ContraryGuy on November 17, 2011, 11:40:37 am
Quote
Gotta admire Iceland....

AMEN to that!

Sure, if you want rampant unemployment, and no ability to get credit to buy anything.  Of course, that means you'd have to pay cash for everything.
OOps! No job, no cash!

Sure the banks collapsed and werent bailed out, but then the economy collapsed.

Good Times!

mellyrn on November 17, 2011, 01:44:33 pm
Quote
but then the economy collapsed.

Good Times!

"Yet the fact remains that the outlook for the Icelandic economy is looking rather healthier than other distressed economies in Europe. . . ."

Sure, the economy collapsed -- temporarily.  And it could have stayed collapsed if the Icelandic people had just accepted responsibility for the bankers' bad investments.  Gosh, why would they not have wanted that?  Why take on a short-term, temporary hardship in order to avoid a long, possibly endless hardship?

That's the admirable thing, sweetie:  being tough enough to take the necessary medicine up front.


sam on November 17, 2011, 04:09:51 pm
Quote
Gotta admire Iceland....

Sure the banks collapsed and werent bailed out, but then the economy collapsed.

In 2008, the Icelandic banks collapsed, the government guaranteed them and promised bailout, with borrowed money, ("depositors' and investors' guarantee fund", and the 2009 June international agreement to repay the banks depositors)

And the economy promptly collapsed under the burden of the enormous liabilities of the fund. Then in 2010 March 6, the voters, by 93% to 2% voted to stiff the banks and their depositors, collapsing the depositors' and investors' guarantee fund, whose sole asset was taxpayer futures.

Since then, from 2010 March to the present, the Icelandic economy has started to recover

Unemployment is now 5.9% http://www.icelandreview.com/icelandreview/search/news/Default.asp?ew_0_a_id=383405

Obama would kill his mother for an unemployment rate of 5.9%

Recapping:  Icelandic government agrees to take on the banks liabilities; the icelandic economy collapses.  Icelanders are outraged by the collapse, reject the liabilities; unsurprisingly the economy improves.

Sieggy on November 17, 2011, 07:07:09 pm
race was a factor in MBS because Congress and Fannie/Freddie said "make race a factor in MBS."  You've discussed this at length.

Race was *not* a factor in CMBS because no such factors existed in those markets -- rather, they were simply corrupt and riding a classic bubble, chasing market share because that and other metrics determined how much individual players got at bonus time. 

Quite so.  CMBS was a plain old fashioned capitalist bubble, not evildoing by regulators.

It was also fueled by conflict of interest - that those receiving the bonuses failed to do due diligence on behalf of their customers - evildoing by capitalists, which worsened the madness of crowds that leads to bubbles.

But when the CMBS bubble burst, the banks did not lose the gigantic quantities of money they lost in MBS.

I am not arguing that capitalists are perfect angels, just that regulators are usually worse than those they regulate.

Finance is based on trust, trust can be violated, and frequently is.

I have never argued that bankers are nice people who should be free to do as they please.  I have instead argued that those that borrow short and lend long, and find themselves unable to pay their depositors, should be hung, or suffer debt slavery,
This was a classic example of too many piranhas and not enough cow . . . I live in SW Florida, and have seen housing bubbles before, but this one was more than a bubble, it was a mania. My home is paid for free and clear, and in the time before the bubble burst, I was getting 2 - 6 mail solicitations and an infuriating number of telemarketers calling a day wanting to sell me a mortgage (which I neither wanted or needed). About every third commercial on TV was for a builder, developer, or mortgage company.

Flipping was 'in' - the house 2 doors down from me which sold for $26,500 back in 1967 was bought by a speculator for $650,000, and the buyer bragged to me that he was going to sell it in a year for over a million. I just smiled and nodded . . . the house is now a rental, and last I heard, he couldn't move it for a third of that. I knew guys who were mortgaging their houses to the hilt and living high on the hog, others were flipping lots right and left. Out in Lehigh Acres, lots in BFE with no utilities which were going for a few thousand in the early 80s were going for close to $100K. It was nuts, the good times were rolling, and it was going to go on FOREVER because everyone KNEW that housing prices could only go up up UP!

Even after the crash, developers were still building strip centers which are still standing empty.  The developers had the land and the funding, so they continued to build even though they had no tenants lined up. If you think there's a housing glut, that's nothing compared to the commercial real estate glut we have here. And apparently, they don't feel the law of supply and demand applies to them, as they refuse to lower rents to a point that they can attract businesses. Within 5 miles of me are several hundred empty storefronts, and now the county is having to deal with an up surge of people operating businesses out of their homes that the county is NOT happy about.

Race wasn't an issue. If you had a pulse and could sign your name, you could buy a house, turn around, take a second on it (before even making their first payment), and go buy a car. Some developers were throwing in a car with a house purchase. Everyone was getting their money on the front end - who cared if the buyer was obviously unable to make payments? That's somebody ELSE'S problem. I knew brokers who were making $30K - $50K a month writing mortgages that were as firmly rooted as Birnham Wood. Numbers were all that mattered, and qualifying buyers was not even an issue - the brokers and bankers would fill out the forms for the buyers, put in whatever was needed to get it through, and present it to the buyer for signature. The developers set up kiosks in the Mall and told anyone interested that all they had to do was sign on the dotted line and they could move in tomorrow! Fraud was the order of the day, and as long as the bosses said it was OK, no one was going to do anything that would interfere with their commission and bonus checks. And the buyers were tickled pink, they were moving into houses that they thought were going to secure their futures, after all, the prices (they were assured) could only go up.

