Paying my neighbors bills.

[Care4all]

Our entire recession extends from the housing crisis PC.

There is no doubt that some people are going to benefit from this bailout that do not deserve the help....but I firmly believe there will be many, many, many more people that will be helped directly or indirectly from the housing market turn around.

Many people or institutions were at fault in this mess and any help to them is sickening, including the banks, the speculators, the home owners, the Fed, the Rating Agencies and the gvt regulators...and i surely missed a few.

This means we need to bite the bullet and accept the fact that some of the very people and institutions that caused this mess will benefit as well from the govt help put out there to stop this freefall in the market.

Obviously, the more focused our gvt is on fixing this area of our economy, the better it will be for all of us and the sooner Consumer Confidence will return to the marketplace and economy...and some of the bad players in this mess somehow making out on these measures is NOT A REASON to nix it from happening.

Care

Politicalchic:

Good morning. Nice post.

I wish that I were able to convey to you and others how important it is to spotlight the reasons and errors that caused this mighty, and perhaps global problem.

I agree with you, this is very important....otherwise we will repeat our mistakes.

First, there are a number of unspoken assumptions in your post. Major among them is that what the government is doing is able to solve the problem. No one knows. You seem to give no credance to the idea that this is a naked power grab. You imply that without this huge government investment in socialism we would never recover. In post #177 I document a slight improvement in housing in California.

No...I was against the bank bail out and against this stimulus of everything under the sun. Not that i do not think our gvt does need to spend money on key things like our infrastructure, i just don't think it should be called a stimulus nor did I think that this should be done in an omnibus bill where each i and t can not be dotted and crossed in the legislation...leading to gvt waste.

What I was talking about is a specific program to address the housing crisis and the housing crisis alone....AND IF our gvt is going to spend any money, then their money would be better spent on an entire focus on our housing crisis...

California's uptick in housing in December went to the worms...below ground, in January.

Further, and a very important point to me, is how you gloss over who is responsible. Not to punish them, but to enlighten those who will choose future leaders in our country, I want to drum home that Democrats are 95% of the cause. Bush's acts of omission, not confronting the Senate Democrats when Dodd (who was involved with Countrywide) threatened a filibuster if regulation was imposed, was the other 5%.

WWell, this is the part I differ with you on...not completely, because I do believe the lack of regulation with fannie and freddie's debt ratio, which is what Bush and Senator Hagel were proposing could have helped fannie and freddie from going under, ($30 billion bailout for them combined), BUT that this is such a VERY, VERY, VERY small part of this crisis that we are in....and this is where I believe you need some info...

because as we established earlier, we both believe it is very important to know where the system failed us.

The reason Hagel never got a vote on his legislation to regulate fannie/freddie's debt ratio is because Freddie mac LOBBIED REPUBLICAN MEMBERS of congress to vote against Hagel's measure. The republicans were in charge of all legislation at the time and they did not bring up the legislation because REPUBLICANS did not sign up on the Hagel legislated line, on this.....NOT because of Democrats were threatening to filibuster, as YOU implied.

We are in this mess, because banks decided to buy the debt of unregulated mortgage companies out there...some being run by pizza delivery men and car salesmen....i kid you not, who initially had standards of who they got as borrowers, but then to beat the previous years growth, they continued to lower their standards....and the BANKS decided to continue to buy this debt from these now huge mortgage companies....the BANKS kept taking on the risk....and each year getting riskier....without even blinking their eye...without thought of the ramifications....they took these mortgages and pooled them together to make them more palatable, and they got the rating agencies to give these securities a AAA rating....(turns out the banks were the ones paying the rating agencies to give the ratings...I KID YOU NOT.)

by doing this, pension funds and retirement funds invested in them....of which thru regulations and fiduciary responsibilities, allowed them to do....they could not invest in anything but triple A rating securities and stocks, so giving these toxic assets in securities a triple A rating thru their own in cahoots rating's agencies, they sold them, to all of our retirement and pension funds.

This gave the banks the money to fund these fly by night mortgage companies....after they sold all the people who would qualify normally, then the people who would qualify normally but at a slightly higher risk, to then issuing mortgages to people that had jobs but would not qualify normally, then they went on to create subprime mortgages or adjustable rate mortgages that had no interest for the first few years that added to these people's mortgage amounts...got tagged on to their loans....

AND the banks continued to fund these mortgage companies even when they got to the point of loaning to people who did not have to verify their income or assets or need money down to get a home....

