Brown People to Blame for financial meltdown

LadyT said:
I'd argue it has to do with borrowing. I'd also be willing to bet the income of a lot of these borrowers hasn't changed much. Its the fact that they have over extended themselves.
Click to expand...

well with wages having been pretty much flat for years now.
A jobless recovery is not possible in an economy that relies 2/3 on consumer spending.
 
Andrew Sullivan was on Bill Maher last week. And I hated the fact that I agreed with him so much. But he was basically saying what I've been saying in that their is plenty of blame to go around. Blame on "Wall St", blame on "Main St", and blame with the banks themselves for making such piss poor investments.

I suppose the KKK's official response will be to blame in the blacks and latinos. I'm just a little shocked people on here actually bought that crock of $hit.
 
LadyT said:
Wow. People are actually considering this may be a viable arguement?

#1) Minorities WERE NOT the only ones over extending themselves. To even suggest that this crisis even may be on the backs of minorities, is racist ignorant and a crock of $hit.

#2) Where's hte blame on the stupid banks that gave people mortgages that they could not afford?
Click to expand...

They didn’t just give them mortgages they couldn’t afford Tiana, that is where you go wrong. They steered them towards the ARM mortgages even when they had better credit, they high-pressure saled them into homes too big for them. I know you dismiss them as stupid, but, you know, I don’t think it’s that simple, and anyway, not everyone is highly educated, is it OK to prey on them then? I don’t believe so.
 
Darla said:
Income, LOL
What a conservative will do to avoid mentioning the word “class”
Click to expand...

LOL... mortgage lending has to do with INCOME you twit. It is the INCOME that should matter in determining who qualifies for a loan. It has NOTHING to do with "class". There are plenty of middle and upper class people that are getting foreclosed upon.... because they too did not have the appropriate INCOME.

But it was the government that decided to force banks to loan in areas with low income. The idiots in DC exacerbated this problem by doing so.
 
Here's what smart conservatives (i.e. not Cawackoe) are saying about this tripe:

Some of my fellow conservatives are not only embarrassing themselves during the financial crisis, they’re embarrassing the rest of us who share that label. E.g., Mark Krikorian, who poses the question of whether there’s a cause and effect relationship between WaMu’s failure and its affirmative action policies. Worse yet, is Michaelle Malkin, who somehow manages to conflate the financial crisis with illegal immigration:

You’ve heard a lot about Fannie/Freddie and the minority lending shakedowns, but you haven’t heard most commentators/analysts on either the left or the right talk about the massive illegal alien mortgage racket — a topic I’ve reported on for the past five years. That’s because fault lies at the feet of the crime-enabling banking industry and the ethnic lobbyists and the illegal alien-enabling Bush administration.
Click to expand...

There’s a lot of room for legitimate criticism of the bailout and there’s a lot of room for partisan point-making to ensure that the public remembers that the Democrats bear more than their fair share of the blame for this mess, but the raving of people like Malkin and Krikorian should be taking place in a padded room in Arkham Asylum not in the public discourse.

Put simply, the freezing up of the credit markets doesn’t have anything to do with either affirmative action or illegal immigration, and people who believe it does are on a par with the conspiracy theorists who think fluoridation is a Chicom plot.

When you look at the data, it’s true that minorities are slightly over-represented in the sub-prime mortgage market. Yet, whites (non-minorities) received 72.5% of subprime mortgages. Blacks got 16.2% of subprime mortgages, which isn’t all that different from the 12.4% of the general population that blacks comprise. The Hispanics about whom Malkin is so hysterical got only 6.2% of subprime mortgages, significantly less than their 14.8% of the general population. But you don’t find an analysis of that data at blogs like those of Malkin or Krikorian.

Update: Although that data is about 10 years old, the pattern continues to hold:

ComplianceTech, a provider of technology and business intelligence for consumer lending institutions and government agencies, has released an industry report indicating that the majority of subprime-rate loans originated in 2006 were made to non-Hispanic Whites and upper-income borrowers (conventional, 1st lien, 1-to-4 family, owner-occupied, home purchase and refinance).The findings are contrary to the way subprime-rate lending has been portrayed. Frequent media portrayals and congressional dialogue refer to subprime-rate lending as a minority and low-income issue. Findings in the report are based on data submitted by lenders under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) analyzed with the data-mining tool LendingPatterns(TM).
Click to expand...

