Obama back to his roots, smears banks

super duper what are you going to throw in my face about the broker rules.

tell me what the reasoning was for holding bakc these rules for nearly a decade?

why ?
 
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aacj9vBCee8c



Ex-Credit Suisse Brokers Charged With Subprime Fraud (Update2)

By Patricia Hurtado and David Scheer - September 3, 2008 16:48 EDT





Sept. 3 (Bloomberg) -- Two former Credit Suisse Group AG brokers were charged with violating securities laws by fraudulently selling corporate clients subprime mortgages linked to auction-rate securities.

Julian Tzolov, 35, and Eric Butler, 36, falsely told clients the products were backed by federally guaranteed student loans and were a safe alternative to bank deposits or money market funds, said Robert Nardoza, a spokesman for Brooklyn U.S. Attorney Benton Campbell. The scheme ``foisted more than $1 billion in subprime-related securities'' upon customers, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said today.
 
http://newsok.com/taking-stock-gove...l-in-subprime-mortgage-fiasco/article/3770399



Taking Stock: Government lawsuit targets McGraw-Hill in subprime mortgage fiasco

Malcolm Berko: The suit against Standard & Poor's and its parent, McGraw-Hill (MHP-$48), accuses S&P of fraud by intentionally misleading investors about the financial quality and ratings of trillions of dollars' worth of subprime mortgage securities.



By Malcolm Berko | Modified: March 22, 2013 at 7:08 pm | Published: March 24, 2013
 
evince said:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2007/09/cash-out-refis-missing-actor-in.html


more than half were cash out refis.


the banks found a way to tap into personal home equity that was very hard for the wealthy to tap









More than half of subprime loans are actually cash-out refinance loans. Those loans are used to pay off credit cards or other debts, take trips to Bermuda, buy an unaffordable car or do some speculative investing – in the market, real estate or elsewhere.

“These loans are all about people in a tough spot,” said Matthew Lee, head of Fair Finance Watch, a Bronx, N.Y.-based community group that has championed the cause of urban borrowers for whom a traditional bank loan is out of reach.

We see subprime offers all-over the place: “consolidate your debts” or “tap you home’s equity,” the ads read. As Lee puts it, why not pay off credit cards with 18% annual interest rates with a 9% loan?

Half the subprimes were cash out refis. This isn’t implausible. Freddie Mac reported that cash-out (meaning the new mortgage was at least 5% larger than the one it replaced) refis for its borrowers were 35% in the second quarter of 2007, and noted that refinancings as a proportion of total mortgages were declining, which is typical in a rising interest rate environment.

Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2007/09/cash-out-refis-missing-actor-in.html#5jIwy5WE58V4G4Op.99
Click to expand...





Whats your point....its a distinction without a difference, loose requirements, inflated values, same difference.....now Obama is pushing this shit again just as
Clinton did and when the shit hit the fan, all you managed to do was blame Bush....
 
then why did the banks write so many of the subprimes that went way beyond the numbers the law talked of?



Becuase they could now sell securities and roll the subprime into them without warning their customers that it contained sub prime.

They lied to their customers.


That was illegal even under Bushs lax laws.


Now think about this.

if the people who were sold sub prime mostly ALREADY had purchases a home that means they didnt buy homes the couldnt afford huh?


Your lies about it dont fly
 
http://www.lender411.com/mortgage-articles/3248/a-no-closing-cost-refinance-whats-the-catch/









A No Closing Cost Refinance - What's the Catch?

Monday, September 26, 2011 - Article by: Corey Barcus -
















They're not as prevalent as in 2006, but there are still no closing cost refinance options out
there for you if you'd like to refi your home mortgage. You hear ads on the radio and see
them on TV all the time. They can be a good deal, but like so many other things in life
you've got to do your homework before you get a no closing cost refinance or any other
type of refinance. For that matter, it would behoove you to do your due diligence before
you get any type of loan or make any large financial transaction. There can be many pitfalls
and you owe it to yourself and your financial future to avoid them.



As your mom once told you, there's no free lunch, and so it is when you're trying to
refinance your mortgage. There are a couple of things to be aware of if you're searching
for a mortgage, weather it's of the no closing cost variety or any other.
 
I refied two houses during those years and got asked over and over again if I wanted money out.