Coupled with this, they focused on those that owned homes already with conventional mortgages and advertised like crazy that they could refinanced them, no matter their credit score and help them get out of credit card debt and lower their monthly payments...same routine, in the beginning the refinancing was to people who legitimately could afford it, then in order to meet each previous years volume, they loosened the standards and allowed these mortgage companies to continue to sell mortgages and the banks could continue to package them in to MBS's and sell them off to all of us...and the rest of the world.

This peaked in 2006, then people began to default, and the whole thing fell, farther than humpty dumpty and their house of cards was seen by all....those owning MBS's dumped them quicker than a hot potatoe if they could and other investors overseas and here in the usa, lost near everything.

Fannie and freddie did not start buying some of these MBS's until 2005 PC, and this whole scam began in 2001 with these non bank mortgage companies who were then underwriten by the other banks, with tsunami force until 2006/2007...THANK GOD Fannie and freddie did NOT buy alot of these toxic assets...though they bought enough to bring them down, to the tune of about 15 billion each firm in bailout.

Democrats defining principle is "equality" such that everybody should have everything.
Conservatives believe that making success possible should be our goal. Under conservative principles, there will be differences in class, material condition and other inequalities. Everyone should have a house -- as long as they can afford one.

I wish that I could convey these ideas to you, and that you would grant those of my persuasion the respect that we also have good hearts. It is the path we choose toward a common goal that defines us.

I understand this, regarding republicans, I am married to a republican and he has a heart of gold...

Care

 

[bthoma91]

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?

you're a socialist aren't you

Of course the only correct response to such an idiotically leading question is the following:

Perhaps I am. Whereas you are an idiot. But I can always change my mind and become something else, while you, my friend, will always be an idiot.​

that made absolutely no sense. Socialism is bad. how does this make me an idiot? in fact you saying that makes you the complete idiot.

 

[Truthmatters]

Socialism is Bad?

Can you tell us why?

 

[bthoma91]

There is nothing fucking socialist in that post.

If you beleive in american tax dollars going to paying people bills.... sounds socialist to me

tip

look up the definition of Socialism, Socialist....

Tip... Socialism is spreading the wealth. My tax dollars going to my neighbors' bills is, hm... spreading the wealth. If you cant understand that then please go you a government class

 

[Truthmatters]

Tell us why it is inherently bad?

 

[Care4all]

If you beleive in american tax dollars going to paying people bills.... sounds socialist to me

tip

look up the definition of Socialism, Socialist....

Tip... Socialism is spreading the wealth. My tax dollars going to my neighbors' bills is, hm... spreading the wealth. If you cant understand that then please go you a government class

to you maybe, but not to Merriam Webster....!

care

 

[bthoma91]

Tell us why it is inherently bad?

Why is socialism bad? read a bio on the Hitler and the rise of the Nazis

 

[Care4all]

Hitler's system was more Fascist than Socialist, regardless of what name was given to it...imho.

 

[Care4all]

Here is a link that describes the housing crisis and how it began, well....

i would recommend watching the full 2 hour documentary, if you can some time....

House of Cards, Global Economic Collapse, Mortgage Brokers, Investment Bankers, Financial Crisis, Greenspan, Business, Refinance, Credit and Housing Crisis - CNBC.com

 

[Care4all]

When your neighor's house is on fire, and is threatening to burn yours down with it, pitching to to put out the fire of their house, EVEN THOUGH THE FIRE IS ENTIRELY THEIR FAULT, still seems like a good idea to me.

But hey, I understand you basical complaint.

My house is not YET underwater, either.

Not a good analogy, IMO. If my neighbor's house is foreclosed on, mine is in no threat of being foreclosed on just because his was.

Not so if his his house is on fire. Then, in fact, it represents a danger to anything near it.

only if you wanted to sell your home, then the foreclosure devalues your house by about $10 grand less....heard on a financial program.... of course this is an average.

If you are not planning to sell it within the next 10 years, you may be able to recoupe that devaluation....

Care

 

[midcan5]

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....

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?

Damn Truth you are going to confuse the hell of the social and economic darwinists conservatives who inhabit this earth today. Excellent post. It has always struck me as funny that the party that claims they are all born again Christians, or at least religiously moral, are the most heartless bunch of people on earth.

Taming the Savage Market

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/50564-libertarianism-in-a-nutshell-ii.html

 

[PoliticalChic]

because as we established earlier, we both believe it is very important to know where the system failed us.

