Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 43

Thread: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

  1. #31
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,313

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    Holy **** that falsehood has taken hold. NO, no no no no. No one forced US banks in selling sub-prime mortgages that not even Fannie and Freddy would touch.. which in 2006 was a huge majority of all mortgages.



    Again NO. False, Fox News bull****. The only thing the government "mandated" was allowing banks to sell mortgages aka securitize them to Fannie and Freddie Mac and these loans had lower requirements than what the normal market would give out.

    However the mortgages that caused the crisis were so ****ty and outside any regulation, that they could not even be securitize through Fannie and Freddie. You had freaking pizza delivery people selling mortgages to out of work people for **** sake.. because banks were allowed to do so as there was no rules against it.

    Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis | Economics | McClatchy DC





    Now the irony is, that without Fannie and Freddie... most American home owners would NEVER QUALIFY for a freaking mortgage!



    What "socialist policies" and corruption? You right wingers keep throwing that crap out and never back it up with actual facts.

    Its " taken hold " because it's true. Its taken hold because it can be easily proven.

    Whats total and complete BS are the Democrat attempts to cover their asses after the Subprime mortgage crisis. Its the same nonsense you just brought up and it can be easily debunked.

    In 1993 the Riegle Neal interstate Banking Act was signed by Clinton.

    The law tied a banks CRA score directly to their ability to expand and grow by way of merger across State lines.

    Then in 1995, the Clinton administration passed a long list of executive orders via his National Homeowner-ship strategy.

    Among other things the National Homeowner-ship strategy published banks CRA Scores.

    Community organizations and Federal agencies took advantage of this by targeting ( extorting ) banks who had low CRA scores.

    For example, Janet Reno bragged in 1998 that JUST the Justice department had already SUCCESSFULLY targeted ( sued ) 13 different lenders and she vowed to target more.

    In 1999 HUD settled with AcuBank for 2.1 Billion dollars

    Banks were FORCED. Clinton's Treasury Secretary bragged in a E-mail sent to Clinton in 1998 that Clintons new CRA changes had led to a 1 Trillion dollar increase in CRA commitments.

    Clinton's National Homeowner-ship strategy also lowered the GSEs Capital requirements on loans purchased down to 3 percent and it increased their HUD " affordable lending " quota to 42 percent.

    It also gave the GSEs " affordable lending " credit for their purchase of Subprime securities.

    So as usual you have no idea what your'e talking about.

    And your stupid little link there has been debunked. The vast majority of those " private sector " subprime loans were being made by a Company called Country Wide.

    The GSEs were Country Wides primary consumer. Fannie Mae was their best customer.

  2. #32
    Sage
    PeteEU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denmark
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,090

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Its " taken hold " because it's true. Its taken hold because it can be easily proven.
    LOL no it is not.. only in right wing fantasy land.

    Whats total and complete BS are the Democrat attempts to cover their asses after the Subprime mortgage crisis. Its the same nonsense you just brought up and it can be easily debunked.

    In 1993 the Riegle Neal interstate Banking Act was signed by Clinton.

    The law tied a banks CRA score directly to their ability to expand and grow by way of merger across State lines.

    Then in 1995, the Clinton administration passed a long list of executive orders via his National Homeowner-ship strategy.

    Among other things the National Homeowner-ship strategy published banks CRA Scores.

    Community organizations and Federal agencies took advantage of this by targeting ( extorting ) banks who had low CRA scores.

    For example, Janet Reno bragged in 1998 that JUST the Justice department had already SUCCESSFULLY targeted ( sued ) 13 different lenders and she vowed to target more.

    In 1999 HUD settled with AcuBank for 2.1 Billion dollars

    Banks were FORCED. Clinton's Treasury Secretary bragged in a E-mail sent to Clinton in 1998 that Clintons new CRA changes had led to a 1 Trillion dollar increase in CRA commitments.

    Clinton's National Homeowner-ship strategy also lowered the GSEs Capital requirements on loans purchased down to 3 percent and it increased their HUD " affordable lending " quota to 42 percent.

    It also gave the GSEs " affordable lending " credit for their purchase of Subprime securities.

    So as usual you have no idea what your'e talking about.
    Actually you are the one who has no idea what you are talking about. The above loans had a 2-3% default rate when the crisis was full blown with 30%+ default rate among the real problem... the unregulated private sector.

    And your stupid little link there has been debunked. The vast majority of those " private sector " subprime loans were being made by a Company called Country Wide.