Most subprime loans continue to be held by whites. Having said that, it is true that there is evidence of pricing disparities between white and minority borrowers. What’s striking, however, is that “black and Hispanic borrowers were far more likely to be steered into high-cost subprime loans than other borrowers, even after controlling for factors such as income, loan size and property location.” One might not unreasonably infer that discrimination drove much of the ethnic disparities in this market. Indeed, the data indicate that black homeowners who received subprime mortgage loans were much more likely to be issued a higher-rate loan than white borrowers with the same qualifications. (See 1693 PLI/Corp 655, available on Westlaw.) Indeed, it appears that many minorities who would have qualified for prime loans were unnecessarily channeled by predatory lenders into more expensive subprime financing. The Malkin case simply doesn’t hold water.
Click to expand...

http://www.stephenbainbridge.com/index.php/punditry/they_make_you_embarrassed_to_be_a_conservative/


In short, the subprime market is mostly white people by a very very large majority and, to the extent that blacks are overrepresented in the subprime market as compared to their percentage of population generally, it is largely due to discrimination against blacks by steering them into higher priced subprime loans than the traditional prime loans
they actually qualified for.

Assholes.
 
Darla said:
They didn’t just give them mortgages they couldn’t afford Tiana, that is where you go wrong. They steered them towards the ARM mortgages even when they had better credit, they high-pressure saled them into homes too big for them. I know you dismiss them as stupid, but, you know, I don’t think it’s that simple, and anyway, not everyone is highly educated, is it OK to prey on them then? I don’t believe so.
Click to expand...

"High pressured saled them in to homes too big for them"?

Oh come on! Yes. You are stupid if you're making $60k/yr and you purchase a $500k home without a sizeable downpayment or other income stream to pay for it. Most of these people knowingly went for the ride and its not fair that they are going to get bailed out for their stupidity on an investment they couldn't afford. Sell the house and rent. People act like owning a home is part of the bill of rights that must be subsidized at all costs. but I don't just blame them. I also blame management at the banks for giving people who couldn't afford these homes these ridiculous mortgages. If a person was the victim of fraud then they should be protected. I don't want to pick up the downside of faulty investments of banks, people and investors - period.

Unless, when I go to AC this weekend, the fed can spot me the $500 that I might lose.
 
Superfreak said:
LOL... mortgage lending has to do with INCOME you twit. It is the INCOME that should matter in determining who qualifies for a loan. It has NOTHING to do with "class". There are plenty of middle and upper class people that are getting foreclosed upon.... because they too did not have the appropriate INCOME.

But it was the government that decided to force banks to loan in areas with low income. The idiots in DC exacerbated this problem by doing so.
Click to expand...


Bullshit. They forced some banks to serve in low-income communities but no one forced them to make shitty loans. You can make good low-risk loans in low-income communities you know.
 
Dungheap said:
When you look at the data, it’s true that minorities are slightly over-represented in the sub-prime mortgage market. Yet, whites (non-minorities) received 72.5% of subprime mortgages. Blacks got 16.2% of subprime mortgages, which isn’t all that different from the 12.4% of the general population that blacks comprise. The Hispanics about whom Malkin is so hysterical got only 6.2% of subprime mortgages, significantly less than their 14.8% of the general population. But you don’t find an analysis of that data at blogs like those of Malkin or Krikorian..
Click to expand...


nice find.
 
LadyT said:
"High pressured saled them in to homes too big for them"?

Oh come on! Yes. You are stupid if you're making $60k/yr and you purchase a $500k home without a sizeable downpayment or other income stream to pay for it. Most of these people knowingly went for the ride and its not fair that they are going to get bailed out for their stupidity on an investment they couldn't afford. Sell the house and rent. People act like owning a home is part of the bill of rights that must be subsidized at all costs. but I don't just blame them. I also blame management at the banks for giving people who couldn't afford these homes these ridiculous mortgages. If a person was the victim of fraud then they should be protected. I don't want to pick up the downside of faulty investments of banks, people and investors - period.

Unless, when I go to AC this weekend, the fed can spot me the $500 that I might lose.
Click to expand...

Tiana, I don’t know how you know that most, rather than some, of the people knowingly went for the ride, but it doesn’t matter, I ‘m not going to argue with you about it. Not everyone has a Master’s degree or is smart enough to be able to get one. You obviously are. Others are much easier prey. There’s a reason why it’s called predatory lending. It involves predators.
 
Dungheap said:
Bullshit. They forced some banks to serve in low-income communities but no one forced them to make shitty loans. You can make good low-risk loans in low-income communities you know.
Click to expand...
It comes close to the same thing though, if you are in any area, you still need to make income and some sales, which increases the pressure on trying to make at least enough loans to keep you busy. Same reason car salesmen will sometimes make a bad deal for them because they need to make their weekly/monthly quota.
In an area where there is a disproportionate amount of a type of business that would not normally exist there under a free market, you would (and did) see more of that (bad loans) happening.