The reason Hagel never got a vote on his legislation to regulate fannie/freddie's debt ratio is because Freddie mac LOBBIED REPUBLICAN MEMBERS of congress to vote against Hagel's measure. The republicans were in charge of all legislation at the time and they did not bring up the legislation because REPUBLICANS did not sign up on the Hagel legislated line, on this.....NOT because of Democrats were threatening to filibuster, as YOU implied.

by doing this, pension funds and retirement funds invested in them....of which thru regulations and fiduciary responsibilities, allowed them to do....they could not invest in anything but triple A rating securities and stocks, so giving these toxic assets in securities a triple A rating thru their own in cahoots rating's agencies, they sold them, to all of our retirement and pension funds.

Democrats defining principle is "equality" such that everybody should have everything.
Conservatives believe that making success possible should be our goal. Under conservative principles, there will be differences in class, material condition and other inequalities. Everyone should have a house -- as long as they can afford one.

I wish that I could convey these ideas to you, and that you would grant those of my persuasion the respect that we also have good hearts. It is the path we choose toward a common goal that defines us.

I understand this, regarding republicans, I am married to a republican and he has a heart of gold...

Care

Well, itty-bitty-missy, Check it out:
Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve Warned Congress - Greenspan Testified for McCain’s Bill to Fix Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2004 and 2005 - Democrats Voted No in House and in Senate Blocked it Along Party Lines!
Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve Warned Congress - Greenspan Testified for McCain’s Bill to Fix Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2004 and 2005 - Democrats Voted No in House and in Senate Blocked it Along Party Lines! « The IUSB Vision Weblog.

Carter and the Dems codified the Democratic Principle of "equality: homes for everybody" in the CRA. For the time that it worked, it was paddled along by Clinton Administration, Dodd, Frank, and, ultimately, by the voters who put Carter II in office.

Pop culture made any regulation, restriction and even criticism of same "racist."

Had there been no political imprimatur the financial sector would have been hesitant at the least, and, possibly not so reckless.

G-d bless your hubby... Mine is a Dem, but a Reagan Dem.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I am 20 years old. Just starting my life out. I live within my means, and i don't purchase things ie. cars, HOUSES, boats, etc. etc. that I can't afford. And to hear about all these houses being forclosed because people decided to bite off more than they can chew, well call me a Redneck Republican, but its not my job to pay there bills. I would rather be considered a "Idiot Cowboy" who can pay his or her own bills rather than make millions of people pay them for me. I dont care that there trying to help people from there houses being forclosed, the point is, they should have spent a little more time going over there income, and making sure they could afford what they were doing. Instead they were worried about living in a classy more expensive neighborhood to look good. My parents spent 20 years of there life serving this country to then retire and now work for the government. Now at the age of 45, 48 after YEARS AND YEARS of hard work, they just bought there dream house. They waited this long, knowing that if they would have done it any earlier they couldnt have afforded it. My point is I dont want to, and shouldnt have to pay my neighbors bills. Its not my job, nor do I owe it to anyone.

Good for you, your shit smells great!

 

[Vision]

I am the author of the article linked by PoliticalChick

PolitcalChick is quite right.

Hagel, Sunnunu, Elizabeth Dole and later Mccain pushed legislation to reform Fannie, Freddie and mortgage policing to bring them in line with the policing and standards for other banking products. They pushed this year after year. It was always a party line vote in the Senate Committee. The Democrats were fillibustering most legislation at that time and the made it clear that any attempt to pass the reforms the OFHEO regulator was asking for since 2001 would be fillibustered. This is why the Senate never had a floor vote and only had the committee vote. There was no point.

There were many layers to the mortgate crisis, the CRA was one such layer, but ceased to be a factor later because when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac decided that it would buy these high risk (bad) loans. Thats right, the banks could make money just by giving loans to just anyone and selling the loans to Fannie/Freddie.

The mortgage crisis was a perfect storm of corruption, good intentions and trying to legislatively change the rules of economics for political reasons. There are MANY layers that contributed to the problem, the largest layer being the circle of corruption between Congress and Wall Street.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I am the author of the article linked by PoliticalChick

PolitcalChick is quite right.

Hagel, Sunnunu, Elizabeth Dole and later Mccain pushed legislation to reform Fannie, Freddie and mortgage policing to bring them in line with the policing and standards for other banking products. They pushed this year after year. It was always a party line vote in the Senate Committee. The Democrats were fillibustering most legislation at that time and the made it clear that any attempt to pass the reforms the OFHEO regulator was asking for since 2001 would be fillibustered. This is why the Senate never had a floor vote and only had the committee vote. There was no point.

There were many layers to the mortgate crisis, the CRA was one such layer, but ceased to be a factor later because when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac decided that it would by these high risk (bad) loans the banks could make money just by giving loans to just anyone and selling the loans to Fannie/Freddie.