    The GSEs were Country Wides primary consumer. Fannie Mae was their best customer.
    Yes and guess what.. Fannie and Freddie did not securitize the ****ing loans that actually were the root cause of the problem.. because they were not allowed too. And saying that Fannie/Freddie were "customers" is a bit strange. Countrywide was lending money and if those loans met the requirements set out by Fannie and Freddie, then these 2 institutions would buy aka securitize the loans. Since Countrywide was by far the largest lender in the US, the of course a lot of the legal loans went to Fannie/Freddie, since that is how the system is built... to push money into the banks so they can lend more, and doing it by Fannie and Freddie securitizing the loans they have. That is their whole freaking job.

    Stop spreading freaking lies about what happen just because you hate Fannie and Freddie. It is a well established fact that the unregulated sub-prime mortgage created after the removal of Glass-Segall in 1996, was the root cause of the whole mess. It is also a fact that by the time the collapse happened, Fannie and Freddie were only holding aka securitizing under 50% of all loans consider "sub-prime". The rest... private sector and too crappy to be securitized by Fannie and Freddie. It is also a fact, that if it was not for Fannie and Freddie, then most Americans would be renters instead of owners..

    Your view is a lie, and has been invented by far right wing think tanks and certain politicians.. it is simply not true.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/24/op...-lie.html?_r=0

    Thus has Peter Wallison, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and a former member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, almost single-handedly created the myth that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac caused the financial crisis. His partner in crime is another A.E.I. scholar, Edward Pinto, who a very long time ago was Fannie’s chief credit officer. Pinto claims that as of June 2008, 27 million “risky” mortgages had been issued — “and a lion’s share was on Fannie and Freddie’s books,” as Wallison wrote recently. Never mind that his definition of “risky” is so all-encompassing that it includes mortgages with extremely low default rates as well as those with default rates nearing 30 percent. These latter mortgages were the ones created by the unholy alliance between subprime lenders and Wall Street. Pinto’s numbers are the Big Lie’s primary data point.
    Private Wall Street Companies Caused The Financial Crisis — Not Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Or The Community Reinvestment Act | Political Correction

    Financial Crisis Narrative Flunks Reality Check: Jonathan Weil - Bloomberg View

    and many many other sites out there, that say all the same ... your view is flawed and a lie.
    PeteEU

  3. #33
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,313

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by PeteEU View Post
    LOL no it is not.. only in right wing fantasy land.



    Actually you are the one who has no idea what you are talking about. The above loans had a 2-3% default rate when the crisis was full blown with 30%+ default rate among the real problem... the unregulated private sector.



    Yes and guess what.. Fannie and Freddie did not securitize the ****ing loans that actually were the root cause of the problem.. because they were not allowed too. And saying that Fannie/Freddie were "customers" is a bit strange. Countrywide was lending money and if those loans met the requirements set out by Fannie and Freddie, then these 2 institutions would buy aka securitize the loans. Since Countrywide was by far the largest lender in the US, the of course a lot of the legal loans went to Fannie/Freddie, since that is how the system is built... to push money into the banks so they can lend more, and doing it by Fannie and Freddie securitizing the loans they have. That is their whole freaking job.

    Stop spreading freaking lies about what happen just because you hate Fannie and Freddie. It is a well established fact that the unregulated sub-prime mortgage created after the removal of Glass-Segall in 1996, was the root cause of the whole mess. It is also a fact that by the time the collapse happened, Fannie and Freddie were only holding aka securitizing under 50% of all loans consider "sub-prime". The rest... private sector and too crappy to be securitized by Fannie and Freddie. It is also a fact, that if it was not for Fannie and Freddie, then most Americans would be renters instead of owners..

    Your view is a lie, and has been invented by far right wing think tanks and certain politicians.. it is simply not true.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/24/op...-lie.html?_r=0



    Private Wall Street Companies Caused The Financial Crisis — Not Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Or The Community Reinvestment Act | Political Correction

    Financial Crisis Narrative Flunks Reality Check: Jonathan Weil - Bloomberg View

    and many many other sites out there, that say all the same ... your view is flawed and a lie.


    LOL !!

    Grahm- Leach- Bliley was passed in 1999 space cadet, NOT 1996.

    Who's lying now ?

    Fannie and Freddie didn't securitize Subprime loans ? They weren't " allowed too " ?

    In 1998, A YEARS BEFORE Grahm -Leach - Bliley, Freddie Mac guaranteed 380 Million dollars worth of securities backed by Subprime loans.

    Lets see what else the GSEs did that they weren't " allowed to " do.