Greed ruled, the trough was overflowing, and the feeding was frenzied. No one wanted to hear about maybe the market was overheated, their monthly checks were all that mattered. Anyone who tried to point out that all this was unsustainable was shouted down. As long as the money flowed, no one wanted to heed any kind of warning. Everyone cheated - it's easy to blame the buyers, but the sales tactics used by the sellers were in many cases deceptive and despicable, and people with little education or experience with real estate could be led about like Shropshire sheep. I agree they were foolish consumers, but on the other hand, they were being fleeced by professionals.

Playing the race card in this debacle is sheer demagoguery. It didn't matter if you were a dumbass redneck moving up from a singlewide in the woods or an illegal with mexican mud still on your boots - if you could make a mark on a piece of paper, you were in like Flynn. And now that the music has stopped, everyone wants to blame everyone else. Bull. It was everyone in this who were intent on chewing off their piece of the cow with zero concern for due diligence or moral hazard, from the dimwitted, starry eyed buyers to the shrewd, gimlet eyed scammers to the self serving myopic politicians who facilitated this debacle.

A plague on all their houses. But like all plagues, it went epidemic, spread everywhere, and now we're all suffering the effects. I can only take comfort in the fact that I resisted the siren's lure of easy money, and I don't owe anyone a single cent.

sam on November 18, 2011, 04:17:08 am
Greed ruled, the trough was overflowing, and the feeding was frenzied. No one wanted to hear about maybe the market was overheated, their monthly checks were all that mattered. Anyone who tried to point out that all this was unsustainable was shouted down. As long as the money flowed, no one wanted to heed any kind of warning. Everyone cheated - it's easy to blame the buyers, but the sales tactics used by the sellers were in many cases deceptive and despicable, and people with little education or experience with real estate could be led about like Shropshire sheep. I agree they were foolish consumers, but on the other hand, they were being fleeced by professionals.

What I saw, in every case that I observed after 2005 November, was a Hispanic purchasing a startlingly expensive house with no money down, and cashback under the table.  How is that is Hispanic being fleeced?  How is he being foolish?

If the house goes up, he gets to flip it at a profit, if it goes down, he has the cashback and free housing, often free luxury housing, until they get around to evicting him.  Heads he wins a lot of money, tails he wins cashback and free housing.  Or, what commonly happened, was that when housing prices fell, was that he eventually negotiated the loan down to a payment schedule and interest rate that reflected the lower value of the house

That was not just a good deal for that Hispanic, that is a fantastic deal.

Now you might suppose that even if the Hispanic is not being fleeced, nonetheless the banks are making out like bandits selling dud mortgages to suckers on the MBS market, and before 2005 November there was a lot of that, but after 2005 November, the MBS market was undead, a zombie maintained in imitation of life.  Banks were, in substantial part, stuck with the dud mortgages they issued, or at least stuck with the worst of them.  From 2005 November to some time in 2007 people were pretending their existing mortgage backed securities were worth something, but were reluctant to expand the pretense to include more mortgage backed securities.

Playing the race card in this debacle is sheer demagoguery. It didn't matter if you were a dumbass redneck moving up from a singlewide in the woods or an illegal with mexican mud still on your boots - if you could make a mark on a piece of paper, you were in like Flynn.

Yet strange to report, somehow the vast majority of those receiving these loans were somehow not dumbass rednecks, but dumbass hispanics.

When Beverly Hills Bank was found to be "substantially noncompliant with the CRA", it was not because it had been failing to make these loans to "dumbass rednecks", but because it had been failing to make these loans to cat eating no-hablo-english wetbacks with no regular job.

And why is it horribly shocking to call someone a cat eating no-hablo-english wetback, but just fine, and a sign of social superiority, to call someone a dumbass redneck?

Sieggy on November 18, 2011, 08:23:14 am
Greed ruled, the trough was overflowing, and the feeding was frenzied. No one wanted to hear about maybe the market was overheated, their monthly checks were all that mattered. Anyone who tried to point out that all this was unsustainable was shouted down. As long as the money flowed, no one wanted to heed any kind of warning. Everyone cheated - it's easy to blame the buyers, but the sales tactics used by the sellers were in many cases deceptive and despicable, and people with little education or experience with real estate could be led about like Shropshire sheep. I agree they were foolish consumers, but on the other hand, they were being fleeced by professionals.

What I saw, in every case that I observed after 2005 November, was a Hispanic purchasing a startlingly expensive house with no money down, and cashback under the table.  How is that is Hispanic being fleeced?  How is he being foolish?

If the house goes up, he gets to flip it at a profit, if it goes down, he has the cashback and free housing, often free luxury housing, until they get around to evicting him.  Heads he wins a lot of money, tails he wins cashback and free housing.  Or, what commonly happened, was that when housing prices fell, was that he eventually negotiated the loan down to a payment schedule and interest rate that reflected the lower value of the house

That was not just a good deal for that Hispanic, that is a fantastic deal.

Now you might suppose that even if the Hispanic is not being fleeced, nonetheless the banks are making out like bandits selling dud mortgages to suckers on the MBS market, and before 2005 November there was a lot of that, but after 2005 November, the MBS market was undead, a zombie maintained in imitation of life.  Banks were, in substantial part, stuck with the dud mortgages they issued, or at least stuck with the worst of them.  From 2005 November to some time in 2007 people were pretending their existing mortgage backed securities were worth something, but were reluctant to expand the pretense to include more mortgage backed securities.

Playing the race card in this debacle is sheer demagoguery. It didn't matter if you were a dumbass redneck moving up from a singlewide in the woods or an illegal with mexican mud still on your boots - if you could make a mark on a piece of paper, you were in like Flynn.

Yet strange to report, somehow the vast majority of those receiving these loans were somehow not dumbass rednecks, but dumbass hispanics.

