The 84 month loan

[Highmark]

1 minute ago, spin_dry said:

You really don’t understand, do you? 

I do.   Answer the question.   Could a "predatory lender" fooled you?

[motonoggin]

"Debtors prison!!!!"

"Capitalism is the best system ever"

 

[hwytohell]

Remember all those electe(d) braying  pols and  Potus 44 that repeated that they would bring those wall street dembanksters  , and hedge fund kings to justice ?? I must have missed the perp walks into the jails and court houses, but the dem party sure made good coin on the political payoffs / donations.  

Edited April 21, 2018 by hwytohell

[motonoggin]

[spin_dry]

Just now, Highmark said:

I do.   Answer the question.   Could a "predatory lender" fooled you?

When you’re dealing with a moron it’s not about fooling them. They don’t care that they’re being fooled. They don’t care about financial or legal consequences. They just want the big house or new car. Government has a responsibility to protect me from them and those that lend them money that they can’t afford to pay back. 

[spin_dry]

4 minutes ago, hwytohell said:

Remember all those electe(d) braying  pols and  Potus 44 that repeated that they would bring those wall street dembanksters  , and hedge fund kings to justice ?? I must have missed the perp walks into the jails and court houses, but the dem party sure made good coin on the political payoffs / donations.  

And trump gave em jobs in government. Dummy 

Edited April 21, 2018 by spin_dry

[Highmark]

1 minute ago, spin_dry said:

When you’re dealing with a moron it’s not about fooling them. They don’t care that they’re being fooled. They don’t care about financial or legal consequences. They just want the big house or new car. Government has a responsibility to protect me from them and those that lend them money that they can’t afford to pay back. 

No doubt your a moron but where do we draw the line with the govt protecting you?

[spin_dry]

1 minute ago, Highmark said:

No doubt your a moron but where do we draw the line with the govt protecting you?

I don’t know. Make something up. 

[Highmark]

1 minute ago, spin_dry said:

I don’t know. Make something up. 

That's a serious question.   I'm not against all regulation and a down payment of x% probably would have stopped the whole damn thing.  

Bush actually tried on multiple times to clean up the mess the F&M's were well on their way of creating but Barney Frank and other dems put the stops to it back in 2001.   That too would have stopped it. 

[snoughnut]

3 minutes ago, Highmark said:

No doubt your a moron but where do we draw the line with the govt protecting you?

Right about at the spot where govt. forced taxpayers to bail out the banks.

[spin_dry]

5 minutes ago, Highmark said:

That's a serious question.   I'm not against all regulation and a down payment of x% probably would have stopped the whole damn thing.  

Bush actually tried on multiple times to clean up the mess the F&M's were well on their way of creating but Barney Frank and other dems put the stops to it back in 2001.   That too would have stopped it. 

No he didn’t try and clean it up. He gutted the SEC of regulators. There was no one watching the lenders or investigating mortgage exchange investments. Lehman brothers had only 2 regulators overseeing their operation. They should’ve had 30 times that amount looking over the books. The regulations were in place. There wasn’t the manpower to oversee it all. 

Edited April 21, 2018 by spin_dry

[spin_dry]

6 minutes ago, snoughnut said:

Right about at the spot where govt. forced taxpayers to bail out the banks.

Government entities needed to have been in place to prevent the need for a bailout in the first place. 

[Highmark]

1 minute ago, spin_dry said:

No he didn’t try and clean it up. He gutted the SEC of regulators. There was no one watching the lenders or investigating mortgage exchange investments. Lehman brothers had only 2 regulators overseeing their operation. They should’ve had 30 times that amount looking over the books. The regulations were in place. There wasn’t the manpower to oversee it all. 

It never gets old owning you.

 

Keep an open mind and read it.   Towards the end Barney Frank and others claim they are not in financial trouble when the organizations themselves said they were.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html

 

 

Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.  In fact, it was Congress that flatly rejected President Bush's call more than five years ago to reform the GSEs.  Over the years, the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems with the GSEs.

2001

• April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."  (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)

2002

• May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

• February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. 
  
  
   
• September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
  
  
   
• September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."  (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)  
  
  
   
• October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."  (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)
  
  
   
• November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk."  To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE."  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

• February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator:  "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator."  (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
  
  
   
• February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted."  Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator."  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
  
  
   
• April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue."  At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages.  I don't think we are in any remote danger here.  This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there."  ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)
  
  
   
• June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system.  Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs:  Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System."  (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

• April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system."  (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)
  
  
   
• July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)

2007

• August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions.  Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options."  (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)
  
  
   
• August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.  (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)
  
  
   
• December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly.  So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission.  The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start.  But the Senate has not acted.  And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon."  (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)

2008

• February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully."  (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
  
  
   
• March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages."  (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
  
  
   
• April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes."  (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
  
  
   
• May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further. 
  • 
    
  • "Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes.  Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans."  (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
    
    
     
  • "[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes.  And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator."  (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
    
    
     
  • "Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans."  (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
  
  
• June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."  (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
  
  
   
• July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
  
  
   
• September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Doddquestions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years."  (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)

[snoughnut]

5 minutes ago, spin_dry said:

Government entities needed to have been in place to prevent the need for a bailout in the first place. 

