Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditIn a press release last week, Chairman Edolphus Towns of the House Committee for Oversight and Government Reform announced a major investigation "into whether mortgage companies employed deceptive and predatory lending practices, or improper tactics to thwart regulation, and the impact of those activities on the current crisis."
This investigation is much needed, and frankly, overdue, as the foreclosure crisis has now hit record levels.
The Committee has requested--and will subpoena if necessary--records from Wells Fargo, Bank of America (including Countrywide), JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Residential Capital (GMAC), and US Bank Home Mortgage. It is also issuing a subpoena for records on Countrywide Financial's VIP program.
While the media seems focused on the Countrywide VIP program and questions of whether Towns himself benefited from it (he has denied doing so but will forward the documents to the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct), I think the far more significant development here is the breadth of information the Committee is demanding from Big Banking.
The records in question cover 2000 to 2008, and include: the number and types of mortgages issued (whether fixed rate, adjustable, subprime, etc.); number of foreclosures and on which types of mortgages for every month during that time period; any marketing strategies and target audiences for residential mortgages, home equity loans, or similar products; special benefits provided to officials with a regulatory relationship with the banks; any draft legislation pertaining to mortgage lending that was offered to legislators; and any coordinated campaigns with other banks to fight mortgage regulation.
The Nation's national affairs correspondent William Greider recently wrote of the financial crisis: "We may know the broad outlines, but the landscape remains littered with unanswered questions and informed suspicions about who did what to produce the breakdown. The relevant facts are still buried in the files of Wall Street firms and the regulatory agencies that utterly failed as watchdogs.... Asking deeper questions about the true sources of the calamity is a first step toward developing authentic answers to the nation's predicament."
Here's hoping the Towns' investigation helps bring responses, finally, towards some of those crucial authentic answers.
Share this article
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Thoughts on politics, current affairs, riffs and reflections on whats in the news and whats not--but should be.
RSS
Something that is current......
98% of mortgages written this year are now backed by the FHA (that's you and your kids).
Keep this in mind in a few years when we investigate the next Mortgage Crisis.....same players will be involved, Barney is head of the list!
Posted by Happy at 10/28/2009 @ 10:47am
Hmmm...still waiting for a lefty like KVH to explain the difference between a 'predatory' loan - and one that banks were required to make pursuant to the relaxed lending standards of the Community Reinvestment Act - which risky paper were sold with the assistance of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd through FNMA and Freddie Mac...
Same old story - statists destroy a market or industry (unionized auto mfg) - then blame the failure on free markets and free enterprise. Seems to work for them though.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 12:07pm
Not only predatory lending should be investigated, but also rampant and unbridled mortgage fraud which includes bank collusion. Bank files are loaded with no recourse commercial and high end residential loans made to 'friends and relations, hidden behind the veil of shell LLC's. And this is a repeat performance. See Savings and Loan Crisis.
We don't have enough jails to house those who have stolen "other peoples' money."
Marcy Kaptur is just about the only congressperson that is calling for money to expand FBI and Justice Department expansion to go after these criminals. The conduit of criminality to campaign contributions is VERY clear.
Posted by OneVote at 10/28/2009 @ 12:20pm
Posted by OneVote at 10/28/2009 @ 12:20pm
"Marcy Kaptur is just about the only congressperson that is calling for money to expand FBI and Justice Department expansion to go after these criminals. The conduit of criminality to campaign contributions is VERY clear."
Ain't gonna happen my friend - the Dems are up to their eyeballs in mortgage industry corruption - and the chance of any 'ethics' committee getting within a mile of the culprits is less than them investigating Charlie Rangel for his millions in 'forgotten' investments.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 12:28pm
KVH, in the blog above you seem to be confusing the mortgage bank end of the crises with the Wall St. investment bank end. They are not the same. To confuse them only plays into the right-wing's blaming the financial collapse on sub-prime loans. The financial collapse was not caused by these loans but by the "collateralization" of these and other financial instruments and the creation of "derivative" side bets on the instruments by the largely FOREIGN investment banks (Goldman Sachs, etc.). The mortgage lenders (and their collaborators like Frank and Dodd) need their share of the blame, but only their share. The real culprits are on Wall St. and other international banking centers (City of London, Georgetown on Grand Cayman, etc.). And they are still (under Obama) stealing everything that is not tied down. To believe otherwise, is to say that poor people had the power and capacity to bring on a world wide financial collapse. Nonsense.
Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 12:37pm
I wonder if Mr Towns will investigate Sen Dodds below market rate loan he got from countrywide? I wont hold my breath for that to happen LOL
Posted by limoman at 10/28/2009 @ 12:48pm
Things are certainly regressing. At least in the days of Crιdit Mobilier (no, don't blame the French!) the ones who made off with the piles of cash left the US with a railroad network supporting an economy stretching across a continent. The current bunch seems to have done nothing but build McMansions for Congressman Frank, Senator Dodd, et. al.
Posted by Mistral at 10/28/2009 @ 12:51pm
Damn straight we better get an in depth investigation of this human derived megadisaster. And that's just the beginning.
Posted here is a sermon of solemn and profound significance:
www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23819.htm
I've recently raved on these blog spaces over the devastating accuracy of the observations in Chris Hedges' "Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle". Just as James Carroll's "House of War" poignantly documents the birth of Pentagon power and the age of bombing our way to prosperity, Hedges new book reveals how those bombs abroad have equally symbolized the psychic defoliation of the nation at home.
Personally, I'm an atheist, but I nominate Hedges as the Isaiah of our Age. Powerful stuff, get it while it's hot.
Some background:
C-Span interview (highly recommended): tinyurl.com/yjhslrj
Youtube footage of Rockford College address:
tinyurl.com/yh53haf
He was prescient then, he's no less prescient now.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/28/2009 @ 12:55pm
Okay, tell me again, my right-wing friends....
what percentage of CFA mortgages defaulted versus the "other kind" from the "free market"?
Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 12:56pm
Mask, it makes no difference Franks and Dodd With the CFA threw off the balance of supply demand in the housing markets which sent housing prices soaring, ,which created a market for the Bof A and Goldman Sacks et al to sell the bundled mortgages. When the bubble burst everyone got screwed .And all of us got left holding the bag .
Posted by limoman at 10/28/2009 @ 1:10pm
Ain't gonna happen my friend - the Dems are up to their eyeballs in mortgage industry corruption - and the chance of any 'ethics' committee getting within a mile of the culprits is less than them investigating Charlie Rangel for his millions in 'forgotten' investments.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 12:28pm | ignore this person | warn this person
I agree Ponti. And, the prosecutions for mortgage fraud that are happening are the ones that are "apolitical" shall we say. Alot of the big money mortgage fraud is in commercial real estate - and experts predict that if the government doesn't pump money into this sector to keep it afloat via easy credit - little collateral security taxpayer money, this will be the next wave of default.
Posted by OneVote at 10/28/2009 @ 1:31pm
Mask, it makes no difference Franks and Dodd With the CFA threw off the balance of supply demand in the housing markets which sent housing prices soaring, ,which created a market for the Bof A and Goldman Sacks et al to sell the bundled mortgages. When the bubble burst everyone got screwed .And all of us got left holding the bag . Posted by limoman at 10/28/2009 @ 1:10pm | ignore this person | warn this person
--we live in a sad world where banks, when forced to make some loans to some poor people who wouldn't otherwise qualify, use it as an excuse to take absurd risks to make sure that they don't only not lose the money lent to subprime borrowers, but that they continue to grow their profits at sky-high rates.
Posted by urmygyro at 10/28/2009 @ 1:36pm
Investigations are all well and good if they result in indictments for fraud, trials and prison terms. It is mind boggling that so few people are on trial or in prison for crimes related to this financial meltdown. Instead they get bonuses. You'd think Bush was still in the White House and that the Republicans still controlled both houses of congress.
Still, the first priority should be writing down the value of home loans. A whole lot of those homes were overappraised. Stick the investors who bought the inflated derivatives, not the home owners.
Posted by Buddy33 at 10/28/2009 @ 1:54pm
Still, the first priority should be writing down the value of home loans. A whole lot of those homes were overappraised. Stick the investors who bought the inflated derivatives, not the home owners.
Posted by Buddy33 at 10/28/2009 @ 1:54pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Your diagnoses is spot on but your prescription seems a bit off.
The first thing that Obama should have done is reenact Glass-Steagall. The second thing he should have done is start a Justice Dept. investigation of the TARP" rip-off. The third thing he should have done is impose emergency price and currency rate controls and begin international trade negotiations to fix currency rates. The fourth thing he should have done is move to replace the unelected and largely foreign bank controlled FED with a national bank under control of the Executive and Congress. To do he would have to understand that wealth is not made by shuffling paper on Wall St. but by men and women at work producing something. And the fifth thing he should have done is produce measures to help small businesses create jobs (as we all know by now only small to medium, and nationally based companies create jobs - transnational corporations do not). And a real stimulus based on rebuilding our infrastructure rather than rewards to those who helped him in his campaign would have guaranteed Obama's place in history as the President who got us out of the present financial crisis rather than the President who dug us deeper into the hole we are in. Simply "writing down the value of home loans" will help no one but Wall St and is weak gruel.
Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 2:32pm
Posted by limoman at 10/28/2009 @ 1:10pm
Funny, whenever we get a screed on CRA mortgages....and how THEY caused the housing crises...
and despite the fact the housing crises was caused by defaulting mortgages...
and I ask how many CRA loans defaulted...the answer from the Right is always a variation on..
"That doesn't matter! What matters is...."
