Eliot Spitzer explains how Bush screwed the pooch

[Damocles]

Damo these loans were not a problem and did not effect the overall economy. They did allow a small percent of people who had bad credit but good incomes to get into a house.

They became a problem when large numbers of them were written. If you would bother to look into it the lenders began telling people who actually quailified for better rates that all they could get was a subprime loan so that they could profit off the people. The market was such that people thought they would just refi in two years and have equity in their house and better credit which would allow them a better rate. Then the bottom fell out. The average joe who did not understand the market got hosed because they were lied to so someone could make money. Yes some people we just being greedy. There was still crime at the industry level which the states fought to stop then the Bush admin who apoints the head of the OCC got involved to keep them from battling the industry because they needed the economic numbers this mess was giving them at the time.

There was nothing wrong with the loans it was their misuse.

Just like a hammer is a good tool but you should not use it to hit people over the head with to take their money.

Sigh...

This is getting ridiculous. As the bubble grows it is "not a problem"?

Like I said, it is like a zit. Until it grows a head you don't pretend it isn't a zit. Unless it is a Democratic zit. If you are able to stop it before it grows a head then it must not have been a zit!

What you attempt to do is say, "Well the bubble wasn't bursting until now so now is the only time this could be said to be a problem!" It's total rubbish.

You act like nothing except this contributed to the problem. Stopping investigation after the problem is already there because of all the steps to get there is wrong, but it is not the cause of the problem that you want to investigate, that's plain dumb. Bad law was the cause of the problem, and that was created by over-reaching legislators messing around in areas of banking policy they never should have messed with.

Attempting to pretend that the problem suddenly was created at the time people wanted to investigate is total rubbish, and it simply is pretense in order to cement the blinders you wear to any and all errors that might have a D attached.

Law was passed that caused banks to begin giving loans that they otherwise wouldn't, the law was supposed to sunset after three years (let the zit grow, but stop it before it gets a head), instead they extended and expanded the program (wanted that campaignability of "More <insert group here> own homes..."), upon expanding it the banks said, "If you make us give the loans you need to add bundling so we can sell them, otherwise we only have so much free capital to give them!" (bundling began)...

At this point we have created our bubble, even if we stop it before it pops it was STILL a bad idea....

All of this part of the bubble creation you ignore because you so desperately want only one person to be at fault and will do or say anything to be able to pretend exactly that.

Desh, on this one you are so obviously a hack that it would be funny if it wasn't so deadly serious.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Sigh...

This is getting ridiculous. As the bubble grows it is "not a problem"?

Like I said, it is like a zit. Until it grows a head you don't pretend it isn't a zit. Unless it is a Democratic zit. If you are able to stop it before it grows a head then it must not have been a zit!

What you attempt to do is say, "Well the bubble wasn't bursting until now so now is the only time this could be said to be a problem!" It's total rubbish.

You act like nothing except this contributed to the problem. Stopping investigation after the problem is already there because of all the steps to get there is wrong, but it is not the cause of the problem that you want to investigate, that's plain dumb. Bad law was the cause of the problem, and that was created by over-reaching legislators messing around in areas of banking policy they never should have messed with.

Attempting to pretend that the problem suddenly was created at the time people wanted to investigate is total rubbish, and it simply is pretense in order to cement the blinders you wear to any and all errors that might have a D attached.

Law was passed that caused banks to begin giving loans that they otherwise wouldn't, the law was supposed to sunset after three years (let the zit grow, but stop it before it gets a head), instead they extended and expanded the program (wanted that campaignability of "More <insert group here> own homes..."), upon expanding it the banks said, "If you make us give the loans you need to add bundling so we can sell them, otherwise we only have so much free capital to give them!" (bundling began)...

At this point we have created our bubble, even if we stop it before it pops it was STILL a bad idea....

All of this part of the bubble creation you ignore because you so desperately want only one person to be at fault and will do or say anything to be able to pretend exactly that.

Desh, on this one you are so obviously a hack that it would be funny if it wasn't so deadly serious.

So then is it false that the administration went all out to make sure states couldn't fight the legislations.

Your mindless defense of status quo and knee jerk defense of the republicrats is growing tiresome.

