Rule No. 1: The banksters win … always
Chrysler’s “So God Made A Farmer” ad, featuring the voice of Paul Harvey and images of farm life, proved to be one of the highlights of the 2013 Super Bowl. It also inspired Brett Arends of Marketwatch to pen his own version of the sentimental classic, this one titled “So God Made A Banker”.
Some excerpts:
God said, “I need someone who doesn’t grow anything or make anything but who will borrow money from the public at 0% interest and then lend it back to the public at 2% or 5% or 10% and pay himself a bonus for doing so.”
So God made a banker.
God said, “I need someone who will take money from the people who work and save, and use that money to create a dotcom bubble and a housing bubble and a stock bubble and an oil bubble and a commodities bubble and a bond bubble and another stock bubble, and then sell it to people in Poughkeepsie and Spokane and Bakersfield, and pay himself another bonus.”
So God made a banker…
God said, “And I need somebody who will tell everyone else to stand on their own two feet, but who will then run to the government for a bailout as soon as he gets into trouble — and who will then use that bailout money to help elect a Congress that will look the other way. And then pay himself another bonus.”
If only Mr. Harvey were still around to do it justice.
In a much-less-funny report, the New York Times’ Dealbook column reports on documents filed in a lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase, alleging that at the height of the mortgage boom, the bank defrauded investors by peddling mortgages that it knew were going bad:
“According to the court documents, an analysis for JPMorgan in September 2006 found that “nearly half of the sample pool” — or 214 loans — were “defective,” meaning they did not meet the underwriting standards. The borrowers’ incomes, the firms found, were dangerously low relative to the size of their mortgages. Another troubling report in 2006 discovered that thousands of borrowers had already fallen behind on their payments.
But JPMorgan at times dismissed the critical assessments or altered them, the documents show. Certain JPMorgan employees, including the bankers who assembled the mortgages and the due diligence managers, had the power to ignore or veto bad reviews…. In 2006, for example, a review of mortgages found that at least 1,154 loans were more than 30 days delinquent. The offering documents sent to investors showed only 25 loans as delinquent.
A person familiar with the bank’s portfolios said JPMorgan had reviewed the loans separately and determined that the number of delinquent loans was far less than the outside analysis had found….
An assessment of the loans in one security revealed that 24 percent of the sample was “materially defective,” the filings show. After exercising override power, a JPMorgan employee sent a report in May 2006 to a ratings agency that showed only 5.3 percent of the mortgages were defective.
Such investments eventually collapsed, spreading losses across the financial system.”
And then they paid themselves a bonus.
G’day!
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
413 comments Add your comment
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:13 am
ATL Tiger — “Ok, but didn’t the big commercial banks end up buying those loans?”
They ended up buying securitized tranches of *pooled* loans, yes.
“Weren’t those banks subject to CRA?”
Yes, but that’s irrelevant. You clearly don’t understand the difference between a mortgage loan and a Securitized Debt Obligation.
Investment banks bought up mortgages of all sorts (Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae did this too) and ‘pooled’ them. The pools were then broken up into ‘tranches’ of similar-quality loans and sliced up into shares. Those shares were then sold as securities. Rating agencies like S&P and Moody’s rated the *tranches* but not the underlying mortgages. And since the rating agencies’ business model relies on being paid by the people they are rating, they gave undeserved high ratings to many pools that didn’t deserve it.
All this is factual, and there’s no legal dispute involving any of it.
Ergo, a bank that’s subject to the CRA could buy securities *containing* mortgages of a type it couldn’t write.
“Isn’t this article about ‘banksters’ making off with profits and not the independent lenders?”
Once the lenders (that weren’t subject to the CRA) sold off their mortgages to investment bankers, they were done. The bankster part comes from the misrepresentation of mortgage pools being high-quality investments when they were nothing of the sort. And, FWIW, there’s documentary evidence that many banksters *knew* exactly what they were doing and, in some cases, staked out investment positions calculated to take advantage of the failure of the very instruments they were trying to sell their customers.
TBS
February 8th, 2013
10:13 am
Bro
Funny how these banks and other lending institutions as well as those carrying the water for them, didn’t have much to say during the boom times, but now it is the “Feds made us do it” mantra.
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:13 am
0311 — “The bottom line is that the Community Reinvestment Act forced loans for individuals with little or no ability to pay them back.”
Lie.
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:13 am
Remember bookman loves him some liberal leadership. they are such proven leaders in Chicago, the communist in chiefs own hometown, that they have decided not to respond to all 911 calls. this is the same bastion of brilliance that has had gun bans for decades. it took the NRA to kick they liberals butts on that. in fact chicago had to write the NRA a big fat check when they lost.
Granny Godzilla
February 8th, 2013
10:13 am
as Heyward Jr
February 8th, 2013
10:08 am
Free-market trickle downing benefits a helluva lot more people than Government-controlled trickle upping.
.
.
.
Piffle
Butch Cassidy (I)
February 8th, 2013
10:14 am
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801 – “The gub’ment PUSHED their agenda down the throats of the banks and the banks that did not go along were threatened with lawsuits. That’s a fact.”
