In the middle of the Recovery Sum---I mean Wint---I mean...uh...GREEN SHOOTS for everyone!
Posted on 03/02/2011 7:41:29 AM PST by FromLori
Of the nonperforming loans on the balance sheets of the 12 banks that failed in February, 72% were for commercial real estate, according to analytics firm Trepp.
There have been 23 bank failures in 2011, but Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair said closings this year will not surpass the 157 shuttered in 2010. That was an 18-year high, which Bair said will prove to be the peak coming out of the financial crisis.
Analysts at Trepp estimate that there should still be more than 100 failed institutions by the end of 2011, however. Most of the February failures occurred in Georgia, California and Florida.
And while most of the firms will be smaller community banks, the overwhelming amount of problem loans are in commercial real estate, not residential. For the 12 that failed in February, CRE loans made up $230 million of the collective $320 million in nonperforming loans. Roughly 37% were construction loans and 35% were commercial mortgages.
"The residential real estate loan category was a distant second, with $65 million in nonperforming loans," Trepp said. "That was 20% of the total nonperforming balance."
(Excerpt) Read more at housingwire.com ...
Look at all these business dead beats
In the middle of the Recovery Sum---I mean Wint---I mean...uh...GREEN SHOOTS for everyone!
The thing that bothers me about this is you notice the type of banks it took down? Smaller conservative banks while the big boys who backed obama and were given better terms at the Fed. window well they're still around. But at least they are being sued big time now by all the investors they defrauded.
Investor Lawsuits Are Raising the Heat on Bank of America for 'Putbacks'
The thing that bothers me about this is you notice the type of banks it took down? Smaller conservative banks while the big boys who backed obama and were given better terms at the Fed. window well they're still around. But at least they are being sued big time now by all the investors they defrauded.
Total garbage, but it is supposed to make you angry --- at the "rich," "financiers," banks --- just as Marx wanted.
There is no evidence that she understands the words she is using. But she scavenges the Web for anything negative about those usual "culprits of capitalism."
Unfortunately, this garbage reverberates with some less informed FReepers.
Crony-capitalism is not capitalism, nor is it anything we should be defending. You have some nerve to come here and spew such ignorance and then try to accuse other FReepers of being ‘less informed’.
I completely agree. When formLori, you or anybody else finds evidence of cronyism, let's discuss that. You'll find me to be a very vocal critic.
I am sorry to see that your standards are so low: where in fromLori's post did you see any evidence of cronyism?
To be sure, there is plenty of MSM to point to which speaks of "bankers who put us in this mess." Many FReepers but this garbage without knowing any finance: they simply believe what they read. "All those newspapers cannot be wrong,"
All those Communist newspapers in the Soviet Union could not be dishonest either, could they? All those numerous newspapers in Germany --- and even professorial books since 1860s --- could not be wrong about the evils of the Jews, could they?
Many people here fall into a similar trap.
You have some nerve to come here and.. try to accuse other FReepers of being ‘less informed.'
Yes, I have a nerve, although I am sorry to see that rubs you a wrong way.
No, I did not just try: that's what I actually said. Yes, it's been my observation that some FReeprs swallowed commie anti-capitalist propaganda lock-stock-and-barrel. That is what I try to attract your attention to.
"The delegated flow channel purchased approximately $50 billion of prime mortgages annually. These mortgages were not underwriten by us before they were purchased. My Quality Assurance area was responsible for underwriting a small sample of the files post-purchase to ensure credit quality was maintained.
"These mortgages were sold to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other investors. Although we did not underwrite these mortgages, Citi did rep and warrant to the investors that the mortgages were underwritten to Citi credit guidelines. "In mid-2006 I discovered that over 60% of these mortgages purchased and sold were defective. Because Citi had given reps and warrants to the investors that the mortgages were not defective, the investors could force Citi to repurchase many billions of dollars of these defective assets. This situation represented a large potential risk to the shareholders of Citigroup.
"I started issuing warnings in June of 2006 and attempted to get management to address these critical risk issues. These warnings continued through 2007 and went to all levels of the Consumer Lending Group.
"We continued to purchase and sell to investors even larger volumes of mortgages through 2007. And defective mortgages increased during 2007 to over 80% of production."
Check their donation history if you want to see just who they've been donating to and just how deep the cronyism goes.