Fannie and Freddie weren't even bound by the CRA. Less than 10% of subprime mortgages were made by institutions which the CRA applied to.

 

[Care4all]

because as we established earlier, we both believe it is very important to know where the system failed us.

The reason Hagel never got a vote on his legislation to regulate fannie/freddie's debt ratio is because Freddie mac LOBBIED REPUBLICAN MEMBERS of congress to vote against Hagel's measure. The republicans were in charge of all legislation at the time and they did not bring up the legislation because REPUBLICANS did not sign up on the Hagel legislated line, on this.....NOT because of Democrats were threatening to filibuster, as YOU implied.

by doing this, pension funds and retirement funds invested in them....of which thru regulations and fiduciary responsibilities, allowed them to do....they could not invest in anything but triple A rating securities and stocks, so giving these toxic assets in securities a triple A rating thru their own in cahoots rating's agencies, they sold them, to all of our retirement and pension funds.

Democrats defining principle is "equality" such that everybody should have everything.
Conservatives believe that making success possible should be our goal. Under conservative principles, there will be differences in class, material condition and other inequalities. Everyone should have a house -- as long as they can afford one.

I wish that I could convey these ideas to you, and that you would grant those of my persuasion the respect that we also have good hearts. It is the path we choose toward a common goal that defines us.

I understand this, regarding republicans, I am married to a republican and he has a heart of gold...

Care

Well, itty-bitty-missy, Check it out:
Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve Warned Congress - Greenspan Testified for McCain’s Bill to Fix Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2004 and 2005 - Democrats Voted No in House and in Senate Blocked it Along Party Lines!
Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve Warned Congress - Greenspan Testified for McCain’s Bill to Fix Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2004 and 2005 - Democrats Voted No in House and in Senate Blocked it Along Party Lines! « The IUSB Vision Weblog.

First, it was not mccain's bill, it was Hagel's bill and Mccain did not sign up as a sponsor for it untill 2006 or very late 2005, I will get you a link on this and add it to this post via edit, in a few minutes.

HERE IS THE LINK ON MCCAIN: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/10/19/politics/p093616D96.DTL mccain did not sign on to hagel's bill till 9 moths after it made it to the Senate.

In the end, there was not enough Republican support for Hagel's bill to warrant bringing it up for a vote because Democrats also opposed it and the votes of some would be needed for passage. The measure died at the end of the 109th Congress.

McCain, R-Ariz., was not a target of the DCI campaign. He signed Hagel's letter and three weeks later signed on as a co-sponsor of the bill.

By the time McCain did so, however, DCI's effort had gone on for nine months and was on its way toward killing the bill.

I do not deny that the Democrats in committee did not support Hagel's bill, but Hagel's bill made it to the floor of the Senate anyway, because Republicans had the majority. Hagel got his first reading of the Bill on the floor of the senate, regardless of how those few democrats in committee voted.

Hagel continued to fight for support for his bill, from a few dems and all of the republicans, so he could overcome any possible fillibuster, if it was to take place.

PLEASE NOTE, that no filibuster took place by Dems on the Senate floor, so that part is simply not true.

The Republicans did not even bring the Bill up for a vote...? This really confused me when I heard this, because it would have been a perfect opportunity for Republicans to get the voice they needed on this topic of fannie and freddie's mortgage to debt ratio....

If Dems filibustered it, then it would have even brought the opportunity for even MORE ATTENTION to the issue.....so no real excuse for not bringing it to a vote....

it didn't make sense? Not if republs were truly concerned about fannie and freddie....? I just couldn't figure out why they did not bring it up?????

Then a few months pass... and articles in the main stream media show up, that made sense of it...

Freddie Mac SECRETLY HIRED A LOBBYING FIRM, to lobby Republican Senators that had not signed on to Hagel's bill yet, and lobbied them to not sign up for hagel's regulation bill....

Hagel could not get enough republicans to support it, due to this secret lobbying of freddie AND THIS IS WHY the Republican Majority did not bring Hagel's legislation to the floor.

I will put a link here also, when i get time, thru edit function, for the article about Freddie secretly hiring lobby firm to lobby senate republicans, to not support Hagel's bill....

HERE IS THE LINK: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-10-20-fannie-freddie_N.htm

Carter and the Dems codified the Democratic Principle of "equality: homes for everybody" in the CRA. For the time that it worked, it was paddled along by Clinton Administration, Dodd, Frank, and, ultimately, by the voters who put Carter II in office.

Pop culture made any regulation, restriction and even criticism of same "racist."

