Page 29 of 29 FirstFirst ... 19272829
Results 281 to 290 of 290

Thread: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

  1. #281
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,304

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by SenorXm/Sirius View Post
    In your 1st post on this subject you tried to put much of the blame for the crash on Clinton and the CFM act, until I pointed out it was a Republican bill. Then you moved on to trying to say the CRA was a major reason for the crash, until I pointed out most of the subprime loans were made by banks and firms who had nothing to do with CRA. Now you're onto fannie may. I can shoot some of that down too, but then, so you can be true to your agenda, you'll just move onto something else to try and put all the blame on the Dems.

    I've been down this road before with Republicans and conservatives, your material is straight out of the conservative blogs and conservative people like Limbaugh and Hannity. I've heard this all before, and you are regurgitating it almost word for word. Limbaugh and the rest preach to a conservative crowd, so they can get away with the 1/2 truths and exaggerations. And they don't allow dissenting opinions. The problem for conservatives when they discuss the crash on public forums is this isn't a conservative echo chamber, if they are going to try and put all the blame on the Dems, they're going to get called out.

    Someday if you really want to get into a open minded, none partisan politics discussion on this. I'd be all for it. It is an interesting and fascinating subject to discuss. But if you're going to just be an ideologue who's only going to blame one side, then no thanks.

    By and large Clinton and the Democrats ARE responsible for the Subprime mortgage crisis.

    The GSEs were key players in the run up to the 2008 collapse.

    Fannie and Freddie who were exempt from paying State and Federal taxes, who were exem from SEC reporting requirements, ( all publicly traded companies have to submit quarterly reports to the SEC ) , who could operate with Capital requirements as low as 3 percent, who had a cheap and exclusive 4 Billion dollar line of credit straight from the US Treasury that NO Bank could access, who had a " AAA " status on all their debt were staffed by Bill Clinton Appointments.

    From 1993 to 2000 he replaced MANY of their executives with appointments of his own, and appointed over half of their Chair positions.

    These two GSEs, run and protected by Democrats right up until they were declared insolvent, were the primary consumer of Securities backed by Subprime loans and the Loans themselves.

    They created the demand for Trillions of dollars in toxic and worthless securities and distributed Trillions of dollars of woethless GSE backed " AAA " securities throughout the Worlds Capital markets.

    There was little to no oversight over Fannie and Freddie and the Democrats throughout Bush's Presidency made sure to keep it that way.

    In 2011, the SEC started its 3rd investigation on the two corrupt GSEs. Apparently, at the time when these worthless securities were being spread out to banks all over the world, Fannie and Freddie hid over a Trillions dollars worth of worthless debt from.....well everyone.

    Thereby manipulating the very markets that crashed and burned in 2007-2008.

    Thats SECURITIES FRAUD, thats unprecedented securities fraud.

    The combination of Clinton's fair lending initiatives, his 1995 CRA changes and his GSE appointments and GSE mandates created a bubble of systemic proportions.

    In 2001 Bush called for Congress to Congress to create legislation that would include a 3 party regulator for the GSEs, and warned of the systemic effects that would occur from Fannie and Freddie going bankrupt.

    In 2004 ,the House came up with HR1461, which was GSE legislation that was corrupted by the likes of Barney Frank. He added in a " affordable lending " slush fund ".

    Bush shot it down in favor of the Senate bill sb190, that would have created a third-party regulator as early as 2005

    Sb190 passed through the Senate banking committee with ZERO Democrat votes and a promise of a rule 22 fillibuster if it ever made it down to the floor for a vote.

    In 2007, the Republicans sent it back through a DEMOCRAT chaired Senate Banking committee as sb1100.

    It ofcourse was shot down in committee and a year later Fannie and Freddie were declared insolvent holding over 5 Trillion dollars in debt.

    I get why the Democrats tried to blame the banks. They had to divert attention away from the two most corrupt Financial entities involved in the Subprime mortgage crisis, but I'm not one to buy into simplistic false narratives.

