What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

What's so funny is how we gave the keys to the banks and they all ****ed us. Now we're all screwed financially and they all got rich.

But you get down with your bad self on your excessive regulation argument.

People not paying their mortgages is due to deregulation? Huh. I never knew.

You can blame government--Dems and Repubs--for throwing the money at the banks. TARP sure as hell didn't come from the private sector--though the money to pay for it did.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

People not paying their mortgages is due to deregulation? Huh. I never knew.

You can blame government--Dems and Repubs--for throwing the money at the banks. TARP sure as hell didn't come from the private sector--though the money to pay for it did.

Oh, that's too funny. I needed a laugh.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Oh, that's too funny. I needed a laugh.

People losing their homes isn't funny, but follow along:

People stopped paying their mortgages.
The mortgages defaulted.
The securities comprised of these mortgages became worthless.
The insurance policies written on said securities (CDSs) were exercised.

The only thing deregulation did was shift the problem from the banks to the investors/insurers. Interest rates dropping in the early 2000s would've occurred regardless, triggering the massive wave of homeownership during that time.

Let me know where I'm wrong.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

People losing their homes isn't funny, but follow along:

People stopped paying their mortgages.
The mortgages defaulted.
The securities comprised of these mortgages became worthless.
The insurance policies written on said securities (CDSs) were exercised.

The only thing deregulation did was shift the problem from the banks to the investors/insurers. Interest rates dropping in the early 2000s would've occurred regardless, triggering the massive wave of homeownership during that time.

Let me know where I'm wrong.
You forgot a step. An obvious one.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Ah, yes.

1. People got into mortgages that they couldn't afford.

Good catch. Thanks.

..and the bankers knew that and they pulled all their money out before things went kablooie. And then they laughed and said ha ha we got rich and you all can bail us out now.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

..and the bankers knew that and they pulled all their money out before things went kablooie. And then they laughed and said ha ha we got rich and you all can bail us out now.

Loans that were 0% down didn't help things. I'm not going to defend the lenders, because they should've pushed back when prodded to open up lending during the Clinton and Bush the Younger Administrations. I'm just saying deregulation wasn't the cause of the mess. Speculators taking out ARMs while trying to make a quick buck on the rising home prices severly aggravated the situation. And anyone that says they were "duped" into a variable rate mortgage can only blame themselves, because the language is plain as day in every mortgage agreement I've ever seen. I'd be willing to bet that a large percentage of the stories you hear come from people trying to take advantage of the outrage against lenders.

If the bankers did knowingly take their investments out of affected institutions, they'd be prosecuted for insider trading. I haven't seen anything in the media about it, so I don't know much about that particular charge. As for TARP, it was administered HORRIBLY. It should've been given to the stronger banks to buy up the pieces of Citi, WF, etc. More government spending that throws good money after bad--like the Stimulus, Cash for Clunkers, etc.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

What's cute is that you give private citizens zero credit for building this country. For every "evil" private citizen that is out there scamming unemployment or disability insurance, there are thousands that never cross the line to commit ethical transgressions.

FYP.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Loans that were 0% down didn't help things. I'm not going to defend the lenders, because they should've pushed back when prodded to open up lending during the Clinton and Bush the Younger Administrations. I'm just saying deregulation wasn't the cause of the mess. Speculators taking out ARMs while trying to make a quick buck on the rising home prices severly aggravated the situation. And anyone that says they were "duped" into a variable rate mortgage can only blame themselves, because the language is plain as day in every mortgage agreement I've ever seen. I'd be willing to bet that a large percentage of the stories you hear come from people trying to take advantage of the outrage against lenders.

If the bankers did knowingly take their investments out of affected institutions, they'd be prosecuted for insider trading. I haven't seen anything in the media about it, so I don't know much about that particular charge. As for TARP, it was administered HORRIBLY. It should've been given to the stronger banks to buy up the pieces of Citi, WF, etc. More government spending that throws good money after bad--like the Stimulus, Cash for Clunkers, etc.

Best post you've made but I think you miss one major thing that happened. The lobbying dollars that went into deregulating were huge. The amount of time and effort that were spent by the banks or anyone else (media?) sounding the alarm of the impending doom was so silent you could hear a pin drop. Who was protecting us from this? No one. Not the lenders, not the government. A lot of people in the banks were getting rich off vapor. Some speculators got rich off vapor. Folks like me that knew that the doubled value in my home was vapor stood pat and hoped that the incoming mess wouldn't affect things so much that it would get us. Unfortunately, it did. Everyone got screwed on this mess.

All the while the leader of the country at the time spent a lot of time touting his "ownership" society. More people owned homes under his administration then any other. Of course it was all vapor and anyone with half a mind could see that. But no one cared to protect us the people. No one cared.

So, when you say privatization works I say BS. Why? Cause they didn't sound the alarm. They didn't care. They knew, but they didn't give a crap about anything but profit.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Best post you've made but I think you miss one major thing that happened. The lobbying dollars that went into deregulating were huge. The amount of time and effort that were spent by the banks or anyone else (media?) sounding the alarm of the impending doom was so silent you could hear a pin drop. Who was protecting us from this? No one. Not the lenders, not the government. A lot of people in the banks were getting rich off vapor. Some speculators got rich off vapor. Folks like me that knew that the doubled value in my home was vapor stood pat and hoped that the incoming mess wouldn't affect things so much that it would get us. Unfortunately, it did. Everyone got screwed on this mess.

All the while the leader of the country at the time spent a lot of time touting his "ownership" society. More people owned homes under his administration then any other. Of course it was all vapor and anyone with half a mind could see that. But no one cared to protect us the people. No one cared.

