Arizona's New Immigration Law

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

LOL...this post is full lies and not backed up by reality. The gov never ever told or foced the banks to give LIAR Loans.

Wrong. from wiki

Government policies
Main article: Government policies and the subprime mortgage crisis

U.S. Subprime lending expanded dramatically 2004-2006


Both government failed regulation and deregulation contributed to the crisis. In testimony before Congress both the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Alan Greenspan conceded failure in allowing the self-regulation of investment banks.[103][104]
Increasing home ownership has been the goal of several presidents including Roosevelt, Reagan, Clinton and G.W.Bush. In 1982, Congress passed the Alternative Mortgage Transactions Parity Act (AMTPA), which allowed non-federally chartered housing creditors to write adjustable-rate mortgages. Among the new mortgage loan types created and gaining in popularity in the early 1980s were adjustable-rate, option adjustable-rate, balloon-payment and interest-only mortgages. These new loan types are credited with replacing the long standing practice of banks making conventional fixed-rate, amortizing mortgages. Among the criticisms of banking industry deregulation that contributed to the savings and loan crisis was that Congress failed to enact regulations that would have prevented exploitations by these loan types. Subsequent widespread abuses of predatory lending occurred with the use of adjustable-rate mortgages.[2][37][105] Approximately 80% of subprime mortgages are adjustable-rate mortgages.[2]
In 1995, the GSEs like Fannie Mae began receiving government tax incentives for purchasing mortgage backed securities which included loans to low income borrowers. Thus began the involvement of the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with the subprime market.[106] In 1996, HUD set a goal for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that at least 42% of the mortgages they purchase be issued to borrowers whose household income was below the median in their area. This target was increased to 50% in 2000 and 52% in 2005.[107] From 2002 to 2006, as the U.S. subprime market grew 292% over previous years, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac combined purchases of subprime securities rose from $38 billion to around $175 billion per year before dropping to $90 billion per year, which included $350 billion of Alt-A securities. Fannie Mae had stopped buying Alt-A products in the early 1990s because of the high risk of default. By 2008, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac owned, either directly or through mortgage pools they sponsored, $5.1 trillion in residential mortgages, about half the total U.S. mortgage market.[108] The GSE have always been highly leveraged, their net worth as of 30 June 2008 being a mere US$114 billion.[109] When concerns arose in September 2008 regarding the ability of the GSE to make good on their guarantees, the Federal government was forced to place the companies into a conservatorship, effectively nationalizing them at the taxpayers' expense.[110][111]
The Glass-Steagall Act was enacted after the Great Depression. It separated commercial banks and investment banks, in part to avoid potential conflicts of interest between the lending activities of the former and rating activities of the latter. Economist Joseph Stiglitz criticized the repeal of the Act. He called its repeal the "culmination of a $300 million lobbying effort by the banking and financial services industries...spearheaded in Congress by Senator Phil Gramm." He believes it contributed to this crisis because the risk-taking culture of investment banking dominated the more conservative commercial banking culture, leading to increased levels of risk-taking and leverage during the boom period.[112] The Federal government bailout of thrifts during the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s may have encouraged other lenders to make risky loans, and thus given rise to moral hazard.[38][113]
Conservatives and Libertarians have also debated the possible effects of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), with detractors claiming that the Act encouraged lending to uncreditworthy borrowers,[114][115][116][117] and defenders claiming a thirty year history of lending without increased risk.[118][119][120][121] Detractors also claim that amendments to the CRA in the mid-1990s, raised the amount of mortgages issued to otherwise unqualified low-income borrowers, and allowed the securitization of CRA-regulated mortgages, even though a fair number of them were subprime.[122][123]
Both Federal Reserve Governor Randall Kroszner and FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair have stated their belief that the CRA was not to blame for the crisis.[124]
[125]
Economist Paul Krugman argued in January 2010 that the simultaneous growth of the residential and commercial real estate pricing bubbles undermines the case made by those who argue that Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, CRA or predatory lending were primary causes of the crisis. In other words, bubbles in both markets developed even though only the residential market was affected by these potential causes.[126]

I never said "forced", but there were definitely programs/pressure. I never said this was the "single" reason for the economic crash. I also never blamed a specific politcal party or mentioned race.

[saden1]

SS33, read your post, read mine and then read the first paragraph of the article you posted.