When Beverly Hills Bank was found to be "substantially noncompliant with the CRA", it was not because it had been failing to make these loans to "dumbass rednecks", but because it had been failing to make these loans to cat eating no-hablo-english wetbacks with no regular job.

And why is it horribly shocking to call someone a cat eating no-hablo-english wetback, but just fine, and a sign of social superiority, to call someone a dumbass redneck?


You're fixated on 'hispanics'. Hate to tell you this, but while yes, a lot of them bought houses poorly, there were a lot of just regular folk, including a great many retirees who put their money in what they though were sure fire safe investments. The guy who lost his shirt on the house a couple of doors down was a canadian, not hispanic. We had a crapload of people who bought second 'investment' homes here with their retirement money who are now greeters at Wal-Mart , working part time at 7-11s, and living on ramen noodles. There was a LOT of english and german money here that got taken to the cleaners, too. A very great many of the people who were living in single-wides out in the woods got houses . . . a lot of them are back in their single-wides now. And for the record, I tried warning a fair number of dumbass rednecks about what they were getting into, but got laughed at because I was a 'pinhead'. Sheesh . . .

And it wasn't just home sales, it was the shoddy mortgages that were being pushed on one and all. Seriously, between mail and phone, I was getting over 30 solicitations a week trying to get me to take out a mortgage on my house. As for who fleeced who, the brokers and bankers were selling to literally anyone who could hold a pen and pocketing huge commissions. The whole process was corrupt from bottom to top - as I said. You're apparently blaming the people who were buying houses that they (and the sellers assured them) thought could only go up in value while holding blameless the guys who faked the paperwork and oversold to unqualified buyers. When you have gullible buyers and unscrupulous sellers with zero oversight or business ethics, you have a recipe for disaster.

From what I can see up close and personal down here, it's not hispanics being evicted, it's anglos. The hispanics tend to move a dozen or so family members into these houses, and split the housing costs among them. You can generally tell the hispanic homes, they're spotless with a half dozen trucks out front. I guess you blame them for the mess if you want, but from what I can see here, they're doing quite well for themselves. This isn't a racial issue, it's an economic one. If it eases your mind to blame it all on 'those people', well, knock yourself out. But the simple fact is that greed ruled the day, the unscrupulous made a pile, and left the economy in a shambles. There's plenty of blame to go around for everyone in this debacle.


SandySandfort on November 18, 2011, 08:51:27 am
You're fixated on 'hispanics'. Hate to tell you this, but while yes, a lot of them bought houses poorly, there were a lot of just regular folk...

I'm Hispanic (ta da!) and I am here to tell you that some of us are responsible and some of us aren't... just like any other identifiable ethnic group. We don't know what Sam is (well, actually we do, but I mean ethnically), but whatever it is, I bet I personally know members of that community that could never qualify for a bank loan under any rational lending policy. But as you correctly point out, Sieggy, it is always easier for the Sams of the world to scapegoat those people rather than actually deal with individuals as individuals. How sad.

sam on November 18, 2011, 12:48:58 pm
You're fixated on 'hispanics'. Hate to tell you this, but while yes, a lot of them bought houses poorly, there were a lot of just regular folk,

Not true.  Towards the end, absolutely no regular folk.

Towards the end, mid 2005 to early 2007, in Sunnyvale, a suburb that was mostly white, considerably less than one percent of those buying houses were white males with good English skills, very possibly zero white males with good English.

When prices reached unreasonable levels, white males with fluent English completely stopped buying, which suggests that if you were a white male with no credit rating and no assets, you were not in fact eligible for a no money down loan, even though theoretically lenders were not discriminating, loan officers must have been markedly less enthusiastic about faking up documents for white male English speaking borrowers.

If they had been as willing to fake up documents for white males, we would have seen some white male bums buying houses.

(Since a white male with no assets and no credit rating should be cheerfully willing to buy a house with a no money down mortgage at any price, particularly if he gets cashback under the table)

The foreclosure data indicates that the same was approximately true nation wide, in that the distribution of foreclosures by locality indicate ninety nine percent of foreclosures were non asian minority, though this has now fallen to ninety five percent.  You can check that yourself. 

The housing boom was primarily driven by a US government operation to move non asian minorities into the suburbs.

Towards the end, from some time in 2005 onwards, the housing boom was completely, 100% driven by a US government operation to move non asian minorities into the suburbs, in that few white English speaking males, possibly absolutely zero white English speaking males, were buying.

including a great many retirees who put their money in what they though were sure fire safe investments. The guy who lost his shirt on the house a couple of doors down was a canadian, not hispanic.

Why did he have to put money down, when others did have to?

If he lost his shirt, he must have put some money down.  The boom was driven by no money down loans, (because towards the end, no one would risk their own money on a house) To the best of my observation, Hispanics never put money down, and generally received cashback under the table.  If he put some money down, when Hispanics never put money down, that he lost money is evidence that the boom was driven by racially allocated loans, not evidence that it was not.

We had a crapload of people who bought second 'investment' homes here with their retirement money who are now greeters at Wal-Mart , working part time at 7-11s, and living on ramen noodles.

Really?

Why buy with your own money?  By 2005, no one was putting their own money at risk.

Further, your claim just does not fit with the distribution of foreclosures, which closely parallels the distribution of hispanics.

Again, if they lost their own money, when the boom was driven by no money down loans, that is evidence for racial allocation of loans, not evidence against it.

There was a LOT of english and german money here that got taken to the cleaners, too. A very great many of the people who were living in single-wides out in the woods got houses

Again, the redneck jokes.  By 2005, white English speaking males had completely dropped out of the market.  Zero or indistinguishable from zero.

