Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 61

Thread: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Loan

  1. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    The bank is not rewarded in this scenario. In a foreclosure, both the person taking out the mortgage as well as the bank lose. As a matter of fact the home owner most times probably takes less of a hit.
    Sorry but in this scenario the bank gets a bailout by the government while the person declaring bankruptcy gets a severe hit on their credit And can't even get a gas card for several years while the bank gets to keep operating status quo.

  2. #42
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    The bank is not rewarded in this scenario. In a foreclosure, both the person taking out the mortgage as well as the bank lose. As a matter of fact the home owner most times probably takes less of a hit.
    But now the bank won't take any hit. The taxpayers will
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  3. #43
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,358

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    But now the bank won't take any hit. The taxpayers will
    Not that it seems to matter, but the banks do take a hit unless F&F guarenteed the loan. What do you think happens when a house with a $400K mortgage sells for $250K. The government doesn't send a check to the banks.

  4. #44
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,358

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Sorry but in this scenario the bank gets a bailout by the government while the person declaring bankruptcy gets a severe hit on their credit And can't even get a gas card for several years while the bank gets to keep operating status quo.


    Explain the bailout to the bank in this scenario.

  5. #45
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    Hey, how about we make a small trip back in time. 1992, bank kiting scandal.

    Few names you might recognize followed by the number of checks they bounced. Oh yeah, source : Business | The List: Bickering House Hurts Itself -- Final True Confession Tells Little About Scandal | Seattle Times Newspaper

    Richard J. Durbin, D, 12
    Barbara Boxer, D, 143
    Maxine Waters, D, 5
    Henry A. Waxman, D, 434.
    John Jr. CONYERS, D, 273
    Steny H. Hoyer, D, 3

    So...what does that say about Dem leadership?
    If you truly want to go down to the mud and be really partisan and affiliate that guy with the entire movement, well there you go and there are some serious leadership names in the above list.
    That has to be ignored you see... this is a tea party hit piece and your information is not in line with criticizing the tea party and making them out to be the evil boogie man (a.k.a. replacement for G.W. Bush as the doers of all things wrong scapegoat to protect this President's performance and administrations failings). By responding and answering such a post would be acknowledgement of wrong doing on the Democratic side and that's just NOT part of the partisan talking points.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    10-10-15 @ 01:31 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,069
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by ksu_aviator View Post
    That is a very lame excuse.

    However, one individual's actions or hypocrisy do not invalidate the principles behind the movement. Would you actually contend that borrowing more than you can repay is valid practice for an individual or a government?
    Starting a business is a risky venture. Half of all businesses fail within the first 1-5 years. It's just a fact. The job of the person starting the business is to do whatever it takes to make, what is often an emotional attachment to a dream, a reality. Thus, when writing a business plan (quite often, at best, a guessing game of future numbers), many will write a rosier picture than exists.

    It's the job of the investor to protect their money or the money they are responsible for to asses the validity of the business plan. If you're in the job of investing money in new business, or making loans of any type, it's your responsibility to ferret out which are the best start-up plans. There are certainly no shortage to choose from.

    After receiving the loan, it is the responsibility of the business owner to make good on that loan. It should have been spelled out quite clearly in the B-plan break even analysis whether it would be possible. If the break even doesn't show even a chance at break even should the business fail, then the investor didn't invest wisely.

  7. #47
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,174

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    You make a good point. Are you consistent with someone you makes 30K a year who took out a $500K mortgage is also responsible for his/her actions.
    There's an essential difference here. People getting into mortgages they couldn't afford was because loans with no down payment were made available by the banks. If these loans had not been made available, they wouldn't have been made. Couple this with 20-30 years of bi-partisan support for the "ownership society" (to use the words of a certain President who will remain nameless). People didn't walk into banks and get something the bank wasn't willing to give them. The reason for anger over the foreclosures is because of their effect on everybody else. I've not missed one payment on my mortgage through all this economic crap, but because of the foreclosures, the value of my house has gone down to where I can't get what I paid for it -- through no fault of mine. People who did "play by the rules" are getting screwed and losing big portions of their personal wealth.

