Conservatives may want to read this piece about socialism

[BrokeLoser]

The loan officer does not give a shit whether you can pay back the loan or not.

His only motivation is his commission on the sale.

Proving that borrower X has the ability to pay is not the responsibility of the LO or the broker.

 

[Mac1958]

Ah. Please see post 9, which provides an actual, non-Talk Radio account of what happened. From someone in the industry, who lived through it 24/7.
.

You did an awesome job ‘dressing it up’. Still total ******* bullshit.
I struggle to understand how people can possibley spin and repackage this shit. The borrower, a grown adult said via signature “I CAN PAY THESE PAYMENTS AND ADHERE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT”
That’s it....end of ******* story.
The Lib way is to divert blame...it’s what you do, you hate personal accountability.

"Total ******* bullshit".

Got it. It just never happened. I don't see it! It's not there!

I realize none of this information exists within the ideological closed circuit of your world, but it does exist. Not hard to find, either.
.

what is total bullshit? did home owners fail to pay their mortgage or not? It's quite simple.

Well, it really isn't.

If you would like to refute any of my 12 specific points, you're welcome to.
.

so you're saying that a person with a mortgage is not entitled to pay? hly fk dude.

Huh?
.

 

[Mac1958]

I'm getting the funny feeling that there a lot of people who have absolutely no idea whatsoever what happened leading up to the Meltdown, but are just running with the simplest talking points they can conjure.

 

[jc456]

First Clinton, then Bush.

Under clinton and bush.

Say gents...which Administration actively campaigned that "everyone should own a home?"

Clinton or Bush II?

dodd/ frank. I already explained that to you. And it was during Clinton.

 

[Mr Natural]

Proving that borrower X has the ability to pay is not the responsibility of the LO or the broker.

WHAT?

 

[jc456]

You did an awesome job ‘dressing it up’. Still total ******* bullshit.
I struggle to understand how people can possibley spin and repackage this shit. The borrower, a grown adult said via signature “I CAN PAY THESE PAYMENTS AND ADHERE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT”
That’s it....end of ******* story.
The Lib way is to divert blame...it’s what you do, you hate personal accountability.

"Total ******* bullshit".

Got it. It just never happened. I don't see it! It's not there!

I realize none of this information exists within the ideological closed circuit of your world, but it does exist. Not hard to find, either.
.

what is total bullshit? did home owners fail to pay their mortgage or not? It's quite simple.

Well, it really isn't.

If you would like to refute any of my 12 specific points, you're welcome to.
.

so you're saying that a person with a mortgage is not entitled to pay? hly fk dude.

Huh?
.

Huh-- an expression used when one is confused. I see you are. You can't seem to state that the person who signed the mortgage is responsible to pay it back. wow.

 

[Mr Natural]

Huh-- an expression used when one is confused. I see you are. You can't seem to state that the person who signed the mortgage is responsible to pay it back. wow.

And it's incumbent upon the bank to make sure that the borrower can actually can pay it back.

 

[jc456]

I'm getting the funny feeling that there a lot of people who have absolutely no idea whatsoever what happened leading up to the Meltdown, but are just running with the simplest talking points they can conjure.

defaulted loans and the reselling of those defaulted loans. Again, you feel someone with a mortgage isn't responsible to pay against the loan. How weird for your.

 

[jc456]

Huh-- an expression used when one is confused. I see you are. You can't seem to state that the person who signed the mortgage is responsible to pay it back. wow.

And it's incumbent upon the bank to make sure that the actually can pay it back.

yep, so ignoring that fact and instituting that everyone ought to have the same ability to purchase a home and to look the other way legislation passed by dodd/ frank caused the meltdown

 

[BrokeLoser]

Look fellas, there’s nothing trivial about this subject. Let me dumb it way down for ease of understanding.
If Wells Fargo, through the kindness of their heart decided to send ShaQuita, a hood rat with a 420 fico an unsecured credit card with a $100k limit and she ran the card up and defaulted how and the hell can any twisted mind conclude that it was Wells Fargo who ran up the credit line and defaulted?

Because Wells Fargo is on the hook for the money and might want to think about being a bit more selective in who they lend the money to.

It's not a big deal to turn down questionable loan applications.

So the lender offers generous guidelines...therefore the default is their fault? They signed for the purchases and didn’t make the payments set forth in the agreement?
Please listen to how retarded you sound.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Look fellas, there’s nothing trivial about this subject. Let me dumb it way down for ease of understanding.
If Wells Fargo, through the kindness of their heart decided to send ShaQuita, a hood rat with a 420 fico an unsecured credit card with a $100k limit and she ran the card up and defaulted how and the hell can any twisted mind conclude that it was Wells Fargo who ran up the credit line and defaulted?

Because Wells Fargo is on the hook for the money and might want to think about being a bit more selective in who they lend the money to.

It's not a big deal to turn down questionable loan applications.

It's not a big deal to turn down questionable loan applications.

Some community organizers disagree with your claim.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

First Clinton, then Bush.

Under clinton and bush.

