Taxes were cut, where are the jobs?

Wow. Common sense, sez you. And 'Ron'. 'Ron' says so in the blog that you linked. Too bad there is nothing sourced in his blog to support 'Ron's [ahem] "wisdom". :D



Wow, 'Ron' is like, so accomplished and everything. He must be right. If only he would provide his last name so his credentials could be verified....oh, well.

:rofl2:

I'd take his word over Media Matters, or Demo-Underground, or DailyKOS, or HuffPost, or any of the far left propaganda sites you seem to love so....
 
And you prove mine with your laughable credibility standards. Bwak-Bwak-Bwak! sez j-mac the parrot.


Good God you are annoying....No wonder you can't have a life with an attitude like yours...Now run along and pester someone else, Lord knows you won't be in here having any actual debate troll.
 
Good God you are annoying....No wonder you can't have a life with an attitude like yours...Now run along and pester someone else, Lord knows you won't be in here having any actual debate troll.

She is annoying. Normally I would say that no matter what EVERY woman is at least useful as a semen receptacle. I may have to amend that in BIjous case
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
A "fact" that he will stubbornly ignore or spew forth a deluge of suppositon and conjecture to try and bridge such to deny a simple fact as you present.


The fact that you are disingenuously hanging your hat on a false premised question of the existence or lack thereof, of a line within the CRA, is not the entirety of the causes. But it is a piece of the puzzle that resulted in the meltdown...

http://www.thewisdomjournal.com/Blog/what-really-happened-in-the-mortgage-meltdown/

Banks, like Countrywide (a demo favorite) were complicit in using the horrible political correctness that the CRA institutionalized rather than sound banking practices meant to qualify people for the house they were buying.

Now I am sure you will dismiss any liberal thought involvement in the crash, in favor of really dumb arguments like the straw dog you threw out there from the likes of Media Matters, but the truth in the end is 'was it greed'? Hell yes, greed on the part of banks, greed on the part of community organizers that thuggishly pressured banks into making vig payments to them so they could further their criminal endeavors, greed on the part of people like Franklin Raines that mislead banks into the loans by making them seem to be government backed then jumping ship with a $90 Million dollar parachute, and greed by demo politicians that could use the lax standards to buy votes in their elections while destroying the communities that they represented.

So think what you want pal, I don't give a crap, common sense is on my side. All you have is propaganda.


this is about the third opinion piece from some right wing blogger you've put forth that weaves his supposition and conjecture together with some excerpted facts.

And like the others, he leaves out some important FACTS:

1. Banks had been making mortgage loans to white folk of low income LONG before CRA.....but they were "red-lining"

2. Nowhere in the CRA of 1977 is there a passage that says banks must make BAD LOANS...it merely states that the type of loans banks were making previously continue WITHOUT DISCRMINATION! Since banks were NOT of the habit of makiing bad loans to white folk, why would they suddenly do so for non-white folk.

3. Private lenders were NOT affected by the CRA of 1977. So your source's BS about "activist" using the CRA to bully banks into making loans to "unqualified" minorities is just that, BS.

4. NO ONE TOLD THESE BANKERS TO BUNDLE BAD LOANS WITH GOOD ONES AND THEN PUT THESE TOXIC PACKAGES ON THE MARKET. There is NO stipulation in the CRA that does this.

5. The Bush administration held of on SEC ruling that would have watchdogged the private lenders from pulling the crap they did, as Althea pointed out.


So Mac, you can repeat your BS ad nauseum, but you can't get past these FACTS.
 
Last edited:
Who is responsible for this mortgage/financial train wreck?

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were put under U.S. government conservatorship on September 7, 2008 at a taxpayer cost of $200 billion. Countrywide, the nation's largest mortgage lender failed, along with large Wall Street mortgage investment banks, and the nation's 4th largest bank, Washington Mutual. The American mortgage/financial collapse was underway.

President Bush proposed a $700 billion taxpayer bailout of the mortgage and banking industry meltdown. The Democrat-controlled Congress wanted to do it, but they would not without Republican support because they don't want to be blamed if it doesn't work. The bailout was, of course, approved. Not to do it would have probably caused further financial chaos here and throughout the world financial markets, to which we are inextricably tied.