 

[Damocles]

So then is it false that the administration went all out to make sure states couldn't fight the legislations.

Your mindless defense of status quo and knee jerk defense of the republicrats is growing tiresome.

There is no defense of that, your mindless repetition notwithstanding. Also, you are not Desh and aren't even contributing other than evidence that you totally have no comprehension of the previous conversation between Desh, SF, and I on this subject.

If you don't understand where Desh and I are in a different argument that has lasted over a few threads then don't enter the conversation, because it just makes you look foolish.

And if you can't read that I didn't excuse any of it, then you really have no comprehension in reading.

 

[evince]

Sigh...

This is getting ridiculous. As the bubble grows it is "not a problem"?

Like I said, it is like a zit. Until it grows a head you don't pretend it isn't a zit. Unless it is a Democratic zit. If you are able to stop it before it grows a head then it must not have been a zit!

What you attempt to do is say, "Well the bubble wasn't bursting until now so now is the only time this could be said to be a problem!" It's total rubbish.

You act like nothing except this contributed to the problem. Stopping investigation after the problem is already there because of all the steps to get there is wrong, but it is not the cause of the problem that you want to investigate, that's plain dumb. Bad law was the cause of the problem, and that was created by over-reaching legislators messing around in areas of banking policy they never should have messed with.

Attempting to pretend that the problem suddenly was created at the time people wanted to investigate is total rubbish, and it simply is pretense in order to cement the blinders you wear to any and all errors that might have a D attached.

Law was passed that caused banks to begin giving loans that they otherwise wouldn't, the law was supposed to sunset after three years (let the zit grow, but stop it before it gets a head), instead they extended and expanded the program (wanted that campaignability of "More <insert group here> own homes..."), upon expanding it the banks said, "If you make us give the loans you need to add bundling so we can sell them, otherwise we only have so much free capital to give them!" (bundling began)...

At this point we have created our bubble, even if we stop it before it pops it was STILL a bad idea....

All of this part of the bubble creation you ignore because you so desperately want only one person to be at fault and will do or say anything to be able to pretend exactly that.

Desh, on this one you are so obviously a hack that it would be funny if it wasn't so deadly serious.

What problem did these loans cause Damo?

None until they were used in a way they were not designed to be used.

Damo this was attempted to be acted on by not just Democrats. Some of the people trying to stop the mess in their own state were Republicans Im sure. Why do you ignore that part of the equation.

You are so stuck in the idea that I am nothing but a partisan you are failing to get off the merry go round. This was allowed to happen because it was the only thing steaming the economy at the time. Many of us said it at the time REMEMBER!

 

[Damocles]

What problem did these loans cause Damo?

None until they were used in a way they were not designed to be used.

Damo this was attempted to be acted on by not just Democrats. Some of the people trying to stop the mess in their own state were Republicans Im sure. Why do you ignore that part of the equation.

You are so stuck in the idea that I am nothing but a partisan you are failing to get off the merry go round. This was allowed to happen because it was the only thing steaming the economy at the time. Many of us said it at the time REMEMBER!

It caused the fricking bubble, are you totally incapable of understanding how things grow?

"None"... LOL. The Banks requested the bundling because the loans were so bad they couldn't sell the loans and release the capital so they could loan money to others (banks sell the loans often, it is regular practice). This was because the loans were bad. Each of these steps were a place we could have stopped the zit from gaining a head, instead at each place we moved in the wrong direction.

You are so stuck on a partisan hack idiocy that you cannot even understand what is directly before your face.

Yes I remember many of us said at that time. Many of us said it before, and spoke of the housing Bubble, shoot it was spoken of in many magazines before Bush even took office. Do you remember the articles about the housing bubble that came out almost as soon as the tech bubble was collapsing? I do.

My only point is that each of this steps contributed to what led to the current problem. Ignoring it only means that we will just repeat it later because we'll think it is safe to go "this far"...

It is not safe to muck around here, and not working to understand the implications of our own actions will only ensure we repeat it.

All I see is you, and it appears AHZ, walking around saying "It doesn't have a head, it can't be a zit!" repeatedly.