That is complete Bullspit! I spent the last 5 years of my 25 year financial career as a broker with Citi in NYC. NO loans were ever made under threat of government retribution. Everyone knew that the loans being made and bundled were pure profit machines. There’s a reason why I retired in 2008, I had already amassed a huge portfolio and didn’t see the need to be around when the wrecking ball came down. ANYONE who thinks the mortgages were written to appease the government regulators has their head shoved so far up ther A$# that I’m amazed that they can even talk without having to take a Sh*& first!
Granny Godzilla
February 8th, 2013
10:14 am
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:13 am
Remember bookman loves him some liberal leadership. they are such proven leaders in Chicago, the communist in chiefs own hometown, that they have decided not to respond to all 911 calls. this is the same bastion of brilliance that has had gun bans for decades. it took the NRA to kick they liberals butts on that. in fact chicago had to write the NRA a big fat check when they lost.
.
.
.
.
Hot mess alert.
DannyX
February 8th, 2013
10:15 am
“Dems controlled Congress during the height of the bubble?”
No, but it was terrible! Bwaney Fwank was able to pin down Bush and the weak Republicans and shove his massive loans down their throats. It was just awful.
JamVet
February 8th, 2013
10:15 am
Free-market trickle downing benefits a helluva lot more people…
“Free” market???
Riiiiiight!
These white collar criminals cannot even run a business half way decently without constantly going to Uncle Sugar for handouts and bailouts and subsidies and tax shelters and legally stealing money from people.
THESE are your models of business excellence? THESE are your heroes of capitalism?
Take a good look around at your trickle down handiwork, Reaganistas.
Fortunately Republican fascism in lieu of American capitalism is on it’s way out…
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:15 am
0311 — “The bottom line is that the Community Reinvestment Act forced loans for individuals with little or no ability to pay them back.”
Lie.
just because some liberal loon states a FACT is a lie doesnt not change thats its a FACT. It merely means the liberal loon is also an ignorant fool.
TBS
February 8th, 2013
10:16 am
“Bonnie Fwank right there on C-Span threatened the banks with a gub’ment lawsuit if they did not lend to the “every day man” aka broke Dem Voters.”
I hope some just lie on blogs and not as a habit.
At least you put a question mark behind “Morality”
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:18 am
ATL Tiger — “By 2001, it was offering mortgages with no down payment at all. By 2007, Fannie and Freddie were required to show that 55 percent of their mortgage purchases were LMI loans and, within that goal, 38 percent of all purchases were to come from underserved areas (usually inner cities) and 25 percent were to be loans to low-income and very-low-income borrowers.”
What the Spectator won’t tell you is that Congress authorized Freddie and Fannie to do that because they were *losing* business to the commercial trade. It’s not that FHLMC and FNMA were *forced* to take on that business — it’s that they were *losing* that business to commercial bankers — who were already happily taking on the risky business that they now claim that the CRA *made* them accept.
Commercial bankers led the way in this, not Freddie and Fannie.
barking frog
February 8th, 2013
10:19 am
Keep Up
Guess you are right the banks and Fannie Mae are just doing
this to aid one homeowner while they boink another. Good Bankster
and Fannie Mae. There is no transparency in these transactions
is my point. The assumption would be that the bank would receive
payment in full for its mortgage from Fannie Mae or it would sell
the house itself.
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:20 am
Hey granny, do the research and educate yourself and you will see that every word from my post is absolutely accurate. liberals have controlled chicago for decades. they had a gun ban for years. the nra defeated chicago in the Supreme Court. Chicago paid the NRA when they lost and now chicago has decided not to respond to all 911 calls. dont be so ignorant of the facts. you may want to look into things a little more thoroughly. if you did that you would look a lot more intelligent on here.
Stevie Ray
February 8th, 2013
10:20 am
Brosephus™
February 8th, 2013
10:10 am
Seems to me that would be akin to deciding not to take advantage of IRS legal loopholes to mininimze tax liabilities. IMO, there were too many variables by too many contributors and some simple market forces to lay blame effectively. The lowered downpayment government deals contributed. The Wall Street banks playing both sides of the fence and criminally selling while betting against….criminal in my mind anyhow. I think most of the blame rests with rating agencies. Oddly, I think AIG was somewhat of a scapegoat by trusting rating agencies to evaluate risk and rate for insuring these packages. Of course, the policy conditions of AIG’s (and others) allowed for collection in the event of a single default…Meanwhile, Frannie and Freddie decided to compete with private markets and assumed shady loans, some of which were high risk due to low down payments pushed by that Homes For All My Friends legislation.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 8th, 2013
10:20 am
The bottom line is that the Community Reinvestment Act forced loans for individuals with little or no ability to pay them back.
That is total BS and shows you haven’t a clue as to what the CRA even is! It forces banks to lend in a certain area, it doesn’t force banks to lend to troublesome borrowers. Why don’t you do yourself a favor and at least wiki what the hell the CRA is.
Lord Help Us
February 8th, 2013
10:20 am
Has any Exec from AIG, Goldman, Lehman (RIP), Merrill, JPM, etc…EVER testified they were forced to make bad loans?
Granny Godzilla
February 8th, 2013
10:20 am
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:15 am
0311 — “The bottom line is that the Community Reinvestment Act forced loans for individuals with little or no ability to pay them back.”
Lie.
just because some liberal loon states a FACT is a lie doesnt not change thats its a FACT. It merely means the liberal loon is also an ignorant fool
.
.
.
.
FACT remains….it is a LIE
Who’s the ignorant fool?