Which indicates that if you were a white male with no job, no income, and no assets, you could not get a no money down loan for a million dollar house, while it is apparent that Hispanics could, and regularly did.

sam on November 18, 2011, 12:53:22 pm
Quote from: SandySandfort link=topic=637.msg17721#msg17721 I'm Hispanic ([i
ta da![/i]) and I am here to tell you that some of us are responsible and some of us aren't... just like any other identifiable ethnic group. We don't know what Sam is (well, actually we do, but I mean ethnically), but whatever it is, I bet I personally know members of that community that could never qualify for a bank loan under any rational lending policy.

And if they were white males, did not qualify.

By 2005, high prices excluded people with money at risk from buying houses.  So anyone who purchased a house, was a bum.  White bums could not buy houses.  No rednecks allowed.  So white English speaking males stopped purchasing houses, almost completely.

If affirmative action is in force, you can say on the basis of race that every single person who is grossly unqualified, despite being supposedly qualified, is of certain races.

The boom was driven by bums with no job, no assets, and no credit rating, who took out million dollar mortgages no money down.  And white males with no job no assets and no credit rating did not get million dollar mortgages no money down.

If white bums could have borrowed the way Hispanic bums could borrow, I am sure that they would have.  I saw none, zero, borrowing that way, from which I conclude that  they could not, so they did not.

This a general principle of affirmative action:  If you start letting people qualify on the basis of race, it always end up that 100% of those so qualified, are in fact unqualified, so that the effect of affirmative action turns a moderate difference into a complete100% difference.

White bums were excluded, Hispanic bums were allowed.  Thus no whites that were included were bums, and towards the end every Hispanic that was included was a bum, for in the end, (2005) only bums were buying houses, so everyone that was buying a house was non asian minority bum.  (I did see some seemingly white single females buying houses, even though white single females were not, so far as I know, targets of affirmative action lending, but no white english speaking males)

If you take a person at random from one race, and a person at random from another race, you cannot say on the basis of race that one person is good and the other no good.

When however, you take person selected not at random, but the product of affirmative action, you can say on the basis of race that the person qualified on the basis of affirmative action, is not qualified. 

« Last Edit: November 18, 2011, 01:13:08 pm by sam »

sam on November 18, 2011, 06:07:22 pm
When prices reached unreasonable levels, white males with fluent English completely stopped buying,

I exaggerated.  White males continued to purchase, though in smaller numbers, even after 2005.

However, as we saw in this thread, it is completely acceptable to display bigotry, hatred, and contempt to white males that are poor and/or rural and/or work with their hands, but totally unacceptable to mention that certain races, a certain gender, and certain sexual preferences to have undesirable characteristics.

From this one can easily predict that Hispanics with no job and no credit rating will be able to buy million dollar houses no money down, and that white males with no job and no credit rating will not be able to buy million dollar houses no money down.

And, since the crisis was driven by bums buying million dollar houses no money down, it follows, from the fact that it is socially acceptable in this thread to hate and despise white male bums, that none of the bums that caused the crisis were white males.

Though some of the buyers were white males (albeit a lot fewer after 2005) none of the buyers that were bums were white males.




which suggests that if you were a white male with no credit rating and no assets, you were not in fact eligible for a no money down loan, even though theoretically lenders were not discriminating, loan officers must have been markedly less enthusiastic about faking up documents for white male English speaking borrowers.

If they had been as willing to fake up documents for white males, we would have seen some white male bums buying houses.

(Since a white male with no assets and no credit rating should be cheerfully willing to buy a house with a no money down mortgage at any price, particularly if he gets cashback under the table)

The foreclosure data indicates that the same was approximately true nation wide, in that the distribution of foreclosures by locality indicate ninety nine percent of foreclosures were non asian minority, though this has now fallen to ninety five percent.  You can check that yourself. 

The housing boom was primarily driven by a US government operation to move non asian minorities into the suburbs.

Towards the end, from some time in 2005 onwards, the housing boom was completely, 100% driven by a US government operation to move non asian minorities into the suburbs, in that few white English speaking males, possibly absolutely zero white English speaking males, were buying.

including a great many retirees who put their money in what they though were sure fire safe investments. The guy who lost his shirt on the house a couple of doors down was a canadian, not hispanic.

Why did he have to put money down, when others did have to?

If he lost his shirt, he must have put some money down.  The boom was driven by no money down loans, (because towards the end, no one would risk their own money on a house) To the best of my observation, Hispanics never put money down, and generally received cashback under the table.  If he put some money down, when Hispanics never put money down, that he lost money is evidence that the boom was driven by racially allocated loans, not evidence that it was not.

We had a crapload of people who bought second 'investment' homes here with their retirement money who are now greeters at Wal-Mart , working part time at 7-11s, and living on ramen noodles.

Really?

Why buy with your own money?  By 2005, no one was putting their own money at risk.

Further, your claim just does not fit with the distribution of foreclosures, which closely parallels the distribution of hispanics.

Again, if they lost their own money, when the boom was driven by no money down loans, that is evidence for racial allocation of loans, not evidence against it.

There was a LOT of english and german money here that got taken to the cleaners, too. A very great many of the people who were living in single-wides out in the woods got houses

Again, the redneck jokes.  By 2005, white English speaking males had completely dropped out of the market.  Zero or indistinguishable from zero.

Which indicates that if you were a white male with no job, no income, and no assets, you could not get a no money down loan for a million dollar house, while it is apparent that Hispanics could, and regularly did.

