The Proof this whole mess was the Bush admins fault

You keep pretending you dont understand.

You just keep doing it.

We all know the only reason any business exsists is to make money.

These turds got rolled into securities and unsuspecting people bought the turd packages.

Then the turds collapsed causing a whole bunch of people to take it in the shorts.

Now why did it all happen ????? Because someone found a way to make money off of turds.

They made money writing the loans and then made money selling the loans and left the explosion to be in someone elses hands.


Its a very old story and this lack of regulations explains why it was so easy for them to do it.

Keep pretending you dont understand.

Im very used to conservatives lieing to me.
 
evince said:
You keep pretending you dont understand.

You just keep doing it.
Click to expand...

No Desh, as I stated, I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. YOU DO NOT. YOU ARE PRETENDING YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FINAL RULING PERTAINS TO. BUT YOU KEEP DISPLAYING BULLSHIT THAT TELLS OTHERWISE.

We all know the only reason any business exsists is to make money.
Click to expand...

yes, businesses are supposed to be profitable. Just as you wish to be profitable when renting out homes to other people. But again, this has nothing to do with this issue.

These turds got rolled into securities and unsuspecting people bought the turd packages.
Click to expand...

I do not disagree with the above. It is clear that very few people, if any, understood the complexity of some of the CDO's. They all knew the types of loans that were in them, but they didn't understand the risk factor did not change just by lumping a bunch of subprimes together. The ratings agencies should be held accountable for that.

But AGAIN... THIS WAS GOING ON LONG BEFORE 2007 DESH. IT DID NOT JUST MAGICALLY START OCCURRING IN 2007. IF YOU HAD BOTHERED TO READ THE ENTIRE PIECE YOU LINKED US TO, YOU WOULD NOTE THE BANKS DID NOT HAVE TO IMPLEMENT THE FINAL RULING UNTIL AFTER THEIR FIRST FISCAL BUSINESS DAY AFTER SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2008.

Then the turds collapsed causing a whole bunch of people to take it in the shorts.

Now why did it all happen ????? Because someone found a way to make money off of turds.

They made money writing the loans and then made money selling the loans and left the explosion to be in someone elses hands.


Its a very old story and this lack of regulations explains why it was so easy for them to do it.
Click to expand...

again, I do not disagree with the above... but AGAIN, THIS ALL WAS OCCURRING BEFORE 2007 AS WELL AS AFTER.

Keep pretending you dont understand.

Im very used to conservatives lieing to me.
Click to expand...

Again Desh, I DO understand.... it is you who does not. You cannot even tell us about the 'broker' mentioned in the final ruling. Do you even know who that refers to?
 
The rules are designed to accommodate the business practices of banks and to protect investors. In developing these rules, the agencies consulted extensively with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of Thrift Supervision. Banks do not have to start complying with the rules until the first day of their fiscal year commencing after September 30, 2008.





Get it , they did not have regulations to comply to on this issue until september of 2008.

There was a purposeful void in the GLB act right up until the election.
 
evince said:
Why do you keep pretending there was no VOID in the regulations until this final ruling?
Click to expand...

Because there was no void in terms of the CDO's and MBS's that were a huge part of the reason the economic implosion occurred. Again Desh... WHO is the broker in the final ruling? Why do you deny the FACTS? You cannot even demonstrate a basic understanding of the very link YOU posted. You have NO CLUE what this final ruling entails. You have NO CLUE that it actually INCREASED investor protection.... albeit too late to stop the implosion that began with the repeal of Glass Steagall.
 
evince said:
The rules are designed to accommodate the business practices of banks and to protect investors. In developing these rules, the agencies consulted extensively with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of Thrift Supervision. Banks do not have to start complying with the rules until the first day of their fiscal year commencing after September 30, 2008.

Get it , they did not have regulations to comply to on this issue until september of 2008.

There was a purposeful void in the GLB act right up until the election.
Click to expand...

So you admit that this was ALL IN PLACE due to the bill that Clinton passed. Good, you are finally starting to catch on. It was indeed a direct result of the repeal of Glass Steagall. AS I HAVE STATED ALL ALONG.

You on the other hand tried to pretend it was because of Bush.
 
evince said:
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-198.htm


Washington, D.C., Sept. 24, 2007 - The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) on Monday announced the adoption of final joint rules to implement the "broker" exceptions for banks under Section 3(a)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These exceptions were adopted as part of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (GLB Act). The SEC and the Board approved the final rules at separate open meetings held on September 19, 2007, and September 24, 2007, respectively.
Click to expand...

