Page 62 of 98 FirstFirst ... 1252606162636472 ... LastLast
Results 611 to 620 of 972

Thread: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

  1. #611
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    How do you lose your life savings by refusing to pay your mortgage payments on a loan that you took out with no down payment, Jasper? Answer that before going off on diatribes about how the people who walked out on their loans were just innocent victims.
    Where did I call them "innocent victims." I'm just not blaming deadbeats for taking banks up on their offer to borrow money, no down payment, no job, no income check, etc. The core function of a bank is to make loans to people who can pay them back. During the bubble, they thought they didn't care if the borrowers could pay them back because they thought they could offload the default risk to some widow in Topeka Kansas who bought AAA rated dog crap. So they thought all the borrower had to do was stay current for 90 days or less and they were off the hook. So sad there was too much dog crap the banks weren't able to offload on their "customers."

    And I don't know how these borrowers managed to discharge the mortgage with a bunch of savings socked away that they just decided not to put towards their mortgage. In which bankruptcy court is this allowed? Sure, I guess some were able to commit a crime and hide assets from creditors and "walk away" but you have to know that's not how the bankruptcy system works for ordinary people in America.

  2. #612
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,968
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    jmotivator;1064222812]FALSE! This is patently and demonstrably false. Creation is ALWAYS an available option so wealth creation is always available.
    This is correct. It does not, however, disprove the FACT that only SO MUCH can be created within a set amount of time.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  3. #613
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Where did I call them "innocent victims." I'm just not blaming deadbeats for taking banks up on their offer to borrow money, no down payment, no job, no income check, etc.
    You should be blaming the deadbeats for walking away from their obligations. They borrowed money with a promise to repay the loan and they reneged on their part of the deal. They left the banks and the taxpayers to take the loses for their bad purchases and their defaults.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  4. #614
    Weekend Political Pundit
    Bob N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-17 @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,821

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by SlevinKelevra View Post
    The faster they can get to 100% , the sooner it will start trickling down.
    Yeah but they need more tax cuts first. Seriously. How else will they keep on making good paying jobs and make America strong again.

  5. #615
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Ok, simple or not I think clarification was needed, so I asked...Is that ok with you?
    Yes, I'm taking out on you what is my problem with the system. My apologies.

    I disagree...The lending environment was created by a law created to make sure that people who traditionally couldn't qualify for home loans, got them anyway, because it just 'wasn't fair' to use the proponents of that law's words...So, the banks, as far as I understand, were being told that the loans to these people were backed by the government, and the banks took steps to hedge their risk on the loans....Was it proper? no. Was it proper for the government to force the banks to make these loans? no.
    We've had lots of threads on this topic, but my reading of the environment, and I've read a number of books from different perspectives on the crisis, is there was little to nothing being forced on banks. The GSEs were a bit different because they had a mandate of sorts to make 'affordable' loans and we backed them with taxpayer guarantees, but made them into the ultimate crony capitalism example of a public guarantee, massive private profits. But outside the GSEs, and I know it's hard to separate them, it's my reading that the lenders thought they'd found a way to genuinely eliminate or nearly so the risk of making loans to deadbeats with various forms of derivatives that functioned as "insurance" of a sort. Only problem is the "insurers" had no ability to make good on those losses. They effectively wrote insurance they had no ability to cover. Point is, the vast majority made the loans because they made record profits doing so, and didn't account for the actual risks involved.

    More than a few banks went under as a result of this crap. And the ones that got bailed out were with the blessing of the government against the wishes of the majority of the population...
    I agree with that, and I also recognize that the banks had to be bailed out. We couldn't see the system collapse. My only wish was at least the people who led their companies into ruin paid a price, and many did not. It makes me ill to hear some of them come on TV now and whine about their poor banks being regulated. Boo hooo - don't want to be regulated, don't come running to the taxpayer when your banks is collapsing. That's the "free market."

    I agree with that Jasper, but if I remember correctly, the administration said that they had to do this to avoid a total collapse of the banking system...So, yes, we got hosed....Guess what, under this administration, they are doing it all over again.

    Fannie and Freddie to offer 3% down payment mortgages - Dec. 8, 2014
    Yes, I am not here to defend Obama. I think he failed in this area and set some terrible precedents, and one of the greatest disappointments was early on when he appointed Geithner and Summers - two guys who DIRECTLY pushed for and signed off on the system that collapsed. Their advice was catastrophically wrong. In a sane world, they are nowhere near any lever or power again, ever.

    The whole process forced me to rethink the relationship between government and Wall Street et al and who actually wields power in this country. I'm getting more and more convinced we don't ever even see the people wielding actual power, and we (and by this I also mean almost all of the nominal power structure as well) surely get no say in what they do.