[/quote]

Sieggy on November 19, 2011, 08:55:30 pm
Wow, dude, you have major issues . . .  So let me get this straight. According to you, the whole housing bubble was the result of a diabolical plot on the part of the gov't to flood white neighborhoods with minorities. Greed and shortsightedness across the entire spectrum had nothing to do with it, market manipulation had nothing to do with it, aggressive and deceptive marketing had nothing to do with it, banks and brokers originating patently unrealistic mortgages had nothing to do with it, banks packaging bogus notes then paying a rating agency to rate them AAA and peddling them on the market had nothing to do with it, investment brokers taking out CDOs on what they knew were garbage packages and betting they would fail had nothing to do with it, flooding the international markets with toxic junk bonds had nothing to do with it, because it was all a gov't plot to move a mexican in next door to you. It was evil hispanics manipulating the system that were responsible because they were so sophisticated about the ins and outs of real estate fraud.

Ummmm . . . OK, yeah, sure. 

I'm terribly sorry, I have discussions with rational people. You, sadly, are not among them. I'm quite sure that like Sandy, I know exactly what you are, and as a general rule, I don't permit people like you in my universe. So please feel free to bay at the moon, feel all victimized, and rant about the plots around you to your heart's delight. I will simply regard your subsequent posts as unintended humor and chuckle sadly at you.

Oh, and my statements regarding dumbass redneck has to do with the number of the aforementioned dumbass rednecks I tried to warn about what they were getting into, and that no, housing values would NOT keep going up in value indefinitely. That despite their broker's assurances, they would NOT be able to 'refinance at a lower rate' down the line, and that when those teaser rates ran out, their payments would shoot up astronomically. Being a charitable soul, for the most part, I have refrained from telling these dolts 'I told you so'. Except for a couple who were exceptionally nasty about how I was an idiot who didn't know what I was talking about so I could go to hell, mind you . . .

sam on November 20, 2011, 02:56:24 am
Wow, dude, you have major issues . . .  So let me get this straight. According to you, the whole housing bubble was the result of a diabolical plot on the part of the gov't to flood white neighborhoods with minorities.

Rather, the rationale was that if you give minorities mortgages and suburban houses, they will become middle class and, in a middle class environment, would start to display all the middle class virtues.  Same theory as section eight housing and busing.  Since section eight housing and busing conspicuously and spectacularly failed, the obvious solution was to try even harder.

Greed and shortsightedness across the entire spectrum had nothing to do with it, market manipulation had nothing to do with it, aggressive and deceptive marketing had nothing to do with it,

Where is the deception?  A bum buys a million dollar house no money down with cashback under the table.  If it goes up, he flips it and cashes out, if it goes down, he gets to live in it rent free till evicted.  Either way he wins.

Where is the greed?  Are you telling me that when The Bank of Beverly hills was told by the regulators to make "innovative" loans to under served minorities, which "innovative" loans to under served minorities sent it bankrupt, the regulators were telling it to be greedy?

banks and brokers originating patently unrealistic mortgages had nothing to do with it, banks packaging bogus notes then paying a rating agency to rate them AAA and peddling them on the market had nothing to do with it,

The government, not the ratings agencies, issued white paper after white paper explaining why these loans were safe.  Who were the ratings agencies to disagree?

 
Oh, and my statements regarding dumbass redneck has to do with the number of the aforementioned dumbass rednecks I tried to warn about what they were getting into,

Liar.

You are speaking out of hatred, bigotry, and ignorance.

Because your ignorance and hatred is socially approved and high status, low income, low credit rating whites, "rednecks", were not given loans.

Rednecks could not buy million dollar houses no money down, as Hispanics could, and if they had been able to do so, it would have been great for them.  House goes up they flip it, house goes down, they get to live their free.

In your home town, you know, or can easily find out, what areas are white, and what areas are predominantly non asian minority.

Look up foreclosures on Trulia.com

You will observe the foreclosures are where the non asian minorities are.

It is at once obvious, that our economic crisis, is primarily a crisis of affirmative action, that nearly all the foreclosures, are foreclosures on non asian minorities - the recipients of no money down mortgages.

Find me a foreclosure on a redneck.

« Last Edit: November 20, 2011, 02:58:53 am by sam »

Sieggy on November 20, 2011, 02:14:09 pm
Sigh. You'd think by now I'd have learned not to feed trolls, but what the hell . . .

I don't know where you're getting your facts, though I strongly suspect they're of the "alter the facts to fit the narrative" persuasion, who will tell you exactly what you are predisposed to hear . . .

Let's see . . . I personally know of around a dozen fools who bit hard on the teaser rate mortgages, and got their clocks cleaned when their payments jumped from about $600 a month to close to $1,500. Or more. Considerably more, if they missed a payment or two. Several of them I helped move from their old digs to their new ones, and then out back again. If I added up the ones I know about from others, probably several dozen local yokels who got whipsawed when the housing market went south.

My Kiwanis club runs a thrift store, and most of our customers aren't hispanic (which is not to say that there aren't a fair number), they're local good ol' boys (and gals). Most of the people we deliver food baskets to aren't hispanic, they're retirees who are scraping by, barely. Many of them I tried warning that they were being suckered, but it all just sounded SO good, SO plausible - I mean, EVERYONE knew that housing prices would NEVER come down, and this was their shot at the American Dream. These are the same people who only paid the minimum on their credit card payments, and whenever they'd bump up against their limit, the credit card companies were obliging enough to raise them . . . And when things got tight, what the hell, they'd just get another card.

Fella, ANYONE with a beating heart and the ability to make a mark on a piece of paper could get into a house near the end of the bubble. White, black, brown, fuchsia, paisley, it didn't matter. If a broker or salesman wanted to make his (or her) monthly numbers and get that fat, juicy commission check at the end of the month, they would pass off whatever line of BS was necessary to do so. Race was NOT an issue, as much as you'd prefer it to be. We had several brokers down here get busted for originating totally bogus mortgages and just pocketing the money. Seriously, it was crazy.

