If there had been, there default rate would have been lower than everybody else' default rates, meaning they were being held to higher underwriting standards than everybody else.
Their default rate was higher than everybody else' default rates, meaning they were already being held to lower underwriting standards.
Your logic is dead on....
“Their default rate was higher than everybody else’ default rates, meaning they were already being held to lower underwriting standards.”
It is worse than that; the government put a gun to the banks’ heads to force them to lend to unqualified minority borrowers, then accused them of deceiving those same people.
In the meantime, whole neighborhoods were destroyed and hardworking taxpayers forced to flee even further from the welfare influx that had been foisted on them.
You're absolutely correct. However, there's always been, at least up until now, discrimination against those who cannot afford to repay the debt.
deny a loan=”redlining”
approve a loan= “predatory lending”
“pwedatowy wending” if you’re Barney.
You assume that banks are using racism to keep blacks and other minorities from getting homes. If that was the case you would be correct.
However, the problem with your logic is that most banks comply with the CRA, where the Justice Department brings down their hammer as in the recent case with Wells Fargo was that blacks and other minorities were being charged higher fees and interest rates, even if their credit and income was close to the same.
Therefore is lending is flowing to minorities but banks are charging them more. While some racism does exist in the system, I think a majoritity of these charges show up because of a lack of knowledge by the borrowers not because of some overt racism.
You assume that banks are using racism to keep blacks and other minorities from getting homes. If that was the case you would be correct.
However, the problem with your logic is that most banks comply with the CRA, where the Justice Department brings down their hammer as in the recent case with Wells Fargo was that blacks and other minorities were being charged higher fees and interest rates, even if their credit and income was close to the same.
Therefore is lending is flowing to minorities but banks are charging them more. While some racism does exist in the system, I think a majoritity of these charges show up because of a lack of knowledge by the borrowers not because of some overt racism.