Tom Middleton
February 8th, 2013
10:21 am
Jay, ever hear Woody Guthrie’s “Pretty Boy Floyd”? I best remember the rendition done by folksinger Joan Baez, but others did it as well (like Woody Guthrie). Anyway, here’s the last two verses of a truly great song:
Yes, as through this world I’ve wandered
I’ve seen lots of funny men;
Some will rob you with a six-gun,
And some with a fountain pen.
And as through your life you travel,
Yes, as through your life you roam,
You won’t never see an outlaw
Drive a family from their home.
Jay, somehow these just seemed fitting here!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InWqYjQwrvU
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:21 am
Keith — “just because some liberal loon states a FACT is a lie doesnt not change thats its a FACT. It merely means the liberal loon is also an ignorant fool.”
Son, I know how this all worked from the *inside.*
If you’ve got any evidence to offer, then trot it on out. Otherwise, pipe down and pay attention so you can learn something.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 8th, 2013
10:22 am
No government rule has ever been written that tells bankers they have to lend to subprime/icapable/troublesome/risky borrowers.
Never. How idiotic would a rule like that be? Think it through, people.
DebbieDoRight - The Only Thing Wrong With Capitalism Is Capitalists..
February 8th, 2013
10:22 am
Ground hog day again at Bookman’s Blog:
“Bonnie Fwank and the Dem Congress threatened the banks to loan to unqualified clients or else”
This has been disproven so many times, its really quite sickening to see people still repeating it.
The bottom line is that the Community Reinvestment Act forced loans for individuals with little or no ability to pay them back.
Forced huh? Can anyone please show me/point out the lawsuits that FORCED these banks, after they were kicking and screaming NO, no NOOOO!!!, to “loan to people who couldn’t pay them back?” How idiotic IS that statement? Next they’ll be saying, “Chevy sales went up because the Government FORCED people to buy Camaros and Malibus!!”
===============
Mr. Numbers Man: CLASSIC liberal emotion over conservative reason ………. and look what happened.
Is conservative reason the same thing as conservative math? You know what I mean! Matherbation but if you put the words conservative reason in there, (which of course, conservative reason is an oxymoron), you can change the whole context by just saying jack off.
So, instead of saying “conservative reason” you can now say, “Classic liberal emotion over conservatives’ jack off”.
Voila!!
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:22 am
anyone remember barney frank telling us that Fannie Mae was just fine financially? the gop tried to tell us that simply was not the case. history has proven the little liberal poster boy was full of crap. but then what liberal isnt full of crap?
Keep Up the Good Fight!
February 8th, 2013
10:22 am
Any property sold for less than what is owed on it means someone takes a loss on it and that loss is shared by taxpayers through income tax deductions unless the loser is a government entity
No Frog, losses offset profits in a business. Taxes are paid on income after all deductions. This is true of all business. When GE loses money on a engine, it offsets a profit it may have made on a nuclear reactor. If a company has a NOL carryover, it can offset against future profits to a limited degree.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 8th, 2013
10:23 am
That was back in the day when the Oakland Raiders mattered. It’s been a long 28 years for Oakland fans.
n
February 8th, 2013
10:24 am
Federal regulations must have been particularly intense here in GA, forcing the bank to give Graves and Rogers a loan they didn’t want and couldn’t pay back, and also causing the highest rate of bank failure in the country, and hundreds of thousands of acres of pvc forests.
Federal regulations are some mighty potent hoodoo.
Brosephus™
February 8th, 2013
10:24 am
TBS @ 10:13
My point exactly!!
—————————
Stevie Ray @ 10:20
Seems to me that would be akin to deciding not to take advantage of IRS legal loopholes to mininimze tax liabilities.
Well, seems to me that if one cries about what the government MADE them do against their will, they wouldn’t want ill gotten gains in their bank account, right? That’s like the Madoffs complaining about what Bernie did while going on a shopping spree in Paris.
Adam
February 8th, 2013
10:26 am
Scout: The bottom line is that the Community Reinvestment Act forced loans for individuals with little or no ability to pay them back.
ACTUALLY, they didn’t. In fact these loans were LESS risky than the private lender loans overall.
It’s nothing but a conservative boogeyman. The loans were heavily regulated under CRA, and thus actually had, IN REALITY, less of a chance of being problematic.
JamVet
February 8th, 2013
10:26 am
The bankster coddlers and their insane hatred for the good Americans who started standing up to the criminals on Wall Street definitely cost them in this past election.
BIG time.
Their reaction was beyond disgusting and the soft-on-crime, corporations before people, GOP is now paying the price.
By 2016, the GOP will officially be a whites-only, rural only party of yesteryear that will be for all intents and purposes drownable in a bathtub.
Occupy that.
Thomas Heyward Jr
February 8th, 2013
10:26 am
Yea, the State enabled bankers always win.
Thank God we bailed them out so…………………………they can do what they’re doing here.(Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA)
WARNING…………do not watch the VIDEO at the bottom of page …unless you’re a hardcore statist or just plain dumb.
THIS IS NOT SATIRE.
This is for real……..broought to you by the same friendly entity that brought us the CRA.
.
http://www.hesc.ny.gov/content.nsf
.
when is enough?
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
February 8th, 2013
10:27 am
keith:
“just because some liberal loon states a FACT is a lie doesnt not change thats its a FACT. It merely means the liberal loon is also an ignorant fool.”