    In 2006 the GSEs for the very first time in their history started submitting their quarterly financial statements to the SEC.

    They were exempt prior to 2006 but were compelled by the MASSIVE amount of fraud committed by their Clinton appointed CEO Franklin Raines.

    According to the 2011 SEC investigation, the GSEs failed to report 90 percent of their worthless debt in their SEC quarterly filings.

    Huh, the SEC isn't a " Right Wing " think tank. So why would they say such a thing ? Because the GSEs were profoundly corrupt.

    No amount of links to left wing hack opinion pieces from YOU is going to change that.

    Lets try to figure out just how much worthless trash Securities they purchased. ( of-course this doesn't address the amount of trash Securities they created on their own and then distributed out to Capital markets all of the world )

    Well, thanks to dip **** Holders law suites a good portion of their worthless debt has been made public.

    250 Billion dollars worth of Subprime securities was made public in one law suite alone.

    The FED has agreed to buy 1.25 Trillion dollars worth of worthless MBS s through their quantitative easing initiative.

    So 1.5 Trillion ? Actually its closer to 2 Trillion if you add in the other law suites.

    They were supposedly not ALLOWED to purchase subprime securities .....hmmmm.

  4. #34
    cynical class clown
    Luftwaffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    CONNECTICUT
    Last Seen
    11-18-17 @ 10:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,499

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    If we're in the midst of such a great economic recovery then why are interest rates still down next to nothing ?
    Because that was the Fed's plan... Or were you just not listening the whole time?
    -----MOS 19D = cavalry scout = best damn MOS there is

  5. #35
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,313

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by Luftwaffe View Post
    Because that was the Fed's plan... Or were you just not listening the whole time?

    The markets sets interest rates genius, not the FED.

    The Fed can influence rates to a degree by setting the overnight rate and manipulating the money supply, but ultimately its the markets that have the final say.

  6. #36
    cynical class clown
    Luftwaffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    CONNECTICUT
    Last Seen
    11-18-17 @ 10:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,499

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    The markets sets interest rates genius, not the FED.

    The Fed can influence rates to a degree by setting the overnight rate and manipulating the money supply, but ultimately its the markets that have the final say.
    The Fed has INCREDIBLE influence, to the point where I would think it safe to say that they pretty much control interest rates.

    They're showcasing the level of control they have right now, they want the rates low, the rates become low. If the Fed wants the rates to stay low, they stay low. That is what we are seeing right now.

    Genius
    -----MOS 19D = cavalry scout = best damn MOS there is

  7. #37
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,313

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by Luftwaffe View Post
    The Fed has INCREDIBLE influence, to the point where I would think it safe to say that they pretty much control interest rates.

    They're showcasing the level of control they have right now, they want the rates low, the rates become low. If the Fed wants the rates to stay low, they stay low. That is what we are seeing right now.

    Genius

    " Incredible " ??

    If investors doubt that their principle in treasuries will be returned it doesn't matter what the FED does, interest rates are going up.

    So no, its not " safe to say " they control interest rates.

    Because the truth is in the end they dont, the markets do.

  8. #38
    cynical class clown
    Luftwaffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    CONNECTICUT
    Last Seen
    11-18-17 @ 10:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,499

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    " Incredible " ??

    If investors doubt that their principle in treasuries will be returned it doesn't matter what the FED does, interest rates are going up.

    So no, its not " safe to say " they control interest rates.

    Because the truth is in the end they dont, the markets do.
    If means nothing to me.

    The FED made a goal, keep interest rates low. The FED took action. The FED 100% got its goal and continues to do so this very second we are arguing.

    That is a pretty sound level of control.
    -----MOS 19D = cavalry scout = best damn MOS there is

  9. #39
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,313

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by Luftwaffe View Post
    If means nothing to me.

    The FED made a goal, keep interest rates low. The FED took action. The FED 100% got its goal and continues to do so this very second we are arguing.

    That is a pretty sound level of control.

    Of-course it means nothing to you. You're wrong and can't admit otherwise.

    The value of humility is lost on the young.

  10. #40
    cynical class clown
    Luftwaffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    CONNECTICUT
    Last Seen
    11-18-17 @ 10:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,499

    Re: 'Red warning lights' flashing for global economy

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Of-course it means nothing to you. You're wrong and can't admit otherwise.

    The value of humility is lost on the young.
    The value of intelligence is lost on the senile.
    -----MOS 19D = cavalry scout = best damn MOS there is

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 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
  •