A very good summery of the credit problems in the US

The rules need to be where that is is not possible to loan money in a predatory manner. We know how successfully predators are prosecuted.
Make the rules on lending so thay just can't do it. We had it that way for many years till partial deregulation took place.
 
Damocles said:
The part where you said, "I fully agree new regulations need to be instilled to curb the phenomenon of predatory lending."

Because she is always projecting rather than reading. Later she'll say how she said this and was "excoriated" for her view. She has perpetual persecution syndrome. I think she caught it from the Christians.
Click to expand...


No I just get tired of the old line its all the fault of the individual.

Yes they did not act in their own best interest in many cases but it is only because they did not understand and trusted what they thought was an expert.

Its just more effienct to make the market safe for the people who dont understand everything than it is to try and teach every single person how to navigate the market safely.

Its also unreasonable to expect a person with a 80 point IQ to understand every aspect of the market. There are people who can make enough to buy a house but will never understand the complexities of a contract.

In the world of let the market do whatever it wants these people would just be eaten alive instead of being able to build a future.
 
Desh said:
No I just get tired of the old line its all the fault of the individual.

Yes they did not act in their own best interest in many cases but it is only because they did not understand and trusted what they thought was an expert.

Its just more effienct to make the market safe for the people who dont understand everything than it is to try and teach every single person how to navigate the market safely.

Its also unreasonable to expect a person with a 80 point IQ to understand every aspect of the market. There are people who can make enough to buy a house but will never understand the complexities of a contract.

In the world of let the market do whatever it wants these people would just be eaten alive instead of being able to build a future.
Click to expand...
They never said that.

They said that they agreed with what you stated about more regulation, then added to it as well.

You simply projected a belief that no regulations would help onto him. And I stand by my prediction that you, sometime in the future, will state how you were "excoriated" for your views on this regardless of the agreement you have seen.

Stating that some of the problem lies with individuals accepting loans they knew they couldn't afford does not say that there should be no regulation, nor does it state that additional regulation would not help resolve the issue.
 
Desh said:
There were regulations that curbed the way these loans dwere then packaged and sold to investors who were no fully aware of the sub prime risk in the package.

In 1999 Phil Gramm sponsered a bill which dismantled them.
They had protected the American public from this economic situation since the drepression. This is a deregulation problem created by the current R philosophy of screw the little people.

You are the one who refuses to understand.
Click to expand...

Seriously Desh... how many times are you going to post the above crap?

How many times must it be pointed out to you that the dismantling of Glass Steagall began before Clinton even took office in 1993? It began in 1992 under Bush and a dem Congress.

Clinton continued breaking it down under the Fair lending act of 1995 (under a Rep Congress). Clinton further broke it down when he signed Gramms bill.

The current Bush and the corresponding Rep and Dem Congresses have done nothing to put Glass Steagall back in place.

This was a policy put into place by idiotic politicians in BOTH parties who wanted to claim "more people own homes than ever before".

But I do applaud the fact that you FINALLY learned how to spell the word "public".
 
Superfreak said:
Seriously Desh... how many times are you going to post the above crap?

How many times must it be pointed out to you that the dismantling of Glass Steagall began before Clinton even took office in 1993? It began in 1992 under Bush and a dem Congress.

Clinton continued breaking it down under the Fair lending act of 1995 (under a Rep Congress). Clinton further broke it down when he signed Gramms bill.

The current Bush and the corresponding Rep and Dem Congresses have done nothing to put Glass Steagall back in place.

This was a policy put into place by idiotic politicians in BOTH parties who wanted to claim "more people own homes than ever before".

But I do applaud the fact that you FINALLY learned how to spell the word "public".
Click to expand...
The advent of outrageous interest rates began even before that, under Carter, in response to the then-ceiling being too low to account for the inflation rate. At the same time they lifted restrictions on using revolving credit for cash advances. But rather than write the new regs in a manner to account for variable economic conditions, they simply opened the stop cocks wide, and lending companies have been fucking their customers while rowing a sinking ship ever since.
 
Desh said:
There were regulations that curbed the way these loans dwere then packaged and sold to investors who were no fully aware of the sub prime risk in the package.

In 1999 Phil Gramm sponsered a bill which dismantled them.
They had protected the American public from this economic situation since the drepression. This is a deregulation problem created by the current R philosophy of screw the little people.

You are the one who refuses to understand.
Click to expand...
I understand far more than you do. Deregulation started long before 1999. The sub prime crisis is a result of a national cross-partisan effort to convince the public their party could do better at giving people what they want. Specifically, the American Dream of a 4 bedroom (or more) house for every family, and a car and SUV and boat in every garage, a steak on every barbecue, Dom Perignon in every fridge, and wide screen TV in every living room.

To do so they had to open credit to lower income brackets. To do that they had to allow lenders the ability to take high risk in lending to lower income brackets.