Who (alive today) is primarily to blame for the easy mortgage madness, the inflation of housing costs and the mortgage/financial meltdown? Former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Representative Barney Frank, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senate Banking Committee Chairman, Christopher Dodd, Senator Chuck Schumer, and all the complicit congressional Democrats who facilitated the economic disaster

Carter's CRA, the Clinton Administration and Representative Barney Frank encouraged risky lending, and put pressure on banks and mortgage lenders such as Countrywide, which snowballed into the subprime mortgage crisis.

Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and all complicit Democrats in the House and Senate should be held to account and removed from office without retirement pay. Likewise, Former presidents Carter and Clinton should have all taxpayer compensation cut-off.

The burning question is, why are elected officials and the news media (other than Fox News and newspapers such as the Daily Press) not explaining what really happened, what caused the housing and mortgage madness and financial meltdown, and laying blame where it belongs? To understand why, read on, and watch the Fox News Special on the matter:

The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) was created as part of the National Housing Act of 1934. The goals of the organization are: to improve housing standards and conditions; to provide an adequate home financing system through insurance of mortgage loans; and to stabilize the mortgage market. In 1965, the FHA became part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). FHA insurance premiums are paid by homeowners, which are included in monthly payments, and it is the only government agency that is completely self-funded and comes at no cost to taxpayers.

The total number of FHA loans fell from 19 percent in 1996 to 6 percent in 2005, with almost all of the decline occurring since 2001.

If government had done nothing further, and not created the housing/mortgage monsters that followed the creation of the FHA, this mortgage/financial meltdown would not have happened. Government-driven mortgage financing for unqualified homebuyers turned into easy-money mortgage madness, which created mortgage and finance monsters that threatened the entire economy.

The Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) was created in 1938 as a government agency by FDR' New Deal to provide liquidity to the mortgage market. For the next thirty years, Fannie Mae held a virtual monopoly on the secondary mortgage market.

In 1968, LBJ removed Fannie Mae from the annual balance sheet of the federal budget and converted it into a private corporation. The guarantor of government-issued mortgages was transferred to the new Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae)

The Emergency Home Finance Act of 1970 created Freddie Mac. The goal was to create a secondary market for conventional mortgages, as indicated in the Fannie Mae charter.

In 1977, Former President Jimmy Carter created the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which was passed by the 95th Congress to increase affordable housing, despite opposition from the banking community.

In 1992, the regulator of Fannie Mae was critically weakened by the actions of Congressional Representative Barney Frank. The agency was required to get its budget approved by Congress, while agencies that regulated banks set their own budgets. That gave congressional allies an easy way to exert pressure. In the late 1990's, under the direction of the Clinton Administration's relaxing of lending standards, Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines allowed subprime borrowers to obtain loans.

In 1995, President Clinton's administration revised Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulation, which allowed mortgage lenders like Countrywide not to mitigate loan risk with savings deposits as do traditional banks, using the new subprime authorization, which is known the secondary mortgage market. The revisions allowed securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages, which were first started by Bear Sterns in 1997. The number of CRA mortgage loans increased 39 percent between 1993 and 1998, while other loans increased only 17 percent. Other rule changes gave Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac extraordinary leverage, allowing them to hold just 2.5% of capital to back their investments, as opposed to 10% for banks.

By 2007, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who securitize half of our nation's $12 trillion mortgage market, accumulated significant bad debt, but because they were not registered under the 1933 or 1934 Securities Act, they were not required to disclose their risky portfolios.

In 2003, the Bush administration proposed changes to move governmental supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. Spearheaded by Representative Barney Frank, the proposal was defeated. Frank said, "Theses two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Max -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we see in terms of affordable housing."

In 2004, a congressional hearing was held pursuant to charges by the Director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) regarding irregularities at Fannie Mae and regarding CEO Franklin Raines. Raines, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were vigorously defended by the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank and other Democrats on the committee. Representative Shays and other Republicans on the committee expressed deep concerns about Fannie Mae's severe lack of capital, double standards, hiring too many lobbyists, paying lobbyists not to work against it, and the clear and present danger of a financial collapse.

Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines subsequently stepped down because of accounting irregularities at Fannie Mae, which paid him $90 million in the process. In 2006, the OFHEO announced a suit against Raines to recover $50 million in payments made to him based on overstated earnings. Raines is now advising Barack Obama in his campaign for president.

In 2005, the Bush administration made further attempts to reign-in the risky buying and lending practices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were knocked down by the Democrats in Congress. Senate Republicans introduced legislation to do the same, but all their efforts, including measures introduced by Senator John McCain, were defeated by Senate Democrats lead by Senators Chris Dodd and Chuck Schumer. The proposed legislation was blocked from a full Senate vote.

As Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank sits at the center of power. Frank knew that his defense of the failed mortgage system was catching up with him, so he steered a major housing relief bill of 2008, which aimed to protect thousands of homeowners from foreclosure by falling back on FHA to substantially increase its insurance of home loans, including 2,3 and 4 unit dwellings. The increase in insured loans allows homeowners to re-finance bad loans or to purchase new homes if they had lost their homes to foreclosure.

Frank was at the forefront of House approval of the $700 billion taxpayer bailout of the financial train wreck that he substantially engineered. Adding insult to injury, Speaker Nancy Pelosi fraudulently pointed the finger at President Bush's failed economic policies for causing the meltdown. Many House Republicans rejected the bailout because Democrats added 100 pages and demanded the inclusion of such things as giving $20 billion to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) The same organization that intimidated lending institutions into making home loans to those who could not afford them. The Senate then added over 300 pages and $billions in pork for congressional re-elections, and passed the bailout, which was approved by the House and signed by President Bush on October 3, 2008.

After the House passed the final bailout package, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts took credit for the rescue, heaping praise upon Barney Frank as the leader of the rescue, and upon their presidential candidate Barack Obama for his direction and support. Rather than a rescue, the taxpayer fraud was, in effect, a bailout of Barney Frank and others responsible for the mess.

http://www.realdemocracy.com/trainrek.htm

Plenty disagree with your coverup tactics here...
 
Who is responsible for this mortgage/financial train wreck?

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were put under U.S. government conservatorship on September 7, 2008 at a taxpayer cost of $200 billion. Countrywide, the nation's largest mortgage lender failed, along with large Wall Street mortgage investment banks, and the nation's 4th largest bank, Washington Mutual. The American mortgage/financial collapse was underway.

President Bush proposed a $700 billion taxpayer bailout of the mortgage and banking industry meltdown. The Democrat-controlled Congress wanted to do it, but they would not without Republican support because they don't want to be blamed if it doesn't work. The bailout was, of course, approved. Not to do it would have probably caused further financial chaos here and throughout the world financial markets, to which we are inextricably tied.

Who (alive today) is primarily to blame for the easy mortgage madness, the inflation of housing costs and the mortgage/financial meltdown? Former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Representative Barney Frank, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senate Banking Committee Chairman, Christopher Dodd, Senator Chuck Schumer, and all the complicit congressional Democrats who facilitated the economic disaster

Carter's CRA, the Clinton Administration and Representative Barney Frank encouraged risky lending, and put pressure on banks and mortgage lenders such as Countrywide, which snowballed into the subprime mortgage crisis.

Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and all complicit Democrats in the House and Senate should be held to account and removed from office without retirement pay. Likewise, Former presidents Carter and Clinton should have all taxpayer compensation cut-off.

The burning question is, why are elected officials and the news media (other than Fox News and newspapers such as the Daily Press) not explaining what really happened, what caused the housing and mortgage madness and financial meltdown, and laying blame where it belongs? To understand why, read on, and watch the Fox News Special on the matter:

The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) was created as part of the National Housing Act of 1934. The goals of the organization are: to improve housing standards and conditions; to provide an adequate home financing system through insurance of mortgage loans; and to stabilize the mortgage market. In 1965, the FHA became part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). FHA insurance premiums are paid by homeowners, which are included in monthly payments, and it is the only government agency that is completely self-funded and comes at no cost to taxpayers.

