|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Dec 17, 2008 11:02:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Dec 17, 2008 11:12:06 GMT -6
We've been telling you that for years. See sub-prime mortgages.
|
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Dec 17, 2008 12:57:02 GMT -6
We've been telling you that for years. See sub-prime mortgages. Who voted for him twice? |
|
|
|
Post by NotMyKid on Dec 17, 2008 15:25:03 GMT -6
We've been telling you that for years. See sub-prime mortgages. Who voted for him twice? What were the options? |
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Dec 17, 2008 17:39:37 GMT -6
Gore, Nader, Kerry........I think the world would look different now |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Dec 17, 2008 22:05:27 GMT -6
Gore, Nader, Kerry........I think the world would look different now Looking at recent Bush interviews, it's like he's resigned himself to the fact he's going to hell. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Dec 18, 2008 8:37:40 GMT -6
We've been telling you that for years. See sub-prime mortgages. He should have abandoned his Fed Chief a long time ago. Remember this: www.nytimes.com/2005/05/21/business/21fed.htmlThis is what you get when the overlords of the money supply refuse to acknowledge that double digits in home price growth is inflation and refuses to pop the bubble. The orgy could have ended before everybody fucked the dirty gal and got herpes. And subprime is safe, just ask the Dems: jp.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs |
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Dec 18, 2008 10:07:04 GMT -6
We've been telling you that for years. See sub-prime mortgages. He should have abandoned his Fed Chief a long time ago. Remember this: www.nytimes.com/2005/05/21/business/21fed.htmlThis is what you get when the overlords of the money supply refuse to acknowledge that double digits in home price growth is inflation and refuses to pop the bubble. The orgy could have ended before everybody fucked the dirty gal and got herpes. And subprime is safe, just ask the Dems: jp.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7RsBoth of those references bring back memories. I still recall all the warnings of people earning $30K getting into $300K homes with nothing down and no background checks. Not even simple verification of ID, employment or income. All the warnings and the evidence backing up the warnings were completely ignored and look where we are today.....all in the name of "everyone should have the "right" to home ownership". It is supposed to be the "right to pursuit of happiness", not the "right to happiness". |
|
|
|
Post by Saggitariutt Jefferspin (ith) on Dec 18, 2008 11:06:16 GMT -6
He should have abandoned his Fed Chief a long time ago. Remember this: www.nytimes.com/2005/05/21/business/21fed.htmlThis is what you get when the overlords of the money supply refuse to acknowledge that double digits in home price growth is inflation and refuses to pop the bubble. The orgy could have ended before everybody fucked the dirty gal and got herpes. And subprime is safe, just ask the Dems: jp.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7RsBoth of those references bring back memories. I still recall all the warnings of people earning $30K getting into $300K homes with nothing down and no background checks. Not even simple verification of ID, employment or income. All the warnings and the evidence backing up the warnings were completely ignored and look where we are today.....all in the name of "everyone should have the "right" to home ownership". It is supposed to be the "right to pursuit of happiness", not the "right to happiness". Towards the end of '05, we qualified for double the house we purchased, had to provide minimum documentation, 100% financing, and I'm not embarrassed to say my credit isn't the best (damn failed business venture). I looked to see what we could have purchased, and I think I calculated our debt to income to 65%, where as it's about 25% currently. |
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Dec 18, 2008 11:27:06 GMT -6
He should have abandoned his Fed Chief a long time ago. Remember this: www.nytimes.com/2005/05/21/business/21fed.htmlThis is what you get when the overlords of the money supply refuse to acknowledge that double digits in home price growth is inflation and refuses to pop the bubble. The orgy could have ended before everybody fucked the dirty gal and got herpes. And subprime is safe, just ask the Dems: jp.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7RsBoth of those references bring back memories. I still recall all the warnings of people earning $30K getting into $300K homes with nothing down and no background checks. Not even simple verification of ID, employment or income. All the warnings and the evidence backing up the warnings were completely ignored and look where we are today.....all in the name of "everyone should have the "right" to home ownership". It is supposed to be the "right to pursuit of happiness", not the "right to happiness". Yet the companies providing these loans are not to blame and should not have a sense of social consciousness. The company providing that home loan to the 30K'er for a $300K home is an issue. The company could have said 'NO LOAN" at any point. |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Dec 18, 2008 12:02:47 GMT -6
Both of those references bring back memories. I still recall all the warnings of people earning $30K getting into $300K homes with nothing down and no background checks. Not even simple verification of ID, employment or income. All the warnings and the evidence backing up the warnings were completely ignored and look where we are today.....all in the name of "everyone should have the "right" to home ownership". It is supposed to be the "right to pursuit of happiness", not the "right to happiness". Yet the companies providing these loans are not to blame and should not have a sense of social consciousness. The company providing that home loan to the 30K'er for a $300K home is an issue. The company could have said 'NO LOAN" at any point.Sure, and then be slapped with some sort of discriminatory lawsuit. The lenders were basically forced to be "socially conscious"(in letting people who couldn't afford a house buy one) by the lending policies set by congress in their attempt to be fair. That really worked out well. |
|
|
|
Post by Saggitariutt Jefferspin (ith) on Dec 18, 2008 12:20:40 GMT -6
Yet the companies providing these loans are not to blame and should not have a sense of social consciousness. The company providing that home loan to the 30K'er for a $300K home is an issue. The company could have said 'NO LOAN" at any point.Sure, and then be slapped with some sort of discriminatory lawsuit. The lenders were basically forced to be "socially conscious"(in letting people who couldn't afford a house buy one) by the lending policies set by congress in their attempt to be fair. That really worked out well. There is certainly some liability that lies with the lenders. I work for a notoriously conservative lender...and even though we're taking a bite of the shit sandwich, we survived. Our mortgage consultants used to be furious with our lending practices, because the Countrywide's and WaMu's were basically setting up HELOC's with a purchase of a small pop without qualifying. So, there are ways that you could be conservative and survive. It's not all the government's fair lending practices that take the blame. |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Dec 18, 2008 12:30:27 GMT -6