What YOU fail to understand is BOTH political parties are not only responsible for ALLOWING predatory lending, but are responsible for PUSHING lending - to include predatory lending - into economic sectors it never should have gone. Not to mention in is the government who has been significantly responsible in the continuation of the "gotta have it now" economic attitude that is driving the entire fiasco.

And even with all that, there is STILL a significant (but not all, which I have NEVER maintained) part of the blame for the situation falls on the individual. It does not take a high level of education, or an IQ of 80, to understand the simple logic that if you cannot afford something now, what could POSSIBLY make it affordable later PLUS interest, without a guaranteed increase in income? Very few people have ever had a guaranteed increase in income, and in the past two decades or so, most don't even have a guaranteed LEVEL income. Yet people in droves went into hock up to their eyebrows anyway.

And there is the additional logic that the last "expert" you take advice from is the expert who stands to benefit from your decision. It does not take an IQ above 80 to figure that one out, either.

This does NOT defend fraudulent lending, or most predatory lending. But it does show the consumer is not blameless either. Placing ALL (or even most) the blame on the lender is no more an accurate view than placing ALL (or even most) of the blame on the consumer. (which I have yet to see anyone do, except in your own (deliberate?) misreading of other's posts.)

It is important to have an accurate view, because unless we develop an accurate view of the causes of the problems we face, we will not be able to come up with a comprehensive and workable solution to the problems. The band aid approach is part of what got us into this mess, additional band aid approaches will NOT get us out. Focusing ONLY on regulating lending practices is a band-aid approach.
 
Good Luck said:
I understand far more than you do. Deregulation started long before 1999. The sub prime crisis is a result of a national cross-partisan effort to convince the public their party could do better at giving people what they want. Specifically, the American Dream of a 4 bedroom (or more) house for every family, and a car and SUV and boat in every garage, a steak on every barbecue, Dom Perignon in every fridge, and wide screen TV in every living room.

To do so they had to open credit to lower income brackets. To do that they had to allow lenders the ability to take high risk in lending to lower income brackets.

What YOU fail to understand is BOTH political parties are not only responsible for ALLOWING predatory lending, but are responsible for PUSHING lending - to include predatory lending - into economic sectors it never should have gone. Not to mention in is the government who has been significantly responsible in the continuation of the "gotta have it now" economic attitude that is driving the entire fiasco.

And even with all that, there is STILL a significant (but not all, which I have NEVER maintained) part of the blame for the situation falls on the individual. It does not take a high level of education, or an IQ of 80, to understand the simple logic that if you cannot afford something now, what could POSSIBLY make it affordable later PLUS interest, without a guaranteed increase in income? Very few people have ever had a guaranteed increase in income, and in the past two decades or so, most don't even have a guaranteed LEVEL income. Yet people in droves went into hock up to their eyebrows anyway.

And there is the additional logic that the last "expert" you take advice from is the expert who stands to benefit from your decision. It does not take an IQ above 80 to figure that one out, either.

This does NOT defend fraudulent lending, or most predatory lending. But it does show the consumer is not blameless either. Placing ALL (or even most) the blame on the lender is no more an accurate view than placing ALL (or even most) of the blame on the consumer. (which I have yet to see anyone do, except in your own (deliberate?) misreading of other's posts.)

It is important to have an accurate view, because unless we develop an accurate view of the causes of the problems we face, we will not be able to come up with a comprehensive and workable solution to the problems. The band aid approach is part of what got us into this mess, additional band aid approaches will NOT get us out. Focusing ONLY on regulating lending practices is a band-aid approach.
Click to expand...

Got that right.
 
Yep Advertising, perception and being trained that our self worth is defined by posessions.

All about "stuff" and a Macstorage mansion to keep it in.

current day USA is defined by wastefulness, execssive spending and personal self worth being very materialistic.
Heck even preachers preach get rich now.
 
Uneducated people will self esteem problems may define themselves like that, not anybody I associate with does though.
 
Topspin said:
Uneducated people will self esteem problems may define themselves like that, not anybody I associate with does though.
Click to expand...
Really? Then why is it I get the very distinct impression you define success by the size of ones investment portfolio?
 
uscitizen said:
Yep Advertising, perception and being trained that our self worth is defined by posessions.

All about "stuff" and a Macstorage mansion to keep it in.

current day USA is defined by wastefulness, execssive spending and personal self worth being very materialistic.
Heck even preachers preach get rich now.
Click to expand...
And much of it coming from the good old U.S. Government. Remember the 90s - riding the economic bubble for all that it was worth. When it comes to pushing debit economy to boost GDP figures, there has never been a better example of bipartisan efforts.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Oh yes. Blame the victim. How typical of your horseshit worldview.
Click to expand...
Blame the victim?

How does that work? Somebody goes around to your house and forces you maniacally to buy items you can't afford, to accept credit cards without reading the terms and agreements, to buy more items instead of trying to pay off debt. These are some maniacal maniacs if so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top