Occupy Wall Street: Not on major media but worth watching!

[Dudesome]

If you want to know about the info I referenced, try reading it.

Lenders make money from fees and subprime paid the most. Subprime was least regulated and easiest to manipulate.

Speaking of relevance, you're off in left field... again. We were disagreeing over who gets the bad image from out-of-control borrowing and lending, not post-bust aspects that didn't apply pre-bust.

aye beg my pardon, sai guess I didn't catch that.

gotta reread this well paced conversation.

 

[dagnabit]

subprime was unregulated junk until backed by federal dollars (fannie/freddie)

no one would touch the stuff so there was no need to regulate it.

it regulated itself prior to government "backing"

 

[forty]

commercial mortgages weren't subjected to the lower qualifying standards and didn't end up "toxic" to banks, they stayed solid. full documents and full 20-25% down payments always required. had the gov not intervened by mandating banks to ease qualifying standards to unqualified borrows for home mortgages things would look a lot different today.

 

[Dudesome]

ok I have reread the converstaion. Damn I guess I was abit off. somehow I jumped from page 40 to the last one.

subprime was unregulated junk until backed by federal dollars (fannie/freddie)

no one would touch the stuff so there was no need to regulate it.

it regulated itself prior to government "backing"

this is my opinion overall stated perfectly.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

Ah Jimmy, you really fudged that up. Intentionally of course, and we have equally as fervent an ideologue in the White House now.

It sounds great, "Fairness" and what not, but essentially that begat the over-leveraged market we have today. Risk doesn't disappear because government says so.

The keynesians still fail to truly understand the basic micro theory of utility. You can't force action but only provide incentives for it. Keynesian theories failed Europe in the 30's, reignited hyper-inflation and then ultra-nationalist tendencies (Much like it has affected Europe RIGHT NOW). Soon after: WWII.

Ofcourse, the far Left would fail to be relevant if it were admitted their economic underpinning is a plastic pu-pu platter. Keynes is dead. Stop fucking with his corpse.

Lenders didn't buy Keynesian versions of calculators. They just stopped doing due diligence on borrowers. You can't point to a single mandate that condones liars loans.

subprime was unregulated junk until backed by federal dollars (fannie/freddie)

no one would touch the stuff so there was no need to regulate it.

it regulated itself prior to government "backing"

Contraire, mon frere, banks, lenders and ratings agencies colluded enough for global recession.

Backing loans isn't regulation of lending standards. The idea that government would back liars loans is a myth.

 

[forty]

The idea that government would back liars loans is a myth.

how did they end up on the hook?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJmjf_gZOUs

 

[dagnabit]

the FACT that fannie backed bundled sub prime loans is no myth.

iv'e pointed to several you refuse to read

 

[Dudesome]

guees im not relevent here either need to get teh heck out

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

how did they end up on the hook?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJmjf_gZOUs

I guess when lenders knew how to fill out loan applications so deadbeats would flop. Then they packed bubble payments to ensure they'd flop. Then they insured their flops to pay when they flopped.

It's gotta be somebody else' fault.

Nobody's off the hook. Hindsight is 20/20. Whether this dysfunctional congress can pass landing regulations is anybody's guess. But we know the difference between what happened and the fabrications that government allows or ever allowed liars loans. There's nothing to back that charge. This is why the argument gets so weird because nobody can reference legislation that backs fraud, much less systemic fraud.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

the FACT that fannie backed bundled sub prime loans is no myth.

it's also no lending standard, regulation or any rule that tells lenders whether to falsify loan applications.

it's not what you point to, it's the argument you make.

 

[greenmatter]

Your premise falls apart when you realize the fact you can get herpes even when you're wearing a raincoat. You can't blame someone for going balls deep it happens whether you want to or not when the drunk chick passes out and throws the rhythm off.