LOL
Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 3:45pm
Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 3:45pm |
They love the idea of the hapless banker being forced at gunpoint to make stupid loans, but it holds as much water as the sieves they have for gray matter.
As if the CRA somehow caused builders to create a glut of new homes, caused speculators to buy them by the dozen, and caused banks to make subprime loans well beyond any ratio delineated by the act.
Did the CRE require banks to not verify income or payment history of applicants?
50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision; another 30% were made by banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations.
Were "No Money Down" Mortgages required by the CRA or GSEs?
Did the CRA mandate using corrupt appraisers that always magically came in at the purchase price or better?
Did the CRA require banks to develop automated underwriting (AU) systems (that may leave many with a free home, if a judge says so and the bank can't prove their the mort holder)?
How exactly did legislation force Moody's, S&Ps and Fitch to rate junk paper as AAA debt?
What about piggy back loans? Were banks required by Congress to lend the first mortgage and do a HELOC for the down payment too?
Still waiting for even one little answer from you Ponti...
Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 4:35pm
"Still waiting for even one little answer from you Ponti..."
~snowball
Why waste your time waiting. These relentless games of "Why in god's name don't these people get it?!" ought to bore you guys to tears --at least those whose gray matter isn't quite so sieve-like.
I know I don't get it. There's a very select few rightwingers here that are worthy of an absorbing conversation. Thrawn's the only one that jumps to mind and, in some ways, he hardly qualifies as a rightwinger.
I realize that there are plenty of more leftward leaning commentators here that don't burn too brightly either, but by and large, the question that should puzzle us all is, "Why are righwingers so damn thick?".
Solve that and win the SuperNobel --the one that actually means something.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/28/2009 @ 4:48pm
Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 12:37pm
Hey, can you come up with an analogy for this?
Like there are elves in a cave making widgets which they loan out to the village folk... Believe it or not I mean it. I need help with the concept that the problem was not the first level of activity but this mystical background level. Can you put this in the form of a creative narrative to serve as an analogy?
Posted by winyahn at 10/28/2009 @ 5:08pm
I'm outta here.
Good night and good luck, ~B
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/28/2009 @ 5:17pm
....I ask how many CRA loans defaulted...the answer from the Right is always a variation on..
"That doesn't matter! What matters is...."
LOL
Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 3:45pm
Your question is akin to, after a meteor hits the Pacific Ocean that leads to Armageddon, wiping out all coastal cities w/little waves, you ask, just how big was it? 50 meters, 200 meters, 500 meters wide?
Look around and ask the dead and dying, do they care just how "big" the little rock was?
Posted by Happy at 10/28/2009 @ 5:18pm
Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 4:35pm
snowball, what exactly do you think was the purpose of the CRA if it was not to force the banks to lower lending standards, to enable loans to people who would not qualify under 'traditional' lending standards? Can you follow the idea that once banks were forced to lower lending standards for low income/bad credit borrowers, then these standards were then necessarily applied to ALL borrowers (MASK, take note)? And which government decisions led to enabling the securitization of mortgage-backed securities resulting from these risky lending practices? FNMA and Freddie Mac.
There's no doubt in mind that it was government intervention in the mortgage industry that caused the bubble. How could the government not expect to drive up the cost of housing and create a housing asset bubble, after it forced banks to abandon traditional lending standards, and created a market for subprime debt?
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:22pm
What do you think Dodd and Frank, supervisors of FNMA and Freddie MAC, were doing playing footsie with Countrywide, the largest subprime lender in the nation? Does it mean nothing to you that in 2005-206 Frank was reassuring everyone who would listen that there was no asset bubble in real estate? Check it out on youtube if you didn't know that. Really, it takes some tremendous cognitive dissonance not to see the connections here. To blame it all on 'greed' is like blaming gravity for the collapse of a poorly designed building.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:25pm
Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 4:35pm
http://tinyurl.com/najavp
Obviously, if you're bound and determined to refute the argument that the CRA led to the housing bubble, I can't convince you otherwise. If you find yourself in an open frame of mind and really want to see a good explanation of how it all happened, go to the above URL and read it, because the arguments are pretty clear and widely held. If you want to continue to blame the housing bubble on greed and the lack of sufficient socialism in America, you can go right ahead and believe that too.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:36pm
Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 12:56pm
"Funny, whenever we get a screed on CRA mortgages....and how THEY caused the housing crises...and despite the fact the housing crises was caused by defaulting mortgages...and I ask how many CRA loans defaulted..."
From the above URL:
* How do you explain the fact that CRA loans historically had low levels of default. Doesn't this mean that loan standards were not relaxed?
Actually, no. We know that lending standards were relaxed under the CRA. The fact that they had relatively low default levels was initially a surprise but it isn't an indicator that lending standards were secretly high. There are plenty of explanations for this, including the lack of borrower ruthlessness in unsophisticated home owners and a tendency of delinquent low-income borrowers to sell the home and prepay the mortgage rather than default. Especially during a period of rising home prices, the default option was not heavily exercised.
* But even during the crisis, CRA loans didn't default at higher rates than other mortgages. CRA banks aren't failing more than other financial institutions, CRA areas aren't hotspots of defaults. What about that?
In part, this is evidence that the lending standards of the CRA had spread to the rest of the mortgage market.
* I thought you said CRA loans caused this crisis.
Nope. It isn't losses from CRA loans that drove the crisis (although they are disproportionately responsible for losses at some banks). Instead, the CRA required lax lending standards that spread to the rest of the mortgage market. That fueled the mortgage boom and bust.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:44pm
Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 4:35pm
"They love the idea of the hapless banker being forced at gunpoint to make stupid loans, but it holds as much water as the sieves they have for gray matter. "
From the source I provided you:
* What about "No Money Down" Mortgages? Were they required by the CRA?
Actually, yes they were. The regulators charged with enforcing the CRA praised the lowering of down payments and even their elimination. They told banks that lending standards that exceeded that of regulators would be considered evidence of unfair lending. This effectively meant that no money down mortgages were required. A Treasury Department study published in 2000 found that the CRA had successfully lowered down payments not just for CRA loans, but for all mortgages.
* Explain the shift in loan to value away from the traditional lending requirement of 80%.
Again, the regulators told banks that much higher LTVs was an appropriate way to meet the CRA obligations.
* What about the elimination of payment history? How about income requirements?
Regulators instructed banks to consider alternatives to traditional credit histories because CRA targeted borrowers often lacked traditional credit histories. The banks were expected to become creative, to consider other indicators of reliability.
Similarly, banks were expected by regulators to relax income requirements. Day labors and others often lack reportable income. Stated-income was a way of resolving the gap between actual income of borrowers and reported income. The problem, of course, comes when the con-artists and liars come into the game.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:47pm
Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 4:35pm
"Did the CRA require banks to develop automated underwriting (AU) systems (that may leave many with a free home, if a judge says so and the bank can't prove their the mort holder)? "
This was another lending innovation praised by regulators to the point that it became mandatory for banks. Those who were not employing automated underwriting would be putting their CRA ratings at risk. Automated underwriting was seen as a way of eliminating bias in lending.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:50pm
* Point out to me where in the CRA or any regulation that any of this is required.
I cannot. But this kind of legislative fundamentalism misconstrues the way laws constrain business activity. An unenforced law exercises little constraint, regardless of how onerous it is worded. Think of the way anti-trust enforcement changes from presidential administration to presidential administration.
In the case of the CRA, it was the activity of the regulators that matters. And each of these credit innovations described above was put into place to satisfy the CRA regulators.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:51pm
And again I ask the resident lefties after having answered all of your questions: what's the difference between a 'predatory' loan, and a loan made pursuant to CRA regulations requiring low or no-downpayments, 'stated' rather than verified income be used, and in general, that 'non-traditional' credit standards be applied by lendors, under threat of being held in non-compliance with the CRA?
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:55pm
Some broad truth here, but a nation in which Finance dominates and purchases legislation freeing it, is not likely to be a nation which prevents "affirmative action housing."
Posted by zionopp at 10/28/2009 @ 6:11pm
Urmy @1:36pm, exactly!
Posted by Denise29 at 10/28/2009 @ 6:57pm
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:55pm |
"Obviously, if you're bound and determined to refute the argument that the CRA led to the housing bubble, I can't convince you otherwise. "
Not true...I'm just seeing more handwaving than proof. I see it as maybe 20% CRA, 20% GSEs, 20% stupid borrowers, and 40% banker greed.
I get that the CRA encouraged lending to poor people, and having GSE backstop made it possible for banks to do far more than they were required (something like $6T over the course of the bubble), but you keep drawing these "miracle occurs here" diagrams with "encouraged" or "praised" on one side of the chart and "mandatory" and "forced" on the other and it doesn't add up.
Why aren't the bankers responsible for making sure they are solvent in your world?
" Can you follow the idea that once banks were forced to lower lending standards for low income/bad credit borrowers, then these standards were then necessarily applied to ALL borrowers?"
Uh, no...the banks had no reason to extend their largesse beyond the minimal number of CRA applicants necessary to get their FDIC cookie.
Banks made the subprime loans not just to "po folk" but also to people who qualified for fixed-rate products because they were specifically incentivized to "push the moneymakers".
50% of the subprime loans weren't to ma and pa kettle; I've been seeing their moving vans in my lovely, ocean-view neighborhood for months now.
Believing that automation of underwriting was anything but a way for the banks to crank out more loans is just silly, praise or no. They had specific docs in some banks on how to game those systems to get questionable loans to go through fer chrissakes.
Just because they could doesn't mean they "had to".
Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 7:23pm
the Dems are up to their eyeballs in mortgage industry corruption -
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 12:28pm
just the democrats?
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:05pm
To believe otherwise, is to say that poor people had the power and capacity to bring on a world wide financial collapse. Nonsense.
Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 12:37pm
as you can see from this chart,
non-agency "players" gained an ever increasing share of the securitization [what a misnomer!] of the scam as the bubble pumped'n'pumped:
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/ 2009/10/rise-and-fall-of-nonagency-securitization.html
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:14pm
a couple more posts read and i see that the left/right blame game is in full swing.
wake up, folks.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:15pm
Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 7:23pm
"Uh, no...the banks had no reason to extend their largesse beyond the minimal number of CRA applicants necessary to get their FDIC cookie. "
from the above article:
* So how and why did the CRA lax lending spread to the rest of the mortgage market?
The structure of the CRA regulations encouraged the spread. Banks that were the best at making CRA loans were allowed to grow by making acquisitions and opening new branches. This created a kind of political-financial Darwinism that reward the biggest enthusiasts for lax CRA lending standards. Of course, the most successful people under this regime were not the types who needed their arms twisted to make loose loans. They were who were predisposed to engage in loosey-goosey finance, who discovered that the CRA had made the world their oyster.
As for the "why" part of your question, the answer is a bit ironic. Banks making CRA loans initially expected that defaults would be higher due to lax lending standards. When they discovered the low-income borrowers had an unexpected propensity to pay their mortgages. After years of data poured in showing that borrowers were paying mortgages despite high LTVs, low down payments and unconventional income measures, bankers began to believe that many of the traditional measure of credit worthiness were overly conservative. Recall what I said earlier about how mortgage service providers started pursuing low-income borrowers in part because of the CRA.
What they didn't take into account was that different types of borrowers may behave differently, and that much of the data on those lax lending mortgages was warped by increasing home prices. Wealthier, more sophisticated borrowers ruthlessly default when their mortgage goes underwater, fo
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 9:15pm
what percentage of CFA mortgages defaulted versus the "other kind" from the "free market"? Posted by Mask at 10/28/2009 @ 12:56pm
cfa?
don't you mean "cra"?
http://www.cfainc.org/
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:17pm
Investigate the Making Home Affordable Program which does not work except for those fortunate few who have their mortgages in banks bailed out by TARP. The rest of us including people like me with mortgages at credit unions can drop dead while our houses sink underwater and we use our credit cards to survive. Credit unions are allowed not to participate in this program if they don't want to and - guess what? - why should they since they will lose control of a source of profit? Making Home Affordable was supposed to save people like me and instead it is not being implemented in a way that makes it accessible to everyone. Why doesn't The Nation get its crack investigative staff busy on this disaster of a program?
Posted by AWinters at 10/28/2009 @ 9:18pm
The first thing that Obama should have done....
Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 2:32pm
waiting for godot, you are.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:19pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:05pm
"just the democrats?"
Actually, the Bush Administration thought all this subprime lending was a real good idea; this fits very well into the liberal, country club Republicanism of the Bush family (the opposite of Reaganism, I might add). But the Democrats had much more hands on and direct responsiblity, from the original promulgation of the CRA, to its more problematic regulatory application. It appears that Dodd and Frank are two prime culprits, inasmuch as they were very powerful committee chairman overseeing finance and were closely associated with FNMA, Freddie Mac, and the most aggressive subprime lenders (Countrywide, for example, which gave Dodd a sweetheart mortgage).
Dodd is in big re-election trouble for his Countrywide connections, by the way, and his related shenanigans with his Irish 'cottage' (i.e., estate) that he got through what looks an awful lot like a payoff.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 9:21pm
CRA
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 5:22pm
cra! cra! cra!
would you like a cracker, ponti?
"The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977"
1977
1977
1977
sheesh...
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:22pm
Not true...I'm just seeing more handwaving than proof. I see it as maybe 20% CRA, 20% GSEs, 20% stupid borrowers, and 40% banker greed.
Posted by snowball777 at 10/28/2009 @ 7:23pm
and 351% greenspan.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:24pm
(the opposite of Reaganism, I might add).
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 9:21pm
oh, por favor.
reagan was a complete hypocritical doofus.
reaganism is continuing to destroy america.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:26pm
For a comical look at where it all started, click on:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/assets_c /2009/10/crisisgreed.php
take out any spaces in the url!
Posted by Happy at 10/28/2009 @ 9:41pm
" "The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977"
1977
1977
1977
sheesh...
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:22pm"
* How could a piece of 1977 legislation be significant to the deterioration of mortgage standards 25 years later?
The CRA was not a static piece of legislation. It evolved over the years from a relatively hands-off law focused on process into one that focused on outcomes. Regulators, beginning in the mid-nineties, began to hold banks accountable in serious ways. Banks responded to this new accountability by increasing the CRA loans they made, a move that entailed relaxing their lending standards.
* That's still too early. Why would changes in the mid-nineties result in a mortgage boom a decade later?
Throughout the nineties banks, as banks lowered their mortgage standards, mortgage rates remained high. The laxity was spreading but the incentives for borrowers to re-finance even under relaxed standards remained low. New buyers often still didn't know that some of the loosey-goosey mortgages existed. Speculators had an internet bubble, so they weren't yet attracted to real-estate. Treasury rates were not yet so low that investors seeking yield would pour into mortgage backed securities. Securitization levels were low enough that banks weren't yet willing to fully embrace the loose standards. The historical data on default and loss rates from the lax lending were not yet available, so they weren't embraced by banks or the broader market.
But as the years went by, these factors changed. The Fed pushed interest rates down. This made refinancing more attractive, and created an investor demand for yield. Fannie and Freddie popularized low-income securitization. Low defaults and loss rates from lax loans made them seem not as risky as previously
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 9:49pm
expected. A shrinking consumer asset base thanks to the dot com bust created a demand for home-equity loans and high loan-to-value loans, as consumers exchanged high-interest credit card debt for low interest home debt. Speculators seeking higher returns and ordinary home buyers became aware that lax lending standards would allow them to buy bigger homes with little or no money down.
In short, the lax lending standards created in response to the CRA had dug a pit that was waiting to get filled when the circumstances were right.
* Ah ha! So it wasn't the CRA that caused the mess. It was everything else!
Of course it wasn't the CRA that caused everything. The CRA was a factor in lowering lending standards. This was a necessary, although not sufficient, cause for the mortgage mess.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 9:50pm
cra! cra! cra!
a fool lost in the spin of the hamster partisan wheel.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:54pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:54pm<-------------------a fool lost in the spin of the hamster partisan wheel.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 9:59pm
The first thing that Obama should have done....
Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 2:32pm
waiting for godot, you are.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:19pm
Thank you frosty zoom or Estragon. Call me Vladimir. Sometimes I get utopian and actually convince myself that we can have a better world someday. But not waiting for the crop of leaders we have in this country to actually do something good. I guess we can't be saved.
Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 10:26pm
Start the investigation with Barney Frank. Get busy.
Posted by apoorspic at 10/28/2009 @ 10:38pm
...convince myself that we can have a better world someday. - yep
I guess we can't be saved.-yep
Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 10:26pm
President Obama's signing of a $680 billion bill, he pared more weapons systems than any president has in decades.
Also in the + column, Boeing Company said Wednesday that it would open a second assembly line for its long-delayed 787 jetliner in North Charleston, S.C.
Looking forward to flying on one someday.
Posted by winyahn at 10/28/2009 @ 10:50pm
Not to mention the Apple Slate.
Posted by winyahn at 10/28/2009 @ 10:51pm
Well Ponti my question is when will it stop? When will people stop walking away from their homes. There was pure greed at work here from the builders,bankers,appraisers,and mortgage houses. How do big dollar houses sit vacant here in the Twin Cities. What about the roles of Oxley and Gramm? As leading Republicans who favored de-regulation did they lend a hand? I just have a problem with the mortgage crisis revolving around lower cost homes.It seems like the poor were part of a grand experiment which went bad because of corrupt Democrats. Then the trend of eased restrictions spread like the swine flu into middle priced homes in select markets. Mansions were waiting in the wings along with the large commissions that went along with them to the realtors. Just as this great real estate bonanza reached its crescendo the bottom fell out of the economy. Thousands of home owners now had no means to satisfy their mortgage payments. Our jobless recovery is now starting. How long is the bleakness going to go on. An investigation will take months and come to a fruitless conclusion. Meanwhile,Americans will continue to get gouged at the pump,on credit card interest,and on their health care insurance premiums.Foreclosures have come to towns across the nation. Sheriffs auctions have become commonplace. Housing crashed and so did our economy. Let's point our fingers at our great corporations that make sure they get a return on investment but don't make sure them employ Americans.
Posted by whatozz at 10/28/2009 @ 11:15pm
Posted by whatozz at 10/28/2009 @ 11:15pm
"When will people stop walking away from their homes."
They'll stop walking away when prudent mortgage standards are restored - 20 percent downpayment, good credit record, verified income. Insanely enough, Barney Frank has not learned from the disaster and is set to expand the CRA AGAIN - yes AGAIN - somebody needs to stop him.
"There was pure greed at work here from the builders,bankers,appraisers,and mortgage houses. "
In my view, you blame everyone but the real culprits - the policy makers. Greed existed long before the CRA - and so did a stable, sound mortgage banking system. Now we have a collapse - and you want to blame everythign that did NOT change? That's counterintuitive.
"Let's point our fingers at our great corporations that make sure they get a return on investment but don't make sure them employ Americans."