And not everything was a NINJA loan - there were an awful lot of people who did it right, paid the 20% down, and then lost their shirts when the $500K house they bought 2 years ago was suddenly worth only $300K . . . and dropping fast. The canadian who bought the house down the way is still making payments on a house that's only worth a third of what he paid, and the rental he's getting doesn't even come close to making his payments or his property taxes.

I guess it just makes you feel better if the problems we're having is all the fault of the evil commie gov't with their socialist Affirmative Action and all them damned furriners. It wasn't. This was a perfect storm of greed, incompetence,  wishful thinking, deliberate blindness, and the same kind of general stupidity that humans engage in with great regularity. I suggest you read "Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" for an historical perspective. This wasn't 'them', this was 'us'. Well, not me, I saw this one coming a mile off (housing bubbles in Florida are as regular as hurricanes) and didn't dance the dance that was so seductive to others.

And I guess it's my "ignorance and hatred" that causes me to volunteer 15 - 20 hours a week to various church, Kiwanis, and Rotary projects trying to help people who are up against it. Tell ya what, guy, turn off the AM radio, go out there and do something to help your fellow man instead of fulminating against 'those' people. I guarantee you, you'll feel batter about yourself and perhaps release some of that bitterness and bile from your heart.


sam on November 20, 2011, 11:58:55 pm
I don't know where you're getting your facts,

From official documents issued by the regulators back when they were causing the crisis, which documents I have repeatedly cited, from the claims made in lawsuits over dud mortgages, which I cited earlier but have not recited recently, from direct observation of numerous borrowers, and from the distribution of foreclosures within the bay area.

The basic fact that you are ignoring is that the money disappeared by people gambling the real estate market with the bank's money.  First, recognize that fact, then ask why the banks let it happen.

Then, since the money was pissed away on dud mortages, look to see who took out these mortgages, and subsequently defaulted on them.

Everyone who gambled on the real estate market with other people's money is not a victim, but a robber.  And most of these robbers are black or hispanic, as is revealed by searching for foreclosures, and observing where the foreclosures are, and where they are not.

Because of too big to fail, the banks have insufficient incentive to lend responsibly.  So the regulators substitute themselves for the judgement of bankers.  The regulators lack expertise and have bad incentives - they have no incentive to worry about longer term risks, and have an active incentive to command money to be lent to the politically well connected, and to particular voting blocks.

If one looks at the geographic distribution of foreclosures, it is evident that the the overwhelming majority of foreclosures are on homes purchased by blacks and hispanics, indicating that the largest cause of the crisis was affirmative action lending, loans to the black and hispanic voter blocks.  This is also evident in the histories of particular banks.

In my direct personal observation, every single borrower purchasing a house purchased the house no money down.  Since everyone knew the market was overpriced, purchasing a house no money down, thereby avoiding any risk of your own money, was the obvious way to go, and since, manifestly it was possible to do it, we should be unsurprised that people did it - I personally observed people doing what the overwhelming incentive was to do.

Let's see . . . I personally know of around a dozen fools who bit hard on the teaser rate mortgages, and got their clocks cleaned when their payments jumped from about $600 a month to close to $1,500.

$1500 a month is a reasonable charge to pay off a house.  They are not having their clocks cleaned.  That sounds like a pretty fair rate to me.  The problem, however, is the guy who purchased a million dollar house no money down, with no job, no assets and no credit, and whose payments would therefore be $4000 - $6000 a month.

It is the guy with the million dollar loan that caused most of the money to disappear.  The guy paying $1500 is paying what he damn well should pay.  He is whining because he got a favorable deal, and now no longer gets a favorable deal.  Much like the kid with the hundred thousand dollars in college debt:  No one lied to him, no one robbed him, no one overcharged him.  What is he complaining about?

Is the guy with the $1500 mortgage now paying above market rates?  Perhaps he is.  If he is, why does he not refinance?

Oh?  He cannot refinance BECAUSE HE PUT NO MONEY DOWN!    Sounds like he was gambling on real estate with other people's money, which is to say, my money.

If someone has a problem when the teaser rate ends, his only problem is that he was gambling with other people's money and failed to get lucky - which usually means in practice that the bank loses, rather than him.  And the bank was up for that, because when the bank loses, the bank does not lose, instead the taxpayer loses.

The wrong is not that he lost, the wrong is that he is allowed to gamble with other people's money.

The man who gambles on the real estate market with other people's money is not the victim, but the robber.

And the great majority of these robbers, the great majority of those that gambled on the real estate market whilst putting little or no money of their own at risk, were black or hispanic.  Doubltess there were plenty of whites who would have played, but the deal was primarily marketed to hispanics.

They took a bet with unlimited upside and limited downside.  That eventually everyone hit the downside is not "getting their clocks cleaned".  When you bet on the roulette wheel, sometimes it comes up black, and sometimes it comes up red, but if you get unlimited profit on red, and limited loss on black, cannot complain when after a long series of reds, it eventually comes up black.

If you have no credit rating to lose, buying houses no money down was a great deal, even though sooner or later it was going to come up bad..  Everyone whose credit rating is not worth protecting should have taken it, but, if you look at where the defaults are, somehow, the overwhelming majority of those that got that great deal, were black or hispanic - particularly after 2005 November.

If I added up the ones I know about from others, probably several dozen local yokels who got whipsawed when the housing market went south.

And a lot more got rich when it was heading North.  They were gambling with other people's money, with my money, thus, big gains, small losses.  Heads they win, tails I lose.  If we sold the losers into debt slavery and had them work under the lash, they would have refrained from gambling.