This is fraud. Fraud that damn near brought the country to its knees. Fraud that has destroyed the lives of many people. And did anyone go to jail? No, they got BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OUT OF THE POCKET OF JOHN Q. TAXPAYER for their efforts!!! And if you think they're the only one, you're on crack.
So, go on. Tell me I'm a Marxist. Tell me illuminating truths about the Community Reinvestment Act. Tell me how these guys are the 'backbone' of America.
Every one of them should be in handcuffs along side their accomplices in the government.
Breaking News: JPMorgan May Need Another $4 Billion For Legal Losses
You make some pretty bold assertions. Since you’ve dubbed yourself as some sort of authority I’ll take the liberty of suggesting it is you who are among the “less informed” Freepers.
You give a long quote from a testimony. The only thing it says is this: "My opinion about the mortgages differed from that of the rest of the management: I thought mortgages were defective." Firstly, he does not tell what he means by defective.
Secondly, this is just one man's opinion. He admits that there were many others on the management team, and none picked him up on that "signal."
Thirdly, not every defect must be reacted to. How many time did you hear from a car mechanic things like, "Your break pads are getting thin, you may want to think about replacing them," and reply: "Thanks, I'll do that at the next oil change, in three months." Some "defects" are not critical, or not known to be critical at the time the decision is made.
Let's return to the second point. The testimony appears to say that the rest of management ignored the speaker's. You immediately conclude "This is fraud." I hope you can see now that you are too hasty. It can be that the man was simply incorrect in this understanding of what "deficiency" is; he may have made an honest mistake just as you mistakenly jump to conclusions. Second, the deficiency may have been understood as such but ignored because it was not viewed as important. It well may be that management made a mistake here, but that does not necessarily make it a fraud. Thirdly, the management may have actually been alarmed by the "deficiency" of mortgages, but did not involve this particular person in rectifying the problem -- -some other people may have worked on that.
There could've been great many things other than fraud. There is absolutely no evidence in this testimony that fraud has been committed, as you claim.
You've got to check the definition of fraud and how it differs from mistake, error, negligence, etc. This is just an example of what I said: (i) you are throwing words around without knowing fully their meaning, (ii) you do not practice careful reasoning, jumping to unwarranted conclusions.
It's OK, of course, not to know finance the difference between a fraud and mistake: we all have but a limited knowledge. But when you don't know something, have no opinion. The opinion you express is just the opinion of hte MSM and your anger --- completely unfounded in anything you say -- is directed just at what socialists wanted to target. I am talking about Marx, Hitler, Mussolini, Lenin and all the variations thereof: they always focused on "financiers," because people don't know what "financiers" do and it is easier to anger them at those symbols of capitalism.
The purpose of my writing is to make you think about that. If you know that you are inadvertently aiding commies in destroying this country, then fine, go ahead. But if this is an accident, the commie propaganda got under your skin by mistake, then ask yourself, "How did that happen? Perhaps I should not trust the sources I did; perhaps I should learn more details abut all those finance and governentb things?"
Tell me I'm a Marxist.
I did not and will not, unless you become one. I don't even know you. What I said was that many people repeat commie propaganda. That does not make them Marxist: they could be doing it by mistake. I don't call them anything, but Lenin called them useful idiots.
Tell me illuminating truths about the Community einvestment Act.
I will not if you don't start thinking and just continue to give to your anger.
Tell me how these guys are the 'backbone' of America.
Another logical mistake. Firstly, I've never said that they were. Secondly, no particular sector of our economy is supposed to be "backbone of America" any more than any other: we all pull our fair share. Thirdly, finance IS backbone of business and economics: two main and equally important inputs into production are labor and capital.
Did you notice how unfair you are, how many times you've already put words in my mouth, attributed to me something I never said? You do the same with respect to hundreds of thousands of Americans working in the financial industry and hundreds of millions of Americans that own financial industry. You probably don't even know that it is Main Street that owns Wall Street, not a few "rich" people.
Finally, step back and look at what happened here. You accused someone of no less than fraud based on some testimony that you completely misunderstood. That is also unfair --- how about me just accusing you, out of the blue, of being a thief and a rapist. You'd go through the roof. And yet you do that with respect to other people without a moment of hesitation.
