Thank you obama economy. (sarcasm to ensue)

Attack the source, not that facts. LOL! You all wonder why you keep losing?
And you CON$ never attack "the Liberal Media"

And I did attack the facts, that the CRA addressed REDLINING, involved QUALIFIED minorities and had nothing to do with Bush's housing crash, but you couldn't rebut that so you chose to divert by defending IBD, which has no credibility to begin with and this is yet another example of that lack.

I'm not a 'conz' though I will say, no, I'm not going after left media.

There was no claim about CRA not being about 'red-lining', quite the contrary and the obvious attempt to segue differently makes you the loser of today.
Wrong again! Your IBD link tried to make it look like the minorities were not qualified for the loans, but if you remember the banks got stung by the media. Reporters sent in black couples with identical credit information as white couples sent in second. The black couples were rejected and the white couples accepted. So white couples with the identical "poor credit" as the blacks were given loans in spite of the crap from the dishonest IBD.

From your link:

"The study did not take into account a host of other relevant data factoring into denials, including applicants’ net worth, debt burden and employment record. Other variables, such as the size of down payments and the amount of the loans sought to the value of the property being bought, also were left out of the analysis. It also failed to consider whether the borrower submitted information that could not be verified, the presence of a cosigner and even the loan amount.
When these missing data were factored in, it became clear that the rejection rates were based on legitimate business decisions, not racism."
 
Don't be butthurt because you don't know how economics in the real world work.

We were not discussing the NASDAQ, or dotcom bubble burst, or gold prices. You apparently didn't watch more than three or four seconds if you only pulled GSE info from the clip. The stick market derivatives ordeal was simply a conduit to funnel toxic securities through. It was not the main cause, and it was also not part of the original equation for malinvestment.

Anyways, you're wrong about how the bubble was built and how it burst. But at least now you know.

I didn't watch the video at all. I don't watch TV. I found a quote of Ron Paul's original prediction before Congress and read that.

I do notice that you don't actually present anything , except to say other people are wrong or that they don't know economics.

It is one thing to say others don't know econ. It's another to actually demonstrate that you do.

It is one thing to make vague general comments. It's another thing to actually say something specific and verifiable.

It's one thing to say that some thing like investment should have caused the housing market collapse. It is another thing to demonstrate that, in fact, this did occur.

What I read form you are vague generalities, supposition of what should have occurred, ego stroking and attempt to elevate yourself by claiming other don't understand.

Do we need to go through all your comments and count how many were simply you jerking yourself off as compared to how many actually presented specific information?

If your so smart, then present the evidence and explain how it goes together. If you can't, it's because you don't know what your talking about.
 
bbnf4B.jpg


Captain's log, stardate 41153.7. Our destination to planet Earth has been severely delayed. We're pretending to ignore the issue of the vehicle by which the last crash occurred and instead have resorted to ad hominem and useless banter regarding posting style.. We've avoided the information provided in favor or nothing except "ring around the rosy." Should we get to Earth and land, the Captain my return to the log for an update. Otherwise, he expects the morans to pay attention to the information provided if the planet is to be reached.
 
Last edited:
Captain's log, stardate 41153.7. Our destination to planet Earth has been severely delayed. We're pretending to ignore the issue of the vehicle by which the last crash occurred and instead have resorted to ad hominem and useless banter regarding posting style.. We've avoided the information provided in favor or nothing except "ring around the rosy." Should we get to Earth and land, the Captain my return to the log for an update. Otherwise, he expects the morans to pay attention to the information provided if the planet is to be reached.

You are patently insane.

The point is very simple. In the final analysis, the run up to the housing bubble burst was driven by investors, flippers, with non-prime loans. The final bursting of the housing bubble was the result of flippers walking away from the mortgages, driving single family home prices down.

The detailed analysis is available in the paper I provided.

The GSEs were not involved in the non-prime loans for the investor market or the secondary market for MBS that these low doc and non doc loans were packaged into.

You have managed to provide no evidence to the contrary. Rather, you provided as "proof", that some unnamed invidividuals "predicted" the housing bubble and burst. Your single specific detail is a video titled about how Ron Paul predicted it.

Of course, the basis of Ron Paul's prediction is that the bubble and burst would be caused by the GSEs, which it was not, as evidence by the data that it was, in fact, the private market, including real estate investors "flippers".

So, in the end, your only evidence is meaningless.

The rest of your ranting involves ad hominum attacks and statements where you bolster your own ego with;

"I just happen to understand economics. You should try reading more about it and spend less time running off at the mouth with this type of drivel. You know, sort of like a summer course while high school is on hiatus." (Yeah, lets discuss how much you know about economics)

"You're out of your element"

"You really are retarded."

"Starcraftzzz is a moron."

"Someone skipped typing class."

"the amount of stupid pouring out of you in every thread"

"School all done for the year, champ? Any summer courses for you? I recommend economics 101." (Sure, let's talk about your recommendations for econ courses.)