    And I don't get my information from Hannity or Limbaugh and if you've been down this road before you should have learned something by now.

  2. #282
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,304

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    The most important thing about the financial crisis is, IMO, precisely that there is widespread and bipartisan support for Wall Street in D.C. If you want to blame Clinton, and ignore Gramm's role or that he's now a senior VP with UBS (one of DOZENS of examples like that, in both parties), then you're missing the key problem, which is Wall Street just wields MASSIVE influence and it doesn't much matter which party is in charge of Congress or the regulators. They all serve the interests of the biggest banks.

    Which is why it's also so funny that anyone can believe anyone in government forced the banks to do a single thing they didn't really want to do, like make loans to poor blahs in the inner city.....
    In 1998, Janet Reno bragged about the effectiveness of Clintons CRA changes and his " fair lending initiative " amd publicly and stated that the Clinton DOJ had already SUCCESSFULLY sued 13 lending institutions for " discriminatory lending practices " and vowed to target more.

    And the DOJ wasn't the only one shaking down Banks. HUD sued Banks and so did Community Activist Organizations like ACORN.

    Of-course the Banks were forced. In 1999, Clintons own Treasury Secretary congratulated Clinton in a Email over the success of his CRA changes.

    There's your opinion, and then there's reality. Ill provide the reality, you provide your opinions.

  3. #283
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,036

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Thank you for posting that. Good info.

    But, I never claimed there was more secrecy, and as I pointed out in a response to another poster, just because this has been accepted practice in the past does not make it any more kosher.

    Note: My stance on this is for pretty anything government, barring legitimate national defense concerns, etc. NN does not qualify for that exemption.
    The reason for my "no more secrecy" comment was to point out that if you can't point to any problems then, then you don't have a convincing cause for worry now. Let's just say for the sake of argument that it was important to you to convince me that there was cause for concern. You haven't given me that cause. Specifics are always going to have weight over vague referrals to nebulous fears. In fact the anti- position in these threads have consistently been unable to list any such specifics.

  4. #284
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    98053
    Last Seen
    04-19-15 @ 03:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    264

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    In 1998, Janet Reno bragged about the effectiveness of Clintons CRA changes and his " fair lending initiative " amd publicly and stated that the Clinton DOJ had already SUCCESSFULLY sued 13 lending institutions for " discriminatory lending practices " and vowed to target more.

    And the DOJ wasn't the only one shaking down Banks. HUD sued Banks and so did Community Activist Organizations like ACORN.

    Of-course the Banks were forced. In 1999, Clintons own Treasury Secretary congratulated Clinton in a Email over the success of his CRA changes.

    There's your opinion, and then there's reality. Ill provide the reality, you provide your opinions.
    What nonsense. The mortgage crisis wasn't created by CRA or pressure on banks to lend. The crisis was created by banks making loans that people could not pay back. There was no one in government who was pressuring any bank to do that. The reason that the banks did this was that they found out they could repackage the loans and get S&P to give a AAA rating on what should have been junk. This made selling loans the source of income rather than earning interest on the loan. The enabler for this was the invention of the credit-default swap. Things would have been OK but the banks began to believe their own hype about the value of the loans and they loaded their portfolios with this junk. The fact that the government let banks behave in this way is awful. However, blaming government for not preventing the financial system from being stupid is kind of silly. However, we see that if the government doesn't prevent it, the people in the financial system will game the system for their own personal benefit and not care if they put their companies or the entire financial system at risk. That's why talk of completely free markets is so stupid. It meets Einstein's definition of insanity.

  5. #285
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,304

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by zip98053 View Post
    What nonsense. The mortgage crisis wasn't created by CRA or pressure on banks to lend. The crisis was created by banks making loans that people could not pay back. Things would have been OK but the banks began to believe their own hype about the value of the loans and they loaded their portfolios with this junk. The fact that the government let banks behave in this way is awful.


    Nonsense ? No, despite your uninformed OPINION it's the truth. You just have no idea what your'e talking about.

    Here, educate yourself. I'll even do the leg work for you...

