evince
Truthmatters
Now prove "they" did none of this?
They did and were trashed by may for talking about it.
Things are getting dark
- Thread starter evince
- Start date
Now prove "they" did none of this?
They did and were trashed by may for talking about it.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Desh, as I stated, they (meaning both parties) did little. If you have an example of something the politicians (of either party) did in 2002-2006 to prevent this, please share. Because I am currently unaware of anything that they have done.
Diuretic
New member
Why do you make such a big thing about your own education as against what you see as the lack of education in others?
Diuretic
New member
I'm really interested to know why you do that. That's why I asked before. Anyway when you're ready it would be good to discuss this.
evince
Truthmatters
cawacko
Well-known member
If it wasn't reported how did you know they did them?
evince
Truthmatters
The internet
cawacko
Well-known member
Wouldn't that be considered reported on then?
evince
Truthmatters
http://banking.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Articles.Detail&Article_id=125&Month=3&Year=2007
Despite those warning signals, in February of 2004 the leadership of the Federal Reserve Board seemed to encourage the development and use of adjustable rate mortgages that, today, are defaulting and going into foreclosure at record rates. The then-Chairman of the Fed said, in a speech to the National Credit Union Administration, said:
“American consumers might benefit if lenders provided greater mortgage product alternatives to the traditional fixed-rate mortgage.”
Shortly thereafter, the Fed went on a series of 17 interest rate hikes in a row, taking the fed funds rate from 1% to 5.25%.
So, in sum: By the Spring of 2004, the regulators had started to document the fact that lending standards were easing. At the same time, the Fed was encouraging lenders to develop and market alternative adjustable rate products, just as it was embarking on a long series of hikes in short term rates. In my view, these actions set the conditions for the perfect storm that is sweeping over millions of American homeowners today.
By May, 2005, the press was reporting that economists were warning about the risks of these new mortgages.
June of that year, Chairman Greenspan was talking about “froth” in the mortgage market and testified before the Joint Economic Committee that he was troubled by the surge in exotic mortgages. Data indicated that nearly 25% of all mortgage loans made that year were interest-only.
Yet, in December, 2005, the regulators proposed guidance to reign in some of the irresponsible lending. And we had to wait another seven months, until September, 2006, before that guidance was finalized.
Even then, even now, the regulators’ response is incomplete. It was not until earlier this month – more than 3 years after recognizing the problem – that the regulators agreed to extend these protections to more vulnerable subprime borrowers. These are borrowers who are less likely to understand the complexities of the products being pushed on them, and who have fewer reserves on which to fall if trouble strikes. We still await final action on this guidance, which I urge the regulators to complete at the earliest possible moment.
Despite those warning signals, in February of 2004 the leadership of the Federal Reserve Board seemed to encourage the development and use of adjustable rate mortgages that, today, are defaulting and going into foreclosure at record rates. The then-Chairman of the Fed said, in a speech to the National Credit Union Administration, said:
“American consumers might benefit if lenders provided greater mortgage product alternatives to the traditional fixed-rate mortgage.”
Shortly thereafter, the Fed went on a series of 17 interest rate hikes in a row, taking the fed funds rate from 1% to 5.25%.
So, in sum: By the Spring of 2004, the regulators had started to document the fact that lending standards were easing. At the same time, the Fed was encouraging lenders to develop and market alternative adjustable rate products, just as it was embarking on a long series of hikes in short term rates. In my view, these actions set the conditions for the perfect storm that is sweeping over millions of American homeowners today.
By May, 2005, the press was reporting that economists were warning about the risks of these new mortgages.
June of that year, Chairman Greenspan was talking about “froth” in the mortgage market and testified before the Joint Economic Committee that he was troubled by the surge in exotic mortgages. Data indicated that nearly 25% of all mortgage loans made that year were interest-only.
Yet, in December, 2005, the regulators proposed guidance to reign in some of the irresponsible lending. And we had to wait another seven months, until September, 2006, before that guidance was finalized.
Even then, even now, the regulators’ response is incomplete. It was not until earlier this month – more than 3 years after recognizing the problem – that the regulators agreed to extend these protections to more vulnerable subprime borrowers. These are borrowers who are less likely to understand the complexities of the products being pushed on them, and who have fewer reserves on which to fall if trouble strikes. We still await final action on this guidance, which I urge the regulators to complete at the earliest possible moment.
Battleborne
Terminator
Battleborne
Terminator
Because...........
Those that lack a real degree...want to bring everyone down below their internet personna...thats it in a nut shell!
Those that lack a real degree...want to bring everyone down below their internet personna...thats it in a nut shell!
Diuretic
New member
I must admit I haven't seen it. But then I haven't been involved in much here except beating back AHZ and Watermark
But I do see the insults flying about GED (some sort of equivalency thing isn't it?) and I wonder about people who feel they have to display the results of their own paper chase to bolster their ego. Seems to me if you've got the smarts you don't need to shove the parchment in someone's face. Education is a process not a product.
evince
Truthmatters
I must admit I haven't seen it. But then I haven't been involved in much here except beating back AHZ and Watermark
But I do see the insults flying about GED (some sort of equivalency thing isn't it?) and I wonder about people who feel they have to display the results of their own paper chase to bolster their ego. Seems to me if you've got the smarts you don't need to shove the parchment in someone's face. Education is a process not a product.
Very true Di, there are those on here who seem to think it proves something if they wave degrees arround and insult others education. Funny thing is I have seen people claim five degrees here and there is no way to prove any of this bluster. Some of the smartes people I have know barely passed high school. Smart is smart and degrees are just one measure of the attainment of education.
Diuretic
New member
Well, as any woman will tell you Topspin, men never really grow up
Here's my parchment
University of Hard Knocks
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Wow, a statement from Chris Dodd. A statement he managed to put together this year. Impressive. Yet Desh do you notice that in 2005 Greenspan warned in testimony that there were problems? What did your Dems do? The answer... the same as the Reps.... NOTHING.
The quote from Greenspan saying that alternatives to fixed rate mortgages should be explored.....
It is obviously a cherry picked portion of the statement Greenspan made... lets see the whole thing. Because he could easily have been talking about equity accelerators or something along those lines. ARMs have been in existence for decades, so I doubt that was what he was referring to, but unless Dodd or yourself would like to provide the entire testimony from Greenspan, then we will just assume that he cherry picked it to make Greenspan look bad.
Next... do you think you might provide something the Dems did OTHER than trying to place blame on the Reps? Didn't think so.
Finally... just how do you expect us to take this seriously? From Dodd? A democrat running for President who benefits from trying to blame this on Reps? Please... do try to find a source that is not quite that biased.
