McSames economic advisers
- Thread starter evince
- Start date
evince
Truthmatters
People rushed to the market because they thought they would be forever priced out of the market.
You see when the little guy trys to act in his own self interest not much of the economy is effected.
When the big guys do it to the detriment of the markets long term health things get all F'ed up.
That is why you have to police the market with things like Glass Steagal. It worked for 60+ years until Gramm and friends repealed it. Then we got all F'ed up again.
Blaming the little guy gets you nothing. Making sure the big players dont get to F us up again gets you a more stablearket.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
People don't default on their mortgage for profit????? What the hell are you talking about?
This was done at the behest of politicians seeking to gain favor with voters. They wanted more people to own homes. They thus dismantled Glass Steagall over the past 15 years and created the environment to make that happen.
Yes, the corps that packaged the loans made money selling those packages to investors. But the CDOs and SIVs being packaged together has ZERO effect on the borrowers ability to pay back the loans they took out. ZERO effect.
The reason the loans defaulted is that the borrowers took out more money than they could afford and the lenders let them. All based on the idiotic belief/greed factor that home prices always go up.
evince
Truthmatters
[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLBA[/ame]
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) allowed commercial and investment banks to consolidate. For example, Citibank merged with Travelers Group, an insurance company, and in 1997 formed the conglomerate Citigroup, a corporation combining banking and insurance underwriting services. Other major mergers in the financial sector had already taken place such as the Smith-Barney, Shearson, Primerica and Travelers Insurance Corporation combination in the mid-1990's. This combination, announced in 1993 and finalized in 1994, would have violated the Glass-Steagall Act and the Bank Holding Acts by combining insurance and securities companies, if not for a temporary waiver process [[1]].The law was passed to legalize these mergers on a permanent basis. Historically, the combined industry has been known as the financial services industry.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) allowed commercial and investment banks to consolidate. For example, Citibank merged with Travelers Group, an insurance company, and in 1997 formed the conglomerate Citigroup, a corporation combining banking and insurance underwriting services. Other major mergers in the financial sector had already taken place such as the Smith-Barney, Shearson, Primerica and Travelers Insurance Corporation combination in the mid-1990's. This combination, announced in 1993 and finalized in 1994, would have violated the Glass-Steagall Act and the Bank Holding Acts by combining insurance and securities companies, if not for a temporary waiver process [[1]].The law was passed to legalize these mergers on a permanent basis. Historically, the combined industry has been known as the financial services industry.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
There are so many things wrong with the above. We have pointed them out to you over and over and over again. But your incessant need to blame the Reps blinds you to this.
I do indeed blame those that took out the loans right along with those that gave them the money. They are the root of this fiasco.
Topspin
Verified User
Jesus christ, Obama better get some economis cause cut and paste lib morons like desh could ruin the country.
Desh, lenders and borrowers are to blame. You are effectively retarded if you think millions of borrowers are not to blame because they rush to pay too much for something they thought would keep going up. Thousands of bankers were fired including ceo's now thousand of defaulters need to be thrown out as we have for 60yrs.
Actuall your post are comical, thanks
Desh, lenders and borrowers are to blame. You are effectively retarded if you think millions of borrowers are not to blame because they rush to pay too much for something they thought would keep going up. Thousands of bankers were fired including ceo's now thousand of defaulters need to be thrown out as we have for 60yrs.
Actuall your post are comical, thanks
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Again Desh... no matter how many times you post the above, it does not change the fact that the above is not what caused individuals to be able to take out these loans. It is a part of it to be certain, but it is not where the problem began. No matter how much you desire it to be.
evince
Truthmatters
Toppy the question of regulation is not off the table just because you dont like it.
We have regulations now and will have them in the future. They are part of the equation and just because you want to fail like a toddler and ignore them will not change that.
The RIGHT regulations could have prevented or at least ameilorated the problem.
FACT
We have regulations now and will have them in the future. They are part of the equation and just because you want to fail like a toddler and ignore them will not change that.
The RIGHT regulations could have prevented or at least ameilorated the problem.