Let's stop telling American automakers and other manufacturers that they have to pay unskilled, uneducated labor $80 per hour to do the same job that an Asian worker is willing to do just as well for less than half that. Then, with basic economic sense restored, we will get American jobs returning to this country. How's that for a start?
Would I like it if it was actually worth $80 per hour to screw in a bolt in Detroit? Sure, and I'd like a lot of other fantasies to be true to. But wishing doesn't make it so. What we've got in this country is people trying to make their fantasies come true by passing laws.
Posted by pontificus at 10/28/2009 @ 11:37pm
Ponti-I think that the 5% I put down on my home in 1994 was enough. Was my credit verified along with my work history of course it was. You are making an excuse for the bankers etc. My question is why? They got to go home earlier and not do their jobs because they perceived that the standards were lower? That is what you are saying,successful lenders did not use a model that had made them successful. They worked in concert with appraisers and realtors to make people help to realize the American Dream. I know we need 4 bedroom homes as newlyweds don't we. You want Barney and Chris's ass to fry. I think the builders had a good thing going with the larger homes they were selling and the developers had money rolling in from the 1 1/4 acre lots. Many of the homes being foreclosed have nothing to do with your argument. They are the third or fourth homes owned by people. They are victims of the recession. I sure am happy to know we paid $80/hourly to auto workers. What is the fringe benefit part?Maybe that is why we need reform to health care.What do the Japanese car companies pay for health care? Thank you for telling me that the Communist Chinese deserve to make our goods. Do you have a relative on the Central Committee. I am tired of conservatives telling us this. Do they have laws regarding pollution in China. When they had the Olympics that had to shut heavy industry down. When will the next unregulated product come down the turnpike from China. Next you will say that we should run our banks like they do in the Cayman Islands.
Posted by whatozz at 10/29/2009 @ 12:22am
cra! cra! cra!
Posted by pollificus at 10/28/2009 @ 11:37pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 12:24am
When will the next unregulated product come down the turnpike from China.
Posted by whatozz at 10/29/2009 @ 12:22am
(CNN) -- Officials are looking into claims that Chinese-made drywall installed in some Florida homes is emitting smelly, corrosive gases and ruining household systems such as air conditioners, the Consumer Product Safety Commission says.
Gas emitted from defective drywall corrodes copper wiring, turning it black, some Florida homeowners say.
The Florida Health Department, which is investigating whether the drywall poses any health risks, said it has received more than 140 homeowner complaints. And class-action lawsuits allege defective drywall has caused problems in at least three states -- Florida, Louisiana and Alabama -- while some attorneys involved claim such drywall may have been used in tens of thousands of U.S. homes.
Homeowners' lawsuits contend the drywall has caused them to suffer health problems such as headaches and sore throats and face huge repair expenses.
The drywall is alleged to have high levels of sulfur and, according to homeowners' complaints, the sulfur-based gases smell of rotten eggs and corrode piping and wiring, causing electronics and appliances to fail.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 12:30am
Posted by Happy at 10/28/2009 @ 5:18pm
Noooooo....my question is a logical one, which implodes your Limbaugh talking point, HAPP.
just like this question-
How did Barney Frank use magical powers IN THE MINORITY from 2003-2004 to "stop" Bush and the Republicans "valiant attempts to reform Freddie and Fannie"?
What method did he use?
Posted by Mask at 10/29/2009 @ 07:27am
Posted by whatozz at 10/29/2009 @ 12:22am
First, you need to actually read the articles I posted if you really want to understand what happene with the mortgage mess, as opposed to whining and complaining about how unfair it all is. And yes, the Communist Chinese workers, and those in elsewhere in Asia, such as South Korea, Japan, etc. are willing to make better cars than we have here, for less. If you want to keep playing the victim, it's fine by me. But if you're really, truly looking for the guilty party when it comes to American companies closing up shop and sending their jobs overseas, you should stop kidding yourself, and look in the mirror. Then stick out your figure and say "it's YOUR fault." Then you might be getting somewhere. Alternatively, you can keep whining and crying like a little baby.
Posted by pontificus at 10/29/2009 @ 08:20am
How did Barney Frank use magical powers IN THE MINORITY from 2003-2004 to "stop" Bush and the Republicans "valiant attempts to reform Freddie and Fannie"?
Posted by Mask at 10/29/2009 @ 07:27am
Here's exactly what he did. He grabbed the legislation. He ran to the cloak room. He wolfed down a pint of Ben & Jerry's SuperGay PowerPeppermint. Super endowed now, in a fabulous minty green cape and nothing else, he began his secretive language-changing magic! Undoing the good wherever he found it!
In fact, Freddie and Fannie used to be called Fred and Fan before he twirled his wand (do not picture that one) and sprinkled his pixie juice all over them.
Posted by winyahn at 10/29/2009 @ 09:40am
How did Barney Frank use magical powers IN THE MINORITY from 2003-2004 to "stop" Bush and the Republicans "valiant attempts to reform Freddie and Fannie"?
What method did he use?
Posted by Mask at 10/29/2009 @ 07:27am | ignore this person | warn this person
The Demoncrat liberal national media decrying any Republican attempt to remedy such problems as bigoted racist attempts to disenfranchise the poor blacks and latinos! Just as they always do when any conservative trys to remedy the Demoncrat giveaways of taxpayer money which they use in attempts to broaden their vanishing Demoncrat voter base.
Posted by BigPasture at 10/29/2009 @ 09:42am
Posted by winyahn at 10/29/2009 @ 09:40am |
Perhaps their homophobia makes his lisp extra scary.
Posted by snowball777 at 10/29/2009 @ 09:42am
Posted by BigPasture at 10/29/2009 @ 09:42am |
And you had Strom in your party for HOW MANY DECADES?
Pull the other one, nimrod.
Posted by snowball777 at 10/29/2009 @ 09:43am
Posted by BigPasture at 10/29/2009 @ 09:42am
So now it's the "Liberal Media", Rio...and NOT Barney Frank's fault?
Please make up your mind.
BTW, where did Reagan give his first speech after the 1980 GOP Convention...and why there?
Posted by Mask at 10/29/2009 @ 11:28am
"The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977"
1977
1977
1977
sheesh...
~frosty zoom at 10/28/2009 @ 9:22pm
Indeed.....
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mt5ggkuQIbc
Love this little ditty....kicks some ace, and zaps the recognition bone with an ironic, contorted bit of twist.
IN 1977 YOU'RE ON THE NEVER NEVER YOU THINK IT CAN'T GO ON FOREVER BUT THE PAPERS SAY IT'S BETTER I DON'T CARE 'COS I'M NOT ALL THERE NO ELVIS, BEATLES OR THE ROLLING STONES
Good fun.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 12:13pm
you can keep whining and crying like a little baby.
Posted by pontificus at 10/29/2009 @ 08:20am
now i get it!
you're phil gramm!
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 12:20pm
Posted by winyahn at 10/29/2009 @ 09:40am
pixie juice, huh?
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 12:21pm
Mitch McConnell, Super Grandwizard of No!
Now has little bitch 'aetna-joey alongside tugging at his gown.
Rev Rio Happy are silent on Mitch McConnell. Silent love.
Posted by winyahn at 10/29/2009 @ 12:21pm
BTW, where did Reagan give his first speech after the 1980 GOP Convention...and why there?
Posted by Mask at 10/29/2009 @ 11:28am
on the banks of the river styx for obvious reasons.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 12:25pm
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 12:13pm
i hope i go to heaven, too.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 12:28pm
FZ,
dja' check out the Hedges speech I posted near the top of the thread?
Dude's devastating, man. And, sadly, precisely on target....unlike our bombs.
Here's the latest news from the --laughably, in the cosmic sense perhaps-- ironic:
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8329129.stm
tinyurl.com/ykny995
tinyurl.com/ygyu6ke
All very interesting. And comporting, snuggly, the big picture that Hedges paints in gruesome de-tail'. The Hieronymous Bosch of the modern age --only the portraits are of reality this time, not fantasy.
Happy Halloween, all.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 12:46pm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hieronymus_Bosch
Bosch, for the uninitiated.
Enjoy.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 12:58pm
thanks, bk.
i'll check 'em out.
here, live footage of the hunt for usama bin laden:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLSIU9BG41U
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 1:03pm
Thanks frost.
I started that clip and thought it was about our Health Care system.
"STOP the patient, STOP the patient....."
:D
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 1:15pm
pixie juice, huh? Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 12:21pm |
I'm betting you could get really good yield from a freshly squeezed Black Francis.
Posted by snowball777 at 10/29/2009 @ 1:24pm
are in. Simply "writing down the value of home loans" will help no one but Wall St and is weak gruel.
Posted by dont_know at 10/28/2009 @ 2:32pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Reducing the principal amount due on home loans would put more money in homeowners pockets by reducing monthly mortgage payments. Infrastructure repair is not broad enough to stimulate the overall economy to any meaningful extent. With the unemployment rate at 10% money has to get into consumers pockets, especially at the low end of the income scale. I'd like to see a program whereby anyone with credit card debt would be eligible for debt consolidation at a rate of 3 or 4%.
Posted by Buddy33 at 10/29/2009 @ 1:31pm
dja' check out the Hedges speech I posted near the top of the thread? Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 12:46pm |
<...utopianism wedded to violence has caused more genocides in human history than...>
Good sauce, B.
Methinks I'll order a copy of "Empire of Illusion".
Posted by snowball777 at 10/29/2009 @ 1:41pm
"Good sauce, B....."
~snowball
It's even better than freshed squeezed Black Francis, I'd wager.
