Page 128 of 128 FirstFirst ... 2878118126127128
Results 1,271 to 1,274 of 1274

Thread: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

  1. #1271
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,584

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by mmi View Post
    I suppose I'm a frustrated politician. I tried, but I guess the community just wasn't able to discern my wisdom.

    How's business at Oohrnberger's Cheeburgers anyway? Mmm. Haven't had lunch yet; I could go for one right now. Do you guys deliver in my area? The special all the way, with grilled onions and a cold pop?
    What the heck is a "pop"?

    You must be one of them danged yankees. Down here, we call them "dranks".
    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    ...I'm not interested in debating someone who is trolling for an argument....
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I see a big problem with the idea that whatever the majority wants is OK.

  2. #1272
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,584

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by mmi View Post
    Just because I called you a liar, does that mean I threw a temper tantrum? I was quite calm when I called you a liar.



    From #1: "The CRA, which was amended in the 1990s and this decade, requires banks—which had a long, distinguished history of not making loans to minorities—to make more efforts to do so."

    From #2: "CRA performance evaluations have become more quantitative since 1995, when regulatory changes were enacted that stress actual performance rather than documented efforts to serve a community's credit needs."

    I'll give ya some more from that one, since you apparently didn't read it:

    However, the CRA does not stipulate minimum targets or even goals for the volume of loans, services, or investments banking institutions must provide. While it is fair to say that the primary focus of CRA evaluations is the number and dollar amount of loans to lower-income borrowers or areas, the agencies instruct examiners to judge banks' performance in light of 1) each institution's capacity to extend credit to lower-income groups and 2) the local economic and market conditions that might affect the income and geographic distribution of lending.

    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. This fact weakens the potential link between the CRA and the current mortgage crisis.

    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.

    From #3: "Since the mid 1990's, federal bank examiners have relied upon a series of numerical measures to help evaluate compliance with the CRA. These measures include the share of loans originated (or purchased from other lenders) in LMI census tracts or made to LMI borrowers."

    #4 is a review of #3 by a Cato Institute Senior Fellow, so I assume you won't include him as a member of the communist conspiracy to overthrow the government.

    #5 is a very short piece, and it's loaded with comments referring to the 1995 revisions. #6 is short as well — I didn't notice anything in that one.

    So in other words, five of the six links I put up do refer to what you say they "don't mention." I guess that means you are a liar. To be fair, the lie was the suggestion that you had read any of that material to begin with. And you can't refute one little bit of it. Not because some it can't be contested, I'm sure it can. Yer problem is that you have no clue what yer talking about.
    I dunno about all of that fancy legal stuff, but what I do know is that the worst offenders in the housing bubble and burst were companies that weren't actually classified as banks, thus they weren't parties to the CRA.

    Also, I am under the impression that most loans made under the CRA were not subprime loans, but I may be mistaken about that.

    Blaming the CRA for the subprime housing bubble is like blaming the earthquake we had a few months ago on global warming. It seems logical, until we realize that one is a geologic event, the other is a weather event, and thus there is little relationship.
    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    ...I'm not interested in debating someone who is trolling for an argument....
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I see a big problem with the idea that whatever the majority wants is OK.

  3. #1273
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,584

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Its funny that we dismiss CBO estimates when they don't fit into our political agenda, but when they do, the CBO is the gold standard of predictions.

    In another thread someone was arguing against a higher min wage, citing that the CBO projects that a higher min wage would result in the loss of a half million jobs. the same poster who was using CBO projections to argue his case in one thread, dismissed the CBO projections that Obamacare was going to reduce the deficit in another thread.

    I guess we all pick and chose our sources, not for the value of the sources, but based upon if that source happens to support their aguement or not. We all all hipocrits.
    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    ...I'm not interested in debating someone who is trolling for an argument....
    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    I see a big problem with the idea that whatever the majority wants is OK.

  4. #1274
    Sage


    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,953
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: Economy adds 192,000 jobs; unemployment rate holds steady at 6.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by imagep View Post
    Its funny that we dismiss CBO estimates when they don't fit into our political agenda, but when they do, the CBO is the gold standard of predictions.

    In another thread someone was arguing against a higher min wage, citing that the CBO projects that a higher min wage would result in the loss of a half million jobs. the same poster who was using CBO projections to argue his case in one thread, dismissed the CBO projections that Obamacare was going to reduce the deficit in another thread.

    I guess we all pick and chose our sources, not for the value of the sources, but based upon if that source happens to support their aguement or not. We all all hipocrits.
    Your observation is really not a surprise.

    The CBO estimates whatever the congress critter states as their assumptions. You expect a congress critter's assumptions fed to the CBO to estimate to not be politically biased? Not to their political advantage? Not to their political agenda?

    The CBO is an apolitical calculating machine. You put garbage in, you'll get garbage out. Most of what the congress critters put into the CBO for estimation is garbage in one way or another, so you get the same type of political garbage back out from the CBO.

    Yes, the CBO is apolitical. It calculates everyone's garbage on request with equal accuracy. It's not the CBO's fault the congress keeps feeding them garbage assumptions. Right?
    the Fix-is-in Bureau of Investigation

Posting Permissions

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