Page 11 of 29 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 289

Thread: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

  1. #101
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,285

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    It seems people cannot accept the fact that CRA loans (even sub prime CRA
    loans) performed better than their counterparts at equal risk levels.
    It seems the left doesn't possess the cognitive abillity to understand the impact of CRA regulations on the lending standards of private and Govt backed institutions.

    No, the banks lowered the standards of Govt backed sub-prime loans. How ridiculous.

  2. #102
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,105

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    No cite ? I post 99% of the time from a droid phone. Its difficult to post links so take the information I laid out in specifics( which is more than you have to offer ) and Google your damn self.

    Yea your'e right, allot of people have no idea what actually transpired and your one of them.
    Your the one trying to make the point; its your duty to back up your statements when challenged. I want to see what you got... I want to know its not from a right-wing political porn site (as I know it is).

    .... I have googled this stuff and know it pretty well (as have personal, professional experience with this stuff, including being involved in the legislative process that led to the CRA in the 70's and strategic consulting for a sub-prime mortgage originator in 2005) Despite having personal experience with this stuff, I have no shortage of cites to back up my positions; you can't produce ONE.

    I suggest that before you make this obnoxious claims that it it "amazes you have few people understand this issue"... that you document your understanding of it. We'll wait for you to make one of those 1% posts that doesn't come from a Droid.

    Again, the CRA had no regulatory control... it had NO TEETH. It was substantially a watered down piece of legislation that had reporting requirements.... the reporting could be used against bank, but in no case inhibited any major bank from doing what this wanted. The Wells Fargo issue you cited as a not a suit under the CRA, it was a suit under fair lending and civil rights laws. It did not involve mortgages going to specific districts under the affirmative-action type system of CRA; the steering of loans from otherwise credit worthy individuals into sub-prime loans (at considerably higher costs) just because of race.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/bu...rges.html?_r=0
    Last edited by upsideguy; 02-09-13 at 03:07 PM.

  3. #103
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    People are claiming that the CRA forces banks to give loans to unqualified borrowers.
    No, the CRA went largely unnoticed until the early 90's when Barack Obama, acting for ACORN, sued Citibank for discriminating against minorities. Of course at the time even Black owned banks were discriminating against these people because they were risks.
    I would like to see the language in the CRA legislation, or associated regulations, that require banks to give loans to people who are not qualified. I don't believe that such language exists because it is never quoted by the CRA opponents. I suspect that the opposition to the CRA is from racists and/or people who oppose government regulation against discrimination.
    You are missing the point.

    If the argument is that regulators are misinterpreting the law or going beyond the law to force banks to give loans to the unqualified, then it is an issue with the interpretation or the enforcement, not the legislation itself. I don't believe that problem is widespread, but if anyone has statistics that doesn't come from a right wing organization that proves regulators frequently abused the law to force banks to provide loans to the unqualified I will reconsider.
    You can look up Barrack Obama sues Citibank in Chicago which forced banks to lend money to credit risks. It's all a matter of record and if you genuinely want to see something, as you say, just do some research. No one can spoon feed you.

  4. #104
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,285

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by upsideguy View Post
    Your the one trying to make the point; its your duty to back up your statements
    when challenged. I want to see what you got... I want to know its not from a right-wing political porn site (as I know it is).

    .... I have googled this stuff and know it pretty well (as have personal, professional experience with this stuff, including being involved in the legislative process that led to the CRA in the 70's and strategic consulting for a sub-prime mortgage originator in 2005) Despite having personal experience with this stuff, I have no shortage of cites to back up my positions; you can't produce ONE.

    I suggest that before you make this obnoxious claims that it it "amazes you have few people understand this issue"... that you document your understanding of it. We'll wait for you to make one of those 1% posts that doesn't come from a Droid.
    You have experience but continue to push the false narrative that CRA and HUD given regulatory control over Govt and Private institutions in the early 90s had no or little appreciable impact ?

    That the securitizing of these sub-prime loans wasn't given the green light under Clinton ?

    That there was no quota system put in place by Barney Frank and is ilk in the early 90 s ?

    That the GSEs didn't buy, and then bundle good paper with bad paper fro the express purpose of getting these toxic securities out into the market ?