FACT
Surely it couldn't have been the case that corps packaging and selling the loans just went out and made bad loans because they didn't really give a shit about the ability to pay it back since it was all going to be bundled up in this commercial paper that everyone seems to want.
The buyers of the paper were equally driving the demand for mortgages as much as buyers of the properties. Instead of a scenario where the bank won't make the loan to someone who isn't credit-worthy because it held the mortgage and wanted to get paid, lenders make loans regardless since were going to package and sell the thing anyway so it's not their risk involved. How the hell else can you explain the existence of the Alt-A Liar's Loans? They wouldn't exist if Bear Stearns didn't buy the shit out of them.
Of course none of the above is true, it was all led by the greedy borrowers.
Note: of course the borrowers are to blame as well, and not just the "subprime" folks, but rich folks taking out HELOCs to support their lifestyle and the like.
cawacko
Well-known member
Exhibit A for why we need to teach kids economics and personal finance in school.
Freddy Figbottom
Was it me?
Superfreak, stop being a douche. There are reasons why this was in place. Doing away with it was idiocy. Just accept it.
Yeah but you think that the lenders have no blame for any of this, so how can you talk Cawacko?
evince
Truthmatters
These types of loans were no threat to the economy when they were nearly profitless to write.
GLB act laid the path to them being profitable to write. If Glass Steagal had been allowed to stand then this would not have happened.
Bush would have had a stagnate economy and would not have been reelected I bet.
cawacko
Well-known member
No, they have a big role in it. Lenders and borrowers are both to blame in this mess.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
The last portion is correct. We had them in place. But BOTH parties dismantled them. BOTH parties Desh. So yes, BOTH parties are partially to blame. But at the end of the day.... no one forced the borrowers to take out the loans. To a small extent the lenders were forced to do so by the politicians. But once the CDO market blossomed, greed set in on all fronts... borrowers, lenders and investment bankers and then the problem escalated further when interest rates decreased.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
1) That is bullshit. They were always profitable to the lenders Desh.
2) GLB made the packaging of such loans profitable to investment banks and took the risk away from lenders. But it did nothing to force individuals to buy more than they could afford.
3) The last part is purely opinion, but it certainly is plausable. Couple with the war, a slower economy might have been enough to push the braindead Kerry to a win.
4) Bottom line the bulk of the blame still falls to those that took out the loans and those that gave out the loans.
Oh, well now we are getting somewhere. So sometimes corporations act wrongly. Wow. This is a big step. See what seven and a half years of capitalism run amok can do? I’m amazed.
So have you been complaining about the bailout of the lenders? Is that socialism? Have you written your congressperson? How dare they be so irresponsible and now you have to bail them out? You work for a living.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Either comprehend what you read or do try to remain silent while you learn something.
I have stated over and over again that it was idiocy on the parts of politicians to dismantle Glass Steagall.
evince
Truthmatters
Super if Glass Steagal had been left in place the profit would not have been there to make. They would have not had a reason to write so many sub primes. They would not have been bundled into securities and sold. The economy would have lingered in a recession and Bush would have been shitcanned.
This is why they did not correct the flaws in the market ,This is why they did not inforce the broker laws even under GLBact for YEARS after they were passed. They ignored the parts of the law that might have helped and used the shit out of the part of it that did help them profit.
It was done by a Republican Pres and a Republican congress.
This is why they did not correct the flaws in the market ,This is why they did not inforce the broker laws even under GLBact for YEARS after they were passed. They ignored the parts of the law that might have helped and used the shit out of the part of it that did help them profit.
It was done by a Republican Pres and a Republican congress.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Yes Desh, I agree that had Glass Steagall been left in place the bulk of this mess would not have occured. Where you are wrong is in your perception of when Glass Steagall was dismantled. GLB was a PART of it. It did not do it entirely.
These loans were not new. They were simply made available to more people at the request of the idiots in DC in both parties who wanted more people to own homes. This began in 1992... not 1999.
Registering as a broker and meeting those requirements has NOTHING to do with a borrowers ability to pay back a loan. NOTHING.
I have to go, but will check back later