The Real Culprits In This Meltdown

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by Etta Place

And, if the law was enacted in 1977, how is it that the problems are just now causing this crisis?

Answers are here, regardless of what you think of the source:

Congress Lies Low To Avoid Bailout Blame

[billbrasky]

Originally Posted by Etta Place

And, if the law was enacted in 1977, how is it that the problems are just now causing this crisis?

well if you mean racist against white folks then yes.

Since folks on the left take "racist" to mean anythign bad that happens to you based on race even if by proxy, by chance, or a host of other factors.

If you mean racist cause someone "noticed" this was to help blacks and force business to not be business but be charity to buy black votes with white folks money and business profits then no thats not racist against blacks at all. Simply noticing is not racist. functionally its racist against whites.

When i hear someone cry racist i want to hear someone punched them in the face and said they did it cause they were black, asian etc. Not you waiting in line and someone looked at you funny, or too many white applicants get into U of M or some other school so we need to make it "even" etc. Racist has come to mean some perverted version of "fair", "nice", firendly, or shielded from reality.

What part was negative and what race was being singled out. If you cant name the race being singled out how can it be racist.

[billbrasky]

Originally Posted by Etta Place

And, if the law was enacted in 1977, how is it that the problems are just now causing this crisis?

they continued systematically removing safeguards that had been instituted in the 1930s right up to wait for it .... wait for it. 1999. When whom left office.

yeah slick willy.

then it took only a few years to really get rolling and get the word out ... rember all the ARM commericals on tv and radio from about 2001 -2005. Then once it reached a critical mass only took a few years for the house of cards to collapse.

[Etta Place]

Originally Posted by XDConvert9mm

Answers are here, regardless of what you think of the source:

Congress Lies Low To Avoid Bailout Blame

That article says nothing about Jimmy Carter or 1977.

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by Etta Place

I understand short selling somewhat, but truthfully, I don't know how it contributed to this crisis, except that it probably caused many people to be overextended.

Short selling=borrowing a stock at price X and hoping it goes lower so you can replace it at price A=lower. You then repay the loan with shares bought at a lower price and lmake money on the difference. You usually first have to borrow the shares from a party to make this transaction.

Naked short selling is shorting a stock without having borrowed it first. Basically you have not found someone that would take you bet that the stock would go down before you made the bet. This is one of the things that has killed the financials. You are supposed to be able to show that you have already borrowed it before you can short. This was not adhered to.

Until 1 1/2 years ago there was a rule that you could not short a stock while it was going down. You had to do it while the price was rising. This prevented the piling on to stocks that are sinking that we've seen lately. That rule was eliminated and much chaos has been seen since in the form of "Bear Raids". You start or join in to a negative rumor about a company, short the stock as it sinks, and make a killing.

Shorting has a very valid place in the market as it lets others know that there might be problems with a company. It does not have a place as it's been perverted lately though.

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by Etta Place

That article says nothing about Jimmy Carter or 1977.

Her's a Slick Willy/CRA link.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/...4/vmck4-94.pdf

[Etta Place]

Janet Yellen, president of the San Francisco Federal Reserve, offers the killer statistic: Independent mortgage companies, which are not covered by CRA, made high-priced loans at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts. With this in mind, Yellen specifically rejects the "tendency to conflate the current problems in the sub-prime market with CRA-motivated lending.? CRA, Yellen says, "has increased the volume of responsible lending to low- and moderate-income households."

According to Fed Governor Ned Gramlich:

Ned Gramlich, who warned about the risks of the submprime boom while Alan Greenspan was cheering it on:

"banks have made many low- and moderate-income mortgages to fulfill their CRA obligations, they have found default rates pleasantly low, and they generally charge low mortgages rates. Thirty years later, CRA has become very good business."

CRA applies only to banks and thrifts that are federally insured; it's conceived as a quid pro quo for that privilege, among others. This means the law doesn't apply to independent mortgage companies (or payday lenders, check-cashers, etc.)... As the University of Michigan's Michael Barr points out, half of sub-prime loans came from those mortgage companies beyond the reach of CRA. A further 25 to 30 percent came from bank subsidiaries and affiliates, which come under CRA to varying degrees but not as fully as banks themselves. (With affiliates, banks can choose whether to count the loans.) Perhaps one in four sub-prime loans were made by the institutions fully governed by CRA.

Mythbusting the right's subprime excuses | OurFuture.org


The facts don't support the CRA being responsible for the current financial crisis.

The CRA was enacted in 1977.

From what I understand, the vast majority of bad loans underlying the current financial crisis were written from 2001 on. And large numbers of bad loans were written after Bush reformed the CRA in 2004. And, it's not just poor people who received bad loans. Some people earning more than $100,000 a year took out mortgages of say $600,000.

Plus, the CRA can't be responsible for the global housing bubble.

[Etta Place]

Originally Posted by XDConvert9mm

Her's a Slick Willy/CRA link.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/...4/vmck4-94.pdf

The Cato Institute doesn't like any government regulation, including environmental regulations.

[XDConvert9mm]

Originally Posted by Etta Place

According to Fed Governor Ned Gramlich:








Mythbusting the right's subprime excuses | OurFuture.org


The facts don't support the CRA being responsible for the current financial crisis.

The CRA was enacted in 1977.

From what I understand, the vast majority of bad loans underlying the current financial crisis were written from 2001 on. And large numbers of bad loans were written after Bush reformed the CRA in 2004. And, it's not just poor people who received bad loans. Some people earning more than $100,000 a year took out mortgages of say $600,000.

Plus, the CRA can't be responsible for the global housing bubble.

Did you bother to read the link I posted above?

[Etta Place]

Originally Posted by XDConvert9mm

Did you bother to read the link I posted above?

No, because it's too hard to read. I hate reading pdf files.