Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
.
If it's anything like HBO's "Too Big to Fail", I won't bother.
I'm in the industry. My guess is that I know quite a bit more than you do about what happened, regardless of what Rachel Maddow tells you.
.
.
So now I'm an evil conservative hardcore capitalist. The wingers are a HOOT.
.
The build-up to the crisis was not one sided. The government knew this would happen because they had caused this same thing to happen on a smaller scale in 1972. A major scandal struck the Federal Housing Administration (FHA).
Don't be such an ill-informed Chickenshit.
I'm in the industry. My guess is that I know quite a bit more than you do about what happened, regardless of what Rachel Maddow tells you.
.
Well, I'm not. Just a man on the factory floor. And if people like me fixed the machinery I work on the way you fellows fixed the financial markets, nothing would run in this nation. But is it the people on the factory floor that took it in the ass, while you fellows just continued to get richer. Their should have been some people from the high levels of finance going to Federal Pens, and not the counrty clubs reserved for white collar miscreants.
I'm in the industry. My guess is that I know quite a bit more than you do about what happened, regardless of what Rachel Maddow tells you.
.
Well, I'm not. Just a man on the factory floor. And if people like me fixed the machinery I work on the way you fellows fixed the financial markets, nothing would run in this nation. But is it the people on the factory floor that took it in the ass, while you fellows just continued to get richer. Their should have been some people from the high levels of finance going to Federal Pens, and not the counrty clubs reserved for white collar miscreants.
Fortunately I wasn't one of those who created or pushed the types of products that had such a big role in the disaster. Those folks definitely deserve the anger directed at them, and only the most partisan would try to defend or spin the abject greed they exercised. "Miscreants"? Yeah, agreed. But that's not the whole story.
Regarding those products, like CMO's, the regulators let them grow and infect the entire economic system. Why is that? The feds had the resources, they knew the products existed, yet they did nothing. Unchecked greed is terribly dangerous, but it's made more so when our "leaders" choose not to regulate them. "Too Big to Fail" doesn't even begin to address this.
And "Too Big to Fail" also clearly chooses not to address the millions of people who took out huge home equity loans to buy that extra big screen, the new car, the lovely vacations, and (worst of all) to pay off credit cards they would then immediately run back up. The politicians can't say this because it would cost them votes - but the greed exercised by the man on the street also played a significant role.
There are many villains in the crisis. "Too Big to Fail" chose to point the finger at one, and only one, direction: Those Evil Banks. The writer, Andrew Ross Sorkin, knows damn well that's only a part of it. The movie is intellectually dishonest.
.
Well, I'm not. Just a man on the factory floor. And if people like me fixed the machinery I work on the way you fellows fixed the financial markets, nothing would run in this nation. But is it the people on the factory floor that took it in the ass, while you fellows just continued to get richer. Their should have been some people from the high levels of finance going to Federal Pens, and not the counrty clubs reserved for white collar miscreants.
Fortunately I wasn't one of those who created or pushed the types of products that had such a big role in the disaster. Those folks definitely deserve the anger directed at them, and only the most partisan would try to defend or spin the abject greed they exercised. "Miscreants"? Yeah, agreed. But that's not the whole story.
Regarding those products, like CMO's, the regulators let them grow and infect the entire economic system. Why is that? The feds had the resources, they knew the products existed, yet they did nothing. Unchecked greed is terribly dangerous, but it's made more so when our "leaders" choose not to regulate them. "Too Big to Fail" doesn't even begin to address this.
And "Too Big to Fail" also clearly chooses not to address the millions of people who took out huge home equity loans to buy that extra big screen, the new car, the lovely vacations, and (worst of all) to pay off credit cards they would then immediately run back up. The politicians can't say this because it would cost them votes - but the greed exercised by the man on the street also played a significant role.
There are many villains in the crisis. "Too Big to Fail" chose to point the finger at one, and only one, direction: Those Evil Banks. The writer, Andrew Ross Sorkin, knows damn well that's only a part of it. The movie is intellectually dishonest.
.
Did not see Too Big to Fail. Just watched the second segment of the PBS Frontline series. And they were not at all kind to the regulators, indeed, pointed out that the failure there was one of the primary causes of the economic disruption.
However, everytime someone pushes for real regulation of the financial transactions in this nation, they are labeled as socialist and anti-business.
Now, as a consumer, I saw a lot of this coming. No big screen TV, no credit cards for over 25 years. And my properties are all above water. However, I have less than half the equity that I had only 4 years ago. But, had I been one of those that lost my job, I would now be bankrupt. When all of this came down, 2008, I was 65. I would have to had to sell all my properties, or let the banks foreclose, and would have ended up with nothing but SS and a small pension from my present employer.
It was not just those that were financially reckless that lost big time.
It's a tough balancing act, and we sure as hell don't have it figured out yet.