    Clinton forcing lenders to lower their standards via New Federal Regulations all based on the manufactured narrative that banks were " discriminating " based on Color.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Smokin...846212214.html
    " At President Clinton’s direction, no fewer than 10 federal agencies issued a chilling ultimatum to banks and mortgage lenders to ease credit for lower-income minorities or face investigations for lending discrimination and suffer the related adverse publicity. They also were threatened with denial of access to the all-important secondary mortgage market and stiff fines, along with other penalties.

    In 1993, Clinton signed the Riegle Neal Interstate banking act, that tied a Banks CRA score to their ability to expand across State lines.

    Did Clinton's " Fair lending " initiative work ? According to his Attorney General it absolutely did. In 1998, Janet Reno gave a speech were she bragged about the effectiveness of Clintons 1995 CRA changes and his " Fair lending " initiative.

    03-20-98: REMARKS OF THE HONORABLE JANET RENO TO THE NATIONAL COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT COALITION

    " The new Community Reinvestment Act regulations enable lenders to develop customized strategic plans for meeting their obligations under the Act, and many have been developed in partnership with your local organizations. In this way you are not only helping to rebuild your communities, but you are showing bankers how to be responsible corporate citizens. In short, you can't do it just with capital, you can't do it just with people who care; we can do it together.

    We want to see equal credit being offered by banks because it is the right thing to do, because the law requires it, because it is good business, because people accept it.

    You've noted that since the inception of our fair lending initiative in 1992 the Department has filed and settled 13 major fair lending lawsuits. We will continue to focus on discrimination in underwriting, the process of evaluating the qualifications of credit applicants. This was the issue in our suits against Shawmut in Boston, Northern Trust Company in Chicago, and First National Bank of Donna Anna in New Mexico. "

    And Clintons DOJ wasn't the only one suing banks. HUD targeted banks with law suites and so did Community Activist Groups like ACORN and Plaintiffs attorneys like Barrack Obama.

    The Clinton administration forced all lenders to sign a " Fair lending " Master Agreement.

    From 1993 to 2000 total CRA commitments from Banks and lenders added up to close to a Trillion dollars. Banks had to pay to play. For example, when Citibank, in April 1998, sought federal approval for a merger with Travelers Group, it only got OK from the Clinton administration after it promised in May to provide $115 billion for anti-redlining loans.

    Clintons Treasury Secretary, Robert Rubin congratulated Clinton in a 1999 memo on the effectiveness of his CRA changes.

    Clinton Library's Doc Dump Reveals CRA Role In Subprime Mess - Investors.com


    "Public disclosure of CRA ratings, together with the changes made by the regulators under your leadership, have significantly contributed to ... financial institutions ... meeting the needs of low- and moderate-income communities and minorities," Rubin gushed. "Since 1993, the number of home mortgage loans to African Americans increased by 58%, to Hispanics by 62% and to low- and moderate-income borrowers by 38%, well above the overall market increase.
    "Since 1992, nonprofit community organizations estimate that the private sector has pledged over $1 trillion in loans and investment under CRA."


    Homeownership rates in 1993 were 63 %. By 2000 they were 68 %. Under Bush they rose another 1 %.
    Last edited by Fenton; 03-01-15 at 01:04 AM.
    The New Democratic Party Slogan :

    " Return to Power By Any Means Necessary "

  6. #286
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,304

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by zip98053 View Post
    What nonsense. The mortgage crisis wasn't created by CRA or pressure on banks to lend. The crisis was created by banks making loans that people could not pay back. There was no one in government who was pressuring any bank to do that. The reason that the banks did this was that they found out they could repackage the loans and get S&P to give a AAA rating on what should have been junk. This made selling loans the source of income rather than earning interest on the loan. The enabler for this was the invention of the credit-default swap. Things would have been OK but the banks began to believe their own hype about the value of the loans and they loaded their portfolios with this junk. The fact that the government let banks behave in this way is awful. However, blaming government for not preventing the financial system from being stupid is kind of silly. However, we see that if the government doesn't prevent it, the people in the financial system will game the system for their own personal benefit and not care if they put their companies or the entire financial system at risk. That's why talk of completely free markets is so stupid. It meets Einstein's definition of insanity.
    Let me expand on the misinformation in your post.