    But yea " the banks did it "

    Thats not experience, thats ignorance.

  5. #105
    Guru

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,483

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    LOL !!! So much for your week attempt at trying to remain objective. You went off the deep end and took the bait. The lenders had no more abillity or power to lower underwriting standards of Govt backed sub-prime mortgages than donald duck.
    Caught in your own web of lies. Underwriting of subprime mortgages increased BECAUSE of the boom in subprime mortgage lending and pressure from shareholders. If there was no market for it then they wouldn't have done it.

  6. #106
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,812

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    No, the CRA went largely unnoticed until the early 90's when Barack Obama, acting for ACORN, sued Citibank for discriminating against minorities. Of course at the time even Black owned banks were discriminating against these people because they were risks.


    You are missing the point.



    You can look up Barrack Obama sues Citibank in Chicago which forced banks to lend money to credit risks. It's all a matter of record and if you genuinely want to see something, as you say, just do some research. No one can spoon feed you.

    No matter the truth, there are far too many Americans who allow their unreasoning hatred of the President to twist and alter reality

    snopes.com: Obama Required Banks to Lend Money to Poor People

    Here's the case and findings - Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank | Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  7. #107
    Professor
    finebead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,558

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    It seems the left doesn't possess the cognitive abillity to understand the impact of CRA regulations on the lending standards of private and Govt backed institutions.

    No, the banks lowered the standards of Govt backed sub-prime loans. How ridiculous.
    It doesn't seem the right understands it was their president Bush who revved up the housing bubble by wanting to put minorities in homes, circa 2002:

    June 17, 2002
    President Bush Calls for Expanding Opportunities to Home Ownership
    Atlanta, Georgia

    But my attitude is, if somebody can't find work and they want to work, we've got to continue to work on expanding the job base. And part of economic security is owning your own home. (Applause.) Part of being a secure America is to encourage homeownership. So somebody can say, this is my home, welcome to my home.

    Now, we've got a problem here in America that we have to address. Too many American families, too many minorities do not own a home. There is a home ownership gap in America. The difference between Anglo America and African American and Hispanic home ownership is too big. (Applause.) And we've got to focus the attention on this nation to address this.

    And it starts with setting a goal. And so by the year 2010, we must increase minority home owners by at least 5.5 million. In order to close the homeownership gap, we've got to set a big goal for America, and focus our attention and resources on that goal. (Applause.)

    <snip>


    And what we've got to do is to figure out how to make sure these stories are repeated over and over and over again in America. Three-quarters of white America owns their homes. Less than 50 percent of African Americans are part of the homeownership in America. And less than 50 percent of the Hispanics who live here in this country own their home. And that has got to change for the good of the country. It just does. (Applause.)

    And so here are some of the ways to address the issue. First, the single greatest barrier to first time homeownership is a high downpayment. It is really hard for many, many, low income families to make the high downpayment. And so that's why I propose and urge Congress to fully fund the American Dream Downpayment Fund. This will use money, taxpayers' money to help a qualified, low income buyer make a downpayment. And that's important.

    One of the barriers to homeownership is the inability to make a downpayment. And if one of the goals is to increase homeownership, it makes sense to help people pay that downpayment. We believe that the amount of money in our budget, fully approved by Congress, will help 40,000 families every year realize the dream of owning a home. (Applause.) Part of the success of Park Place is that the city of Atlanta already does this. And we want to make the plan more robust. We want to make it more full all across America.

    Secondly, there is a lack of affordable housing in certain neighborhoods. Too many neighborhoods, especially in inner city America, lack affordable housing units. How can you promote homeownership if people can't afford a home?

    And so what I've done is propose what we call a Single Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit, to encourage the development of affordable housing in neighborhoods where housing is scarce. (Applause.) Over five years, the initiative amounts to $2.4 billion in tax credits. And that will help. It will help a lot to build homes where people can -- where when fully implemented, people will be able to say, I own my home.

    A third major barrier is the complexity and difficulty of the home buying process. There's a lot of fine print on these forms. And it bothers people, it makes them nervous. And so therefore, what Mel has agreed to do, and Alphonso Jackson has agreed to do is to streamline the process, make the rules simpler, so everybody understands what they are -- makes the closing much less complicated.