By the way if there were fraud there, you would never hear this testimony in the first place: the matter would be in courts, not Congress. Just this should've told you how wrong you are.
But suppose for a moment that in this particular case there was fraud. WHat would that prove? Absolutely nothing. I never said that dishonesty, fraud and other sins don't exist in the world. You've forgotten what we were discussing: financial and housing crisis. So even if there were some kind of fraud in this case (there wasn't) you have to show how that fraud caused the financial crisis.
It has not. I could not have possibly caused a crisis. This is total nonsense.
So, look at what happened here: you could not even maintain focus on the topic at hand, threw out completely meaningless statement, misusing the words such as "fraud," attempted to give as evidence something totally unrelated, and then misread what that "evidence" actually said. Then you topped that with new accusations.
Why? Only because you are angry --- just what the Marxists want. You'll not learn nothinhg at all if you continue to be angry, You want to pass judgment on finance and its role in government --- fine. But then learn something about that. There are plenty of ways to do that, from reading on your own to taking courses. In the very least you should ask questions about these matters and carefully and critically think and rethink many times the answers you receive.
Stating the course you are on does not help you a single but: your anger at imaginary enemies does not help to win arguments and only plays into the hands of the commies.
No specifics. If something bothers you, why keep it a secret?
Since you’ve dubbed yourself as some sort of authority I’ll take the liberty of suggesting it is you who are among the “less informed” Freepers.
So if someone claims to be an authority, that makes him uninformed? By what logic did you come to this conclusion?
Just reread your statement. It has the same structure as"Since you claim to be an avid reader, you must be illiterate." Does that make any sense to you?
I'm quite well aware of what I'm talking about. It seems that you can't say the same.
Every single thing you write in this post illustrates that you are woefully uninformed. Beyond that, I do not have half my day to devote to your education.
I would suggest that you read more about this situation and what 'defective' meant and who this person was and how many other people warned of the same dire 'problems'. I suggest you do some homework before coming to me with asshattery like 'not every defect must be reacted to'.
Otherwise, it would be more productive for me to have this conversation with my Siberian Husky.
Sorry to see you chose not to hear and insist instead on showing fully your impotence. You simply have nothing to say --- that is why all you can do is huff and puff. Yep, makes you look like a big shot.
Well, you've made your choice. Just don't continue to be delusional: your huffing and puffing does not pass as intelligence, your habitual defamation of people does not pass as morality, and the socialist propaganda you help to spew does not pass as conservatism.
Continue to be a useful idiot for the commies, help them destroy this country. And, by all means, continue to learn finance from your Siberian Husky.
Have a good socialist day, Mr. "Conservative."
Continue to be a useful idiot for the commies
Just like every other leftist, there you go accusing others of what you yourself are guilty of. You're the one who is here being an apologist for crony-capitalists and their fraudulent activity. You are the one who came to this thread defaming people. You are the one with arguments that make little or no sense.
Good luck with your propaganda, comrade TopQuark.
Since you have nothing to say, you'd look a lot smarter if you jut kept silence. I hope you are happy with posting that photo.
Now, stop bothering adults and go play video games while you can ---- it's about your bedtime, isn't it?
Since you have nothing to say, you'd look a lot smarter if you jut kept silence. I hope you are happy with posting that photo.
Now, stop bothering adults and go play video games while you can ---- it's about your bedtime, isn't it?
How do you bring down a failed bank? Does it fail again?
Anyway, I say let them all fail. No bailouts of the deadbeat banks or the deadbeat borrowers. Productive people can get great deals from the foreclosed properties.
Here's the scoop ,,, I posted that Bozo the Clown Atomic Bomb cloud because it's funny ,, damned funny ... you should recognize it from foreclosurefraud.com ...
As a former IT pro (Fortran, Assembler and Cobol programmer) , a stockbroker and a multi-engine instrument pilot ... I am pretty comfortable saying that my reasoning skills are adequate to understand how the public is being played by the wall street banks.. I can also see how here on my own city's main street that CRE is DEAD and has been for about 4 years.... There are huge amounts of CRE that were given the "extend and pretend" treatment at the beginning of the crash and are getting ready to go through another bigger refinance (remember most of these are 5-7 year interest only balloons) that will be even MORE painful for the banks that will be taking the cramdown AGAIN.
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.