One can tell how many got whipsawed when the market went south by looking up foreclosure sales in your own city - whereupon it is obvious that number of foreclosure sales in a location is proportional to the number of blacks and hispanics in that location.  That quite a few whites got in on the deal that was created for blacks and hispanics and primarily marketed to blacks and hispanics is akin to the fact that these days, computer science classes do not really teach programming to either males or females.  That computer science has largely stopped teaching programming is, however, to accommodate the females, not the males, and similarly, the mortgage deal that some whites got was not really intended for them, and for the most part, it was not whites that got it.

There were other corrupt deals, particularly those got packaged as CMBS, that were intended primarily for white folks, but the most money was pissed away in regular mortgages, in which standards were lowered largely for race conscious reasons, just as computer science standards are lowered for gender conscious reasons.

My Kiwanis club runs a thrift store, and most of our customers aren't hispanic (which is not to say that there aren't a fair number), they're local good ol' boys (and gals). Most of the people we deliver food baskets to aren't hispanic, they're retirees who are scraping by, barely. Many of them I tried warning that they were being suckered, but it all just sounded SO good, SO plausible - I mean, EVERYONE knew that housing prices would NEVER come down

Untrue: the location of foreclosures, which we can both look up quite easily, shows this to be false,  Few poor white people gambled on the housing boom - because the banks looked at them and rightly sneered, much as you are wrongly sneering.  It is socially acceptable to sneer at poor whites, and especially poor white males, so it was easy for the banks to turn away deadbeat whites, especially deadbeat white males, and for the most part, they did, while they could get in deep trouble turning away deadbeat blacks and hispanics. If a trailer park is pretty much white, (and trailer parks tend to be all hispanic or all white), there are few or no foreclosures in it.

Quite a few affluent white people gambled on the housing boom, and some of them became a lot less affluent because their bets went wrong and they failed to bail at the right moment, but they are not the ones that are costing me money. Most of them are hurting, but still affluent.

Fella, ANYONE with a beating heart and the ability to make a mark on a piece of paper could get into a house near the end of the bubble.

Theoretically this is true, and yet, somehow all the deadbeats that I observed getting loans were Hispanic, and the number of foreclosures in a location is closely proportional to the number of blacks and Hispanics in that location.  The people I saw aggressively marketing these loans spoke Spanish, and marketed them to people who spoke Spanish.  These loans were theoretically available to anyone, but in practice, they were created for, and primarily marketed to, blacks and Hispanics.

If you had no credit rating and no money, and were white, and applied for one of these loans, you would often somehow find it strangely difficult for one reason and another reason, despite the loud proclamations that no credit rating or money was required.  The old rules were theoretically suspended for everyone, but in practice, were suspended more for some people than for other people - because, you see, it is socially acceptable to sneer at poor whites, especially poor white males.

White, black, brown, fuchsia, paisley, it didn't matter.

Theoretically it did not matter, yet strangely, somehow, in practice, all the no good bums that I saw receiving million dollar loans back then just  somehow happened to be Hispanic, and today when I look up foreclosures on the real estate web sites, the foreclosures are overwhelmingly in neighborhoods that are distinctly on the brown or the black side, and the browner the location is, the more foreclosures it has.  If you were a white bum, no one wanted to talk to you.

Indeed a white could get one of these loans, but for a white to get one of these loans, it helped a lot if you had the right connection, which of course a poor white would seldom have.  Your loan officer made these loans happen, and he could be helpful, or less helpful.  And poor white males tend to find that people are unhelpful.

If a broker or salesman wanted to make his (or her) monthly numbers and get that fat, juicy commission check at the end of the month, they would pass off whatever line of BS was necessary to do so. Race was NOT an issue,

Race was most certainly an issue, as is evident in the CRA compliance reports, as is evident in the effort, energy, and thought that every banker applied to CRA compliance issues, and as is evident in the distribution of mortgage defaults by neighborhood.  The bank of Beverly Hills was forced by the regulators, kicking and screaming, very much against their will, dragging their feet the whole way, into making loans to poor Hispanics, which loans sent them broke.

Washington Mutual, on the other hand, was genuinely and sincerely enthusiastic about making loans to blacks and Hispanics, specifically to blacks and Hispanics in particular, which loans also sent them broke.

The US banks think about race all the time, every minute, the way a teenage boy thinks about sex, the way an academic in science, maths, and engineering thinks about gender ratios.

Of course, European banks also had political lending, though European political lending was seldom about race, nonetheless politics was in every breath they breathed, for European bankers as for US bankers.  Basel means that finance is all politics, all the time, and in the US, politics is in substantial part racial politics.

And not everything was a NINJA loan - there were an awful lot of people who did it right, paid the 20% down, and then lost their shirts

They lost their shirts, but they are not the ones that lost my shirt.[/quote]

When people lose their own shirts, that is an inherently self correcting problem.  When they lose other people's shirts, they are apt to repeat the performance.

Indeed, this is why the economy cannot recover.  Businessmen fear that they will be made to pay for someone else's problems, as, for example, GM's creditors were sacrificed to benefit GM's unions, and the depositors of MF Global were sacrificed to save Greece.

I guess it just makes you feel better if the problems we're having is all the fault of the evil commie gov't with their socialist Affirmative Action and all them damned furriners. It wasn't.

It was:

What is screwing the economy:

1. Unpaid mortgages:  Observe, is mostly furriners, most of them Hispanic, many of them illegal immigrants, that are not paying their mortgages.   Observe where the foreclosures are, and it is not hard to figure out who it is that is not paying.

2 Suspension of the rule of law in favor of General Motors unions:  The creditors of GM were robbed, sending the fear of Obama into businessmen all over the US, robbed for the sake of the Union pension fund, which these days pays out to mostly black pensioners and mostly white union activists.

