And he's pretty much spot-on. Libtard screams of "Nooooooo!" below...

You might want to go look at those numbers Bloomsborg.

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Back to the CRA red herring again, are we?

It's all they have.

What Bloomsborg is referring to is the practice of "redlining" basically drawing a red line around neighborhoods and denying loans to anyone inside them. Those neighborhoods tended to be minority and poor. Congress never forced anyone to give a loan, they restricted that process so that banks had to actually look at each applicant and not deny them based on their address.

That shiat is very disappointing, Mike.

LordZorch: And he's pretty much spot-on. Libtard screams of "Nooooooo!" below...

Oh, we know, bankers are helpless against the urge to make profits at the expense of the entire country, and the government failed as their caretaker.

It's the government's job to put out the fires the banks/wall street start, but their FIRST responsibility is to stay out of the way UNLESS there's a fire.

Why can't corporations self-regulate safely? Why, they're helpless retards, that's why. But it's our job to defend them and let them do whatever they want, because like Jesus said, "Whatever you did to the least of these, you did to Me". -Matthew 25:40

By the way, if you're reading to this point and actually agree with this ball of compressed Poe-esque sarcasm, please don't vote.

Barbigazi: What Bloomsborg is referring to is the practice of "redlining" basically drawing a red line around neighborhoods and denying loans to anyone inside them. Those neighborhoods tended to be minority and poor. Congress never forced anyone to give a loan, they restricted that process so that banks had to actually look at each applicant and not deny them based on their address.

That shiat is very disappointing, Mike.

But let's not let facts get in the way of Zorch's herpy derp.

I am shocked, SHOCKED that the Mayor of New York City would publicly express opinions sympathetic to Wall Street's interests. I suppose the next thing you know, we'll have Presidential candidates in Iowa singing the praises of ethanol subsidies.

Nabb1: I am shocked, SHOCKED that the Mayor of New York City would publicly express opinions sympathetic to Wall Street's interests. I suppose the next thing you know, we'll have Presidential candidates in Iowa singing the praises of ethanol subsidies.

The shocking part is that he's using such a terrible argument to do it.

The old "Clinton made the banks lend money to black people who wouldn't pay it back" nonsense was more for the conspiracy theory crowd than for normal people. If Blomberg is using it now then he must be desperate.

Barbigazi: Congress never forced anyone to give a loan, they restricted that process so that banks had to actually look at each applicant and not deny them based on their address.

Which the banks then decided it was too much work to actually look into each applicant's information individually, and simply offloaded the responsibility to the brokers, who took their word for it instead.

Sure, single mother with 8 kids living in a Section 8 apartment, you too can have a $300K home just like the rich people! Simply sign here guaranteeing us you make $100K a year in stated income, and we'll believe you, sight unseen! Oh and btw we're selling your mortgage liability to some hapless investment group in a few months that believes this loan carries a AAA rating, but don't you worry about the mumbo jumbo, just send your payment to this address every month and enjoy your brand-new home!

And here we are.

For the hundredth time, defaulted mortgages did not crash the economy. By themselves, they would have caused the real estate bubble to pop, which would have caused a minor recession, at most. The problem is what the poor, poor banks did with those mortgages before they went into default. By combining them and passing them along as investment-grade securities, then over-leveraging themselves beyond all reason, they magnified the effect of the bad mortgages many times over.

So yeah... I guess the tl;dr version for LordDerp would be "Libtard screams of 'Nooooooo!'"

skinnycatullus: For the hundredth time, defaulted mortgages did not crash the economy. By themselves, they would have caused the real estate bubble to pop, which would have caused a minor recession, at most. The problem is what the poor, poor banks did with those mortgages before they went into default. By combining them and passing them along as investment-grade securities, then over-leveraging themselves beyond all reason, they magnified the effect of the bad mortgages many times over.

So yeah... I guess the tl;dr version for LordDerp would be "Libtard screams of 'Nooooooo!'"

To trolls, politics isn't about facts, any more than football is about an inflated leather ball. It's just team sports, and public policy is the ball.

Bloody William: And now it's too much work to look at each foreclosure individually, so instead robo-sign everything and take peoples' houses when they're paid off or not even bought through a mortgage.

Well at least they got slapped for doing that, but yeah. It's been half-assed for too long, and now it's coming back to bite all of us.

Hobodeluxe: afaik there wasn't a big problem with people misreporting income. that is the sort of thing that is verifiable. the loan company/bank has the responsibility of doing their due diligence in verify these things. the problem was the bank was allowing loans to go to people who couldn't afford them. because they were passing off the mortgages asap to someone else. All because they took down the wall separating the lending institutions and the investment institutions.

No actually it was a huge problem. I was in the middle of it since my ex was a realtor during that period, and the "stated income" line was being abused by mortgage brokers left and right. I was getting a second mortgage on my house to do some repairs and the guy tried to lend me $600K on it when I was only asking for $80K. I turned him down because I didn't want to have to pay all that money back. I saw this sort of thing over and over.