Thank you ………… but go easy on our liberal friends (Mama, Granny, et al).
They are obviously having a bad day and when they want to ignore the facts/history, etc. they just bring out the name calling and hit their computer keys harder (they can’t yell on here so they do that instead).
The bottom, BOTTOM line is always the same.
Liberal emotion vs. conservative reason.
TaxPayer
February 8th, 2013
10:27 am
spectator!
Excuse me.
I can’t help myself!
Lord Help Us
February 8th, 2013
10:27 am
Yea, I remember…it was about the same time McCain and his Chief Financial Adviser were saying we were only having a ‘Mental recession’…
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:27 am
Keith — “just because some liberal loon states a FACT is a lie doesnt not change thats its a FACT. It merely means the liberal loon is also an ignorant fool.”
Son, I know how this all worked from the *inside.*
If you’ve got any evidence to offer, then trot it on out. Otherwise, pipe down and pay attention so you can learn something.
i will simply refer you to history and what your great liberal leaders were saying at the time. for example barney frank telling us fannie mae was in great financial shape while it was going under. REMEMBER?????????? no you do not remember. your liberal induced comma will not allow factual information contrary to your liberal indoctrination to penetrate your leftwing wall commonly referred to as a skull.
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:28 am
liberal induced COMA that is.
Morality?
February 8th, 2013
10:28 am
“And the Dems were in Congress during the height of the bubble”? Think please. The bubble was not created in a day. Bonni Fwank was in charge of regulating and watching Fannie May and Freddie Mack. Bonnie was a KEY instigator in loans to the “under served” aka low income Dem voters. My own bank here in south Georgia was actually SUED because they refused to loan to those that weren’t financially qualified. I am talking about BB&T. Ameris was also sued by the Fed gub’ment for the same reason. There were others. Fwanks agenda went beyond just helping the “low income” buy a house. He personally received bank lobbyist’s cash to fund his campaigns.
Lord Help Us
February 8th, 2013
10:28 am
‘Liberal emotion vs. conservative reason.’
Can you name me the Big Bank Execs that testified they were forced to make bad loans?
Otherwise…you lose…
Granny Godzilla
February 8th, 2013
10:28 am
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:20 am
Hey granny, do the research and educate yourself and you will see that every word from my post is absolutely accurate.
>OK
liberals have controlled chicago for decades.
>yep
they had a gun ban for years.
>yep
the nra defeated chicago in the Supreme Court.
>yep
Chicago paid the NRA when they lost and now chicago has decided not to respond to all 911 calls. dont be so ignorant of the facts.
>HERE”S were you get into trouble fella.
>Relook at your source VERY CAREFULLY…have they decided to not respond to all 911 calls
>or are they prioritizing gun crImes?
you may want to look into things a little more thoroughly.
> Yes, you should.
if you did that you would look a lot more intelligent on here.
>son, it ain’t about looking, it’s about being. and I am obviously a smarter cookie than you.
.
.
.
That said, take your goofy commie in chief claptrap and try it on some weak minded friends of yours.
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:28 am
LHU — “Has any Exec from AIG, Goldman, Lehman (RIP), Merrill, JPM, etc…EVER testified they were forced to make bad loans?”
Nope. And you won’t find any of them on camera prior to 2008 making that claim, either.
Thug
February 8th, 2013
10:28 am
While on the topic of stuck on stoopid…can
you believe the regime agrees to donate F-16’s & tanks
to that muslim brotherhood guy? choooooo
barking frog
February 8th, 2013
10:28 am
Keep Up
Thanks for explaining that taxpayers only share in business
losses charged against profits but the income is reduced by
the losses thus reducing the profits.
skipper
February 8th, 2013
10:28 am
Bwany Fwank…………..good Lord…………………
Keep Up the Good Fight!
February 8th, 2013
10:29 am
There is no transparency in these transactions
is my point. The assumption would be that the bank would receive
payment in full for its mortgage from Fannie Mae or it would sell
the house itself.
No transparency? Right.
security deeds and other deeds are all public records and available online. I can in minutes trace the ownership history of your home as well as all title encumbrances.
I am sorry you made a claim that you cannot back but now to just go into some absurd rant and an unsupported assumption is just silly on your part.
Now if you are trying to claim that BOA defrauded Fannie Mae when it sold it the loan originally (moving the goalposts to an entirely new field), that is an entirely different issue unrelated to Homepath
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:30 am
the economy was doing great during the bush admin until oh about the time pelosi became speaker of the house and reid bacame senate mkajority leader. everything went to hell when those nuts took control. go look it up.
indigo
February 8th, 2013
10:30 am
This above all:
Money talks and BS walks
Keep Up the Good Fight!
February 8th, 2013
10:31 am
Thanks for explaining that taxpayers only share in business losses charged against profits but the income is reduced by the losses thus reducing the profits.
How silly.
TBS
February 8th, 2013
10:31 am
Morality
When did Democrats take the House? It is not hard. Google if you can’t seem to remember.
When did the “bubble” peak? Google if you need to remember
The government to include Democrats are not without blame, however the Barney the Boogeyman talking points meme that you willfully allowed yourself to be brainwashed with doesn’t wash with the facts.