3 MF Global:  Depositors robbed to protect Greece, again sending fear of Obama throughout US business.  Greeks are definitely furriners, and indeed are lazy no good furriners sponging on welfare and government jobs.

I suggest you read "Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" for an historical perspective.

That book describes bubbles in which people lose their own money.  This was a bubble in which people primarily lost other people's money, in particular, my money, and the money of the kind of businessmen who create value, rather than trade in political connections.

A bubble in which people lose other people's money is necessary a political bubble, a madness and delusion of the political class, not a madness and delusion of the capitalist class.

The delusion in question being that giving non asian minorities mortgages that they did not deserve would make them middle class, even though busing had failed to make them middle class, and section eight housing had failed to make them middle class.

In Europe, they also have a delusion, the delusion in their case being that they can print money to pay people to neither fight nor work, and the money will still be worth something.  Recall what Rudyard Kipling had to say about this delusion.  In both the US and Europe, there is a bubble in government bonds and paper money, but their bubble is closer to bursting than ours.

This wasn't 'them', this was 'us'.

I saw who it was.  It was them.  And when you look at where the foreclosures are, it is still them.

Sieggy on November 21, 2011, 09:32:40 am
Yup, shouldn't 'av fed the troll . . .

I think this is a case of you seeing what you want to see, and me seeing what's there. I don't have an ideological lens through which to filter reality, no axe to grind, no fingers to point, other than my contention that pretty much everyone was sucking at the teat and that there's plenty of blame to go around. As long as the milk flowed freely, everyone was happy. But sooner or later, the teat runs dry, and if you continue to suckle, you go from suckling milk to draining life's blood . . . You want to blame the gov't and brown people because, I strongly suspect, they're the ones you blame for every conceivable ill society faces to begin with. And no, I don't care to hear a recitation of your paranoia.

From your perspective, all this came about through nefarious gov't scheming, socialist social engineering, and ne'er do well minorities working the system, victimizing the poor, unsuspecting banking, securities, and real estate industries. All innocent, guileless babes in the woods, taken advantage of by those awful scheming brown people and their evil socialist accomplices. From my perspective, this was just another housing bubble which because of the elimination of laws specifically designed to prevent what happened from happening, the avarice of everyone who stood to make a fast buck, and the inability of people with their lips wrapped around a teat to see the consequences of their action, got way out of hand. Or a simple indifference to the consequences, which amounts to the same thing. My personal feeling is that we got way too clever for our own good, too adept at shuffling numbers and creating wealth out of thin air by pretending the number shuffling had a reality outside of a piece of paper.

The reason no one could refinance is that no one was refinancing. If you're underwater on your house, no lender will touch you. The banks who originated the mortgages, for the most part, had packaged and resold them, so they were in no position to do so. One of the major problems that people have had in trying to keep their homes is that it's virtually impossible to follow the labyrinthine trail of speculators to find out who actually held their notes . . . even the local county tax people threw up their hands in despair trying to figure out who held what. There are numerous abandoned properties for whom the county cannot find the owners to cite them for code violations.

I think the difference between you and I is that you ascribe to malice, social engineering, and chicanery what I ascribe to stupidity, shortsightedness, and chicanery. If it makes you feel better to think that the people you obviously detest to begin with are behind it all, well, enjoy your hate. If it's all you've got, I suppose you may as well make the best of it. I, on the other hand, am more concerned with helping people who are the victims of this debacle survive and recover. I would like very much to see regulations put back in place to prevent a repetition of this fiasco, but I have severe doubts about the competence of those responsible for doing so.

Oh, and you also seem to have this fixation on 'million dollar homes'. Sorry, but most of the homes down here that were of the 'get in free' variety tended to be in the $150k - $350k range (though it went really crazy there at the end), homes that ten years before the bubble had been going for $40K - $75K. The homes in my neighborhood were priced higher because I'm on an island, and the island was built out decades ago. No crackerbox developments here, though the inflated prices were even more spectacular because of the proximity to water. There was no huge hispanic influx on the island, but still a very great many speculators (a very large percentage of them being canadian and european) lost their shirts when the bubble burst. In 2006, the assessed market value on my home (not taxable value, though, thank god . . .) was $615K. According to the tax notice I got last month, the assessed value is now $163K. When we bought the house back in '66, we paid $26.5K . . .

The ones who made money on this weren't the buyers, it was the brokers, bankers, builders, developers, the speculators who got in early and had the sense to get out before the bubble burst, and all the little side businesses that benefited from the boom. Like carpet dealers, furniture stores, landscapers, you name it that have been dropping like flies here. Smart money got out early, but to be honest, not that many did. So when the bubble burst, it took all of them down in flames as well. You seem to think that the ones who made out like bandits were the buyers. I'm sorry, but simply looking at the physical situation they're now in shows them as being the ones who got wiped out. People who profited from this bubble are not sleeping in their cars or in tent cities.

The only difference between this bubble and all the preceding ones is that it spread nationally, and this time rather than the banks holding the notes like they used to, the junk mortgages were repackaged, mislabeled, marketed as sure-fire quality investments, and the toxic sludge was spread worldwide.

Believe what you like. I see the results of the greed and shortsightedness of pretty much all involved, whereas you see a nefarious plot. To you, it's all about race because that's what you want to see. Sorry, I'm here actually dealing with this shit. I'm seeing up close and personal the people affected, and it's not all minorities, it's ordinary folks of all ages and social strata who were ruined by this disaster as well. Of the people we help, maybe a third are minorities. I see what's happening from physically being here, being directly involved with the fallout of this mess. I don't get information from websites who feed your prejudices and lay the blame on people you obviously don't like to begin with. I'm trying to help people get through this. What are you doing . . ?

 

anything