I mean if I was in a poor area but low-risk, is it really a big deal if I have to travel a few more blocks for a loan? Would that stop me from getting a mortgage? Of course not, it's not like I have to travel the distance more than a handful of times in my lifetime.

Cypress's title is dishonest and an attempt to split people by race, does anyone really think the poor whites in those neighborhoods did any better? If anything, hispanics from what I've experienced tend to be better with their money.
 
Darla said:
Tiana, I don’t know how you know that most, rather than some, of the people knowingly went for the ride, but it doesn’t matter, I ‘m not going to argue with you about it. Not everyone has a Master’s degree or is smart enough to be able to get one. You obviously are. Others are much easier prey. There’s a reason why it’s called predatory lending. It involves predators.
Click to expand...
You don't need a masters degree, the mortgage company (before giving you the mortgage, actually you can even get it online) outlines what your hypothetical bi-weekly or monthly payments would be. You contrast that to the rent you pay and just about anyone can get a rough idea of whether they could afford it.
If they go beyond that, then they and the mortgage company will end up with bad results that they are responsible for, not the rest of us taxpayers.
 
Darla said:
Tiana, I don’t know how you know that most, rather than some, of the people knowingly went for the ride, but it doesn’t matter, I ‘m not going to argue with you about it. Not everyone has a Master’s degree or is smart enough to be able to get one. You obviously are. Others are much easier prey. There’s a reason why it’s called predatory lending. It involves predators.
Click to expand...

Again, if people were the victim of predatory lending, then they should get retribution from the brokers that led them astray. I understand that they did prey on the elderly and others were lied to and/or tricked when it was time for them to close on their house. In those instances the instutions (if they are left) should pay retribution to the victims. I'd even support letting people refinance into fixed mortgages at current rates if they can afford to keep up the payments. But when you're talking about lowering the principal and using tax payer money to buy up potentially bad loans and renogiating the principal? That's where I draw the line. they agreed to the price, if they can't afford it they should sell. Period.
 
KingCondanomation said:
You don't need a masters degree, the mortgage company (before giving you the mortgage, actually you can even get it online) outlines what your hypothetical bi-weekly or monthly payments would be. You contrast that to the rent you pay and just about anyone can get a rough idea of whether they could afford it.
If they go beyond that, then they and the mortgage company will end up with bad results that they are responsible for, not the rest of us taxpayers.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm......if Dano agrees, I change my mind.

Bail out everybody.
 
Darla said:
Tiana, I don’t know how you know that most, rather than some, of the people knowingly went for the ride, but it doesn’t matter, I ‘m not going to argue with you about it. Not everyone has a Master’s degree or is smart enough to be able to get one. You obviously are. Others are much easier prey. There’s a reason why it’s called predatory lending. It involves predators.
Click to expand...

People are also dumb enough to believe the "we are here to help you" in commericals.
 
LadyT said:
Again, if people were the victim of predatory lending, then they should get retribution from the brokers that led them astray. I understand that they did prey on the elderly and others were lied to and/or tricked when it was time for them to close on their house. In those instances the instutions (if they are left) should pay retribution to the victims. I'd even support letting people refinance into fixed mortgages at current rates if they can afford to keep up the payments. But when you're talking about lowering the principal and using tax payer money to buy up potentially bad loans and renogiating the principal? That's where I draw the line. they agreed to the price, if they can't afford it they should sell. Period.
Click to expand...

Ok, but in my opinion, keeping homes from flooding the market, especially homes in foreclosure, is good for most homeowners. Listen, for me, it’s fine. I am in a condo, that I am considering buying early next year. I am really happy here. The farther the value falls, the better off I am. But, for people who are in homes already, the more homes flooding the market, the lower your value is going to go. Further, even if you are willing to take that hit, lower home values across the board is bad for the economy. It really hurts all of us.
I am not for the bailout personally, however, if you are going to have it, there is no way to have it for banks only as the R’s wanted. You have to include help for distressed homeowners as well. Also, things aren’t as simple as, you can’t afford it sell it. By the time you’re in that boat, your credit is often destroyed, you can’t even get an apartment, most of these people have kids. You know, I guess I just think that our American system sucks if you want to know the truth. It’s all for the big guys, the rich, and the very well educated can make out ok in that atmosphere too, but that is not the majority of Americans. I’m sick of making excuses because I don’t like to see people thrown out on the street. Did you know that there are tent cities now??? Is that what we want in this country?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top