"But you might not recall still being in middle school "

"Want me to help you learn something new?" (By all means, lets talk about how you can teach).

"but if you can't follow along, junior, I certainly wont waste my time." (Yes, lets talk about your valuable time)

"Don't be butthurt because you don't know how economics in the real world work. " (But you do)

That is eleven instances, all of which are just you stroking your own ego or making ad hominum attacks.

You are the one that has brought up how smart you are as evidence that your premise is correct.

You said, "Look at me". I agreed, "Yeah, look at you."

And in the end, your final and greatest demonstrated proof of the housing crisis not being a free market process but rather a GSE issue is to say "instead have resorted to ad hominem..."

I've provided no ad hominem attacks simply because you have presented no information that demonstrates your initial premise. To be ad hominem, others would have to be avoiding your evidence, attacking you instead. You've provided no evidence to be avoided.

Rather, you continued to talk about yourself. How smart you are, how learned you are. You want to talk about yourself, fine, lets talk about you.

Yes, you are patently insane.
 
You could not possibly be any more dead wrong on this assessment. There is nothing "free" about the housing market. Artificially low interest rates coming out of the dotcom burst, along with a host of government "ownership" programs and incentives, pumped up the value of homes immensely. Which is why now, after the pop, and the govt. continues the same inflationary/credit expansion policies, home prices are still falling.

Instead of a swift correction they tried to prop it up and that is why it is dragging out.

oh bullshit. The value of homes, prior to 2007, was pumped up by demand and speculation. The mass of sub-prime loans was to speculators which is, by the way, what sub-prime loans are for. It wasn't, as you want to believe, a host of government ownership programs.

No shit, Sherlock. That demand was made by credit expansion and govt. ownership incentives. If interest rates weren't held low, the credit to provide homes to people who could not afford them in the first place would have never happened. "Speculation" was the moral hazard of a such an increase in credit. Which was extended out to the very people who now are in forclosure over the house they could not afford but took a variable interest rate mortgage out on.

It wasn't until the market was seen by those in the bubble as toxic, that sub-primes were bundled and packaged with other assets to hedge against the real feat of loss using VaR.

The credit market was expanded by the govt. guaranteeing that corporate retirement funds could be used for investment and if lost would be covered by the US govt.
 
Last edited:
These are more interesting;

Mortgage Basics, Ch. 3: How lenders set mortgage rates

"It is these financial investors in the secondary market [MBS], not mortgage lenders and brokers, that collectively determine the interest rate of your mortgage loan. As with the stock market, interest rates in the secondary market tend to move up and down. When the economy is on an upswing, investors demand higher yields, forcing lenders to raise mortgage rates. In a market downturn, rates tend to drop for consumers because of increased investor demand."

Any change in rate is simply the result of demand in the money markets, a free market process.

Real Estate Charts: Graphs of inflation-adjusted, historical housing prices.

"The graph below compares the change in home prices to the change in owner-equivalent rents over time. Without any bubbles, they should increase at roughly the same rate over time:"



This one is nice because jparsons provides a reasonable baseline upon which housing prices, and a bubble, can be referenced.
 
The bubble was created by monetary inflation from the federal reserve and artificially low interest rates. From there, this additional money and credit went into the housing market due to incentive programs like the American Dreams Act, CRA and the federally backed GSEs Frannie and Freddie, which were showing trillions in unfunded liabilities as early as 2001. The lenders were giving no money down, variable rate loans to folks who could not, under normal credit circumstances, afford the homes. When the toxicity became apparent, which happened due to the raise in interest rates from the federal reserve. This caused variable rates to jump, toxic securities to be bundled and the explosion in the derivatives market. Which was simply the conduit with which hedging occurred.

I'm not arguing that lenders played along in malinvestment and bad lending. But that was bound to happen, as stated by Paul in 2001, with all the additional money and credit being fed into the market by the federal reserve's inflationary policy.

Did lenders make bad investments and loans? Yes. But that is not WHY the bubble formed or why it popped. It was simply a symptom of money and credit expansion, along with government incentive programs to get people into home they could not afford.

I'm not going over this again with you.
 
The bubble was created by monetary inflation from the federal reserve and artificially low interest rates.
Really so according to you the private sector made shitty and fraudulent loans and overinvested in housing because there were low interest rates. The simple fact that this bullshit you present has been debunked a thousand times yet you still spew it means you a re either illiterate are a retard most likely both.
I mean shit how many times do we have to tell you taht 2+2 equals 4 in order for you to stop saying it is 5?
You are a retard. everyone include conservative say and know it that makes you a retard
 
Really so according to you the private sector made shitty and fraudulent loans

actually the way it works is that the Fed makes the loans to the banks who in turn use the money to make loans to home buyers. If one bank does not participate all the business goes to other banks and the non participating bank goes bankrupt. So the Fed, in effect, forces the situation. In fact it had an open and well known policy to stimulate the housing market!! The chairman of one bank said, " you've got to keep dancing until the music stops"

And now the silly liberal knows the story too.
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top