  6. #616
    Sage
    KevinKohler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    CT
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,968
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    You should be blaming the deadbeats for walking away from their obligations. They borrowed money with a promise to repay the loan and they reneged on their part of the deal. They left the banks and the taxpayers to take the loses for their bad purchases and their defaults.
    Well, yeah, we can blame the dead beats, which I do....but I also blame Clinton for FORCING banks to lend to some of these people.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Reports indicate that everyone knew he was hauling a bunch of guns up there. But, since you brought it up, there's something which should be illegal: guns that breakdown.

  7. #617
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Yes, I'm taking out on you what is my problem with the system. My apologies.



    We've had lots of threads on this topic, but my reading of the environment, and I've read a number of books from different perspectives on the crisis, is there was little to nothing being forced on banks. The GSEs were a bit different because they had a mandate of sorts to make 'affordable' loans and we backed them with taxpayer guarantees, but made them into the ultimate crony capitalism example of a public guarantee, massive private profits. But outside the GSEs, and I know it's hard to separate them, it's my reading that the lenders thought they'd found a way to genuinely eliminate or nearly so the risk of making loans to deadbeats with various forms of derivatives that functioned as "insurance" of a sort. Only problem is the "insurers" had no ability to make good on those losses. They effectively wrote insurance they had no ability to cover. Point is, the vast majority made the loans because they made record profits doing so, and didn't account for the actual risks involved.



    I agree with that, and I also recognize that the banks had to be bailed out. We couldn't see the system collapse. My only wish was at least the people who led their companies into ruin paid a price, and many did not. It makes me ill to hear some of them come on TV now and whine about their poor banks being regulated. Boo hooo - don't want to be regulated, don't come running to the taxpayer when your banks is collapsing. That's the "free market."



    Yes, I am not here to defend Obama. I think he failed in this area and set some terrible precedents, and one of the greatest disappointments was early on when he appointed Geithner and Summers - two guys who DIRECTLY pushed for and signed off on the system that collapsed. Their advice was catastrophically wrong. In a sane world, they are nowhere near any lever or power again, ever.

    The whole process forced me to rethink the relationship between government and Wall Street et al and who actually wields power in this country. I'm getting more and more convinced we don't ever even see the people wielding actual power, and we (and by this I also mean almost all of the nominal power structure as well) surely get no say in what they do.
    I think for the most part we have agreement here....Thanks for explaining further.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  8. #618
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,567

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    You should be blaming the deadbeats for walking away from their obligations. They borrowed money with a promise to repay the loan and they reneged on their part of the deal. They left the banks and the taxpayers to take the loses for their bad purchases and their defaults.
    Those deadbeats didn't represent themselves as financial experts.

    The banks are supposed to be financial experts, and to be reasonably good judges of risk. Our banking system failed horribly at doing what it is supposed to do. We probably should have used a magic 8 ball to determine who was qualified for a loan, as there would have only been a 1 in 8 chance of "yes" appearing.
    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.

  9. #619
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    You should be blaming the deadbeats for walking away from their obligations. They borrowed money with a promise to repay the loan and they reneged on their part of the deal. They left the banks and the taxpayers to take the loses for their bad purchases and their defaults.
    Like I said, if you stand on any street corner begging people to take $200,000 NINJA, negative amort, zero down, 110% loans, etc. you'll get an endless number of people willing to borrow money. But if you go bankrupt, I won't blame the people accepting the money. Your sole job as lender is to lend to those who can repay, and to manage the risk to cover the losses of those who will not.

    I'm not calling the borrowers victims, but the idiot is the person BEGGING deadbeats to take their money. They thought they'd rewritten the rules on risk and eliminated it. They were catastrophically wrong. Really, who believes in low risk, high return investments? Suckers is who. The banks were the suckers. They're paid 7 and 8 figures to be smarter than that.

    Well, they were partially right - we bailed some of them out so they did get low risk, and high returns! Bad on us....

  10. #620
    Villiage Idiot
    imagep's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Upstate SC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,567

    Re: The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinKohler View Post
    Well, yeah, we can blame the dead beats, which I do....but I also blame Clinton for FORCING banks to lend to some of these people.
    Which Clinton didn't do. That's not even logical. Seriously, think about it...

    Most of the defaults between 2007 and 2011 were on mortgages issued between 2002 and 2006. How do you blame that on Clinton?

    And bankers were getting bonuses by the wheelbarrow load to make bad loans. You don't actually have to force someone to accept wheelbarrows full of money, not the last time I checked.

    How many banks were shut down or fined because they weren't making enough subprime loans? I'll give you a hint, zero.

    Most of the subprime loans in existance at the start of the financial burst, were not even issued by commercial banks. The ARA was only applicable to commercial banks.

    The concept that the financial crises was caused by the ARA is a right wing myth, imagined into existence by bankers who didn't want to accept responsibility for their screw ups, and spread by those who worship those who became rich by corruption.
    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.

Page 62 of 98 FirstFirst ... 1252606162636472 ... 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
  •