Arms Akimbo
February 8th, 2013
10:31 am
During the same time as your quotation, Fannie and Freddie had “forward purchase agreements” in place to buy ALL mortgage product originated. Since 2008, the housing agencies have hemoraged hundreds of millions of dollars with no end in sight and no attempt for reform by the administration. Former agency chief Franklin Raines who received a $multi-million golden parachute after being forced to resign for manipulating agency performance numbers to pad his bonus, is an Obama economic advisor. Rather than agency reform, all we get is a $5 B civil law suit against S&P because they downgraded U.S. debt during the Obama reign. At the same time, the Federal Government STILL requires pension funds, endowments, and other Government investment entities to have investment grade rating opinions from S&P. Dodd-Frank was supposed to remove this requirement, but in typical Obama fashion, two years after Dodd-Frank was approved, they stil haven’t gotten around to that rule. Jim Corzine, a major Obama donor, fraudulently lost $millions of investor funds and yet is still walking around a free man Obama would rather argue about crucial issues like gays in the Boy Scouts. Apparantly, the Chicago way is to give the likes of JP and Bof A billions of dollars in taxpayer funds and then turn around and sue them. Thus, the cost of being a “too big to fail” institution with an implied government guarantee is legal expense and headline risk. The Obama/Holder Chicago model merely shuffles paper around and never grows anything. Of course, as a community organizer/union puppet, Obama will never appreciate the values illustrated in Paul Harvey’s description of a farmer. It just doesn’t fit into Obama’s world view and focus on control and self-perpetuation.
Granny Godzilla
February 8th, 2013
10:31 am
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:30 am
the economy was doing great during the bush admin until oh about the time pelosi became speaker of the house and reid bacame senate mkajority leader. everything went to hell when those nuts took control. go look it up.
.
.
.
.
pointing and laughing in 3…2….1
DannyX
February 8th, 2013
10:32 am
“Federal regulations must have been particularly intense here in GA, forcing the bank to give Graves and Rogers a loan they didn’t want and couldn’t pay back, and also causing the highest rate of bank failure in the country, and hundreds of thousands of acres of pvc forests.”
“The chairman of the state Senate Banking Committee, already the subject of lawsuits over a failed bank and bank debt, could lose a Forsyth County property to foreclosure.
State Sen. Jack Murphy, R-Cumming, owns a one-acre tract along Tribble Gap Road in downtown Cumming that has been listed for foreclosure on July 5, according to a legal notice published earlier this month in the Forsyth County News.”
http://www.ajc.com/news/business/senate-banking-chair-has-property-in-foreclosure/nQwSY/
A lot of our Georgia Republican state leaders are the victims of Bwaney Fwank and federal regulations.
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:32 am
0311 — “Thank you ………… but go easy on our liberal friends (Mama, Granny, et al). ”
I like how y’all don’t actually have any facts but still like to pet each other.
“They are obviously having a bad day and when they want to ignore the facts/history, etc.”
I was there. You weren’t/. Who’s got facts again?
“they just bring out the name calling”
I haven’t called you any names, but I have pointed out that you’re lying and relying on an unreliable political publication. Whereas the guy you’re thanking is well-known for having nothing but insults to back himself up.
“and hit their computer keys harder (they can’t yell on here so they do that instead).”
Shrug. Once again, I was *consulting* for one of the GSEs. I *know* what happened. You, not so much.
“The bottom, BOTTOM line is always the same. Liberal emotion vs. conservative reason.”
Liberal who was there vs conservative with a crank magazine article. (laughing, pointing)
Thomas Heyward Jr
February 8th, 2013
10:33 am
JamVet
February 8th, 2013
10:15 am
Free-market trickle downing benefits a helluva lot more people…
“Free” market???
Riiiiiight!
These white collar criminals cannot even run a business half way decently without constantly going to Uncle Sugar for handouts and bailouts and subsidies and tax shelters and legally stealing money from people.
THESE are your models of business excellence? THESE are your heroes of capitalism?
Take a good look around at your trickle down handiwork, Reaganistas.
Fortunately Republican fascism in lieu of American capitalism is on it’s way out…
—————————————————————————————————————-
.
I never said that there WAS a free-market……………………….goob.
(See 80,000 page Federale code.)
.
Be that as it may………My statement is true.
barking frog
February 8th, 2013
10:33 am
Keep Up
Thanks for your comprehension.
Tundra Dude
February 8th, 2013
10:34 am
B Cassidy wrote, in part:
NO loans were ever made under threat of government retribution. Everyone knew that the loans being made and bundled were pure profit machines.
(the former) heads of Washington Mutual would agree. Their emails to employees reminded them, these “sub-prime” loans were up to 8x more profitable.
The insider term for these was Liars Loans (Yuk Yuk).
(thank God the Gubmint is making us do this) $$$$$$$
indigo
February 8th, 2013
10:34 am
keith – 10:13 “the communist in chief”
Obama has never endorsed this political philosophy.
Do you post these stupid lies just to get attention, child?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/communism
DebbieDoRight - The Only Thing Wrong With Capitalism Is Capitalists..
February 8th, 2013
10:34 am
My father was a mortgage banker who retired in the early 90’s, and my brother-in-law has been working for Fannie Mae about 25 years. Its interesting listening to them talk about how FEDERAL REGULATIONS CAUSED BANKS TO WRITE THESE FLAWED LOANS…really giving them no choice but to do so
Hate to tell you this, but they’re both lying.