Had there been no political imprimatur the financial sector would have been hesitant at the least, and, possibly not so reckless.

G-d bless your hubby... Mine is a Dem, but a Reagan Dem.

the CRA simply states that loans and services made available by banks to people of the same financial status in white neighborhoods, should also be offered to those in "minority" neighborhoods.

lawsuits were not rampant.

The CRA has been in effect through Carter and Reagan, and Bush 1 and Clinton and Bush2....and every single one of these presidents had a push to an "ownership" society, and in to putting more qualified poor people in to homes, in minority neighborhoods....

President Bush 2's home ownership initiative for the minority was to put almost 6 million more of them in to homes by 2010.

I will link to this also, thru edit feature.

Fannie and Freddie did not buy subprime loans and never offered other banks or financial institutions for the individual underwriting of these loans, not even for the people involved in CRA covered communities.

CRA did not force fannie to laon money to those who could not afford to pay it back...this is simply a myth.

only 6% of the toxic loans issued were loaned to people in CRA covered areas by banks.

Fannie and freddie did begin to buy some, very few, mortgaged backed securities with their tripple A ratings in 2005....by that point, it was all over but the shouting....the PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS, OTHER THAN FREDDIE had already loaned out trillions for insecure loans to whoever and whatever....THEY CAUSED this mess....not freddie and fannie and not the CRA legislation which had been around for 4 decades with no detrimental impact to our society...something changed in the "whole system" of banking to allow happen what just happened...

you need to watch the program i watched last night on cnbc called House of Cards....it was very eye opening

ty...my hubby is a doll!

Care

 

[Care4all]

I am the author of the article linked by PoliticalChick

PolitcalChick is quite right.

Hagel, Sunnunu, Elizabeth Dole and later Mccain pushed legislation to reform Fannie, Freddie and mortgage policing to bring them in line with the policing and standards for other banking products. They pushed this year after year. It was always a party line vote in the Senate Committee. The Democrats were fillibustering most legislation at that time and the made it clear that any attempt to pass the reforms the OFHEO regulator was asking for since 2001 would be fillibustered. This is why the Senate never had a floor vote and only had the committee vote. There was no point.

There were many layers to the mortgate crisis, the CRA was one such layer, but ceased to be a factor later because when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac decided that it would buy these high risk (bad) loans. Thats right, the banks could make money just by giving loans to just anyone and selling the loans to Fannie/Freddie.

The mortgage crisis was a perfect storm of corruption, good intentions and trying to legislatively change the rules of economics for political reasons. There are MANY layers that contributed to the problem, the largest layer being the circle of corruption between Congress and Wall Street.

well, if it was the article I read, you left out a lot....that makes the picture clearer...

 

[Vision]

I am the author of the article linked by PoliticalChick

PolitcalChick is quite right.

Hagel, Sunnunu, Elizabeth Dole and later Mccain pushed legislation to reform Fannie, Freddie and mortgage policing to bring them in line with the policing and standards for other banking products. They pushed this year after year. It was always a party line vote in the Senate Committee. The Democrats were fillibustering most legislation at that time and the made it clear that any attempt to pass the reforms the OFHEO regulator was asking for since 2001 would be fillibustered. This is why the Senate never had a floor vote and only had the committee vote. There was no point.

There were many layers to the mortgate crisis, the CRA was one such layer, but ceased to be a factor later because when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac decided that it would by these high risk (bad) loans the banks could make money just by giving loans to just anyone and selling the loans to Fannie/Freddie.

Fannie and Freddie weren't even bound by the CRA. Less than 10% of subprime mortgages were made by institutions which the CRA applied to.

Hey there ace, I never said Fannie and Freddie were........

 

[Care4all]

Report: Mortgage firm arranged stealth campaign - USATODAY.com

Report: Mortgage firm arranged stealth campaign

WASHINGTON (AP) — Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million to kill legislation that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae, three years before the government took control to prevent their collapse.
In the cross hairs of the campaign carried out by DCI of Washington were Republican senators and a regulatory overhaul bill sponsored by Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. DCI's chief executive is Doug Goodyear, whom John McCain's campaign later hired to manage the GOP convention in September.

Freddie Mac's payments to DCI began shortly after the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee sent Hagel's bill to the then GOP-run Senate on July 28, 2005. All GOP members of the committee supported it; all Democrats opposed it.

In the midst of DCI's year-long effort, Hagel and 25 other Republican senators pleaded unsuccessfully with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., to allow a vote.

 

[Care4all]

looks like it was a bipartisan effort to not let hagel's bill come to a vote...no?