Happy Thanksgiving.
Posted on 11/22/2008 7:58:20 PM PST by FocusNexus
All you need to say is that I’m , speaking of your self, to uneducated to grasp the derivatives melt down, we would understand. The hyper ventilating about the boogie man, liberal are republican, gets you no where in addressing the problem.
Communicate, org.whodat. That’s what we’re here for.
In simple terms if the probably was only the ARMS, Paulson could take a small part of the 700 billion and buy them all down to an affordable level, however there is no way to buy down 283 +++ trillion derivatives. Just look at the obligation of citi and you will see. "The US' Citibank is selling its exposure to a $6bn debt at a loss after the syndication of the loan to the sovereign fund, the Investment Corporation of Dubai (ICD), failed to secure bank support."
“Stupid is as stupid posts!, “
YOU said it. Look in the mirror.
You are runnig around personally attacking people, because you can’t refute their rational arguments, and are just trying to spread liberal propaganda, to misdirect people from the real root cause of the problem, the Democrats, as described well in this article.
Stated income loans USED TO BE reserved for the self-employed who could verify sufficent income through bank statements but not tax returns. Even this category was bastardized into a program to reach the "underserved" when Fannie/Freddie started accepting stated income loans for W-2 wage earners.
Government intervention killed the commonsense and self-preservation of the lending institutions with a marketing promise of "government backing."
Which doesn't even get close to the truth and the truth is that CRA covered institutions made >75% of the dollar value of the loans.
And how might we decide which one of us is telling the truth? Simply by looking at which institutions are falling by the waysaid like dead jihadists. The CRA covered institutions are the dead jihadist institutions while the institutions not covered by CRA go about their business mostly unaffected by the meltdown.
Why do you suppose that is?
Because it is not true would be the best answer. http://www.mortgagebankers.org/files/News/InternalResource/44130_Testimony.pdf
What isn’t true? That you didn’t tell the truth about the dollar amount of loans or that the CRA covered institutions have been more adversely affected than those that weren’t covered. You can attempt to answer in your own words. Go ahead, give it a try.
As an interesting note, I read in the Atlanta paper last week, that nearly half of the notices sent out about refinancing came back undelivered, it seem that a very, very large part of those so called arms were investors gaming the system.
History has shown that Socialism corrupts everything it touches. Then like untreated cancer, eventually kills it. The United States of America is about to learn this lesson the hard way.
My best guess is that you have no concept of what you are talking about, would be the answer?? Other than that your sentence makes no sense.
Right you are; the historical record is clear. Black helicopters, my arse. It could not be clearer. Clinton and the dems, including Barney and Teddy, did not invent derivatives but they pushed the hell out of them while encouratging the “community organizers” to demand that they be allowed to lie to get them. It was all for votes.
They affirmatized the eschaton, so to speak.
You slipped in to ad hominem because you don't have the knowledge to answer the simple assertions I made.
To wit,
"University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations."
which is misleading at best because while it indicates that only 20% of subprime mortages were issued by CRA covered institutions it fails to note that greater than 75% of the dollar value of those loans were written by that same 20% of those institutions.
You undertand that part right?
Secondly, CRA covered institutions are disproportionately going under. You understand what that sentence means Mr Economy?
More to the point your link has the following paragraph:
"On average, loans with a high loan-to-value ratio (LTV) are riskier than lower LTV ones. Borrowers with little equity in a home can walk away more easily from their homes, putting lenders more at risk. Furthermore, when the LTV is high, there is increased risk that the home value could fall below the loan balance, creating a negative situation during the early years of the loan. The average LTVs of loans in most states in the two divisions are significantly higher than the national average."
CRA covered institutions were given incentives, read big hammer of government, to make these loans with no incentive to make sure they performed.
So Mr Economics, what happens when government gives incentives for a and not for b?
No question about it, especially in certain markets. But the number of undelivered default notices is only an indicator. I have people in my own neighborhood who have simply thrown the keys through the door and abandoned their properties. Reminds me of earlier RE market crashes — Houston, Los Angeles, early 90s.
Not childish at all. Quite a good parallel I think. But perhaps to you childish. Our Banking sector got Nationalized when Congress demanded that Banks become Social Services in stead of private ventures.
I don’t know about you, but I sure got a working over in the market because of it. Felt like rape to me.
Been away on business, just saw your silly reply, if you read the link I gave and look at the graphs, you will find the apex of the arm’s defaults was almost two years ago. The banks going under today are the result of the derivatives and other speculative deals and a 20% are more greater drop in the value of mortgaged property, because of the collapsed housing market from over building.
Happy Thanksgiving.
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.