Page 15 of 21 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 206

Thread: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

  1. #141
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by mtlhdtodd View Post
    Nope but you apparently missed the part about the park rules that allow access by all and the flea baggers with their camp and it's lack of cleanliness broke said rules which the responsibility goes back on the OWS crowd.
    And they cleaned it up, which I think is the proper solution. They should be allowed to stay and should be aware enough to clean up after themselves. There's not going to be zero impact, but limiting the impact is a grown up and responsible attitude to have. I just think something like a dirty park is not worth oppression protest, assembly, and dissent rights.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  2. #142
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    No, I am saying that the CRA was a generally broad act that was interpreted in such a way as to force the initial bad loans, this led to the derivatives that would eventually cause the bubble, I am not excusing the mortgage lenders but am agreeing with those who say the government is complicit.
    This is probably the most informative article in regards to the discussion:


    Did the CRA cause the mortgage market meltdown?

    As the current financial crisis has unfolded, an argument that the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) is at its root has gained a foothold. This argument draws on the fact that the CRA encourages commercial banks and savings institutions (collectively known as banking institutions) to help meet the credit needs of lower-income borrowers and borrowers in lower-income neighborhoods.1/ Critics of the CRA contend that the law pushed banking institutions to undertake high-risk mortgage lending.

    This article discusses key features of the CRA and presents results from our analysis of several data sources regarding the volume and performance of CRA-related mortgage lending. On balance, the evidence runs counter to the contention that the CRA lies at the root of the current mortgage crisis.

    Before we turn to our analysis of CRA lending data, we have two important points to note regarding the CRA and its possible connection to the current mortgage crisis.

    The first point is a matter of timing. The current crisis is rooted in the poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2005 and 2007. If the CRA did indeed spur the recent expansion of the subprime mortgage market and subsequent turmoil, it would be reasonable to assume that some change in the enforcement regime in 2004 or 2005 triggered a relaxation of underwriting standards by CRA-covered lenders for loans originated in the past few years. However, the CRA rules and enforcement process have not changed substantively since 1995.2/ This fact weakens the potential link between the CRA and the current mortgage crisis.

    Our second point is a matter of the originating entity. When considering the potential role of the CRA in the current mortgage crisis, it is important to account for the originating party. In particular, independent nonbank lenders, such as mortgage and finance companies and credit unions, originate a substantial share of subprime mortgages, but they are not subject to CRA regulation and, hence, are not directly influenced by CRA obligations. (We explore subprime mortgage originations in further detail below.)

    The CRA may directly affect nonbank subsidiaries or affiliates of banking institutions. Banking institutions can elect to have their subsidiary or affiliate lending activity counted in CRA performance evaluations. If the banking institution elects to include affiliate activity, it cannot be done selectively. For example, the institution cannot "cherry pick" loans that would be favorably considered under the law while ignoring loans to middle- or higher-income borrowers.

    In the next section, we discuss the data analysis we undertook to assess the merits of the claims that the CRA was a principal cause of the current mortgage market difficulties. The analysis focuses on two basic questions. First, what share of subprime mortgage originations is related to the CRA? Second, how have CRA-related subprime loans performed relative to other loans? We believe the answers to these two questions will shed light on the role of the CRA in the subprime crisis.
    CRA-related lending volume and distribution

    In analyzing the available data, we consider two distinct metrics of lending activity: loan origination activity and loan performance. With respect to the first question posed above concerning loan originations, we determine which types of lending institutions made higher-priced loans, to whom those loans were made, and in what types of neighborhoods the loans were extended.3/ This analysis therefore depicts the fraction of subprime mortgage lending that could be related to the CRA.

    Using loan origination data obtained pursuant to the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), we find that in 2005 and 2006, independent nonbank institutions—institutions not covered by the CRA—accounted for about half of all subprime originations. (See Table 1.) Also, about 60 percent of higher-priced loan originations went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods, populations not targeted by the CRA. (See Table 2.) In addition, independent nonbank institutions originated nearly half of the higher-priced loans extended to lower-income borrowers or borrowers in lower-income areas (share derived from Table 2).