The problem with "regulation" is that the feds tend to assume that more regulation is better regulation, and that's just not true. Effective, elastic regulation is crucial, but when it's nothing more than red tape designed to restrict, it becomes a negative.
I'm in the industry. My guess is that I know quite a bit more than you do about what happened, regardless of what Rachel Maddow tells you.
.
Well, I'm not. Just a man on the factory floor. And if people like me fixed the machinery I work on the way you fellows fixed the financial markets, nothing would run in this nation. But is it the people on the factory floor that took it in the ass, while you fellows just continued to get richer. Their should have been some people from the high levels of finance going to Federal Pens, and not the counrty clubs reserved for white collar miscreants.
Fortunately I wasn't one of those who created or pushed the types of products that had such a big role in the disaster.
A MASSIVE part of the crash was the way the ratings agencies gave AAA ratings to these shit products. Had they given appropriate ratings to that garbage, not nearly as much damage would have been done. Yet, once again, the film chooses to ignore this. Why? Because the film had an agenda.
It's a tough balancing act, and we sure as hell don't have it figured out yet.
Not hardly. I spent 18 years writing mortgage loans. And we had a fine system in place when it was run by true mortgage bankers.
As soon as investment houses were permitted to write, fund and sell mortgage loans, all the BS loans started hitting the streets.
Now what was the legislative act that permitted this change?
And to think that people in the industry did not know what was going to happen is crazy.
I and some of my cohorts would bet on which month a loan would go into default.
Any decent underwriter or loan officer KNEW that we were creating a disaster. The ONLY reason it was allowed to continue is because of the money being made and with the sale of MBS, the risk of these bad loans could be passed on to an un suspecting investor.
Thanks to the credit rating agencies.
BTW, sub prime loans used to serve a useful purpose in the mortgage market. A niche if you will. When sub prime loans became the norm the end was near. I always wrote what was considered "A" paper loans and got out as the sub prime collapse was near. Besides that, as the end neared you couldn't find anything but crummy borrowers getting sub prime loans.
But to think the industry did not know what they were doing is crazy. They knew. They just didn't care. Greed was king. You had loan officers making 200k a year that had never made over 50. That will make you greedy. Managers making 500k a year. The amount of money being made was astounding.
But surely the right wing knows it was all Barney Frank's fault.
Fannie and Freddie are the binary black holes at the epicenter of the bubble and meltdown.
Fortunately I wasn't one of those who created or pushed the types of products that had such a big role in the disaster. Those folks definitely deserve the anger directed at them, and only the most partisan would try to defend or spin the abject greed they exercised. "Miscreants"? Yeah, agreed. But that's not the whole story.
Regarding those products, like CMO's, the regulators let them grow and infect the entire economic system. Why is that? The feds had the resources, they knew the products existed, yet they did nothing. Unchecked greed is terribly dangerous, but it's made more so when our "leaders" choose not to regulate them. "Too Big to Fail" doesn't even begin to address this.
And "Too Big to Fail" also clearly chooses not to address the millions of people who took out huge home equity loans to buy that extra big screen, the new car, the lovely vacations, and (worst of all) to pay off credit cards they would then immediately run back up. The politicians can't say this because it would cost them votes - but the greed exercised by the man on the street also played a significant role.
There are many villains in the crisis. "Too Big to Fail" chose to point the finger at one, and only one, direction: Those Evil Banks. The writer, Andrew Ross Sorkin, knows damn well that's only a part of it. The movie is intellectually dishonest.
.
Did not see Too Big to Fail. Just watched the second segment of the PBS Frontline series. And they were not at all kind to the regulators, indeed, pointed out that the failure there was one of the primary causes of the economic disruption.
However, everytime someone pushes for real regulation of the financial transactions in this nation, they are labeled as socialist and anti-business.
Now, as a consumer, I saw a lot of this coming. No big screen TV, no credit cards for over 25 years. And my properties are all above water. However, I have less than half the equity that I had only 4 years ago. But, had I been one of those that lost my job, I would now be bankrupt. When all of this came down, 2008, I was 65. I would have to had to sell all my properties, or let the banks foreclose, and would have ended up with nothing but SS and a small pension from my present employer.
It was not just those that were financially reckless that lost big time.
Yup.
The problem with "regulation" is that the feds tend to assume that more regulation is better regulation, and that's just not true.
Talking about the 08 Collapse without mentioning Fannie and Freddie is like discussing Earth's climate without mentioning the Sun
It's a tough balancing act, and we sure as hell don't have it figured out yet.
Not hardly. I spent 18 years writing mortgage loans. And we had a fine system in place when it was run by true mortgage bankers.
As soon as investment houses were permitted to write, fund and sell mortgage loans, all the BS loans started hitting the streets.
Now what was the legislative act that permitted this change?