Glad to see yer inerested in Empire of Illusion. It won't disappoint.
Peace out, ~B
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 2:10pm
Of course those mortgage companies engaged in deceptive practices.
But who does not?
Do you want a list of the deception, the dishonest twists, the patent lies that The Nation circulates in every issue?
Do you want an account of the deceptive practices of the administration, and of the president himself?
A year ago, to win the election, he accused the Republicans of dithering on Afghanistan, of denying it the resources to stem the Taliban, and of relegating that theater to a holding action. He in effect vowed to turn that Afghan ember into a blazing war to win the hawkish voters and capture the White House.
How is that for deception? The entire nation was buncoed by that predatory tactic.
Where is the congressional committee looking into that fraud?
Actually, when a politician urges the nation into war, simply as a way of advancing his political fortunes, that is more than a con job, that is hi
Posted by Pirovano at 10/29/2009 @ 2:25pm
Posted by Pirovano at 10/29/2009 @ 2:25pm |
"How is that for deception?"
The thousands of new troops in theater know you're full of something stinky.
"Where is the congressional committee looking into that fraud?"
Too distracted by ACORN, I suppose.
"Actually, when a politician urges the nation into war, simply as a way of advancing his political fortunes, that is more than a con job, that is hi"
I'll assume you meant "high treason"...and we're waiting on Dubya's indictment.
Posted by snowball777 at 10/29/2009 @ 2:30pm
Of course those mortgage companies engaged in deceptive practices.
But who does not?
Do you want a list of the deception, the dishonest twists, the patent lies that The Nation circulates in every issue?
Do you want an account of the deceptive practices of the administration, and of the president himself?
A year ago, to win the election, he accused the Republicans of dithering on Afghanistan, of denying it the resources to stem the Taliban, and of relegating that theater to a holding action. He in effect vowed to turn that Afghan ember into a blazing war to win the hawkish voters and capture the White House.
How is that for deception? The entire nation was buncoed by that predatory tactic.
Where is the congressional committee looking into that fraud?
Actually, when a politician urges an unnecessary war, a war for the sake of his career interests, not the nations interests, that is more than a con job. It is an act of corruption, an act of treason, a high crime and misdemeanor.
Posted by Pirovano at 10/29/2009 @ 2:32pm
For a better understanding of mortgage servicers, the National Consumer Law Center's Report on the Puzzling Behaviors of Mortgage Servicers is a must read. The report will allow you to understand part of our foreclosure mess.
Posted by coleenea at 10/29/2009 @ 2:54pm
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 1:15pm
yeah!
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 3:10pm
Of course those mortgage companies engaged in deceptive practices. But who does not?
Posted by Pirovano at 10/29/2009 @ 2:25pm
me.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 3:11pm
Financial Meltdown 101.
(Here's all you need to know!)
There were 3 major villains in the Wall Street meltdown: mortgage companies, credit agencies and major banks.
Mortgage companies, such as Angelo Mozilo's, Countrywide Financial Corp. CFC's specialty was providing sub-prime mortgages for minorities and low-income people. When the housing bubble burst, it also lead to his firms' demise.
Mozilo, however, was but one player in the recent Wall Street flame out: Dean Starkman at the Columbia Journalism Review makes the case that Countrywide, along with Ameriquest, Washington Mutual and Citigroup were running "boiler rooms" (seemingly illegal enterprises) at the direction of Bear Stearns, Lehman, Merrill Lynch, etc. The purpose of these boiler rooms was to bring in as many mortgages as they could, so, even people without jobs and no money could get one.
These junk mortgages were then shoveled through the doors of the banks and insurers like AIG. There, the bankers prevailed, as Gretchen Morgenson of the New York Times notes, upon the rating agencies (since the banks paid them) to label the junk as AAA securities. These "troubled assets" were then sliced and diced, securitized , leveraged 30x and sold around the world as if they were gold. The business was such a money machine that it was impossible to say no to it. When the housing bubble burst, people lost their life savings, and countries went down. Quite a price to pay for such outrageous greed, deception and alchemy.
Conclusion: Wall Street's financial geniuses, also known as "the best and the brightest'," create an endless array of financial instruments that are more of less bets: bets that your company or stock will go down, or that oil will sell at $80 a barrel, or Bear Stearns stock will tank in 9 days .
Posted by hkaplan at 10/29/2009 @ 4:39pm
Very nice, succint post, h kaplan.
Now, the question is --as alluded to in the new Nation lead editorial-- whether or not public anger can be brought to bear on the Congress and the Prez for the excruciatingly necessary substantive reform.
Lord knows, they aint cuttin' it now --to put it mildly-- and the danger of unrecedented havoc is growing faster than a magma dome under Krakatoa. I'm bettin' she's gonna blow before long (within a few years or so, most likely). And it's not gonna be purty.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 5:08pm
.....When the housing bubble burst, people lost their life savings,...
Posted by hkaplan at 10/29/2009 @ 4:39pm
So, bubble wealth is "life savings"!
Is that anything like "bubble" buyers using "bubble" credit rated by "bubble" credit agencies?
I got it, "life savings" are created with each and every asset bubble, neat! Those that lost such "life savings" are just the dim ones who didn't nail down their timing to turn "bubble" savings into something, less bubbly!
Posted by Happy at 10/29/2009 @ 5:20pm
Windsor had some excitement today! Bet the vermin was on his way to Frosty's `safe' house....LOL!
Son of Radical Islam Leader Killed in FBI Shootout Caught in Canada
Thursday, October 29, 2009
One of three people sought by the FBI was captured in Canada Thursday......after a federal raid and deadly shooting of a radical Islam leader.....
Federal authorities in Detroit said the son of 53-year-old Luqman Ameen Abdullah, who was killed in Wednesday night's shootout with FBI agents, was arrested across the border in Windsor, Ontario.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police took 30-year-old Mujahid Carswell, who was considered armed and dangerous, into custody Thursday. No other details were released......
Posted by Happy at 10/29/2009 @ 5:41pm
I think one of the companies that was alluded to Droopster was your pal Kenny's Enron. They fooled their employees into helping bankroll their own Ponzi scheme. Remember Droop it happened in your adoptive state of Texas. Why didn't that group of thieves get the book thrown at it for all the lives they destroyed. I guess those people were just "dim". I wonder Droop if your big mouth would spout off in front of some of the Enron victims? Do you regularly give people a hard time who lost 40-50% of their investments in stock market crash? I bet you would get your ass kicked.
Posted by whatozz at 10/29/2009 @ 6:54pm
Along with the demonization of bankers and the racist allegations about CRA, some of our compatriots are acknowledging that interest rates, set by the Fed, were too low. And why were they too low? For the same reason that interest rates were too low during the 80s, the last time this happened.
A 'conservative' voodoo-economics government borrowed and spent a quarter-trillion a year, year after year, so interest rates should have skyrocketed. Instead, the 'conservative' unelected government, the Fed, bought the re-election of its fellow ideologues with devalued US dollars.
A tax policy that rewarded labor instead of penalizing it would have created economic growth, as in the 90s. But a borrow-and-spend policy that rewarded wealth inflated asset values, and a politically-biased monetary policy deflated the cost of obtaining assets.
That's why I sold stocks and bought bonds, and stayed away from real estate. I knew that the 'Bush Recovery' would end as badly as the go-go 80s. History has repeated itself: the tragedy of Reaganomics re-played as the farce of BushJrnomics.
Posted by samcrossett at 10/29/2009 @ 7:16pm
Hey Ponti you nare a free trader and that's O.K. but you didn't answer the question ,what is the advantage the Japanese have in health care savings paid for by their government?Any tax incentives do you think also playing into this situation? I am not pointing fingers I am just pointing some things out. I did read your treatise,I just didn't agree with it. Housing prices are in a free fall ,is that a result of government policy? Phil Gramm's hands were in the pie and I didn't see his name in your posting .It was one sided and frankly biased but I've read a number of stories of that direction. I just think economics rarely are affected by small number transactions. That is the flaw in your series of posts.
Posted by whatozz at 10/29/2009 @ 7:36pm
Wm. Greider, in his recent piece stated that - "We may know broad outlines, but the landscape remains littered with unanswered questions and informed suspicions about who did what to produce the breakdown. The relevant facts are still buried in the files of WS firms and the regulatory agencies that utterly faided as watchdogs...asking deeper questions about the true sources of the clamity is a 1st step toward developing answers to the nations predicament." AND MY NEW BOOK EXPOSES ALL THE CULPRITS, THE TRUE ROOT CAUSE AND PROVIDES ANSWERS! Go to my blog at: www.howwegotswindled.blogspot.com to understand why my new book, "How We Got Swindled by Wall Street Godfathers, Greed and Financial Darwinism," illuminates Grieder's proper issues. From 40 years of personal successful experience in the securities business; and from having written a Phd thesis-like book 20 years ago - which David Satterfield Bus Ed of The Miami Herald said was, "better titled: Zen and the Art of not Getting Hosed," and further said..."It's like no other book!...Invest for Success is a worthy read," I seem to know what so many others either do not or will not talk out loud about. The problem with media, including The Nation, my favorite publication, is there is a favored group to interview or publish who really don't understand or care about SEC rule 10b-5, and worse. People with Goldman and the Trojan Mega Bank Holding Companies don't either face the truth or tell the real truth because it might be bad for business. So until the media is more open to receiving calls from qualified strangers who know more than their current friends the darkness will prevail. Maybe someone will tell Katrina to check me out on my blog and then Wm Grieder will be less confused! along with anyone else who care
Posted by schoenberger at 10/29/2009 @ 8:36pm
s. If anyone reads the above i apologise for the length, but after 7 months of writing and now attempting to get the truth out to find myself in an infinitely more superficial media and publisher/agent world than 20 years ago is at times depressing. I feel like Dr. Strangelove having to break into a coke machine to get a quarter to save the world when Col. Bat Guano interfered because he wanted to protect the coke machine. e. henry schoenberger
Posted by schoenberger at 10/29/2009 @ 8:46pm
Very nice, succint post, h kaplan.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/29/2009 @ 5:08pm
i agree.
i do, however, include the fed and its accomplices in all three branches of government.
after all, where did all those fiatscos come from?
btw his name is actually "hkap lan".
finnish, i believe.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 9:06pm
into something, less bubbly!
