft and therefore a crime.

No one signs a mortgage without realizing they are signing a mortgage.

skull, these banks and mortgage companies and financial institutions did a disservice to their stockholders by not being good fiduciaries of their money....they did not practice good business practice to issue loans to people that could afford them now but would not be able to when the terms changed....they lost their stock holders A LOT, AN AWFUL LOTof money simply because they decided to loosen their own lending practices and loan to people that could not pay it back....

they took a chance with their stock holders's money and loaned it to people that they should not have loaned it to......simple as that....why they would make such foolish business decisions after decades of knowing better is beyond me....? it was a ponzi scheme it seems.... of passing the risky debt along, and as long as it didn't land with anyone then it all worked fine....

These mortgages were NOT given to people due to CRA.... these were creative mortgages and risky at that, created by these financial institutions ALL ON THEIR OWN....WITH NO RELATION to CRA....cant say that enough.....

if you were the person getting the loan, wouldnt you think the bank would not loan you money you could not afford?

To ME, that was a GIVEN....I was sweating my ass off....hoping and praying Bank of America would approve matt and me for our loan on our house in Massachusetts...why, did these business people decide that making money now was more important than losing money later?

care