Sure, and then be slapped with some sort of discriminatory lawsuit. The lenders were basically forced to be "socially conscious"(in letting people who couldn't afford a house buy one) by the lending policies set by congress in their attempt to be fair. That really worked out well. There is certainly some liability that lies with the lenders. I agree. |
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Dec 18, 2008 12:48:15 GMT -6
Yet the companies providing these loans are not to blame and should not have a sense of social consciousness. The company providing that home loan to the 30K'er for a $300K home is an issue. The company could have said 'NO LOAN" at any point.Sure, and then be slapped with some sort of discriminatory lawsuit. The lenders were basically forced to be "socially conscious"(in letting people who couldn't afford a house buy one) by the lending policies set by congress in their attempt to be fair. That really worked out well. I'll call bullshit. Can you provide a legal case citation where a discrimination claim was successful based upon a bad credit score? |
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Dec 19, 2008 3:09:06 GMT -6
Sure, and then be slapped with some sort of discriminatory lawsuit. The lenders were basically forced to be "socially conscious"(in letting people who couldn't afford a house buy one) by the lending policies set by congress in their attempt to be fair. That really worked out well. I'll call bullshit. Can you provide a legal case citation where a discrimination claim was successful based upon a bad credit score? Sure. www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/04/03/mortgage.settlement/Mortgage Company To Pay $2.1 Billion In HUD Discrimination Settlement
WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, April 3) -- Accubanc Mortgage Corporation of Dallas,Texas, has agreed to a pay $2.148 billion in a settlement with the Department of Housing and Urban Development for discrimination in loan practices.
HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo announced the largest settlement ever in an unfair housing dispute.
Accubanc will make the money available through mortgage loans and program development to increase home ownership over the next three years. The loans will allow 15,700 low- and moderate-income families and minority families to obtain home mortgages that were previously denied. Accubanc is expected to take a loss on the loans, although the dollar figure was not immediately available. [/b] Sweet. A loss on the loans. Sure sounds like they were previously qualified. There are plenty of lawsuits and threats of lawsuits by the government or groups such as acorn to conform to the CRA. Greenlining, a Berkeley based company, threatens banks with lawsuits among other things to secure community lending(shit loans). www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=60It all started with The Community Reinvestment Act, a federal law originally passed during the Carter administration and then ramped up during the Clinton years, that was originally designed to prevent racist lending practices by banks who wouldn’t loan money to minorities, even if they were qualified. Which was a fine idea. But over time the law was twisted to force banks to make loans to minorities even if they weren’t qualified — which all may sound very peachy keen in Fantasy Utopia Land but which inevitably spells long-term financial suicide for a bank.
The Greenlining Institute’s self-appointed role is to identify those banks which by Greenlining’s reckoning haven’t doled out enough money to underqualified minority borrowers, and then threaten them with lawsuits, protests, and accusations of institutional racism if the banks don’t start opening their wallets ASAP. And the banks caved. Greenlining brags that they have unparalleled access to banking boardrooms, and they successfully squeezed $2.4 trillion (yes, trillion) in “CRA commitments” (i.e. loans to unqualified borrowers) out of terrified banks. Nearly every bank and financial institution you’ve ever heard of seems to kowtow to Greenlining. |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Dec 19, 2008 5:42:12 GMT -6
Both of those references bring back memories. I still recall all the warnings of people earning $30K getting into $300K homes with nothing down and no background checks. Not even simple verification of ID, employment or income. All the warnings and the evidence backing up the warnings were completely ignored and look where we are today.....all in the name of "everyone should have the "right" to home ownership". It is supposed to be the "right to pursuit of happiness", not the "right to happiness". Sure. www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/04/03/mortgage.settlement/Mortgage Company To Pay $2.1 Billion In HUD Discrimination Settlement
WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, April 3) -- Accubanc Mortgage Corporation of Dallas,Texas, has agreed to a pay $2.148 billion in a settlement with the Department of Housing and Urban Development for discrimination in loan practices.
HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo announced the largest settlement ever in an unfair housing dispute.
Accubanc will make the money available through mortgage loans and program development to increase home ownership over the next three years. The loans will allow 15,700 low- and moderate-income families and minority families to obtain home mortgages that were previously denied. Accubanc is expected to take a loss on the loans, although the dollar figure was not immediately available. [/b] Sweet. A loss on the loans. Sure sounds like they were previously qualified. There are plenty of lawsuits and threats of lawsuits by the government or groups such as acorn to conform to the CRA. Greenlining, a Berkeley based company, threatens banks with lawsuits among other things to secure community lending(shit loans). [/quote] Ouch, the stupidity... It's got to be all those minority mortgages. Translation: Darned brown people (F'ing N---ers) messing it up for us oppressed white males... Except when it's not: www.fairhousing.com/index.cfm?method=page.display&pagename=advocate_june98_page3I mean... it's just gotta be the brown people... www.huduser.org/publications/polleg/tsoc98/part2-3.html.....because the requirements in the CRA that lenders not discriminate against urban zip codes resulted in the $million HELOC's in countless suburban cul de sac developments... and the entire "flip this house" TV series genre was all due to rules relating to urban renewal only... I get it. |
|