    In total, of all the higher-priced loans, only 6 percent were extended by CRA-regulated lenders (and their affiliates) to either lower-income borrowers or neighborhoods in the lenders' CRA assessment areas, which are the local geographies that are the primary focus for CRA evaluation purposes. The small share of subprime lending in 2005 and 2006 that can be linked to the CRA suggests it is very unlikely the CRA could have played a substantial role in the subprime crisis.

    To the extent that banking institutions chose not to include their affiliates' lending in their CRA examinations, the 6 percent share overstates the volume of higher-priced, lower-income lending that CRA examiners would have counted.4/ It is possible, however, the examiners might have considered at least some of the lower-income lending outside of CRA assessment areas if institutions asked that it be considered in their CRA performance evaluations. No data are available to assess this possibility; however, the majority of the higher-priced loans made outside of assessment areas were to middle- or higher-income borrowers. In our view, this suggests it is unlikely that the CRA was a motivating factor for such higher-priced lending. Rather, it is likely that higher-priced lending was primarily motivated by its apparent profitability.

    It is also possible that the remaining share of higher-priced, lower-income lending may be indirectly attributable to the CRA due to the incentives under the CRA investment test. Specifically, examiners may have given banks "CRA credit" for their purchases of lower-income loans or mortgage-backed securities containing loans to lower-income populations, which could subsequently affect the supply of mortgage credit.

    Although we lack definitive information on banks' CRA-induced secondary market activity, the HMDA data provide information on the types of institutions to which mortgages are sold. The data suggest that the link between independent mortgage companies and banks through direct secondary market transactions is weak, especially for lower-income loans. (See Table 3.) In 2006, only about 9 percent of independent mortgage company loan sales were to banking institutions. (Figure not shown in table.) And among these transactions, only 15 percent involved higher-priced loans to lower-income borrowers or neighborhoods. In other words, less than 2 percent of the mortgage originations sold by independent mortgage companies in 2006 were higher-priced, CRA-credit-eligible, and purchased by CRA-covered banking institutions.......................

    Two basic points emerge from our analysis of the available data. First, only a small portion of subprime mortgage originations is related to the CRA. Second, CRA-related loans appear to perform comparably to other types of subprime loans. Taken together, the available evidence seems to run counter to the contention that the CRA contributed in any substantive way to the current mortgage crisis.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  3. #143
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Well that is my solution, one to return to free market. I do think that we have lax regulations where we need strong ones, and strong regulations where we need lax ones. There will always be some amount of government necessary to maintain free market, but it has to be limited. Essentially minimized to allow the market to efficiently perform. The corporate capitalist model, however, is one geared more towards oligarchy and not republic.

    I think that in the eyes of the law and what's written the protesters can bee seen as being in the wrong. But I think the law itself is too much and tramples on the spirit of the 1st amendment. Protest and dissent must be allowed maximally. There is no way around that. We MUST have it.
    I see where you are coming from. My argument about the way things are is from the legal side not the ethical side not necessarily where my opinion is on the issue. I think the protesters started to clean up to stay in the park, which is a no-harm, no-foul argument and is legitimate. Still, the professional crews know the exact things that need to be done whereas the protesters do not, there may be things that need to be washed or supported due to various issues, etc. and they must be allowed to perform their duty.

    As far as the government corporate stance you held here, I agree fully.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  4. #144
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    This is probably the most informative article in regards to the discussion:


    Did the CRA cause the mortgage market meltdown?
    They are trying to use the two years of the bubble burst as primary sample data, that is problematic as the burst didn't cause the problem but was a final result. The article I provided dates back all the way to the Carter years and especially focuses on the '90s where the bubble was allowed to form.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  5. #145
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,459
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    At least as we have seen in the last two days, New York is not yet ready to create that scene. However, there have been flare-ups in both NY and Denver in the last 24 hours where arrests have been made.