    Clinton via a long list of executive orders called The National Homeowner-ship strategy co-opted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into the Subprime market.

    By increasing their quota of " low income " loans they had to purchase ( 43 percent ) and by allowing them to count the purchase of Subprime loans towards their new HUD affordable lending quotas.

    His 1995 National Homeowner-ship strategy also lowered the GSEs Capital requirements for loans purchased to 3 percent. He also filled the two highly corrupt GSEs with his own appointments including Franklin Raines.

    By 1999 the GSEs were openly lobbying banks to sell their Subprime loans to Fannie and Freddie so that they could be turned into Securities and distributed out to Capital markets all over the world.

    Banks didn't get a " AAA " rating on their Securities, the Subprime loans purchased and securitized by Fannie and Freddie did. Banks didn't even start creating their own securities backed by Subprime loans until late 2002.

    And when they did the GSEs were their primary consumers.

    Banks weren't the ones behaving badly ( unless you want to count Country Wide as a " Bank " ). The GSEs were and they were protected by Government regulation and corrupt Politicians.

    In fact, Fannie Mae started working with Country Wide exclusivley back in 1999, when Country Wide created a loan process specifically for Fannie Mae called the Fast and EZ loan.

    The Government didn't " prevent " the Subprime mortgage crisis because they fueled it. They built it from the ground up and they FINANCED it via two GSEs that were committing Securities fraud on a unprecedented scale.

  7. #287
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,807

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    In 1998, Janet Reno bragged about the effectiveness of Clintons CRA changes and his " fair lending initiative " amd publicly and stated that the Clinton DOJ had already SUCCESSFULLY sued 13 lending institutions for " discriminatory lending practices " and vowed to target more.

    And the DOJ wasn't the only one shaking down Banks. HUD sued Banks and so did Community Activist Organizations like ACORN.

    Of-course the Banks were forced. In 1999, Clintons own Treasury Secretary congratulated Clinton in a Email over the success of his CRA changes.

    There's your opinion, and then there's reality. Ill provide the reality, you provide your opinions.
    No, you're providing the completely one sided opinions of an ideologue that in half a dozen posts on the crisis hasn't managed to find any blame to spread to GOPers. You ignore that during the time in the mid 2000s that the banks were being forced by Janet Reno and Clinton to make loans to poor people that these poor, put upon banks were all making record profits, paying record bonuses, as were every other player in the mortgage lending field. They were running ads in my area on TV and radio begging poor people to take out loans, no doc liar loans, negative amortization loans, 110% of equity loans, home equity loans to go to Paris, buy a car - basically if you could fog a mirror, they wanted your business. The underwriters were making record bonuses, the people bundling the loans skimmed off their share and paid out record bonuses, the ratings agencies took record fees to rate them AAA, the house builders were getting wealthy - in short the entire industry was shoveling money in as fast as they could move the shovels.

    And you're telling me it's because Reno and Clinton FORCED them to do these things that made them all wealthy beyond their wildest imaginations...... Sure. I buy it, and also that at the end of the rainbow is a pot of gold, etc.....

    BTW, global phenomena require global causes. Here's a picture of the global housing market. How did CRA cause a housing bubble in Ireland? Guess Reno had a global reach...


  8. #288
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,304

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    No, you're providing the completely one sided opinions of an ideologue that in half a dozen posts on the crisis hasn't managed to find any blame to spread to GOPers. You ignore that during the time in the mid 2000s that the banks were being forced by Janet Reno and Clinton to make loans to poor people that these poor, put upon banks were all making record profits, paying record bonuses, as were every other player in the mortgage lending field. They were running ads in my area on TV and radio begging poor people to take out loans, no doc liar loans, negative amortization loans, 110% of equity loans, home equity loans to go to Paris, buy a car - basically if you could fog a mirror, they wanted your business. The underwriters were making record bonuses, the people bundling the loans skimmed off their share and paid out record bonuses, the ratings agencies took record fees to rate them AAA, the house builders were getting wealthy - in short the entire industry was shoveling money in as fast as they could move the shovels.