    We had years of "you don't have to pay for things" on the government side -- low taxes and high spending. It was bound to slip over into private loans.

    The article in the OP is crap. It's about a lawsuit. People (especially lawyers) say things in the course of a lawsuit that are complete BS. It's normal, and they all know it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  8. #48
    Sage

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    8,358

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    There's an essential difference here. People getting into mortgages they couldn't afford was because loans with no down payment were made available by the banks. If these loans had not been made available, they wouldn't have been made. Couple this with 20-30 years of bi-partisan support for the "ownership society" (to use the words of a certain President who will remain nameless). People didn't walk into banks and get something the bank wasn't willing to give them. The reason for anger over the foreclosures is because of their effect on everybody else. I've not missed one payment on my mortgage through all this economic crap, but because of the foreclosures, the value of my house has gone down to where I can't get what I paid for it -- through no fault of mine. People who did "play by the rules" are getting screwed and losing big portions of their personal wealth.

    We had years of "you don't have to pay for things" on the government side -- low taxes and high spending. It was bound to slip over into private loans.

    The article in the OP is crap. It's about a lawsuit. People (especially lawyers) say things in the course of a lawsuit that are complete BS. It's normal, and they all know it.
    I did not mean to hold the banks harmless for making loans to folks they should have known could not pay. The trap I think was that they thought that the underlying asset would continue to rise so people could either refinance or sell at a profit. Once prices started to decline the game was up.

    Let's also remember that many of the worst loans were made by mortgage companies, not banks. Most if not all these companies are out of business. BAC is in the trouble it is largely because it bought one of these companies.

    There are always two sides to a bad deal. Here because of the layers there are more than two. You can also look at the big banks and investment companies that packaged these loans. You can also look at the pension funds and the like that chased yield and bought bonds without understanding, doing the homework to know what they were buying.

    Plenty of bad actors all around. To try and pick one, seems like scapgoating. But that is just me.

  9. #49
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by washunut View Post
    Not that it seems to matter, but the banks do take a hit unless F&F guarenteed the loan. What do you think happens when a house with a $400K mortgage sells for $250K. The government doesn't send a check to the banks.
    F&F didn't gaurantee the loan; The BOUGHT the loan. The govt paid money to BUY the loan and if the loan goes into default, the govt doesn't get its (our) money back. This is Finance 101. Which part is so incomprehensible?
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  10. #50
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,830

    Re: Tea Party Rep: Bank Should Have Known I Wouldn't Be Able To Repay $2.2 Million Lo

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    Hey, how about we make a small trip back in time. 1992, bank kiting scandal.

    Few names you might recognize followed by the number of checks they bounced. Oh yeah, source : Business | The List: Bickering House Hurts Itself -- Final True Confession Tells Little About Scandal | Seattle Times Newspaper

    Richard J. Durbin, D, 12
    Barbara Boxer, D, 143
    Maxine Waters, D, 5
    Henry A. Waxman, D, 434.
    John Jr. CONYERS, D, 273
    Steny H. Hoyer, D, 3

    So...what does that say about Dem leadership?
    If you truly want to go down to the mud and be really partisan and affiliate that guy with the entire movement, well there you go and there are some serious leadership names in the above list.
    Are any of these people saying it's the bank's fault for giving them a checkbook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    That has to be ignored you see... this is a tea party hit piece and your information is not in line with criticizing the tea party and making them out to be the evil boogie man (a.k.a. replacement for G.W. Bush as the doers of all things wrong scapegoat to protect this President's performance and administrations failings). By responding and answering such a post would be acknowledgement of wrong doing on the Democratic side and that's just NOT part of the partisan talking points.
    You've missed the point of this thread.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 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
  •