the Bankruptcy laws of 2005 and the forecloseur rates

evince

evince

Truthmatters
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2007/04/bankruptcy_foreclosures.html


Just another thing the Rs did to create this mess instead of avoid it.






Bankruptcy Laws Contributing to Foreclosure Epidemic
Consumer Groups Press Congress to Amend Bankruptcy Code



Bankruptcy law changes are needed if hundreds of thousands of American families struggling with abusive subprime mortgages are going to escape foreclosure and the loss of up to $164 billion in home-based wealth, according to a joint call for Congressional action issued by the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys (NACBA), the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) and the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL).

The three consumer groups warned that -- while primarily low-income subprime mortgage borrowers face often insurmountable bankruptcy hurdles to hold onto their homes -- high-income individuals in bankruptcy court get preferential treatment when they seek to save second and third homes.

"The only chance many of these (subprime) borrowers have is through declaring bankruptcy," the groups said. "The problem is that as currently enacted, the Bankruptcy Code favors home mortgage lenders over virtually all other secured and unsecured creditors."
 
Just once---that is all I ask--just once in any medai---will they answer this one question. For the people losing their hioomes---how many of them lost a job--how many of them got raises over the last 10 years that was greater than the cost of living (most are lower today).

Nobody is mentioning the irresponsible globalization as a factor of people making less money. For the people losing their homes (that also make less income over the last decade due to several reasons)--the candle was burnt from both ends. I want to know how many people lsing their hiomes were related to the manufacturing sector. Nobody is telling us this (probably because it would not be good for the socialist, one world order movement), but I think it is a significant factor.
 
Last edited:
Desh said:
the number one reason stated for bankruptcy in the US was medical bills.
Click to expand...


OK--le5ts dig into that fact (if it is a fact) a little deeper.

How many people that lost their jobs, no longer has health insurance for their families (that was provided by the employeer).

Were these people previously employeed with most of their insurance paid?.

I can see a huge cost in uninsured medical bills with people losing their jobs that offered them the insurance they previously had. many of them have existing problems that were dumped into that stat I am sure. Some health problems caught up to them while still looking for work that paid enough to keep their home.

I can believe that stat---but how much is irresponsible globalization responsible for that stat?

Cause and effect--we lose jobs and the insurance that came with it---the medical bills go up. Now, I do know this--you don't have to pay the hospital bill in big chunks. If you pay them something every month, they usually can't do anything from what I understand. If that is true, I am not sure how medical bills can be a huge factor causing a person to lose their home.

Question everything you can.
 
Last edited:
http://harpers.org/archive/2008/01/hbc-90002247

here is a pretty good idea who caused it.




The two scientists reach their conclusions on the basis of a study of 18 financial and banking crises in developed countries. They concluded that a crisis caused an average drop in the per-capita economic growth of two per cent. Countries took roughly two years to recover. Among the particularly hard-hit nations they studied were Spain in the late seventies, Norway in the late eighties and Finland, Sweden and Japan in the early nineties. In these states economic growth fell as much as five per cent, and recovery could not even be achieved within three years. And this worst case scenario is what Rogoff and Reinhardt are projecting for the United States over the coming years.

The course followed by each of these crises was the same: Houses and stock prices rose strongly on the back of both private and public debt and driven in part by the presence and participation of foreign investors, creating high current account deficits. If asset prices fall suddenly, then sooner or later, a collapse in growth followed. In the case of the USA in particular, the rise in housing prices and the current accounts deficit are more pronounced than in previous crises, which does not bode well. Still, until recently stock prices held strong. But Rogoff and Reinhart believe that this has more to do with the Fed’s frequent interventions injecting liquidity into the market to maintain artificially high values. This won’t work any longer. Last week, for instance, the S&P 500 index fell by 5.4%.
 
Last edited:
Desh said:
http://harpers.org/archive/2008/01/hbc-90002247

here is a pretty good idea who caused it.
Click to expand...

What a joke that article doesn't explain crap (please pardon my French). So you found an article by people that don't like Bush's economic policies. Ok then? So the author wants more 'social economic justice' which is basically more redistribution of wealth; i.e. higher and more punitive taxes on those making money.

The article makes no reference to bankrupticies at all.
 
Desh said:
http://harpers.org/archive/2008/01/hbc-90002247

here is a pretty good idea who caused it.
Click to expand...

Don't believe those are the only factors. Remember--the republicans wrote those irresponsible trade agreements--and Clinton signed it.

I bet that is the #1 reason why our economy is on the rocks--and all industrialized countries who's people made a good life for themselfs. I bet they are having the same problems with their homes.

That would be interesting to look into. Can anybody look into home forclosures in Europe, Canada and Japan? (some examples of countries with socieities close to ours for their people)
 
What has brought this crisis about? On this point the two economists also see parallels with the past. Rogoff and Reinhart stress that of liberalization of financial markets preceded most of the crises they foresaw. There was no legal liberalization in the United States over the last years, but there was liberalization in practice. One has only to think of the many new financial products with nicknames that sound like robots from the “Star Wars” series to understand the considerable problems now facing the financial community. Especially new and unregulated devices, such as the so-called “Special Investment Vehicles” (SIV).
 