The total number of FHA loans fell from 19 percent in 1996 to 6 percent in 2005, with almost all of the decline occurring since 2001.

If government had done nothing further, and not created the housing/mortgage monsters that followed the creation of the FHA, this mortgage/financial meltdown would not have happened. Government-driven mortgage financing for unqualified homebuyers turned into easy-money mortgage madness, which created mortgage and finance monsters that threatened the entire economy.

The Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) was created in 1938 as a government agency by FDR' New Deal to provide liquidity to the mortgage market. For the next thirty years, Fannie Mae held a virtual monopoly on the secondary mortgage market.

In 1968, LBJ removed Fannie Mae from the annual balance sheet of the federal budget and converted it into a private corporation. The guarantor of government-issued mortgages was transferred to the new Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae)

The Emergency Home Finance Act of 1970 created Freddie Mac. The goal was to create a secondary market for conventional mortgages, as indicated in the Fannie Mae charter.

In 1977, Former President Jimmy Carter created the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which was passed by the 95th Congress to increase affordable housing, despite opposition from the banking community.

In 1992, the regulator of Fannie Mae was critically weakened by the actions of Congressional Representative Barney Frank. The agency was required to get its budget approved by Congress, while agencies that regulated banks set their own budgets. That gave congressional allies an easy way to exert pressure. In the late 1990's, under the direction of the Clinton Administration's relaxing of lending standards, Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines allowed subprime borrowers to obtain loans.

In 1995, President Clinton's administration revised Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulation, which allowed mortgage lenders like Countrywide not to mitigate loan risk with savings deposits as do traditional banks, using the new subprime authorization, which is known the secondary mortgage market. The revisions allowed securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages, which were first started by Bear Sterns in 1997. The number of CRA mortgage loans increased 39 percent between 1993 and 1998, while other loans increased only 17 percent. Other rule changes gave Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac extraordinary leverage, allowing them to hold just 2.5% of capital to back their investments, as opposed to 10% for banks.

By 2007, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who securitize half of our nation's $12 trillion mortgage market, accumulated significant bad debt, but because they were not registered under the 1933 or 1934 Securities Act, they were not required to disclose their risky portfolios.

In 2003, the Bush administration proposed changes to move governmental supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. Spearheaded by Representative Barney Frank, the proposal was defeated. Frank said, "Theses two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Max -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we see in terms of affordable housing."

In 2004, a congressional hearing was held pursuant to charges by the Director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) regarding irregularities at Fannie Mae and regarding CEO Franklin Raines. Raines, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were vigorously defended by the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank and other Democrats on the committee. Representative Shays and other Republicans on the committee expressed deep concerns about Fannie Mae's severe lack of capital, double standards, hiring too many lobbyists, paying lobbyists not to work against it, and the clear and present danger of a financial collapse.

Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines subsequently stepped down because of accounting irregularities at Fannie Mae, which paid him $90 million in the process. In 2006, the OFHEO announced a suit against Raines to recover $50 million in payments made to him based on overstated earnings. Raines is now advising Barack Obama in his campaign for president.

In 2005, the Bush administration made further attempts to reign-in the risky buying and lending practices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were knocked down by the Democrats in Congress. Senate Republicans introduced legislation to do the same, but all their efforts, including measures introduced by Senator John McCain, were defeated by Senate Democrats lead by Senators Chris Dodd and Chuck Schumer. The proposed legislation was blocked from a full Senate vote.

As Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank sits at the center of power. Frank knew that his defense of the failed mortgage system was catching up with him, so he steered a major housing relief bill of 2008, which aimed to protect thousands of homeowners from foreclosure by falling back on FHA to substantially increase its insurance of home loans, including 2,3 and 4 unit dwellings. The increase in insured loans allows homeowners to re-finance bad loans or to purchase new homes if they had lost their homes to foreclosure.

