Obama's Poll Numbers Are Falling to Earth

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by schutzenkonig

This shit is strait out of the democrat playbook which is based upon lies. Those banks were FORCED by legislation that DEMOCRATS put in place to give loans to poor minorities that couldn't actually afford homes. If they told those families that they couldn't afford the home or turned them down based upon actual objective standards, then they would be fined by the federal government for violating the community reinvestment act. THEN to hide it more, the democrats took money under the table from Fannie and Freddie for years and stonewalled any efforts to perform oversight on what they were doing. The Republicans saw this coming and blew the whistle, but because of democrats that filibustered and distorted the media, it never came to pass and the dems got their economic demise they wanted to get a communist into power.

Please cite your references from an unbiased source for the following points you made:

-Banks were FORCED to make loans (to anyone).
-Democrats (and not one republican) were solely responsible for FORCING banks to do anything
-Democrats (and not one republican) took money under the table from fannie and freddie
-Democrats (and not one republican) "stonewalled efforts to perform oversight" on taking money under the table
-Republicans (and not one democrat) are responsible for blowing the whistle on all of the above
-Democrats wanted economic demise (this one makes me laugh that you presented it as fact)
-Democrats want a communist in power
-Barack Obama is a communist

You claimed all of the above points in your post, yet backed NONE of them up with any sort of evidence or even commentary from anyone backing you up.

Maybe you've got some truth hidden beneath all your useless bullshit, but you come off as a pompous know-it-all when you present it the way you have.

I doubt even the most conservative neo-cons would appreciate you making the republican party look so out of touch and accusatory.

I'm inviting you to rethink your post and present the same argument in a manner that invites intelligent debate instead of just unloading a bunch of conspiracy theory crap all over the place.

[Ryan]

I can't wait for his response to all of it. I have to get this part out here.

Originally Posted by schutzenkonig

This shit is strait out of the democrat playbook which is based upon lies. Those banks were FORCED by legislation that DEMOCRATS put in place to give loans to poor minorities that couldn't actually afford homes. If they told those families that they couldn't afford the home or turned them down based upon actual objective standards, then they would be fined by the federal government for violating the community reinvestment act...

In December, one of GWB's advisors (a well qualified economist), said this:

Originally Posted by Randall Kroszner

Some critics of the CRA contend that by encouraging banking institutions to help meet the credit needs of lower-income borrowers and areas, the law pushed banking institutions to undertake high-risk mortgage lending. We have not yet seen empirical evidence to support these claims, nor has it been our experience in implementing the law over the past 30 years that the CRA has contributed to the erosion of safe and sound lending practices.

If that isn't enough for you, read the rest of the huge article where he explains in depth why the CRA is NOT responsible in the manner you present.

For the record, Kroszner has an economics degree from Brown, and a PhD in Economics from Harvard. Forgive me if I take his well-researched and source-cited word over yours.

[BackdoorJesus]

penis

[ravenshrike]

Originally Posted by schutzenkonig

This shit is strait out of the democrat playbook which is based upon lies. Those banks were FORCED by legislation that DEMOCRATS put in place to give loans to poor minorities that couldn't actually afford homes.

Eh, that's true as far as it goes, but if that was the only major issue, the crisis wouldn't be nearly as bad. What really happened was that the banks were forced to make the original loans, and in trying to get rid of debt that was EXTREMELY likely to be defaulted on, started the whole bundling process. All was still managable at this point, and would have been easily coverable with under a trilion dollars, even though really it was bad business practice to do at all. But the .gov mandated it and so it was done. Then somebody had an epiphany, 'proved' it with a computer model, and said HEY, we can do this with all TYPES of home loans and not just redlined ones and we'll make SHITLOADS of money. Of course, like most computer models, the lack of all real world variables came back to bite it in the ass *cough*global warming*cough*, and thus a crisis was born. However, the initial cause of the crisis was certainly written by government interference.

Originally Posted by Ryan

-Banks were FORCED to make loans (to anyone).

Technically they weren't forced to make the loans, however the CRA and later adjustments to it allowed people to sue the banks if they didn't make the loans.

[zpr]

NWS

[Ryan]

I love this place. I make a well thought out post and get a one word reply with the word "penis".

This sounds sarcastic, but it's not. I'm rarely serious in real life, so it's nice to spit out a bunch of serious political shit and then have it broken up with dick and fart jokes

The porn isn't bad, either, but it sucks being at work sometimes...

I hope shutzy does respond eventually, but I guess a porn hijack until then is probably the best course of action.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by ravenshrike

Technically they weren't forced to make the loans, however the CRA and later adjustments to it allowed people to sue the banks if they didn't make the loans.

Look deep down in your heart and tell me: Do you really think that the people who don't qualify for loans are the same people who threaten litigation?

Sure, there's always some who fit the bill but seriously... the people that the CRA helps are not exactly doctors and lawyers who understand the legal system or even what the CRA is for the most part. Banks aren't stupid, and they didn't make risky loans simply because they were fearful of being sued by people who don't even understand why they may or may not have had the right to sue- they more often made risky loans to people because they knew the people couldn't pay and that they'd get the property right back after earning points on the loan.

oh yeah- poop

[ravenshrike]

Originally Posted by Ryan

Look deep down in your heart and tell me: Do you really think that the people who don't qualify for loans are the same people who threaten litigation?

On average, no, I don't believe they are. Given that the types of lawsuits that would have occurred were class-action lawsuits, and the fact that once one of those is started people find it very, VERY easy to jump on the bandwagon, it does not matter that the majority of people would not try to start an initial lawsuit in the first place.

[Bipolar]

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by ravenshrike

On average, no, I don't believe they are. Given that the types of lawsuits that would have occurred were class-action lawsuits, and the fact that once one of those is started people find it very, VERY easy to jump on the bandwagon, it does not matter that the majority of people would not try to start an initial lawsuit in the first place.

So you honestly mean to tell me that the banks are the poor victims here who were coerced into making loans that they didn't want to make?

I hate to break it to you, but I work in the finance industry. I've been in a room with mortgage lenders (not my company...we don't do mortgages) while they use photoshop to alter bank statements to get someone into a house they couldn't afford. I listened to phone call after phone call of these guys just taking people for a ride and convincing them that rates would only go down and make the payments easier.

Then a few months later, I listened as these same people made phone calls to the same customers demanding they get out of the house before the sheriffs dept showed up to force them out.

This is not an isolated incident, and I have a few acquaintances that got very rich during that time period by putting people in houses they couldn't afford. I asked them how they sleep at night, and they all told me the same thing: "Very comfortably on my $4000 mattress after driving home in my $90k car to my $750k house".

They weren't scared of the government or anyone suing them. They did whatever they wanted. I know because I was physically there watching it.

They're all fucked now, of course, because the pot of gold ran out and they all had car payments and house payments out of their price range as well. What goes around comes around, I suppose.