Posted by Happy at 10/29/2009 @ 5:20pm
many people lost their "life savings" not because of speculation
but because
the fed's grand scheme to hide price inflation on the backs of brown people and inspire asset inflation to the benefit of the .0001%ers
cost the home "owners" their jobs.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 9:10pm
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police took 30-year-old Mujahid Carswell, who was considered armed and dangerous, into custody Thursday. No other details were released......
Posted by Happy at 10/29/2009 @ 5:41pm
another bunch of thieves hiding behind a book.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 9:11pm
the tragedy of Reaganomics re-played as the farce of BushJrnomics.
Posted by samcrossett at 10/29/2009 @ 7:16pm
mulroney -- harper.
when america gets herpes, canada gets fucked.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 9:16pm
when america gets herpes, canada gets fucked.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 9:16pm
You have what it takes to get fucked repeatedly, you've got UHC!
Posted by Happy at 10/29/2009 @ 9:32pm
don't worry hap,
the chinese will rescue US.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 9:36pm
here happy, merry christmas:
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10 /market-cheers-over-ugly-gdp-report.html
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 9:39pm
Posted by Happy at 10/29/2009 @ 5:20pm |
Too dumb to recognize that people's 401(k) and pensions aren't that easy to turn into "something less bubbly" without a tax hit?
Not everyone has their life centered around their chronic gambling habit, Dippy.
Posted by snowball777 at 10/29/2009 @ 10:19pm
This s to HAPPY..
an investment letter, but I think its our furture with the current commu, er progressives in charge...for now....
Stansberry: Detroit's socialist nightmare is America's future
Thursday, October 29, 2009 Text Size:
From Porter Stansberry in the S&A Digest:
One of the most important things to remember about socialism or coercion of any kind is it fails eventually because human beings have an innate desire for liberty and a strong need for personal property rights. In fact, the origins of government lie in the need of agricultural communities to protect themselves from violence and theft. So it is particularly ironic that in more recent times, it is government itself that has more frequently played the role of bandit. When you start taxing people at extreme rates to pay for socialist "benefits," when you start telling them which schools their children must attend, when you start giving jobs away to people based on race instead of ability... you quash human freedom, which bogs down productivity... and if continued for long enough, leads to social collapse.
I find it perplexing that only 20 years after the collapse of the Berlin Wall, the West continues to implement laws that mimic all of the failed policies of our former "communist" foes. In fact, our current president won the election by promising to "spread the wealth around." But... truth be told... we don't have to look to Eastern Europe or the Soviet Union to find a society destroyed by coercion, socialism, and the overreaching power of the State. We could just look at Detroit...
In 1961, the last Republican mayor of Detroit lost his re-election bid to a young, intelligent Democrat, with the overwhelming support of newly organized black voters.
Cont
Posted by YourJomamma at 10/29/2009 @ 10:22pm
His name was Jerome Cavanagh. The incumbent was widely considered to be corrupt (and later served 10 years in prison for tax evasion). Cavanagh, a white man, pandered to poor underclass black voters. He marched with Martin Luther King down the streets of Detroit in 1963. (Of course, marching with King was the right thing to do... It's just Cavanagh's motives were political not moral.) He instated aggressive affirmative action policies at City Hall. And most critically, he greatly expanded the role of the government in Detroit, taking advantage of President Lyndon Johnson's "Model Cities Program" the first great experiment in centralized urban planning.
Mayor Cavanagh was the only elected official to serve on Johnson's task force. And Detroit received widespread acclaim for its leadership in the program, which attempted to turn a nine-square-mile section of the city (with 134,000 inhabitants) into a "model city." More than $400 million was spent trying to turn inner cities into shining new monuments to government planning. In short, the feds and Democratic city mayors were soon telling people where to live, what to build, and what businesses to open or close. In return, the people received cash, training, education, and health care.
The Model Cities program was a disaster for Detroit. But it did accomplish its real goal: The creation of a state-supported, Democratic political power base. The program also resulted in much higher taxes which were easy to pitch to poor voters who didn't have to pay them. Cavanagh pushed a new income tax through the state legislature and a "commuter tax" on city workers.
Unfortunately, as with all socialist programs, lots of folks simply don't like being told what to do. cont
Posted by YourJomamma at 10/29/2009 @ 10:23pm
Lots of folks don't like being plundered by the government. They don't like losing their jobs because of their race.
In Detroit, they didn't like paying new, large taxes to fund a largely black and Democratic political hegemony. And so, in 1966, more than 22,000 middle- and upper-class residents moved out of the city.
But what about the poor? As my friend Doug Casey likes to say, in the War on Poverty, the poor lost the most. In July 1967, police attempted to break up a late-night party in the middle of the new "Model City." The scene turned into the worst race riot of the 1960s. The violence killed more than 40 people and left more than 5,000 people homeless. One of the first stores to be looted was the black-owned pharmacy. The largest black-owned clothing store in the city was also burned to the ground. Cavanagh did nothing to stop the riots, fearing a large police presence would make matters worse. Five days later, Johnson sent in two divisions of paratroopers to put down the insurrection. Over the next 18 months, an additional 140,000 upper- and middle-class residents almost all of them white left the city.
And so, you might rightfully ask... after five years of centralized planning, higher taxes, and a fleeing population, what did the government decide to do with its grand experiment, its "Model City"? You'll never guess....
Seeing it had accomplished nothing but failure, the government endeavored to do still more. The Model City program was expanded and enlarged by 1974's Community Development Block Grant Program. Here again, politicians would decide which groups (and even individuals) would receive state funds for various "renewal" schemes. cont
Posted by YourJomamma at 10/29/2009 @ 10:25pm
. Later, Big Business was brought into the fold. In exchange for various concessions, the Big Three automakers "gave" $488 million to the city for use in still more redevelopment schemes in the mid-1990s.
What happened? Even with all of their power and all of the money, centralized planners couldn't succeed with any of their plans. Nearly all of the upper and middle class left Detroit. The poor fled, too. The Model City area lost 63% of its population and 45% of its housing units from the inception of the program through 1990.
Even today, the crisis continues. At a recent auction of nearly 9,000 seized homes and lots, less than one-fifth of the available properties sold, even with bidding starting at $500. You literally can't give away most of the "Model City" areas today. The properties put up for sale last week represented an area the size of New York's Central Park. Total vacant land in Detroit now occupies an area the size of Boston Detroit properties in foreclosure have more than tripled since 2007.
Every single mayor of Detroit since 1961 has been a Democrat. Every single mayor of Detroit since 1974 has been black. Detroit has been a major recipient of every major social program since the early 1960s and has received hundreds of billions of dollars in government grants, loans, and programs. We now have a black, Democrat president, who is promising to do to America as a whole what his political mentors have done to Detroit.
Those of you with a Democratic political affiliation may think what I've written above is biased or false. You may think what you like. But there is no way to argue that what the government has done to Detroit is anything but a horrendous crime. cont
Posted by YourJomamma at 10/29/2009 @ 10:30pm
. You may think what I've written above is merely a political analysis. Perhaps so, but politicians drive macroeconomic policy. And macroeconomic policy determines key financial metrics, like the trade-weighted value of a currency and key interest rates.
The likelihood America will become a giant Detroit is growing rapidly. Politicians now control the banking sector, most of the manufacturing sector (including autos), a large amount of media, and are threatening to take over health care and the production of electricity (via cap and trade rules). These are the biggest threats to wealth in the history of our country. And these threats are causing the world's most accomplished and wealthy investors to actively short sell the United States something that is unprecedented in my experience.
Crux Note: The S&A Digest comes free with a subscription to Porter Stansberry's Investment Advisory. Porter's on one heck of a roll. He's made money on 10 of 11 recommendations so far this year... And if his latest trade goes as expected, it could be his biggest winner of all time. He says it's the "best hedge against a money crisis" you can buy, period.
This is worth looking at,,, Name all the states run by Dems that are on this glide path..
Posted by YourJomamma at 10/29/2009 @ 10:34pm
All I'm going to say is that the notion that the debtors are at fault is ridiculous. Its clear that if those that had signed onto subprime mortgages had been informed by an agent that after a period of a few years their mortgages would reset to significantly higher rates, fewer mortgages would be issued. What we need right now is a debt write down.
Posted by nkurland at 10/29/2009 @ 11:03pm
Posted by nkurland at 10/29/2009 @ 11:03pm | ignore this person | warn this person
All these idiotic arguments are the same "hold overs" from the 1980s when FOOLS signed up for new homes on "variable rate mortgages" during the boom and when things were going bust and the rates soared to 15% and then touched 20% they burned the houses to sell them to Insurance companies, abandoned them, vandalized them, etc.
Fools who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it!