    And you're telling me it's because Reno and Clinton FORCED them to do these things that made them all wealthy beyond their wildest imaginations...... Sure. I buy it, and also that at the end of the rainbow is a pot of gold, etc.....

    BTW, global phenomena require global causes. Here's a picture of the global housing market. How did CRA cause a housing bubble in Ireland? Guess Reno had a global reach...


    You know who was advertising ? ACORN.

    Here's a ACORN add that appeared in the 1995 Chicago Sun Times...

    ‘" You’ve got only a couple thousand bucks in the bank. Your job pays you dog-food wages. Your credit history has been bent, stapled, and mutilated. You declared bankruptcy in 1989. Don’t despair: You can still buy a house.” "

    And yes, there were other Credit Bubbles aside from the US Sub-prime crisis in other Countries including Spain and Ireland. They actually prosecuted the corrupt Politicians that got involved in their Credit bubbles and I never said CRA had anything to do with it.

    You people keep making the uniformed assertion that Banks were NOT forced. I've corrected you more than once. You whine about the Banks when Fannie and Freddie, stocked with Clinton appointments and protected by the Democrat party used their 4 Billion line of credit from the US Treasury, their 5 % Capital requirements and their " AAA " debt status to buy Trillions of dollars in Sub-prime loans and Securities.

    They were the primary consumer of sub-prime loans and securities and their involvement and implicit Government created demand for a toxic financial product that inundated the Financial markets. On top of that they basically hid over a Trillion dollars in worthless debt from the SEC and from Congress and the Bush administration.

    SEC Charges Former Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Executives with Securities Fraud; Release No. 2011-267; December 16, 2011
    The New Democratic Party Slogan :

    " Return to Power By Any Means Necessary "

  9. #289
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,807

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    You know who was advertising ? ACORN.

    Here's a ACORN add that appeared in the 1995 Chicago Sun Times...
    1995? You mean nearly a decade before the bubble? LMAO.

    And yes, there were other Credit Bubbles aside from the US Sub-prime crisis in other Countries including Spain and Ireland. They actually prosecuted the corrupt Politicians that got involved in their Credit bubbles and I never said CRA had anything to do with it.
    That's not the point - it's no coincidence that a worldwide debt bubble emerged and that was accompanied by a worldwide housing bubble, and those events had nothing to do with CRA BS. I'd go into it further, but arguing with ideologues is pointless - you aren't interested in anything except blaming democrats.

    You people keep making the uniformed assertion that Banks were NOT forced. I've corrected you more than once. You whine about the Banks when Fannie and Freddie, stocked with Clinton appointments and protected by the Democrat party used their 4 Billion line of credit from the US Treasury, their 5 % Capital requirements and their " AAA " debt status to buy Trillions of dollars in Sub-prime loans and Securities.
    I made the informed assertion backed by all the evidence that these poor, oppressed banks forced in 2005 by Janet Reno to make loans to blahs in the inner cities were raking in profits and bonuses hand over fist, record amounts.



    LMAO that the big banks gave a shiate about CRA as their bonuses hit all time records. Give me a break....

    They were the primary consumer of sub-prime loans and securities and their involvement and implicit Government created demand for a toxic financial product that inundated the Financial markets. On top of that they basically hid over a Trillion dollars in worthless debt from the SEC and from Congress and the Bush administration.
    What you're missing is the entire setup made everyone involved wealthy beyond their wildest dreams.

  10. #290
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,306

    Re: Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    Well it was good while it lasted.
    This is all about Obama collected tax revenue..............ALWAYS FOLLOW THE MONEY! Obamacare was about money!
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

Page 29 of 29 FirstFirst ... 19272829

Posting Permissions

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