I am sorry, could you be more specific than this; how, for example, were these rules directly responsible for the mortgage meltdown that led to a collapse in faith in stocks and the home mortgage businesses?

From your article that you apparently glossed over:

Specifically, the rules implement the statutory exceptions that allow a bank, subject to certain conditions, to continue to conduct securities transactions for its customers as part of the bank's trust and fiduciary, custodial and deposit "sweep" functions, and to refer customers to a securities broker-dealer pursuant to a networking arrangement with the broker-dealer.

The rules are designed to accommodate the business practices of banks and to protect investors. In developing these rules, the agencies consulted extensively with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Office of Thrift Supervision. Banks do not have to start complying with the rules until the first day of their fiscal year commencing after September 30, 2008.
 
evince said:
Why do you keep pretending there was no VOID in the regulations until this final ruling?
Click to expand...

There was never any "void" in regulations and I am still waiting to see something credible suggesting there was this void. This notion that regulation will suddenly make criminals honest or prevent food born illnesses can only be expressed in a vacuum of reality and the facts.

This notion that oversight will somehow make the regulators smarter and capable is stunningly naive. Here is an oversight committee hearing where Democrats were attacking the person in charge of oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; get a clue and become informed:

 
Superfreak said:
Congrats Desh on once again showing this was all due to Clinton signing the GLB act. Thanks for admitting you were wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you will not be surprised by this in the least. I checked out the other board that Desh posts on and ended up in a conversation with her. Several others chimed in with comments of save your time in talking to her, half the board has her on ignore and the other half just gave up talking to her.

It's one thing that on one board some personalities might clash etc. but when two completely different boards have the same opinion, essentially that she does not know what the hell she is talking about, that is not a good sign for her. Other there, as she did/does here, Desh argues that she is right and everyone else is wrong. This is not to say of course that in a given discussion/argument that because a majority of people agree on somthing they are correct. However when you consistently find yourself as the only person arguing a position it might be telling you something.
 
I have been unbanned and my posts on there have been removed or put back to my control.


Having cons hate me and deny facts happens everywhere there are cons.

Yeah the cons hate me and its becaue they dont like facts that prove them wrong.
 
evince said:
I have been unbanned and my posts on there have been removed or put back to my control.


Having cons hate me and deny facts happens everywhere there are cons.

Yeah the cons hate me and its becaue they dont like facts that prove them wrong.
Click to expand...

Yet in this case it is YOU that has been proven wrong. 100% WRONG. The FACTS do not lie Desh. Which is why you keep avoiding answering the questions posed to you, while I have answered every single one of yours while also pointing out exactly why you are wrong.
 
evince said:
Why did they take so long to reslove the regulations under the GLB act?
Click to expand...

Why didn't they resolve it before Clinton signed it into law?

Next.... WHAT exactly is the 'it' you keep referring to? Explain it to us since you have 'facts' on your side. Explain to us what this 'final ruling' did.

Bottom line.... this ruling HAD NO EFFECT ON THE FACT THAT THE REPEAL OF GLASS STEAGALL BY CLINTON caused the financial mess.
 
evince said:
I have been unbanned and my posts on there have been removed or put back to my control.


Having cons hate me and deny facts happens everywhere there are cons.

Yeah the cons hate me and its becaue they dont like facts that prove them wrong.
Click to expand...

The last conversation we had was on deregulation where, just like in this thread, you were proven wrong.
 
evince said:
I have been unbanned and my posts on there have been removed or put back to my control.


Having cons hate me and deny facts happens everywhere there are cons.

Yeah the cons hate me and its becaue they dont like facts that prove them wrong.
Click to expand...


To be very clear Desh.... I do not hate you, not in the least. I just think you are a batshit crazy partisan hack who likes to blame everything that goes wrong in the world on the 'other' party while giving credit to everything good to 'your' party.
 
Superfreak said:
To be very clear Desh.... I do not hate you, not in the least. I just think you are a batshit crazy partisan hack who likes to blame everything that goes wrong in the world on the 'other' party while giving credit to everything good to 'your' party.
Click to expand...

I would like to second this and emphasize his first sentence. I do not equate disagreeing with someone politically to hating them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top