Posted by BigPasture at 10/30/2009 @ 12:36am
Fools who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it!-----Posted by BigPasture at 10/30/2009 @ 12:36am
You're right, RIO....we shouldn't repeat the 1980s.
Posted by Mask at 10/30/2009 @ 07:50am
Posted by BigPasture at 10/30/2009 @ 12:36am |
How many houses did Keating 'burn', Rio?
Posted by snowball777 at 10/30/2009 @ 09:19am
.....politicians drive macroeconomic policy. And macroeconomic policy determines key financial metrics, like the trade-weighted value of a currency and key interest rates.
The likelihood America will become a giant Detroit is growing rapidly. Politicians now control....These are the biggest threats to wealth in the history of our country..... something that is unprecedented in my experience.
Posted by YourJomamma at 10/29/2009 @ 10:34pm
Thanks, JM! Nice read....for a more condensed version, see Dr. Sowell's "Dismantling II" today. Blistering & spot-on!
I feel in my bones, there is a lot of trepidation in the country. I read the various statistics and I get the feeling, there are a lot of investors like me, who are now, literally, flippers of stocks w/most of us, having given up long-term investing, at least for the next few years while we see how this Grand Experiment at Detroiting all of America, plays out.
Whether there is real malice in the Magic administration for the America we love is debatable; but the results, certainly SO FAR, isn't!
Posted by Happy at 10/30/2009 @ 10:33am
......Its clear that if those that had signed onto subprime mortgages had been informed by an agent that after a period of a few years their mortgages would reset to significantly higher rates, fewer mortgages would be issued. What we need right now is a debt write down.
Posted by nkurland at 10/29/2009 @ 11:03pm
Naive!
Nearly all buyers, particularly those stretching their paychecks to do so, are making the bet they will gain "life savings" from buying appreciating homes and pays next to attention to rate resets some years down the road.
Ever notice what kinda commercials fills out media? How many different "Get Rich" ads/infomercials are out there?
Reality....it's an Inconvenient Truth!
Posted by Happy at 10/30/2009 @ 10:36am
.....pays next to NO attention to rate resets some years down the road.
Posted by Happy at 10/30/2009 @ 10:36am
Posted by Happy at 10/30/2009 @ 10:37am
Froma Harrop today: "Questionable agency loans putting taxpayers at risk", on the dangers the taxpayers are assuming for the massive amount of FHA-guaranteed loans going on the books these past 2 years!
What's the downpayment required for these FHA loans: 3.5%.....chew that over! Repubs have proposed raising that to....wow, 5%!
This is a lib who is firing a shot across the bow of USS Barney Frank.....who "insists that these mortgages are needed to keep prices from falling too fast"...
Harrop: "....no sane private lender would take on such risks without a sucker of first resort, again the taxpayers."......"Thing is, we can't support real-estate values with shabby lending practices. That's what got us into trouble"....."Much of the blame for the housing buble-then-bust goes to these government agencies: They let private lenders make mortgages...then guaranteed them"
She thinks taxpayers will be bailing out FHA within next 2~3 years in light of the fact, nearly 1/4 of the FHA loans made in the past 2 years (as prices were declining) are now IN TROUBLE!
Posted by Happy at 10/30/2009 @ 10:47am
BTW, again, curious on this point of the housing crises talking point from the Right...
If Barney Frank, in the MINORITY, in 2003-2004 was able to use magical powers to stop the valient efforts of Dubya and the Repubs from reforming Freddie and Fannie....
why didn't Boehner or Eric Cantor or some Republican, in the MINORITY, use that same magical power to stop "Porkulus" or a bailout or two????
((BTW, no, don't expect a real answer...because the talking point has no real logic behind it!))
Posted by Mask at 10/30/2009 @ 11:47am
. Every single mayor of Detroit since 1974 has been black.
We now have a black, Democrat president,
Posted by YourJomamma at 10/29/2009 @ 10:30p
them niggrahs should be shinin' shoes, i tells ya.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/30/2009 @ 8:29pm
alan greenspan is WHITE!
EVERY SINGLE CHAIRMAN OF THE FED HAS BEEN WHITE!
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/30/2009 @ 8:30pm
You're right, RIO....we shouldn't repeat the 1980s. Posted by Mask at 10/30/2009 @ 07:50am
too late......
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/30/2009 @ 10:37pm
Ya this is great...lets have the Dems who created the problem by insisting that everyone had a right to own a home with no down payment or adequate income..investigate the banks loaning practices .
You know the same banks that ACORN, Barney;s Frank, Maxine Waters ( now being investigated) Charlie Rangle, The entire Black Caucus and Obama himself insisted MUST loan to those who were NOT CREDIT WORTHY!!!!. Geee I wonder who will be blamed the Dems in Congress, who played the race card throughout this scam on the American public and taxpayers or the banks.
What a friggin joke by insidious slime balls. Throw them all out of office now.
Posted by Obamunut at 10/31/2009 @ 12:59am
frosty zoom at 10/29/2009 @ 3:11pm said:
>> me. [I don't engage in deceptive practices] <<
That adroit retort is itself an example of deception. It abuses the fact that you have no alternative.
Are you in a position to profit from some wile, but eschew it out of principle? I will wager, your virtue is a function of your powerlessness, your lack of muscle.
The impotent and weak, who cry most loudly about the injustices of this world, when put in a position of power, tend to become the biggest cheats and bullies. Lynch mob famously have the weakest and lamest up front, most eager to apply the noose. Iran's mullahs, brutally tortured in Evan prison by the Shah's SAVAK, quickly became torturers themselves in that same prison, and the hangmen of Bahai women. Workers, cruelly squeezed while unorganized, when grouped into unions will exploit their strength with little concern for fairness. They will demand as much as they think they can extract from their employer, with little concern for justice and honesty. The polemicists of The Nation, ready to condemn and bemoan every Bushite action, defend, excuse and cover up similar behavior by TeamObama.
Posted by Pirovano at 10/31/2009 @ 05:34am
Until we can put many in the last Adminstration behind bars? This will continue. They're just too many to blame for the horrible mess this Nation, and the world is dealing with to put the blame on just a few. It should begin at the top. President Obama must start by overturning many of the ill conceived policies left by Bush before anything can be achieved.
Posted by sheila60 at 10/31/2009 @ 08:00am
Posted by Obamunut at 10/31/2009 @ 12:59am |
Uh yeah...
Never mind the fact that most of the early "NOT CREDIT WORTHY" borrowers had very low default rates attracting the banks to subprime lending because it was so damn lucrative.
Never mind the SECURITIZATION of said loans which allowed the banks to make those mortgages someone else's problem.
Never mind the bond raters who outright LIED about the quality of said mortgage-backed securities.
Never mind that the banks which made more of those loans were allowed to merge and grow into behemoths like Citi.
Never mind the millions of loans made to speculators who may have been credit-worthy, but took out subprime, no-down, no-doc loans anyway.
Never mind the borrowers that were lied to about the terms of their loans and could not have know that their morts would reset into usury-land.
I'm all for personal responsibility (that's why I don't have an undertwater mortgage right now), but you need to apply it to bankers as well as borrowers.
Each borrower made ONE bad decision, possibly in the name of taking care of their families, but the banks made MILLIONS of them while supposedly having a clue about how to run their businesses.
Posted by snowball777 at 10/31/2009 @ 10:52am
Posted by Pirovano at 10/31/2009 @ 05:34am |
You don't need much 'power' or 'muscle' to lie, do you?
Here's something Frosty or I wouldn't do, but anyone could, if so motivated:
- Find an abandoned foreclosure (not hard these days)
- Change the locks
- Advertise it for rent
- Collect first, last, and deposit
- Fly by night
Posted by snowball777 at 10/31/2009 @ 10:57am
You're right, RIO....we shouldn't repeat the 1980s. Posted by Mask at 10/30/2009 @ 07:50am
too late......
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/30/2009 @ 10:37pm | ignore this person | warn this person
A 70s President presiding over an 80's economy! Definately backwards Carter II.
Posted by BigPasture at 10/31/2009 @ 2:41pm
Are you in a position to profit from some wile, but eschew it out of principle?
always.
I will wager, your virtue is a function of your powerlessness, your lack of muscle.
nope. jesus taught me better.
The impotent and weak, who cry most loudly about the injustices of this world,
now why would they do that?
when put in a position of power, tend to become the biggest cheats and bullies.
stupid humans.
Lynch mob famously have the weakest and lamest up front, most eager to apply the noose.
no wonder the u.s. has the death penalty.
Iran's mullahs, brutally tortured in Evan prison by the Shah's SAVAK,
thank you, america!
quickly became torturers themselves in that same prison, and the hangmen of Bahai women.
kinda like what the israelis have become.....
Workers, cruelly squeezed while unorganized, when grouped into unions will exploit their strength with little concern for fairness.
so, the folks at goldman were originally poor?
They will demand as much as they think they can extract from their employer, with little concern for justice and honesty.
so, the folks at goldman were originally poor?
The polemicists of The Nation, ready to condemn and bemoan every Bushite action,
well, he did open a nice marine sanctuary.
defend, excuse and cover up similar behavior by TeamObama.
i never saw you criticizing mr. bush.
Posted by Pirovano at 10/31/2009 @ 05:34am
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/31/2009 @ 2:59pm
President Obama must start by overturning many of the ill conceived policies left by Bush before anything can be achieved.
Posted by sheila60 at 10/31/2009 @ 08:00am
hahahahaha.....
if only it were funny.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/31/2009 @ 3:00pm
You're right, RIO....we shouldn't repeat the 1980s.