So, when you say privatization works I say BS. Why? Cause they didn't sound the alarm. They didn't care. They knew, but they didn't give a crap about anything but profit.

Agreed, to a certain extent. You're making the assertion that banks are the only private industry out there, when they only make up a small percentage of businesses operating in the U.S. Without the private sector being the driving force behind our economy, the United States doesn't exist as a free country.

With regards to Bush and his touting homeownership: To be fair, his administration tried over a dozen times to rein in the lending by Fannie/Freddie, which write the vast majority of mortgages in this country. Those efforts were repeatedly turned away by his opponents. Should he have done more? Yes, but he's not the only one to blame--especially since the trend toward boosting homeownership started during the Clinton years.

The other parties that should be faulted for this debacle:

* Politicians pushing for looser lending guidelines to expand homeownership
* Mortgage "brokerages" (middlemen) that perpetrated the vast majority of fraudulent lending (even though this makes up a very small percentage of defaults)
* Advocacy groups and non-profits that took taxpayer money to get underqualified borrowers into homes
* HGTV for making it look really easy to flip a house
* The fiscal irresponsibility of Americans that continually (until recently) borrowed more than they could afford to pay back

Essentially, everyone was having a big orgy over getting people into homeownership while turning a blind eye to the results. Throw Fair Lending Laws and non-profit advocacy groups into the mix with two massive GSEs willing to buy up any crap that came around the bend, and the things sped out of control like a Prius on recall. I'm not saying that the alarm shouldn't have been sounded--just that no one wanted to hear it.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

Ah, yes.

1. People got into mortgages that they couldn't afford.

Good catch. Thanks.

No you forgot the main reason banks are in so much trouble. Debt. Leverage. from the investment banking side via derivitives which we don't regulate or monitor apparantly. If the commercial side were seperate and safe we wouldn't need to bail out the investment-commercial banks that were holding so much of these deritivites or counter party contracts. CDS,CDO,MBS... and toxic assets. And after seeing the bonuses they paid with our TARP money.... hate grows, which leads to anger, and you turn to the darkside.... hmm starwars to dexter.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

No you forgot the main reason banks are in so much trouble. Debt. Leverage. from the investment banking side via derivitives which we don't regulate or monitor apparantly. If the commercial side were seperate and safe we wouldn't need to bail out the investment-commercial banks that were holding so much of these deritivites or counter party contracts. CDS,CDO,MBS... and toxic assets. And after seeing the bonuses they paid with our TARP money.... hate grows, which leads to anger, and you turn to the darkside.... hmm starwars to dexter.

Right... people forget that its their own hubris that's getting them in trouble... they aren't trying to steal from the little people... they're trying to make skin off each other because they all think they're smarter than each other.

Read Liar's Poker... the whole game is money guys trying to win money off of other money guys. At no point does Aunt Fanny in Kansas ever enter the picture.

The only problem of "mortgages they couldn't afford" came into play was because they had these assets whose values were largely mis-calculated... that called in the leverage issues. There are no issues if their pricing wasn't warped from reality by their misunderstanding of reality. Again, the problem is they're running and trying to profit off of the thin razors of calculations. The tolerance for error becomes much smaller.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

No you forgot the main reason banks are in so much trouble. Debt. Leverage. from the investment banking side via derivitives which we don't regulate or monitor apparantly. If the commercial side were seperate and safe we wouldn't need to bail out the investment-commercial banks that were holding so much of these deritivites or counter party contracts. CDS,CDO,MBS... and toxic assets.

......which are only considered toxic assets because the mortgages that make them up went into default.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

......which are only considered toxic assets because the mortgages that make them up went into default.

Right, but banks also leveraged these toxic assets with derivitives. That's the reason why the Fed/Treasury bought these toxic assets at 100% value so CDS contracts wouldn't cause cascading domino effect causing house of cards to collapse. Or at least that's the reason given... although from where I'm sitting it seems like all that money is going right to the bankers bonuses.

I know blaming the victim or shifting some of the blame to the victim works but it's in poor taste (like blaming a rape victim because how she was dressed etc...).

And in this case it's not even relevent since it's the entangled contracts (CDS) between all the financial/insurance companies that were hiding the mountain of debt/leverage/risk.

So to reiterate. Debt. Leverage. Contracts. Hidden. and you have a recipe for the Worst Financial Crisis since the Great Depression.
 
Re: Obama 9 -- Its Been a Whole Year Now

The only problem of "mortgages they couldn't afford" came into play was because they had these assets whose values were largely mis-calculated... that called in the leverage issues. There are no issues if their pricing wasn't warped from reality by their misunderstanding of reality. Again, the problem is they're running and trying to profit off of the thin razors of calculations. The tolerance for error becomes much smaller.

It wasn't just the fact the assets' values were mispriced, it was the appreciation of those assets driven in large part by cheap money that created the bubble. Moreover, very few risk models used by i-banks or ratings agencies ever considered the fact these assets c/would decline in value over time. I've been dealing with some of the ratings agencies this year, and they're still some of the biggest tools around. "Well, yeah we could rate that structure AA, but if you overcollateralize to X%, we'll rate it AAA, and you can pay us an extra $145,000 for the additional review and monitoring." Why they haven't been called to account for their "AAA"-mania, and subsequent downgrades that really started the ball rolling, still confounds the hell out of me. If any idiot in Congress, the SEC or White House doesn't see an inherent conflict in issuers paying for ratings, they should all resign or shoot themselves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top