Hahahaaha

BTW I love this thread it reminds me of the rollicking chaotic buzz of OG's politics&debate forum.

hmmmmm ...... you know its diseased and can still get it up cause it's the drunk chicks fault no matter what. and my premise is somehow falling apart.

but you are the one laughing all the way to the free clinic ........ works for me

 

[forty]

we know the difference between what happened and the fabrications that government allows or ever allowed liars loans. There's nothing to back that charge. This is why the argument gets so weird because nobody can reference legislation that backs fraud, much less systemic fraud.

GSE Backed Loans

With all of the headlines in recent times about mortgage lenders tightening loan standards, the phrase GSE Backed Loans keeps popping up as a safe haven for lenders and borrowers alike. What is a GSE? Why are they liquid and other loans not available? How do I get a GSE loan and what should I know about GSE loans?

GSE stands for Government Sponsored Enterprise, and is commonly used to refer to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Fannie Mae was created in 1938 and Fredie Mac in 1970. Both are publicly traded companies and they both helps banks and lenders maintain their liquidity by purchasing conforming loans.

GSE backed loans are offered through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac both offer purchase financing loans with no money down to qualified borrowers. They also both offer their own version of "Expanded Approval" loans for borrowers with less than stellar credit.

There are GSE backed loans for investors available as well. These non-owner occupied loans typically require a minimum down payment of 10%. Multi-Unit financing can exceed the current limit of 417,000. Contact your mortgage professional for more details.

GSE backed loans offered through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have a lower interest rate than non-conforming loans. There are more buyers in the secondary market for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac allowing the GSE's to offer the low rates on their loans.

GSE backed loans have stated income programs available for those with very good credit ratings. These loans are meant for those who cannot easily document their true income and not for those who do not earn enough money to qualify otherwise.

it's pretty clear to me that liar loans were made available and were fully backed..... but no one ever thought anyone would lie, right?

 

[dagnabit]

you can point to facts and links all you want!!!

DB don't wanna hear it..

the government backed sub prime bundles so they were traded as a+++

until the gov backed subprime they were a non issue.
i implore you to do the cross referencing DB..
all the links i provided are to actual "regulations" and practices of the federal government with zero spin(you can tell by the .gov)


where are the truth in lending violation indictments?

 

[dagnabit]

Contraire, mon frere, banks, lenders and ratings agencies colluded enough for global recession.

before the government backed sub prime bundles?

when was this subprime collapse?

 

[InJoy]

Not to nitpick bro, just a heads up, your number is off by a few decimal places its $1307.69 when you divide those #'s.

Ah too right between my dyslexia and the budder i was goin mad with all them digits hehe

ok those numbers look more realistic but can't say the same bout the war money.

Does the cost of war include all the welfare we give the countries we destroy, does it include the loss of life?

Another thing about the welfare that goes towards rebuilding what we paid good money to destroy.

Why is it that it's a few people at home that actually reap the benefits?

Why is it those are the same people who also made huge profits to destroy the infrastructure in the first place?

Doesn't this seem unfair? or criminal...


Now let us hang anybody who defaulted on loans...

Now the market will stabilize, after those deadbeats are gone...la di da la di da

 

[Dudesome]

before the government backed sub prime bundles?

when was this subprime collapse?

actually yes. before. why do you think we have Rating Agencies in the first place if we have bond yields % to know how risky an investment is?

Im just not too convinced about the lenders.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

it's pretty clear to me that liar loans were made available and were fully backed..... but no one ever thought anyone would lie, right?

Hindsight is 20/20. Nobody ever imagined the formerly stingiest bastards on the planet would flip and loan w/o doing due diligence. Nobody imagined balloon payments, inexplicable excepting intentional default. Nobody imagined credit default swaps to insure junk mortgages. Nobody imagined collusion with the ratings agencies, packing one AAA mortgage with 25 or 30 pieces of junk. Nobody anticipated a fed chief would keep interests rates low when loans were at atomic levels. This tanked the bond market and all the global cash poured into home equities instead of treasuries.