Posted by Mask at 10/30/2009 @ 07:50am
too late......
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/30/2009 @ 10:37pm
A 70s President presiding over an 80's economy! Definately [sic] backwards Carter II.
Posted by BigPasture at 10/31/2009 @ 2:41pm
uh, rio, mr. carter et al. [i.e. mr volcker] fixed the economy.
mr. reagan et al. [i.e. mr. greenspan] ruined it.
mr. obama has MUCH more in common with st. ronnie.
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/31/2009 @ 3:02pm
oh, boy........
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/10/congress man-watt-guts-audit-fed-bill.html
Posted by frosty zoom at 10/31/2009 @ 3:48pm
Posted by BigPasture at 10/31/2009 @ 2:41pm
uh, rio, mr. carter et al. [i.e. mr volcker] fixed the economy.Posted by frosty zoom at 10/31/2009 @ 3:02pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Oh thats why we were pushing our cars to the gas stations!
Posted by BigPasture at 10/31/2009 @ 11:07pm
Guess that Carter run away stagflation was good for us! Keep us all in our places (at home) broke!
Posted by BigPasture at 10/31/2009 @ 11:10pm
"Until we can put many in the last Adminstration behind bars? This will continue. "
I guess shelia you didn't realize that Obam and his hacks are in cahrge now and were in charge THE LAST TWO YEARS OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION!!!!
Get real left wing lunnies. Barney's Frank, Chris Dudd, Obama himself helped push this country over the edge with ridiculous policies that insisted every non credit worthy individula, on assistance yet, had a RIGHT to a home. Those policies continue and until those politician IN CHARGE are behind bars this country has no chance to return to growth and proposperity only to a welfare state run by Socialists.
Stop hiding behind your Bush hate mongoring and face the reality of who you supported, waht they did, and what they are bout to do in continuing to dismatle our constituition, our rights and this republic.
Posted by Obamunut at 11/01/2009 @ 10:03am
Posted by BigPasture at 10/31/2009 @ 11:10pm |
Yeah, nail Carter for the results of LBJ's war spending, Nixon's dicking with wage/price controls, and the actions of OPEC...all of which occured before Jimmy set foot in the oval office.
Damn but you are one clueless sumbitch.
Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 10:39am
Posted by Obamunut at 11/01/2009 @ 10:03am |
Hurry, hurry or you'll miss Glenn Beck; we wouldn't want to have him or you cry alone.
Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 10:41am
Hopey and Changey, the magical way!
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Mission Accomplished! Fannie Mae Loan Delinquency Rate Skyrockets 300% Over 2008
Tyler Durden paints an ugly picture for the U.S. taxpayer, courtesy Barney Frank (D-MA) and Chris Dodd (D-CT).
The [Fannie Mae] "seriously delinquent" rate has gone parabolic, increasing by roughly 5% sequentially and just under 300% YoY [year-over-year].....It tells you all you need to know about the Fed's containment of the housing problem.
The August seriously delinquent single-family number comprised of a 2.87% non-credit enhanced delinquencies and a very bothersome 11.52%, consisting of credit enhanced loans... The deterioration of FNM's book however did not stop it from increasing the size of its book [loans]. In September Fannie's total book of business hit $3.242 trillion, up from...$3.079 trillion in the prior year...
...This trend should bother you, dear taxpayer, because it is your money on the hook here......courtesy of the dollar printing press to onboard even more toxic garbage onto your balance sheet....
Posted by Happy at 11/01/2009 @ 11:43am
Posted by Happy at 11/01/2009 @ 11:43am |
As if only the FNMA loans are the problem...
http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/ 08202009_foreclosures_delinquencies.asp
<In the first quarter of this year, a record high 1.37% of all mortgage loans went into delinquency, and in the second quarter that figure only moderated one-tenth to 1.36%, said the Mortgage Bankers Association, who conduct a survey of 44 million loans across the country.
Foreclosures on subprime adjustable-rate mortgage loans have moderated substantially, but foreclosures on the other types of loans increased rapidly, such as on prime fixed-rate loans.
Looking at data for private properties with between one and four units, delinquency rates rose to 9.24% of all loans in the second quarter, up 12 basis points from Q1, which was a record. Compared to Q2 2008, delinquency rates have jumped by 283 basis points.>
Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 11:58am
Actually, when a politician urges an unnecessary war, a war for the sake of his career interests, not the nations interests, that is more than a con job. It is an act of corruption, an act of treason, a high crime and misdemeanor.
Posted by Pirovano at 10/29/2009 @ 2:32pm
so you would hang reagan, bush, clinton, and bush, too?
Posted by frosty zoom at 11/01/2009 @ 12:04pm
Posted by BigPasture at 10/31/2009 @ 11:07pm
rio, sorry dude, but you just don't have a clue.
Posted by frosty zoom at 11/01/2009 @ 12:06pm
Posted by Obamunut at 11/01/2009 @ 10:03am |
<...but please note he does not list GSE reform as an accomplishment of Mr. Snow's tenure at Treasury or the first seven years of the Administration--that did not happen until the EIGHTH YEAR of the Bush term when a bill that I authored was enacted into law. The President and Mr. Snow failed to deliver--even when their party was in charge of both houses of Congress.>
< Dealey also fails to report that the Bush Administration did not support the reform efforts of Republican former House Financial Services Committee Chairman Mike Oxley, who recently told the Financial Times that the White House gave him "the one-finger salute" for his efforts to bring about GSE reform.>
<I also supported--with major opposition from the Bush Administration and their conservative Congressional allies--a tough federal law against predatory lending, and I urged then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan to write regulations based on the Home Owners Equity Protection Act passed by a Democratic Congress in 1994. Those regulations would have OUTLAWED MANY OF THE IRRESPONSIBLE LENDING PRACTICES that fueled the housing bubble and now threaten the entire economy.>
Stop spewing your Bush cheerleading and face the reality of who you supported and what they DIDN'T DO to prevent the dismantling of our economy, dufus.
Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 12:46pm
like teaching bricks, snowy.
Posted by frosty zoom at 11/01/2009 @ 1:22pm
There is no evidence of an Anthropogenic Housing Crisis or an Anthropogenic Banking Crisis. It's all caused by sunspots.
Posted by mikecope at 11/01/2009 @ 1:29pm
like teaching bricks, snowy. Posted by frosty zoom at 11/01/2009 @ 1:22pm |
Beats throwin' em!
Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 2:02pm
coke!
Posted by frosty zoom at 11/01/2009 @ 4:55pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 11/01/2009 @ 4:55pm |
weed!
Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 5:03pm
no way, snowy,
the green party's never gettin' off the ground in the u.s.
PEPSI!
Posted by frosty zoom at 11/01/2009 @ 5:56pm
Posted by mikecope at 11/01/2009 @ 1:29pm | ignore this person | warn this person
fonny
Posted by emile duBois at 11/01/2009 @ 6:07pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 11/01/2009 @ 5:56pm |
But its the only thing I've found that people from every party have said they support (not on camera, in an election, mind you).
Posted by snowball777 at 11/01/2009 @ 6:52pm
Hi Katrina , I know the answer! In about 1988 some bills were passed that allowed derivatives and subprime mortgages. The derivative had fewer regulations than other mortgage investments. The first subprime mortgage was made in 1993. such loans were slow to start because there was no ligament reason to make such a loan. 1999! On the last day of business President Clinton signed the 2000 budget bill. The night before Phill Gramm R, TX slipped in the"Futures Commodity Modernization Act of 2000". Now when the sub-prime mortgages were bundled into derivatives they had a way to hedge, insure, the derivatives. A Credit Default Swap could be used as a hedge with no regulation. Even people who did not own a derivative could buy a CDS contract on them. Why? The only way to make money was if the underlying mortgages foreclosed and who could predict that? If the mortgages were worthless the cost of such a hedge would be prohibitive. Only in the real world. The bond ratings companies found they could not determine a proper rate for the worthless mortgages. So they hired a patsy, no a financial mathematical whiz who used an exotic formula to find the derivatives should have the best rating, AAA. A CDS has a defined term, often 5 years, so for these owners of the CDS contracts to make money some trigger would be needed to cause the foreclosure of many mortgages at once. Chairman of the Fed. Alan Greenspan to the rescue. On Feb. 23, 2004 he gave a speech to the Credit Union meeting on national TV. In the next to last paragraph he said to buy your next home with an ARM, the prime was 1%. In 2 1/2 years he raised the prime to 5.25%. Result many foreclosures right on time. Bill
Posted by BillWilliam at 11/02/2009 @ 4:17pm
Hi frostyzoom, Hang em? First you need evidence, a sheriff willing to arrest them, a prosecutor willing to charge them, a judge willing to go to trial, and "Can I be on the jury?" Reagan? Our greatest Pres? That speech during inauguration. "Iran is so afraid of me they will release the embassy personal right now!" They did, but did the F4 parts we gave them have anything to do with it? The parts that came from U.S.A. government supplies through Israeli hands and on to Iran? A deal set up in Oct- Nov the previous year by H.W. Bush on his trip to the middle east? Before Reagan was elected? That would be treason! Not Reagan? Hang him. H.W. Bush? Hang him. Clinton for lying about a BJ in the Oval Office? Sentence him for life, with Hillary! The worst punishment there is. G. Bush for lying to congress and the American people about his reason for declairing war on Iraq? Hang him. Cheney, hang him, Rove hang him. G. Bush for not entering Afghanistan with at least 900,000 American troops. Sorry he was already hung. Dig him up and do it again.
Posted by BillWilliam at 11/02/2009 @ 11:35pm