Yes, you've pointed out the head of the zit. I simply have pointed out all the other portions and how we could have recognized it was a zit before it reached that point.

 

[Kamala Trump]

But the executive is completely republican controlled, and this article is about that.

It's too much to expect every article to be about everything damo. Are you so stupid you don't know how these things work?

 

[Damocles]

But the executive is completely republican controlled, and this article is about that.

It's too much to expect every article to be about everything damo. Are you so stupid you don't know how these things work?

No, it isn't.

However, recognizing the point of the thread was to show it was only their fault, as she continues to argue in this thread, is because we know each other now and have been holding this conversation over the past weeks and many threads.

Is it too much to expect you to actually read both of our arguments before getting all off topic and blindly supporting one thing when the conversation has progressed from that?

 

[Kamala Trump]

No, it isn't.

However, recognizing the point of the thread was to show it was only their fault, as she continues to argue in this thread, is because we know each other now and have been holding this conversation over the past weeks and many threads.

Is it too much to expect you to actually read both of our arguments before getting all off topic?

yes, bush is responsible for the priorities of his exective regime. He chose to instruct them to stop states from fighting the legislation. He's a republican.

This article is not about the whole bubble, it's about the executive participation in it. Get over it and get a grip.

 

[Damocles]

yes, bush is responsible for the priorities of his exective regime. He chose to instruct them to stop states from fighting the legislation. He's a republican.

This article is not about the whole bubble, it's about the executive participation in it. Get over it and get a grip.

However, the conversation has been going on for weeks, and in that context I continued it.

Now get off your high horse. There was nothing in my post that denied that this too added to the problem. However recognizing that she is posting this because she thinks it means that only Bush is responsible for the problem (as shown by her later hackery apologist idiocy) is evidence that I was correct putting it in that context.

Go away or take part in the larger conversation. What is your malfunction lately? PMS?

 

[Kamala Trump]

However, the conversation has been going on for weeks, and in that context I continued it.

Now get off your high horse. There was nothing in my post that denied that this too added to the problem.

Go away or take part in the larger conversation. What is your malfunction lately? PMS?

No high horses here. I'm laughing my ass off at your moronic defense of republicans, when the executive is really what puts the effectiveness behind all laws, and they chose to fight the states tooth and nail. Like I said, get a grip.

 

[Damocles]

No high horses here. I'm laughing my ass off at your moronic defense of republicans, when the executive is really what puts the effectiveness behind all laws, and they chose to fight the states tooth and nail. Like I said, get a grip.

There is no defense, AHZ. What part of my posts says that they are not at fault?

That is total garbage. And is the part that shows you have no comprehension of what you read or are hacking. Which is it?

Again, her posts make it very clear that she believes that only the Rs were responsible. They were, but so were all the other steps along the fricking way. Now either get into the conversation or go away, your PMSing has added nothing to the conversation.

 

[Kamala Trump]

There is no defense, AHZ. What part of my posts says that they are not at fault?

That is total garbage. And is the part that shows you have no comprehension of what you read or are hacking. Which is it?

Again, her posts make it very clear that she believes that only the Rs were responsible. They were, but so were all the other steps along the fricking way. Now either get into the conversation or go away, your PMSing has added nothing to the conversation.

Two being wrong doesn't make a right. If there's no defense, why are you in such a tizzy? You're like a child.

 

[Damocles]

Two being wrong doesn't make a right. If there's no defense, why are you in such a tizzy? You're like a child.

No, I asked you to point out where I was defending the republican part in this. You clearly have no answer and are embarrassed so call me a "child".

It doesn't matter. The reality is, I was correct to put it in the context of previous conversation as her posts make it very clear she thinks there was never any issue at all before Bush did this. I simply reset it in context of what actually got us here. Each step of that "wonderful" journey. Now, Desh and I will likely continue the conversation as she attempts to find another way to ignore the first 10 rungs of a 13 rung ladder...

 

[Kamala Trump]

No, I asked you to point out where I was defending the republican part in this. You clearly have no answer and are embarrassed so call me a "child".

It doesn't matter. The reality is, I was correct to put it in the context of previous conversation as her posts make it very clear she thinks there was never any issue at all before Bush did this. I simply reset it in context of what actually got us here. Each step of that "wonderful" journey.