Another scam was where the appraiser, mortgage broker and agent and buyer were all in kahutz and writing loans on property that was, say, $50K higher than market value, and then asking the seller to give them $50K in cash back at closing once funding came through. The agents didn't care because they got fatter commissions, the seller didn't care because he sold his house at the price he wanted, the mortgage broker didn't care because he was getting a fatter commission and the buyer didn't care because he was probably splitting the cash with everyone and didn't plan to make a single payment on the place. The mortgage company didn't care because they were sloughing the liability off to mortgage investment funds who would get maybe their money back when the house was repossessed and resold.

Big ol' Ponzi scheme right there.

Did Congress make banks fraudulently sell CDOs backed by worthless mortgages?

Here is a hint:
Link (new window)

Wait a minute. If congress made the banks give loans to poor people back then how come they can't make the banks give loans to smallbiz now???? HUH? I thought all smallbiz really needed right now was capital? Will no one think of the job creators?

Hobodeluxe: Wendy's Chili: Wendy's Chili: Some people made tons of dough on the collapse of those mortgage derivatives but had nothing to do with creating them.

I should rephrase that. Some derivatives had to be created specifically so people could bet against them, but they didn't create the POS mortgages and toxic bonds that they were based on. They simply saw they were shiat before everyone else.

No it is pretty much that simple. The big banks lobbied to get those de-regulations so they cold overextend themselves. and so they could create those derivatives without any regulators on the beat. and they created those bundles that hid the toxic shiat so they could play hot potato with them. Then they would place bets against them with their "preferred clients" while pushing them off on pension fund managers and others. The repeal of Glass Stegall and the other de-regulations that allowed this to happen were not by accident. they lobbied hard and paid a lot of money for that legislation. They worked hard getting the right people installed at the SEC,The Fed and Treasury. And on the appropriate financial /banking committees.

You speak the truth. But fundamentally, the legalized bribery of Congress is the basic problem.

The entire financial meltdown was caused by Barney Frank.

vernonFL: The entire financial meltdown was caused by Barney Frank's penis.

make me some tea: Which the banks then decided it was too much work to actually look into each applicant's information individually, and simply offloaded the responsibility to the brokers, who took their word for it instead.

Yep. I know someone who got WAY more money than they ever should have, given the income, plus a little extra for repairs or whatnot, and guess who can't pay their mortgage and is being foreclosed on? The broker did a lot of things that shouldn't have been done at the time, including claiming a friend who somehow was involved in co-signing was a family member.

I remember at the time thinking "I can't believe the bank is just giving money away like that" but a few years later, it all makes sense now that we see what they were really doing.

Barbigazi: What Bloomsborg is referring to is the practice of "redlining" basically drawing a red line around neighborhoods and denying loans to anyone inside them. Those neighborhoods tended to be minority and poor. Congress never forced anyone to give a loan, they restricted that process so that banks had to actually look at each applicant and not deny them based on their address.

That shiat is very disappointing, Mike.

yeah, but forcing banks to actually treat everyone equally is 'regulating the market' and 'socialism'.

Weaver95: Barbigazi: What Bloomsborg is referring to is the practice of "redlining" basically drawing a red line around neighborhoods and denying loans to anyone inside them. Those neighborhoods tended to be minority and poor. Congress never forced anyone to give a loan, they restricted that process so that banks had to actually look at each applicant and not deny them based on their address.

That shiat is very disappointing, Mike.

yeah, but forcing banks to actually treat everyone equally is 'regulating the market' and 'socialism'.

We can't have that, now can we. Who dares questions the invisible hand of the market?

/On one hand the bank approved these loans
//on the other hand-borrowers accepted the loans without doing the math.
///I got pre-approved for $300,000 loan on a salary of $24,000. Did not take them up on it.

Barbigazi: What Bloomsborg is referring to is the practice of "redlining" basically drawing a red line around neighborhoods and denying loans to anyone inside them. Those neighborhoods tended to be minority and poor. Congress never forced anyone to give a loan, they restricted that process so that banks had to actually look at each applicant and not deny them based on their address.

That shiat is very disappointing,

That shiat is very disappointing, Mike.

and when banks didnt get a statiscal number of loans to risky borrowers, the special interest pandering congressmen would have the IRS all over the bankers or even go so far as to summon then to Capital Hill to get their minds right.

Make loans or else. Is that too hard for the left to admit? Next you will find them glossing over Barney Frank and hiscovering up his boyfriend's fraud at Fannie Mae.

vernonFL: The entire financial meltdown was caused by Barney Frank.

Yep, we should never have let our country be run by a big purple dinosaur.

/screams "Noooooooooo"

False

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Back to the CRA red herring again, are we?

Yup. Despite the mounds of evidence CRA loans were less likely to default.

Or are they going the student loan and not home loan route?

fusillade762: I blame ACORN. For everything.

wait - I thought this was 'blame communism' week?

MEANWHILE, IN A PYRAMID NOT FAR AWAY...



Max: What did I miss?
Sam: I think you just single-handedly destroyed the foundations of the U.S. economic system over a pile of corndogs.
Max: What, again?

If you or someone you know suffers from Anti-Government Derangement Syndrome, ask your doctor how opening a goddamned book once in a while may offer the relief you seek. Symptoms of AGDS include incessant yammering-on about nonexistent abominations, an unshakeable conviction that everyone is out to get you, and a fierce urge to portray oneself as a victim in as many situations as possible.