Did the feds MAKE banks/investment brokers, bundle those loans up to inflate the prices and then sell them around the world to other financial institutions as PRIME?
Did the feds MAKE the banks offer zero down, zero interest for 2 years, balloon payment loans to the “poor people”?
Did the feds MAKE the banks sell those same substandard loans to Fannie and Freddie KNOWING that Fannie and Freddie HAD to buy a percentage of the loans per their mission statement?
And, when you get a chance, why not ask your peeps, did the feds MAKE them pocket those big commission checks and NEVER even think about blowing the whistle on something that they felt was ruining America and/or wrecking havoc?
If you have the guts to question their remarks, get back with me with their answers.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
February 8th, 2013
10:35 am
“The Times (THE NEW YORK TIMES !) itself reported in 1999 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were under pressure from the Clinton administration to increase lending to minorities and low-income home buyers—a policy that necessarily entailed higher risks.”
“THE TRUE ORIGINS OF THE FINANCIAL CRISIS”
“There really isn’t any question of which approach is factually correct: right on the front page of the Times edition of December 21 is a chart that shows the growth of home ownership in the United States since 1990. In 1993 it was 63 percent; by the end of the Clinton administration it was 68 percent. The growth in the Bush administration was about 1 percent. The Times itself reported in 1999 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were under pressure from the Clinton administration to increase lending to minorities and low-income home buyers—a policy that necessarily entailed higher risks. Can there really be a question, other than in the fevered imagination of the Times, where the push to reduce lending standards and boost home ownership came from?
The fact is that neither political party, and no administration, is blameless; the honest answer, as outlined below, is that government policy over many years caused this problem. The regulators, in both the Clinton and Bush administrations, were the enforcers of the reduced lending standards that were essential to the growth in home ownership and the housing bubble.”
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:36 am
Chicago paid the NRA when they lost and now chicago has decided not to respond to all 911 calls. dont be so ignorant of the facts.
>HERE”S were you get into trouble fella.
>Relook at your source VERY CAREFULLY…have they decided to not respond to all 911 calls
>or are they prioritizing gun crImes?
so what you are saying is that chicago has decided not to respond to ALL 911 calls. THATS WHAT I SAID SILLY. And go google Chicago pays NRA. it happened Like i stated on here, your crazed leftwing liberal mindset will not allow you to accept reality even when your post verifies my post, you STILL cant face facts.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
February 8th, 2013
10:37 am
Sure thing Frog. You be a genius in your own mind
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
February 8th, 2013
10:37 am
Taxpayer @ 10:27
“The Times (THE NEW YORK TIMES !) itself reported in 1999 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were under pressure from the Clinton administration to increase lending to minorities and low-income home buyers—a policy that necessarily entailed higher risks.”
LOL !!!!!!!!
Lord Help Us
February 8th, 2013
10:37 am
Colonel Hasenpfefer…
Has any major bank Exec ever testified they were forced to make bad loans?
If you can’t answer, you are just being emotional about this…
Morality?
February 8th, 2013
10:38 am
You BRAIN DEAD ZOMBIES for Obama can’t handle the truth! When you add corrupt bankers and corrupt Congress you get CROOKS……… you know? Why do you keep voting them back in office if you do not like the results? Blame YOURSELF! TERM LIMITS for CONGRESS.
Butch Cassidy (I)
February 8th, 2013
10:38 am
Wall St started bundling homeowner loans together, mortgage back securities and selling slices of those bundles to investors and they were making big money. So they started pushing the lenders saying “Come’on, we need more loans”
The lenders are already giving loans to borrowers with good credit so they go bottom feeding and they lower the criteria.
Before, you needed a credit score of 620 and down payment of 20%. Now they settle for 500, no money down
And the buyer, the regular guy in the streets assumes the expert know what they were doing. He’s saying to himself “The banks are willing to loan me money, I must be able to afford it” So he reaches for the American dream. He buys that house.
The banks knew the securities based on bad mortgages were risky.
So to control the downside, the banks started to buy the kind of insurance: If mortgages defaults, insurance companies pays: Default swap. The banks insured their potential losses to move their risk off their books so they can invest more, make more money
Well a lot of companies insure their stuff; one company is dumb enough to take on almost unbelievable amount risk
AIG
Why?
Hundreds of millions in fees
Thomas Heyward Jr
February 8th, 2013
10:38 am
Lord Help Us
February 8th, 2013
10:20 am
Has any Exec from AIG, Goldman, Lehman (RIP), Merrill, JPM, etc…EVER testified they were forced to make bad loans?
————————————————————————–
.
Actually……..one or two testified that they were FORCED to ACCEPT a bad loan courtesy of the American taxpayer.
(the reasoning being that if they did NOT accept TARP funds then it would make the others look bad).
.
Just as crooked.
Google it dawg.
JamVet
February 8th, 2013
10:38 am
I just read the most insane statement I’ve seen here in many a day:
…the economy was doing great during the bush admin…
During the first decade of this century, American debt exploded to the point where it far outpaced incomes. Which have barely budged since the days of Richard Nixon.
So people and businesses being leveraged to the hilt in lieu of sound investments in the middle class and in the non-war components of this country was the definition of doing great?
My goodness.
In reality, the American economy – for most Americans – has been wrecked for forty years.