Say gents...which Administration actively campaigned that "everyone should own a home?"

Clinton or Bush II?

dodd/ frank. I already explained that to you. And it was during Clinton.

Ummmm….Dodd-Frank was passed in 2010.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Proving that borrower X has the ability to pay is not the responsibility of the LO or the broker.

WHAT?

The burden to prove ability to pay doesn’t lie with the LO or the Broker. What part don’t you understand?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The Meltdown was in many ways the result of government refusing to regulate the very "securities" and derivatives that damn near brought our economy down.
.

Here is where we may part... refusing to regulate is actually incorrect. It was by design. Indeed it was a result of REGULATIONS that were specifically made to route around regulations, and to even remove some market vehicles out of the SEC's jurisdiction.
Larry Summers was one of the top architects of the derivative market (of which he himself made $millions) and BTW - was a two time top advisor to Obama and Obama wanted to make him Fed Chief...so it isn't just Republicans that reward corruption.

As well as. again, it is important to keep driving in the fact that this is NOT capitalism. It is Corporatism. This is critical for people to understand. Corporatism fundamentally changed our country. We are no longer a Democratic Republic. We are a Plutocratic Corporatocracy.

 

[BrokeLoser]

I'm getting the funny feeling that there a lot of people who have absolutely no idea whatsoever what happened leading up to the Meltdown, but are just running with the simplest talking points they can conjure.

In an attempt to blur facts Libs love to build extreme complexity into everything...it’s how they keep their head in their anus. No complexity changes who signed the loan docs.

 

[Some Guy]

Blaming government for problems isn't really any different than thinking government can solve problems. Government is just a corporation with a given job to do. So, government has plenty of blame to share in the financial crisis. But it's perfectly reasonable to lay plenty of blame at the feet of and financial institutions that played loose with people's money and lost. They should have been allowed to fail. As it was though, they got to privatize the gains and socialize the losses, which is some total bullshit.

 

[Tehon]

The Meltdown was in many ways the result of government refusing to regulate the very "securities" and derivatives that damn near brought our economy down.
.

Here is where we may part... refusing to regulate is actually incorrect. It was by design. Indeed it was a result of REGULATIONS that were specifically made to route around regulations, and to even remove some market vehicles out of the SEC's jurisdiction.
Larry Summers was one of the top architects of the derivative market (of which he himself made $millions) and BTW - was a two time top advisor to Obama and Obama wanted to make him Fed Chief...so it isn't just Republicans that reward corruption.

As well as. again, it is important to keep driving in the fact that this is NOT capitalism. It is Corporatism. This is critical for people to understand. Corporatism fundamentally changed our country. We are no longer a Democratic Republic. We are a Plutocratic Corporatocracy.

Whatever you may think we are, it is a result of capitalism.

 

[BlackSand]

Well, they don't:

• Drop standards significantly below what is required of them
• Relax standards to the point at which DOGS were buying homes
• Knowingly put people in balloon mortgages they knew those people would lose
• Lobby (successfully) Greenspan, Bush and the government to refuse to regulate the shit securities
• Go after then-CFTC Chairperson Brooksley Born when she BEGGED Greenspan to regulate these shit securities, and their fucked up derivatives cousins, knowing what was coming
  
• Package shit loans into opaque MBS "securities" and sell them off within 12 hours, eliminating their risk
• Threaten to pull business from ratings agencies if these shit securities are not given AAA ratings
• Make the shit securities even shittier by adding fat fees that were absorbed into operating costs
  
• Sell and buy hundreds of billions of dollars of CDSs that had zero (0) dollars in reserve
• Create shit CDOs, which are three times as shitty as MBSs, and misrepresent them
• Bet against the very same shit securities they're selling to "clients"
• Actually create shit securities DESIGNED to fail and buy swaps on them

The Meltdown was about the above, not about legislation.
.

.
​

If anyone is wondering how all that happen without the government dragging a shitload of people to court ...
Then perhaps you should be wondering why the government didn't want the bankers to testify under oath ...

Of course you could say it is because the government is as corrupt and complicate in the mess as the banks ...
But really ... How's that going to assist the socialist dream?

If you think the government and politicians didn't have the opportunity to nail the bankers to the wall ...
Then ask the socialists how it benefitted them to have the bankers take the fall (especially if you give them a parachute).

.​

 

[Mr Natural]

The burden to prove ability to pay doesn’t lie with the LO or the Broker. What part don’t you understand?

They're the ones lending the money so yes, they're the ones who most likely would like to see it returned to them at some point.

Borrowers can say anything they want to get the loan. It's up to the bank to verify the claims.

What part don’t you understand?

 

[BrokeLoser]

The burden to prove ability to pay doesn’t lie with the LO or the Broker. What part don’t you understand?

They're the ones lending the money so yes, they're the ones who most likely would like to see it returned to them at some point.

Borrowers can say anything they want to get the loan. It's up to the bank to verify the claims.

What part don’t you understand?

Before engaging in this big boy debate you should really learn some fundamentals…LO’s and Brokers don’t fund loans...they originate them.