Frank was at the forefront of House approval of the $700 billion taxpayer bailout of the financial train wreck that he substantially engineered. Adding insult to injury, Speaker Nancy Pelosi fraudulently pointed the finger at President Bush's failed economic policies for causing the meltdown. Many House Republicans rejected the bailout because Democrats added 100 pages and demanded the inclusion of such things as giving $20 billion to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) The same organization that intimidated lending institutions into making home loans to those who could not afford them. The Senate then added over 300 pages and $billions in pork for congressional re-elections, and passed the bailout, which was approved by the House and signed by President Bush on October 3, 2008.

After the House passed the final bailout package, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts took credit for the rescue, heaping praise upon Barney Frank as the leader of the rescue, and upon their presidential candidate Barack Obama for his direction and support. Rather than a rescue, the taxpayer fraud was, in effect, a bailout of Barney Frank and others responsible for the mess.

http://www.realdemocracy.com/trainrek.htm
Plenty disagree with your coverup tactics here...

And let me just pull the rug out from under your House of cards. Here's the CRA of 1977

http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-2515.html

And here is how Business Week (hardly a "liberal" news source) explains how even with Clinton's adjustments, was NOT the green light for banker chicanery http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/community_reinv.html


The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations. As former Fed Governor Ned Gramlich said in an August, 2007, speech shortly before he passed away: “In the subprime market where we badly need supervision, a majority of loans are made with very little supervision. It is like a city with a murder law, but no cops on the beat.”

Not surprisingly given the higher degree of supervision, loans made under the CRA program were made in a more responsible way than other subprime loans. CRA loans carried lower rates than other subprime loans and were less likely to end up securitized into the mortgage-backed securities that have caused so many losses, according to a recent study by the law firm Traiger & Hinckley (PDF file here).

Finally, keep in mind that the Bush administration has been weakening CRA enforcement and the law’s reach since the day it took office. The CRA was at its strongest in the 1990s, under the Clinton administration, a period when subprime loans performed quite well. It was only after the Bush administration cut back on CRA enforcement that problems arose, a timing issue which should stop those blaming the law dead in their tracks. The Federal Reserve, too, did nothing but encourage the wild west of lending in recent years. It wasn’t until the middle of 2007 that the Fed decided it was time to crack down on abusive pratices in the subprime lending market. Oops.
 
Last edited:
Where are the jobs after 30 years of Reagan's "trickle down" economics? Seems the neocon/teabagger cabal have no straight answer.
 
Once again for the cheap seats: In other words, banks were for the longest time making sensible loans to white folk of low income, but "red-lining" minorities OF THE SAME FINANCIAL STANDING

Once again for the ignorant racist... If you have any proof of this, there are about 3,500 civil rights lawyers who'd love to speak with you!
 
Once again for the ignorant racist... If you have any proof of this, there are about 3,500 civil rights lawyers who'd love to speak with you!
Why do you think the CRA was necessary?

Banks were taking deposits from minorities/poor, but refusing them loans. Thus the term redlining. BOA considered CRA paper to be a fantastic investment at one time.
 
Last edited:
Where are the jobs after 30 years of Reagan's "trickle down" economics? Seems the neocon/teabagger cabal have no straight answer.

Exactly.....JFK cut taxes in the 60's......where the hell are the jobs...obviously tax cuts don't create jobs....
.
.
.
.
I love liberal thinking, it makes me feel so superior...
 
Why do you think the CRA was necessary?


Because liberal progressives after having their asses handed to them in the majority of elections listened to quasi communists like Cloward and Piven, and set out to buy votes while creating a permanent underclass of society that would be beholden to them.

Banks were taking deposits from minorities/poor, but refusing them loans. Thus the term redlining.

Credit scores, and ability to pay the loan back I am sure had nothing to do with it....Nooooooo...Look, the fact of the matter is that for decades liberals pushed blacks into inner cities, and slum low rent districts because of their fear of them. Then in the late 60s, Francis Fox Piven, and her communist husband Cloward designed a plan to overload the system, and transition the country toward wealth redistribution, ie; socialism. Well, guess what? it is working. 47% of people in this country pay no income tax, while everyone else pays it. Food stamps go from 6% in JFK's time, to 35% today. Obama going around congress lifting the restrictions on welfare defining work as such silliness as getting a massage, or running an errand for a friend. It is a real disturbing shame what you progressive libs have gotten away with in this country.