But the smoke and mirrors and easy money sure looked great, huh?
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:38 am
Keith — “i will simply refer you to history and what your great liberal leaders were saying at the time. for example barney frank telling us fannie mae was in great financial shape while it was going under. REMEMBER?????????? no you do not remember.”
I remember it just fine. The problem is that your aim sucks and you’re not talking about what everyone ELSE is talking about.
The point under discussion is whether the Community Investment Act FORCED banks to make risky loans they didn’t want to make. Please stick to the point, young man.
“your liberal induced comma will not allow factual information contrary to your liberal indoctrination to penetrate your leftwing wall commonly referred to as a skull.”
(laughing, pointing)
Son, I was *consulting* for one of the GSEs before this all happened, and just FYI, I voted Republican for over 20 years of my voting life. If that’s ‘liberal indoctrination,’ then you must wear a skirt and makeup.
You are *not* going to find the facts about what happened by looking to *political* sources, and your insistence on doing so simply marks you as cluelessly partisan. The economic facts are what they are, and they are *not* political, no matter how much you want them to be.
Once again, I was *inside* one of the GSEs before this all went down. Where were you?
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
February 8th, 2013
10:38 am
keith:
Take point ……… these libs. are starting to bore me and I have errands to run and grandchildren to babysit !
Everyone be nice !!!
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:39 am
“The Times (THE NEW YORK TIMES !) itself reported in 1999 that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were under pressure from the Clinton administration to increase lending to minorities and low-income home buyers—a policy that necessarily entailed higher risks.”
“THE TRUE ORIGINS OF THE FINANCIAL CRISIS”
The NY TIMES! Even they had tocome to terms with reality. see liberals on here, you can do it too, just follow their example and maybe someday you will be able to distinguish reality from those crazy voices in your heads telling you its just not so,.
Granny Godzilla
February 8th, 2013
10:40 am
Keith
EPIC FAIL
Truly.
stands for decibels
February 8th, 2013
10:40 am
“Banksters”?
Why Jay. How shrill.
/drive-by
Peace
February 8th, 2013
10:40 am
Alittlecommonsense @ 9:33
You nailed Jay! His response suggests that you almost left him speechless. … but totally embarrassed.
stands for decibels
February 8th, 2013
10:40 am
(…and unserious. that too.)
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:43 am
0311 — “LOL !!!!!!!!”
Please explain why the first mortgage pools to go bad *weren’t* subprime.
Please explain why the CS 680-720 pools were the first ones to spoil.
TaxPayer
February 8th, 2013
10:43 am
Tell us again what the times reported, scout.
Tell us all about how the CRA-regulated loans led to the breaking of the buck and the run on the banks. Tell us all about the trillions of dollars worth of derivatives written around CRA-regulated loans and the failure of AIG. Tell us all about Lehman’s holdings of CRA-regulated loans.
Keep scratching away at that pothole, scout. Before you know it, it’ll be deep enough to call a wabbit hole.
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:43 am
Once again, I was *inside* one of the GSEs before this all went down.
my point exactly. people like you are exactly what made it all go down.look in the mirror and you will see the cause of all the problems. and while you are at it, put yourself in timeout for the rest of your life.you have done enough harm to this country
Citizen of the World
February 8th, 2013
10:43 am
This Frontline documentary does a good job of showing just how thin were the justice department’s attempts to bring these banksters to justice for their wrongdoing: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/untouchables/
I’m hoping it’s still not too late to send some of these crooks to jail.
Matti
February 8th, 2013
10:45 am
If you are a banker and want to save your soul, then (1) repent now, and (2) kill yourself immediately before you are tempted to ruin anyone else’s life.
You’re welcome.
DebbieDoRight - The Only Thing Wrong With Capitalism Is Capitalists..
February 8th, 2013
10:45 am
While on the topic of stuck on stoopid…can
you believe the regime agrees to donate F-16’s & tanks
to that muslim brotherhood guy? choooooo
I’m sure you are very …………….ummm………..familiar with stupid topics…..
but I digress — what would you want more? A car sold to you by a sneaky used car dealer OR a car sold to you by your worst enemy?
this make take you awhile, (to come up with an answer or to see the relevance), so I can wait until after lunch for your answer.
Toodles
Stevie Ray
February 8th, 2013
10:46 am
BRO
“Well, seems to me that if one cries about what the government MADE them do against their will, they wouldn’t want ill gotten gains in their bank account, right? That’s like the Madoffs complaining about what Bernie did while going on a shopping spree in Paris”.
It seem odd to combine the concept of employee “will” and employee job description. I have no problems if they stuck around to take the money. The question is if within their job description they were required to assume loans they knew were flawed and that went against personal moral fibre, maybe another job would be feasible.
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:46 am
Keith
EPIC FAIL
Truly
interpretation: you cannot disprove a single fact i presented. thank you for showing the completely ignorance of the liberal argument. when the facts are completely against you, you respond with an ignorant comment.
Marty Huggins'
February 8th, 2013
10:46 am
In the 4+ years Obama has been president and Holder had been AG, how many prosecutions of banks has Obama, Holder made?
How many convictions of banksters?
JamVet
February 8th, 2013
10:46 am
keith, go up to Forsythe County to see the epicenter of a “booming bush economy”.