Government deregulation and failed regulation of the commercial and investment banking industries were important contributors to the subprime mortgage crisis. These included allowing the self-regulation of Wall Street's investment banks and the failed regulation of Wall Street rating agencies, which were responsible for incorrectly rating some $3.2 trillion dollars of subprime mortgage-backed securities.[1][2] The introduction of new mortgage products by the Alternative Mortgage Transactions Parity Act (AMTPA), passed by Congress in 1982, ended the long standing practice of limiting banks to making conventional fixed-rate mortgages.[3] Approximately 80% of U.S. mortgages issued in recent years to subprime borrowers were adjustable-rate mortgages.[4] Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac also carry blame. The two GSEs purchased over $500 billion dollars in high risk Alt-A mortgage products, which they had previously classified as too risky for purchase in the 1990s.[5] Both Alan Greenspan and the SEC testified before Congress that the shadow banking system was not effectively regulated, even though it had become nearly as important as the regulated depository banking system in providing credit.

You can bash the gov for the lack of regulation and oversight and I won't defend that but I can not accept "pressure/programs" line. Never!

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by saden1

SS33, read your post, read mine and then read the first paragraph of the article you posted.



You can bash the gov for the lack of regulation and oversight and I won't defend that but I can not accept "pressure/programs" line. Never!

You may not want to accept it, but it was a contributing factor. And I certainly do NOT believe, nor asserted, it was "Tyrone's and Julio's" mortgages that caused the economic meltdown. I live in suburbia in VB, I'm well aware of the foreclosure and for sale signs everywhere.

What I was responding to particularly was jtf's comment about "free marketism failed miserably", which I disagree with.

[joethiesmanfan]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

You may not want to accept it, but it was a contributing factor. And I certainly do NOT believe, nor asserted, it was "Tyrone's and Julio's" mortgages that caused the economic meltdown. I live is suburbia in VB, I'm well aware of the foreclosure and for sale signs everywhere.

What I was responding to particularly was jtf's comment about "free marketism failed miserably", which I disagree with.

We agree to disagree. Now we know where we stand. What do we agree on. It seems like people are agreeing on anything anymore. Which leads me to this question. What are your perceptions of America. Is America an English/European Christian empire or something new created by the founding fathers.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

We agree to disagree. Now we know where we stand. What do we agree on. It seems like people are agreeing on anything anymore. Which leads me to this question. What are your perceptions of America. Is America an English/European Christian empire or something new created by the founding fathers.

Nothing I say or post will change your views/opinions. So it's best we stay at "agree to disagree".

[Rainy Parade]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

And I certainly do NOT believe, nor asserted, it was "Tyrone's and Julio's" mortgages that caused the economic meltdown.

my apologies if that quip was in repsonse to your post, i should have clarified.... i have heard (first hand in person as well as from "the media") plenty of people say that the housing crisis and subsequent economic collapse was caused/mostly the fault of "giving mortgages" to "minorities." my bad for implying that YOU said that or believe that. but it's been asserted.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Rainy Parade

my apologies if that quip was in repsonse to your post, i should have clarified.... i have heard (first hand in person as well as from "the media") plenty of people say that the housing crisis and subsequent economic collapse was caused/mostly the fault of "giving mortgages" to "minorities." my bad for implying that YOU said that or believe that. but it's been asserted.

I have seen the same thing said but more from an allegation that predatory lenders/mortgage brokers were taking advantage of "unsophisticated" purchasers. Not sure if that is the same thing you are referring to. Undoubtedly, many of these unscrupulous brokers made promises of easy money to people who wanted to believe in "pie-in-the-sky" investmets and targeted low-income individuals. Plenty of fault to go around on that scenario.

[Rainy Parade]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I have seen the same thing said but more from an allegation that predatory lenders/mortgage brokers were taking advantage of "unsophisticated" purchasers. Not sure if that is the same thing you are referring to. Undoubtedly, many of these unscrupulous brokers made promises of easy money to people who wanted to believe in "pie-in-the-sky" investmets and targeted low-income individuals. Plenty of fault to go around on that scenario.

agree, predatory lending was a huge part of the problem.

unfortunately i've been around people who claim not to be racist but then always seem to find a way to blame every issue/problem on minorities. in polite language of course.

