If the government makes a law, and you abide by that law, how can it be illegal? This wasn't phony paperwork - that's not the allegation. The allegation is that the bankers should have known better. I claim that that the bankers didn't need to know anything - they filled out the paperwork the government asked for and the borrower got the loan. The borrower may have provided fraudulent info (criminal), and the government may been unwise in the program (for sure), but that doesn't mean "the bank" (as if that's even possible) was required to do more due diligence than the government asked for.
By the way, I'd be happy to let them fail, too. But, demonizing the banks is mis-placed anger. The government is the source of the problem. Otherwise, the banks would've been lending their own money.
So, not criminal on the part of the banks, just bad government. We agree.
No different than the no income verification loan. If the government said it's ok, they can't come back later and say it wasn't ok. Bad government, not criminal bank.
Separate topic.
Perhaps I’m not directly on topic, but the angst is the same. The question I posed was: I don't get why bailout = criminal. Obviously, OWS thinks the banks were criminal. Or, are you saying OWS is just mad that "the banks" contributed to the bad economy? I think they're saying criminal, but I'm not adamant about it.
We agree there. But, the fraud that was perpetrated was by the Federal Government not by the banks. The banks, for the most part, when it comes to the loans and packaging thereof, operated within the rules they were given. The securities should have been strong because they were supposed to be backed by the USA - also a fraud perpetrated by the Federal Government.