In other words, the market was deregulated to the point it no longer worked. Greenspan said as much to congress.

While you're assessing blame, don't forget Mr. Ownership Society, the man who saw 5 centuries of 10:1 leveraging go 30:1 and sink the boat.

You can't honestly assess global-scale fraud by highlighting brief policy statements.

 

[MIway]

Hindsight is 20/20. Nobody ever imagined the formerly stingiest bastards on the planet would flip and loan w/o doing due diligence. Nobody imagined balloon payments, inexplicable excepting intentional default. Nobody imagined credit default swaps to insure junk mortgages. Nobody imagined collusion with the ratings agencies, packing one AAA mortgage with 25 or 30 pieces of junk. Nobody anticipated a fed chief would keep interests rates low when loans were at atomic levels. This tanked the bond market and all the global cash poured into home equities instead of treasuries.

sure someone did... u'v got the most 'educated' people in business, economics & politics, backed & incentivized by small groups of people representing massive accumulations of wealth, whom are in positions of influence & decision, assured with continuity over time through a one party system hell bent on protecting & amassing their own wealth & personal advantages... so you get...

In other words, the market was deregulated to the point it no longer worked. Greenspan said as much to congress.

While you're assessing blame, don't forget Mr. Ownership Society, the man who saw 5 centuries of 10:1 leveraging go 30:1 and sink the boat.

and they very well know what the system is & how they can tweak it, and very well can forecast what the inevitable sets of outcome will result, and hedge accordingly, all the while amassing their mounds & mounds of unprecedented increases in personal wealth... and you get questions like...

You can't honestly assess global-scale fraud by highlighting brief policy statements.

as they sit back & contemplate the continuation of their dynastic wealth system... without any repercussions from their previous acts of pillaging. status quo.

 

[Dudesome]

Hindsight is 20/20. Nobody ever imagined the formerly stingiest bastards on the planet would flip and loan w/o doing due diligence. Nobody imagined balloon payments, inexplicable excepting intentional default. Nobody imagined credit default swaps to insure junk mortgages. Nobody imagined collusion with the ratings agencies, packing one AAA mortgage with 25 or 30 pieces of junk. Nobody anticipated a fed chief would keep interests rates low when loans were at atomic levels. This tanked the bond market and all the global cash poured into home equities instead of treasuries.

In other words, the market was deregulated to the point it no longer worked. Greenspan said as much to congress.

While you're assessing blame, don't forget Mr. Ownership Society, the man who saw 5 centuries of 10:1 leveraging go 30:1 and sink the boat.

You can't honestly assess global-scale fraud by highlighting brief policy statements.

I see that's where you have it different with most conpiracy theories. You are saying that stuff were not planned ahead.
Yet I know a lot of people (Peter Schiff, Robert Kiyosaki and some others) who literally predicted subprime. Those guys are not hardcore sientists. They just had to open their eyes to see wtf is going on with the system.

I don't believe in things being uncoordinated by someone out there. There is a direction to where all this is heading. There is an intention.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

actually yes. before. why do you think we have Rating Agencies in the first place if we have bond yields % to know how risky an investment is?

Im just not too convinced about the lenders.

There always has been and always will be dubious borrowers. Arguably, some of these fraudulent borrows received loans through no fault of the lender, even though standard lending practice doesn't take the borrower's word. They're supposed to check credit history(s) and verify income(s).

But the market wasn't regulated for subprime and neither was widespread mortgage securitization. This left enough room to get rich quick with few laws to convict. AG is hinting at indictments but I won't hold my breath.

Compare the hundreds of billions in bonuses that were justified on the backs of junk mortgages to folks that got kicked out of their house after a few months. The blame is widespread but IMO, the majority rests on the backs of (fraudulent) lenders, bankers, ratings agencies, insurance companies, etc etc etc.

Not the entire conservative establishment that one illustrious poster suggests. (not you, Dudesome.)