The culpability of the Republican Executive is greatly exposed in this article.
They WENT OUT OF THEIR WAY to fight states on the issue.

What you choose to focus on is neither correct nor incorrect, it's merely what you choose to do. If you choose to be a silly "they did it too" child, that's your choice.

 

[Damocles]

The culpability of the Republican Executive is greatly exposed in this article.
They WENT OUT OF THEIR WAY to fight states on the issue.

What you choose to focus on is neither correct nor incorrect, it's merely what you choose to do. If you choose to be a silly "they did it too" child, that's your choice.

Look. It isn't a "they do it too" argument, and if you read that into what I have written then you again deliberately ignore what I wrote so that you can pretend that is what I said. It isn't.

It's okay, I understand you want to "help" Desh in her argument that nothing at all contributed to this except that last part (yes, very bad as I said repeatedly). However not understanding the past and what leads up to problems like this only contributes to future problems created the same way. How we get to the place where Bush is able to do this, is as important as the fact that he did.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Look. It isn't a "they do it too" argument, and if you read that into what I have written then you again deliberately ignore what I wrote so that you can pretend that is what I said. It isn't.

It's okay, I understand you want to "help" Desh in her argument that nothing at all contributed to this except that last part (yes, very bad as I said repeatedly). However not understanding the past and what leads up to problems like this only contributes to future problems created the same way.

It is a "they did it too" argument. That's precisely what it is.

 

[evince]

http://www.icba.org/advocacy/testimonydetail.cfm?ItemNumber=524&sn.ItemNumber=1699

It was recognized as a problem and the 108th congress was told of the need to amend the Gramm -leach- Bliley act back in 2004.

Why did they not act?

 

[Damocles]

http://www.icba.org/advocacy/testimonydetail.cfm?ItemNumber=524&sn.ItemNumber=1699

It was recognized as a problem and the 108th congress was told of the need to amend the Gramm -leach- Bliley act back in 2004.

Why did they not act?

I wish they had. But it was recognized as building up in 2000 while the Tech bubble was imploding.

Desh, I wish we had acted in 1992 to keep the legislators out of that level of regulation on banking policy. I wish we hadn't extended and expanded the program adding bundling to allow banks to sell what they otherwise couldn't sell later. I wish we saw what was coming even during the good times at the beginning when the interest rates were extremely low and stopped "deregulation" of this allowing banks who weren't able to participate jump into that fray.

And I wish we hadn't played hot potato with people's homes and futures. And lastly I wish that Bush hadn't so clearly tried to protect people that were taking advantage of a situation that we already knew was blowing up in our faces...

I wish all along the way we had acted smarter than we did. But refusing to recognize past contributors doesn't make the end the cause, and refusing to learn from the past only ensures we will repeat it.

 

[Kamala Trump]

ANyway. They did do it too. I just like giving you shit, damo. Im trying to get you out of the partisan trap, and to be honest that both parties are here to screw us, and the people have no chance until we unite against the elites in powers. Until you admit this fact, I will continue to be a thorn in your side, and I will agitate against republicans as they are the ones who have betrayed us most. Dems have always been anti-american shitheads. Voting libertarian is not punishment enough damo. Voting for someone who can actually defeat the R's will wake them up quicker. Globalization must end.

 

[Damocles]

ANyway. They did do it too. I just like giving you shit, damo. Im trying to get you out of the partisan trap, and to be honest that both parties are here to screw us, and the people have no chance until we unite against the elites in powers. Until you admit this fact, I will continue to be a thorn in your side, and I will agitate against republicans as they are the ones who have betrayed us most. Dems have always been anti-american shitheads. Voting libertarian is not punishment enough damo. Voting for someone who can actually defeat the R's will wake them up quicker. Globalization must end.

Your argument is based on what you pretend I said, not on what I actually said. You have a happy and healthy imagination, thanks for your special contribution to the conversation.

When have I told you not to vote for Obama? I simply pointed out that Obama is even further from your "core" of anti-immigration than even McCain. I plan on voting third party, because I have long been tired of voting for the lesser of two evils and want to actually vote for somebody I want to win.