BOA considered CRA paper to be a fantastic investment at one time.

Because they were lied to, and led to believe that meeting these requirements would translate to government backing of the loans. When the truth was revealed they looked for other ways to cover the impending losses.
 
Why do you think the CRA was necessary?

Banks were taking deposits from minorities/poor, but refusing them loans. Thus the term redlining. BOA considered CRA paper to be a fantastic investment at one time.

No one was discriminated against on the basis of race. Sorry, that just didn't happen. Now you can IMAGINE that happened, and you can DREAM it happened, and you can run around all the message boards CLAIMING it happened... but it didn't fucking happen, and you know it didn't. Anyone who isn't retarded and understands the Civil Rights Act of 1964, knows it didn't happen, and that you are lying.
 
Because liberal progressives after having their asses handed to them in the majority of elections listened to quasi communists like Cloward and Piven, and set out to buy votes while creating a permanent underclass of society that would be beholden to them.



Credit scores, and ability to pay the loan back I am sure had nothing to do with it....Nooooooo...Look, the fact of the matter is that for decades liberals pushed blacks into inner cities, and slum low rent districts because of their fear of them. Then in the late 60s, Francis Fox Piven, and her communist husband Cloward designed a plan to overload the system, and transition the country toward wealth redistribution, ie; socialism. Well, guess what? it is working. 47% of people in this country pay no income tax, while everyone else pays it. Food stamps go from 6% in JFK's time, to 35% today. Obama going around congress lifting the restrictions on welfare defining work as such silliness as getting a massage, or running an errand for a friend. It is a real disturbing shame what you progressive libs have gotten away with in this country.



Because they were lied to, and led to believe that meeting these requirements would translate to government backing of the loans. When the truth was revealed they looked for other ways to cover the impending losses.

No one was discriminated against on the basis of race. Sorry, that just didn't happen. Now you can IMAGINE that happened, and you can DREAM it happened, and you can run around all the message boards CLAIMING it happened... but it didn't fucking happen, and you know it didn't. Anyone who isn't retarded and understands the Civil Rights Act of 1964, knows it didn't happen, and that you are lying.
Wow...you two must read the same right wing blogs.

Short on facts, heavy on empty rhetoric.

BOA loved CRA paper, because the interest rates were typically higher, and the mortgagees paid back the notes. The CRA never forced banks to lend to anyone who couldn't pay back. What they did do, was to force banks to reevaluate their criteria for lending.

For instance...a person with no credit would never get a loan. When I was young, I had to start with a gas card, and slowly work my way up the credit ladder. The CRA simply stated that a bank would have to evaluate the ability of a customer to repay a note, even if they had no credit, or previously bad credit.

Likewise, the bank would NEVER lend more than app. 75% of appraised value of the home.

Contrast that with the 125% that private lenders were inducing borrowers to take during the boom. This was NOT happening w/CRA deals.
 
Wow...you two must read the same right wing blogs.

Short on facts, heavy on empty rhetoric.

There's no empty rhetoric except from you and the other idiot who claimed blacks were discriminated against based on race. That is what I addressed, and now you want to run have a debate over the particulars of a bill... that's fine, I would abandon the 'racist' charges too, if I made them and then got called on it. Next time maybe you should THINK before you post your emotive stupidity... or is that too much to ask?
 
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-05-12/news/1993132203_1_annapolis-arundel-county-denial



Annapolis blacks face discrimination in loans


May 12, 1993|By Monica Norton | Monica Norton,Staff Writer


Blacks in Annapolis are more than three times as likely as whites to be turned down for a housing loan in Annapolis and are refused loans at a rate higher than other blacks throughout Anne Arundel County and Baltimore City, according to a study by an economist.

Joseph E. Cater III, an economist for the Office of Policy Development and Research at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, issued the 23-page report May 1.
 
Back
Top