If a Dem is elected this year the Congress needs to repeal the new bankruptcy code and go back to the old system where people could not just restructure but completely liquidate their debts. Bush and the Republicans passed Bankruptcy reform as a gift to the credit card companies that GOT THEMSELVES in the problems they were in by giving cards to people that should have NEVER gotten them.
 
There are logical reasons to blame the brunt of this mess on the backs of this current republican party.

Anyone who cares about the republican party should be denouncing these assholes and kicking them out of office and running REAL conservitives.

Let the blame lay at the feet of the people who really did this to us.

The republican party who backed Bush at every turn.
 
Socrtease said:
If a Dem is elected this year the Congress needs to repeal the new bankruptcy code and go back to the old system where people could not just restructure but completely liquidate their debts. Bush and the Republicans passed Bankruptcy reform as a gift to the credit card companies that GOT THEMSELVES in the problems they were in by giving cards to people that should have NEVER gotten them.
Click to expand...

A lot of democrats voted for that bill too Soc.

Our so-called majority leader, Reid voted for it. Joe Biden voted for it. Hillary didn't show up for the vote, which is a thing that I hate, hate hate.

Reid and Biden were both purchased by the credit card companies on that one.
 
Desh said:
There are logical reasons to blame the brunt of this mess on the backs of this current republican party.

Anyone who cares about the republican party should be denouncing these assholes and kicking them out of office and running REAL conservitives.

Let the blame lay at the feet of the people who really did this to us.

The republican party who backed Bush at every turn.
Click to expand...

Real conservatives would vote for the bankruptcy bill Desh.
 
Desh said:
There are logical reasons to blame the brunt of this mess on the backs of this current republican party.

Anyone who cares about the republican party should be denouncing these assholes and kicking them out of office and running REAL conservitives.

Let the blame lay at the feet of the people who really did this to us.

The republican party who backed Bush at every turn.
Click to expand...

But--I think I know what your saying---your saying the republicn party has changed--may be it can be called a shift towards socialism. I think that is what your saying.
 
Desh said:
What has brought this crisis about? On this point the two economists also see parallels with the past. Rogoff and Reinhart stress that of liberalization of financial markets preceded most of the crises they foresaw. There was no legal liberalization in the United States over the last years, but there was liberalization in practice. One has only to think of the many new financial products with nicknames that sound like robots from the “Star Wars” series to understand the considerable problems now facing the financial community. Especially new and unregulated devices, such as the so-called “Special Investment Vehicles” (SIV).
Click to expand...

I am sure there was some destructive/creative accounting goin on. I am not in the know of economic ethical or unethical procedure.

What I see hurting our people and losing homes is the equilization of irresponsible globalization (which includes illegal immirgration), and banks giving out risky loans. Banks do not have the consumers interest at heart anymore. They rape us. Things were good, and they tried to rapes us hard--believing that irresponsible globlaization was a good thing, and we would be able to afford it. it blew up good. People are making less money--and paying more unless some levers are pulled---which also has it's negative side effects I am sure.
 
theMAJORITY said:
I am sure there was some destructive/creative accounting goin on. I am not in the know of economic ethical or unethical procedure.

What I see hurting our people and losing homes is the equilization of irresponsible globalization (which includes illegal immirgration), and banks giving out risky loans. Banks do not have the consumers interest at heart anymore. They rape us. Things were good, and they tried to rapes us hard--believing that irresponsible globlaization was a good thing, and we would be able to afford it. it blew up good. People are making less money--and paying more unless some levers are pulled---which also has it's negative side effects I am sure.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why you tie almost everything to globalization. How did globalization blow up?
 
By our citizens making less money. That is why I wanted to know about home forclosures in other estilished contries with a good life for their people. Every body blames the forclosures here on internal problems of the USA only. My point is asking if other countries are having the same problems, then there may be the same internal problems in those nations, or there may be something more global going on that nobody will admitt. I feel we have made this world (us, and other contries) very very dynamic when it comes to trade with countries that are no where near other nations civilian levels of economics. I feel almost anything bad can happen right now if we are not very very carefull.

Unfortunatly--I also feel it is needed for something really bad to happen--so we learn from it and remember.
 
Last edited:
minority would understand a lot more if he actually read something besides buggywhip jobs were exported.
 
Desh said:
What has brought this crisis about? On this point the two economists also see parallels with the past. Rogoff and Reinhart stress that of liberalization of financial markets preceded most of the crises they foresaw. There was no legal liberalization in the United States over the last years, but there was liberalization in practice. One has only to think of the many new financial products with nicknames that sound like robots from the “Star Wars” series to understand the considerable problems now facing the financial community. Especially new and unregulated devices, such as the so-called “Special Investment Vehicles” (SIV).
Click to expand...

What a crock of shit. The SIVs and CDOs existence doesn't force people to take on more debt than they can afford and it doesn't force lenders to give them money.

We have been over this time and again. The dismantling of Glass Steagall from 1992-present is what led to this mess from a political standpoint. It was the idiot politicians desire to see "greater home ownership percentages". So they encouraged lenders to give out loans they normally would not have.

As for the SIVs and CDOs, yes, this did indeed exacerbate the problem as it took burden off of the lenders if they knew they could simply resell any loans they created to these investment vehicles. But again, WHAT allowed for these investment vehicles to be created in the first place? Oh that is right.... the idiots in DC....in BOTH parties.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top