    We certainly don't want there to be a fine print preventing people from owning their home. We can change the print, and we've got to. We've got to be wise about how we deal with the closing documents and all the regulations, but also wise about how we help people understand what it means to own their home and the obligations and the opportunities.

    And so, therefore, education is a critical component of increasing ownership throughout America. Financial education, housing counseling, how to help people understand that there are unscrupulous lenders. And so one of the things we're going to do is we're going to promote education, the education of owning a home, the education of buying a home throughout our society. And we want to fully implement the Section 8 housing program, homeownership program. The program will provide vouchers that first-time home buyers can use to help pay their mortgage or apply to their downpayment.

    <snip>

    And so these are important initiatives that we can do at the federal government. And the federal government, obviously, has to play an important role, and we will. We will. I mean, when I lay out a goal, I mean it. But we also have got to bring others into the process, most particularly the real estate industry. After all, the real estate industry benefits when people are encouraged to buy homes. It's in their self interest that we encourage people to buy homes. (Applause.)

    And so one of the things that I'm going to talk about a little bit today is how to create a sustained commitment by the private sector that will have a powerful impact. First of all, we want to make sure that we help work to expand capital available to buyers, and as I mentioned, overcome the barriers that I've delineated, as well as provide the education component. In other words, this is not just a federal responsibility.

    That's why I've challenged the industry leaders all across the country to get after it for this goal, to stay focused, to make sure that we achieve a more secure America, by achieving the goal of 5.5 million new minority home owners. I call it America's home ownership challenge.

    And let me talk about some of the progress which we have made to date, as an example for others to follow. First of all, government sponsored corporations that help create our mortgage system -- I introduced two of the leaders here today -- they call those people Fannie May and Freddie Mac, as well as the federal home loan banks, will increase their commitment to minority markets by more than $440 billion. (Applause.) I want to thank Leland and Franklin for that commitment. It's a commitment that conforms to their charters, as well, and also conforms to their hearts.

    This means they will purchase more loans made by banks after Americans, Hispanics and other minorities, which will encourage homeownership. Freddie Mac will launch 25 initiatives to eliminate homeownership barriers. Under one of these, consumers with poor credit will be able to get a mortgage with an interest rate that automatically goes down after a period of consistent payments. (Applause.)

    Fannie Mae will establish 100 partnerships with faith-based organizations that will provide home buyer education and help increase homeownership for their congregations. I love the partnership.
    President Calls for Expanding Opportunities to Home Ownership

    It was on the repubs. They controlled congress from 1995 until the wrecked the country in 2007 and the people threw the irresponsible louts out.
    Last edited by finebead; 02-09-13 at 06:20 PM.

  8. #108
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    No dude, CRA "loans" were NOT the issue. AGAIN, CRA having regulatory control over banks to force the lowering of underwriting standards WAS the issue..
    Show me these regulations which forced banks to lower their standards.

    You claimed that redlining was never a legitimate concern, which sounds racist to any non-racist who knows some history.

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by finebead View Post
    ....If you want to make the case that CRA played a major role in the crisis, first explain HOW it MADE the banks MAKE loans to people who did not deserve them. I know the CRA bill, and I don't believe it.
    The CRA critics just keep dodging this question and bring up assorted other financial issues to distract from the question. Clearly the CRA hate is a faith-based belief, not one based on fact. But why do they want to believe this?

  10. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: U.S. sues S&P over subprime ratings

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    LOL !!! So much for your week attempt at trying to remain objective.

    You went off the deep end and took the bait.

    The lenders had no more abillity or power to lower underwriting standards of Govt backed sub-prime mortgages than donald duck.

    Your'e so partisan you have to marginalize your argument and continue to push the manufactured narrative of the left.


    Those "eeebil banks". How simplistic could you be ?

    Your in the "financial industry" ? Without the fundamental abillity to remain objective ? Do you work for the Govt ?
    Until you can show us the actual laws/regulations that forced banks to lower lending standards you have no credibility.

Page 11 of 29 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... 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
  •