Drive through Laurel Springs or by any of those golf course communities and you will see countless houses for sale that went on the market in………………….. 2008 and 2009 and 2010.
What do you suppose happened to all of the Bush voters who lived in them?
Yep. They are now living in some crummy little apartment in Lilburn.
You bankster lovers did a heckuva job…
Morality?
February 8th, 2013
10:47 am
IQ TEST continued : Brain Surgeon, Rocket Scientist >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Congress >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BRAIN DEAD ZOMBIES FOR OBAMA.
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:47 am
keith — “my point exactly.”
Guy, the only point you have is the one atop your head.
“people like you are exactly what made it all go down”
Really? Tell me how. Tell me how I did it and which of my actions caused it.
Please, go right ahead and tell me.
“look in the mirror and you will see the cause of all the problems. and while you are at it, put yourself in timeout for the rest of your life.you have done enough harm to this country”
(laughing, pointing)
I *love* how completely ignorant you are, yet you flit from notion to notion like some sort of flying insect.
If you stub your toe, how many days does it take for your brain to register that?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 8th, 2013
10:48 am
Excellent point, Marty. And many of us libs are sickened by it.
But would we vote for Romney over Obama? Oh, hell no. or McCain? Not as bad as Romney but still close to the bottom of the barrel.
Adam
February 8th, 2013
10:48 am
keith: The thing about the CRA that you think isn’t a lie has already been shown to be false above, by many, including myself. That you choose to skip over the explanations is telling.
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:49 am
Keith — “interpretation: you cannot disprove a single fact i presented.”
First you have to *present* some facts, keith.
Granny Godzilla
February 8th, 2013
10:49 am
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:46 am
Keith
EPIC FAIL
Truly
interpretation: you cannot disprove a single fact i presented. thank you for showing the completely ignorance of the liberal argument. when the facts are completely against you, you respond with an ignorant comment.
.
.
.
.ACTUALLY, what I said was this:
Relook at your source VERY CAREFULLY…have they decided to not respond to all 911 calls
or are they prioritizing gun crImes?
Bless your heart.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 8th, 2013
10:49 am
some crummy little apartment in Lilburn.
Most.Depressing.Thought.Evah
Thomas Heyward Jr
February 8th, 2013
10:49 am
The real question is………………….will TARP be as “wildly” successful as the Murder by “secret” process Drone program.
.
I shudder.
Marty Huggins'
February 8th, 2013
10:49 am
Matti
February 8th, 2013
10:45 am
You’re all class all the time.
Jerome Horwitz
February 8th, 2013
10:50 am
Plenty of blame to go around
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/10/who-caused-the-economic-crisis/
From an independent source. Everyone has a stake in this mess.
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:50 am
you admit you were on the inside when it all went down. WENT DOWN! Got it? so people JUST LIKE YOU and barney frank are the problem. you both owe the country an apology
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 8th, 2013
10:51 am
Who raised a stink when there was talk that the “carried interest” tax break might get removed?
Was that conservatives or liberals crying for the hedge fund managers?
Joe Hussein Mama
February 8th, 2013
10:52 am
M. Huggins — “In the 4+ years Obama has been president and Holder had been AG, how many prosecutions of banks has Obama, Holder made? How many convictions of banksters?”
Not nearly enough.
The problem comes in getting enough evidence to prove criminal culpability, whereas it’s easier to bring civil cases — so that’s what the administration’s been doing. But the problem with *that* is that often, businesses want to *settle* civil cases, so those negotiations take years — and then if the businesses decide the government wants too much in the settlement, they’ll just tell them to go to court anyway.
So this crap ends up taking 10+ years, all too often.
Moderate Line
February 8th, 2013
10:52 am
Here is a Frontline talking about how none of the bankers were prosecuted for fraud.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/untouchables/
комиссар (Occupation)
February 8th, 2013
10:52 am
Thomas Heyward: “Free-market trickle downing benefits a helluva lot more people than Government-controlled trickle upping.”
50% of American wealth owned by a small cadre of about 400 oligarchic families, like some banana republic, vast numbers of Americans headed towards retirement with measly pensions, or non-existent ones, and a Social Security program under attack from governing elites, child poverty rates at third world levels.
You proud of that record? Is that a record of success for this “trickle down” system, which since Reagan at least has been in the driver’s seat ?
keith
February 8th, 2013
10:53 am
Relook at your source VERY CAREFULLY…have they decided to not respond to all 911 calls
or are they prioritizing gun crImes?
Bless your heart.
so 911 askes “is the robber armed with a gun? oh hes not ok you are a low priority. or “is the rapist armed with a gun? hes not, ok we will get there later today. see how stupid you are now?????
Stevie Ray
February 8th, 2013
10:53 am
Butch Cassidy (I)
February 8th, 2013
10:38 am
AIG’s “fees” were in the form of premiums that vascillated around 2% of package value based on ratings agency opinions. The availability of this “safety net” is a prime reason the packaging continued with trash once the more favorable risks were largely already done.
Funny, I have some experience with Hank Greenberg…His opinion of this product was unfavorable and the exposure taken subsequent to his departure are what brought them down…too much risk, not enough capital or reinsurance to cover. Too bad a means to keep him at the helm of AIG in the mist of the insured fees and commission scandal wasn’t figured out…
MaJo
February 8th, 2013
10:54 am
But the government made them do it!