I had to keep saying NO
 
evince said:
super duper what are you going to throw in my face about the broker rules.

tell me what the reasoning was for holding bakc these rules for nearly a decade?

why ?
Click to expand...

Again Desh... WHAT rules, show me that you have a friggin clue what you are talking about. What rule did they hold back? Quit saying 'broker rules' without knowing what rules you are referring to.
 
evince said:
then why did the banks write so many of the subprimes that went way beyond the numbers the law talked of?
Click to expand...

Because the idiot politicians told them to keep lowering credit standards. The loose standards were a result of Glass Steagall being repealed under Clinton and the push by the two parties to 'get more homeowners than ever before'

Becuase they could now sell securities and roll the subprime into them without warning their customers that it contained sub prime.
Click to expand...

That is complete bullshit. They always had the ability to sell the mortgages and they have always sold subprime in those packages. What changed was the repeal of Glass Steagall took down the firewall between the investment banks and the retail banks. They were not allowed to sell securities without stating what they held. So again you have no clue what you are talking about. What happened was the ratings agencies stated that if you lumped enough together it would mitigate the risk. The ratings agencies should be out of business for rating that AAA.

They lied to their customers.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. The prospectus stated what was in them Desh.


That was illegal even under Bushs lax laws.
Click to expand...

yes, lying to their customers is always and should always be illegal. Good catch. But they did not lie about what was in them.

Now think about this.
if the people who were sold sub prime mostly ALREADY had purchases a home that means they didnt buy homes the couldnt afford huh?
Your lies about it dont fly
Click to expand...

Thanks for again proving beyond a doubt that you are an idiot.
 
Rana said:
And no one, not one, has gone to jail!
Click to expand...


No one was breaking the law....Clinton's goons were calling the banks that didn't follow his order to give stupid loans, "racists banks"....

and Freddy and Fannie under the leadership of Frank and Dodd were buying us the shitty mortgages so the gov. would eventually hand out more welfare.

Now Obama is following in those same footsteps...
 
Superfreak said:
Because the idiot politicians told them to keep lowering credit standards. The loose standards were a result of Glass Steagall being repealed under Clinton and the push by the two parties to 'get more homeowners than ever before'



That is complete bullshit. They always had the ability to sell the mortgages and they have always sold subprime in those packages. What changed was the repeal of Glass Steagall took down the firewall between the investment banks and the retail banks. They were not allowed to sell securities without stating what they held. So again you have no clue what you are talking about. What happened was the ratings agencies stated that if you lumped enough together it would mitigate the risk. The ratings agencies should be out of business for rating that AAA.



Bullshit. The prospectus stated what was in them Desh.




yes, lying to their customers is always and should always be illegal. Good catch. But they did not lie about what was in them.



Thanks for again proving beyond a doubt that you are an idiot.
Click to expand...







please explain the charges and convictions for rolling subprime into triple AAA securities ?
 
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-190.htm



SEC Votes for Final Rules Defining How Banks Can Be Securities Brokers
Eight Years After Passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Key Provisions Will Now Be Implemented
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2007-190
Washington, D.C., Sept. 19, 2007 - Ending eight years of stalled negotiations and impasse, the Commission today voted to adopt, jointly with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board), new rules that will finally implement the bank broker provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. The Board will consider these final rules at its Sept. 24, 2007 meeting. The Commission and the Board consulted with and sought the concurrence of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Office of Thrift Supervision.
 
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-190.htm




Timing and Temporary Exemption
As adopted, Regulation R provides banks with a transitional exemption until the first day of their first fiscal year commencing after Sept. 30, 2008. This will give banks time to make any necessary changes in their systems and compliance programs and should ensure that banks have time to come into compliance with the Exchange Act provisions relating to the broker definition. This exemptive rule will become effective on the date that the Commission's current order expires, Sept. 28, 2007.
 
evince said:
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-190.htm

Timing and Temporary Exemption
As adopted, Regulation R provides banks with a transitional exemption until the first day of their first fiscal year commencing after Sept. 30, 2008. This will give banks time to make any necessary changes in their systems and compliance programs and should ensure that banks have time to come into compliance with the Exchange Act provisions relating to the broker definition. This exemptive rule will become effective on the date that the Commission's current order expires, Sept. 28, 2007.
Click to expand...

Thanks Desh... anyone can post a link to them. I asked you to explain them. What do they mean to you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top