[joethiesmanfan]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I have seen the same thing said but more from an allegation that predatory lenders/mortgage brokers were taking advantage of "unsophisticated" purchasers. Not sure if that is the same thing you are referring to. Undoubtedly, many of these unscrupulous brokers made promises of easy money to people who wanted to believe in "pie-in-the-sky" investmets and targeted low-income individuals. Plenty of fault to go around on that scenario.

Now comes the same simple question. Why would the banks approve and back thes predatory mortgage brokers. Mortgage brokers can't make the mortgage the bank does. Banks made it clear there was money to make and lot's of it for helping them put warm bodies in these houses. By blaming the mortgage brokers you are blaming the banks. The mortgage brokers got rich from the sub primte loans they are not at fault at all. The bank has to approve the loan. They were paid a hefty fee to reduce that inventory. They were helping the banks try to avoid the inevitable.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Rainy Parade

my apologies if that quip was in repsonse to your post, i should have clarified.... i have heard (first hand in person as well as from "the media") plenty of people say that the housing crisis and subsequent economic collapse was caused/mostly the fault of "giving mortgages" to "minorities." my bad for implying that YOU said that or believe that. but it's been asserted.

Cool, Thx.

[joethiesmanfan]

Originally Posted by saden1

SS33, read your post, read mine and then read the first paragraph of the article you posted.



You can bash the gov for the lack of regulation and oversight and I won't defend that but I can not accept "pressure/programs" line. Never!

The pressure came from the punch drunk builders. Building houses creates wealth. They built too many houses and tried to stave off the inevitable housing price decline by trying their best to put warm bodies in those houses. Banks who had invested in the over build mode had to try to get people in those houses. The crisis was caused by over bulding. Banks were throwing out cash to builders left and right. All these 500,000 dollar condos sitting empty. Don't sound like government hand out loans to me, or socialism. See this is the problem with the free marlet religion. They used to have a mantra "housing prices will always increase", and they believed this to be fact. So, if housing prices will always increase, then keep building. All the other mistakes else are just false conslusions derived from this false premise. Like always, the conservative tactic is to blame someone else stick the blame to someone. I made a mistake but it wasn't my mistake you didn't listen to me, totally. Totally submit to my philosophy next time and I won't make those mistakes.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

The pressure came from the punch drunk builders. Building houses creates wealth. They built too many houses and tried to stave off the inevitable housing price decline by trying their best to put warm bodies in those houses. Banks who had invested in the over build mode had to try to get people in those houses. The crisis was caused by over bulding. Banks were throwing out cash to builders left and right. All these 500,000 dollar condos sitting empty. Don't sound like government hand out loans to me, or socialism. See this is the problem with the free marlet religion. They used to have a mantra "housing prices will always increase", and they believed this to be fact. So, if housing prices will always increase, then keep building. All the other mistakes else are just false conslusions derived from this false premise. Like always, the conservative tactic is to blame someone else stick the blame to someone. I made a mistake but it wasn't my mistake you didn't listen to me, totally. Totally submit to my philosophy next time and I won't make those mistakes.

It's been said before and will be said again. Wow. Just wow.

Way to over simplify in order to validate your pre-existing biases. You clearly read just enough to be stupid.

[joethiesmanfan]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

It's been said before and will be said again. Wow. Just wow.

Way to over simplify in order to validate your pre-existing biases. You clearly read just enough to be stupid.

Typical know everything conservative. They have all the answers. Talk about opver simplify "cut taxes" is the way to Nirvana.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

Typical know everything conservative. They have all the answers. Talk about opver simplify "cut taxes" is the way to Nirvana.

1. Did I assert that cutting taxes is the way to Nirvana?

2. Did I assert that I know everything?

3. Did I make sweeping general statements about complex financial relationships?

4. Did I make generic assumptions about large groups of people with points of view different then mine?

Did you do any of the above?

I would put you on ignore, but I find your semi-informed, over simplifications morbidly fascinating.

[joethiesmanfan]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

1. Did I assert that cutting taxes is the way to Nirvana?

2. Did I assert that I know everything?

3. Did I make sweeping general statements about complex financial relationships?

4. Did I make generic assumptions about large groups of people with points of view different then mine?

Did you do any of the above?

I would put you on ignore, but I find your semi-informed, over simplifications morbidly fascinating.

What came first the chicken or the egg? Did the inventory of (over building) houses exist before the sub-prime loans? Why would banks design such crazy loans? What would be their motivation? Government pressure? When have banks ever operated in this fashion?