    As you know, there are points at which law-breaking will be dealt with more harshly, to include arrests. You can bet your bippy that you will see more and more of the OWS'ers finding out where those points are.
    And all of those points will stem from violation of laws that place reasonable limits on free speech, yes.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  6. #146
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I see where you are coming from. My argument about the way things are is from the legal side not the ethical side not necessarily where my opinion is on the issue. I think the protesters started to clean up to stay in the park, which is a no-harm, no-foul argument and is legitimate. Still, the professional crews know the exact things that need to be done whereas the protesters do not, there may be things that need to be washed or supported due to various issues, etc. and they must be allowed to perform their duty.

    As far as the government corporate stance you held here, I agree fully.
    I was happy to see them actually clean up. It was a good move, and what I would consider to be proper compromise. The day we have so many rules as to make it functionally impossible to protest properly is the day we're left with no other choice than to revolt. Which will cause significantly larger amounts of property damage.

    I don't want to be at the beck and call of the government. I believe that it necessarily must be the opposite in order to maintain a free state.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #147
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I was happy to see them actually clean up. It was a good move, and what I would consider to be proper compromise. The day we have so many rules as to make it functionally impossible to protest properly is the day we're left with no other choice than to revolt. Which will cause significantly larger amounts of property damage.

    I don't want to be at the beck and call of the government. I believe that it necessarily must be the opposite in order to maintain a free state.
    Fair enough, we are already under "Free Speech Zones" during conventions and a great many places restrict speech with overbearing obsenity laws and other restrictions that are suspect. So yes I do agree that the constitutional protections must be reinforced, I just don't think in this case the location is worth the fight because of the convoluted issue of who is maintaining and where ownership lies.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  8. #148
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    This is probably the most informative article in regards to the discussion:


    Did the CRA cause the mortgage market meltdown?
    That article is near to complete BS. It is analyzing the years 2005-2006. The bubble was near to full inflation at that point. It had its own impetus ..... housing inflation, that being prices skyrocketing.

    The Housing Bubble, that being the beginnings of when inflationary price increases in housing began to outstrip the normal inflation rate, began in 1997, and then gained momentum through 2000, at which time the slope of its upward trajectory was set. You need to look at what happened in those years to see what got it all started, and how this varied from past housing influences.

    Two main and unique factors:

    1) The influx of sub-prime buyers
    - this was a result of pressure by government, to include lawsuits filed by the DoJ, to have lenders make sub-prime loans which they had prior refused to make. The DoJ used the CRA and alleged discriminatory lending patterns to compel the settlements that included the agreements to make more risky loans.

    2) The growth of Fannie and Freddie, essentially underwriting and enabling these riskier loans. That was the part of the deal Cuomo didn't tell everyone about. It made it easy for the banks to agree to "settle".

    The Bubble was born at that moment. Research it libs. I am tired of posting all the links over and over.

  9. #149
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Fair enough, we are already under "Free Speech Zones" during conventions and a great many places restrict speech with overbearing obsenity laws and other restrictions that are suspect.
    I despise those! I say that America is a free speech zone. Why pen us up like animals blocks away from the convention? It's only to remove them from the public eye and so that the politicians do not have to deal with protesters and dissenters. But those are the VERY people they should have to deal with.

    I think "free speech zones" are criminal.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    So yes I do agree that the constitutional protections must be reinforced, I just don't think in this case the location is worth the fight because of the convoluted issue of who is maintaining and where ownership lies.
    I believe our rights and liberties are ALWAYS worth the fight.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  10. #150
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: Occupy Wall Street protesters refuse to leave for park cleaning

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    And all of those points will stem from violation of laws that place reasonable limits on free speech, yes.
    Actually, I suspect more along the lines of tresspassing, obstruction of traffic, vandalism, destruction of property, and actual assault ..... etc.

    I do not see those as lines drawn against excesses in freedom of speech. To put it as you did is too noble IMMHO.

Page 15 of 21 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •