Posted on 12/13/2014 9:46:05 AM PST by Libloather
Derivatives as an investment class are not limited to bundled mortgage derivatives. Any instrument sold as representative of an underlying asset is technically a derivative..paper nothing more and have been around for centuries. I just don’t think the government should be subsidizing derivative markets in any shape or form due to risk and fraud and apparently Ms. Warren thinks the same even though her party encouraged their use to make housing readily available to those who had not the slightest chance of paying for it.
They're just allowing them to trade where the Dodd Frank barred them.
As expected Zack Carter’s report in the lepersided Huffpoo doesn’t mention conservatives are also opposed to this bailout. In fact it also fails to report Boehner’s cutoff of improvements on FOI. Any so called “conservative” House Member and that includes “Wiz Ryan” who voted for this should be no longer be trusted and that includes every member of the WI GOPES House delegation except Sensenbrenner.
Very likely it Boner/Obama sold them as once the dems took over and perhaps even before (Clinton) banks were told the Fed would backup those bad phoney loans they were buying up and bundling . Selling off to Iceland and bunch of other countries . Both Obama and the GOPES (gop elite statists) wanted this.
While Pocawhochitts is being touted leading the charge it should be pointed out that she was quiet when the House was taking this up at the time.
No, it was the Democrats who strong armed banks and forced them to issue subprime loans. Then they expanded Fannie Mae so that the taxpayer would be liable for those loans.
Remember back in the day in Chicago Obama led a sit in to force Bank of America to agree to issue subprimes. Stuff like this was the root of the problem.
The fake Indian is always pontificating about the middle class,how they are being destroyed,but then she slams the Tea Party,who the hell does she think the Tea Party is made up of?
That's just the scary monster under the bed that they scare you with so you'll compliantly pick up the trillion dollar tab when they gamble and lose.
Geez, don't fall for it.
Really? Where did you get that figure?
well it worked, and now I am demanding that the government brake them up like Reagan did with AT&T.
The demographics of the Rat political base has them having the welfare class, public employees, and the ultra-rich. The Repub base has the private sector middle class.
You can't. Free Republic has a ban against posting anything from Huffington Post, so I do not know why this post was permitted.
I once saw something rather worthwhile there (HP is forced on you by AOL's access page), and I wanted to list it here, but when I set it up, it was blocked.
I don't know ---
The bankers want the taxpayers to hedge thier wallstreet casino bets. That way if they win..they win. If they lose they win! They are too big to lose!
“Really? Where did you get that figure?”
Yea, probably low. You had a bailout for a Trillion. Then the Fed “loaned” trillion to banks (i.e., printed money). Then had Obama get elected and instantly push up government spending by about $500B per year, since he took office (expanded food stamps, green energy, etc.). Probably more like 5 to 10 Trillion. Quite a bit, no?
I'm furious.
How it works is explained here at ZeroHedge:
Try 13 billion and most of that 13 billion not returned is because of "community" a.k.a minority banks.
“Geez, don’t fall for it.”
Nothing to fall for. I followed this stuff religiously from 2005 to 2008, every day, hours. It was obvious that banks were making loans that could ONLY be paid back if property kept appreciating at 10% a year, as the payments were way, way, out of reach to the recipients.
I know, the federal government pushed all this. But I do not remember a SINGLE PERSON in that business saying something like “You realize you’re forcing us to make loans that can never be repaid if property values don’t continue to go up.” NOT ONE PERSON. Instead, they took the cash and figured that they had safety in numbers (and campaign contributions)...and apparently were right.
And now MY CHILDREN pay the price.
They’ll all wet their pants next time dear leader speechifies..
“No, it was the Democrats who strong armed banks and forced them to issue subprime loans.”
If you can, please send me a link to where the people running these banks actually COMPLAINED about it. I have no recollection, at all, of anyone in that business having any problem with those loans...knowing FULL-WELL that they would never be paid back, on the terms of the note.
I do, however, vividly remember Mozzila or whatever his name is, at Countrywide tell Congress about all the great things they were doing for less-advantaged communities.
“How about less regulation and some caveat emptor. No more taxpayer bailouts or government insurance for risky behaviour.”
That’s fine...never happen though.
“You may have noticed, apparently not, that all these Bank Bailouts have come after GREATER AND GREATER regulation. Hows that working for you?”
I still don’t remember a single person in that business having ANY PROBLEM AT ALL with those loans...but then maybe I missed something. In most business, if they are pushed to do something dumb or costly, people COMPLAIN...but not bankers, not at all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.