I was just making a sarcastic point that govt. welfare is ok when it comes to bailing out banks (TARP).......but fuck the little guy.

[spin_dry]

Just now, Highmark said:

It never gets old owning you.

 

Keep an open mind and read it.   Towards the end Barney Frank and others claim they are not in financial trouble when the organizations themselves said they were.  

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business/new-agency-proposed-to-oversee-freddie-mac-and-fannie-mae.html

 

 

Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.  In fact, it was Congress that flatly rejected President Bush's call more than five years ago to reform the GSEs.  Over the years, the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems with the GSEs.

2001

• April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."  (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)

2002

• May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

• February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. 
  
  
   
• September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
  
  
   
• September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."  (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)  
  
  
   
• October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."  (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)
  
  
   
• November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk."  To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE."  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

• February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator:  "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator."  (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
  
  
   
• February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted."  Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator."  (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
  
  
   
• April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue."  At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages.  I don't think we are in any remote danger here.  This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there."  ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)
  
  
   
• June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system.  Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs:  Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System."  (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

• April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system."  (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)
  
  
   
• July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)

2007

• August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions.  Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options."  (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)
  
  
   
• August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position.  (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)
  
  
   
• December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly.  So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission.  The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start.  But the Senate has not acted.  And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon."  (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)

2008

• February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully."  (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
  
  
   
• March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages."  (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
  
  
   
• April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes."  (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
  
  
   
• May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further. 
  •  
  • "Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes.  Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans."  (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
    
    
     
  • "[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes.  And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator."  (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
    
    
     
  • "Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans."  (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
• June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."  (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
  
  
   
• July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
  
  
   
• September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Doddquestions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years."  (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)

What percentage of skin in the game did f&f have in the financial collapse? 

Bush gutted the sec of all senior regulators. He sent them to chase al qaeda following 9/11. These were seasoned and stern regulators. There was no one to watch the wolves. That was the issue. 

[Highmark]

4 minutes ago, spin_dry said:

What percentage of skin in the game did f&f have in the financial collapse? 

Bush gutted the sec of all senior regulators. He sent them to chase al qaeda following 9/11. These were seasoned and stern regulators. There was no one to watch the wolves. That was the issue. 

Huge amounts.   40% before the collapse and 90% now.   Pretty sure they sold off to investment firms that created MBS's as well.  

https://www.cnbc.com/id/100946537

During the housing boom, more than 60 percent of mortgages were funded by investors in the so-called secondary market without government backing. Since then, private investors essentially have fled the mortgage finance market. Nearly 90 percent of mortgages written today are backed by Fannie or Freddie.Aug 7, 2013

Edited April 21, 2018 by Highmark

[spin_dry]

9 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Huge amounts.   40% before the collapse and 90% now.   Pretty sure they sold off to investment firms that created MBS's as well.  

https://www.cnbc.com/id/100946537

During the housing boom, more than 60 percent of mortgages were funded by investors in the so-called secondary market without government backing. Since then, private investors essentially have fled the mortgage finance market. Nearly 90 percent of mortgages written today are backed by Fannie or Freddie.Aug 7, 2013

The finest explanation ever by the man that brought Charles Keeting to his knees. 

http://ritholtz.com/2011/12/fannie-and-freddie-fantasies/

[steve from amherst]

8 hours ago, Ez ryder said:

no regulation needed.  just  zero chance of bail out from any party and end bull shit bankrupt laws you borrow you pay . you loose your property bank sells your property you still owe the difference. 

people will deff think hard before becoming overextended . and banks will still be loose on lending because they are covered 

Exactly. If there is a consequence in place for either side they would be less likely to take the risk . And if they did , their loss.

[steve from amherst]

7 hours ago, motonoggin said:

Lol. Capitalism literally requires government force in order to function. 

Silly boy

So you believe in crony capitalism , but not real capitalism ?

[motonoggin]

7 hours ago, spin_dry said:

The finest explanation ever by the man that brought Charles Keeting to his knees. 

http://ritholtz.com/2011/12/fannie-and-freddie-fantasies/

That's actually a good piece, but I'm sure it won't deter dipshit from blaming the poors. 

[motonoggin]

Just now, steve from amherst said:

So you believe in crony capitalism , but not real capitalism ?

Crony capitalism is real capitalism

[Anler]

12 hours ago, Highmark said:

Just a little bit.   I just laugh how the consumer is never given ANY blame for the housing crash.  Know what the fuck you can afford before you buy it.  

Americans are fucking stupid, probably the dumbest populace on the plant. Does that mean banks (they are loaning the money) should take advantage of that when it threatens the health of our entire economy? Someone has to be the smart person in the room or were all fucked. 

[Mileage Psycho]

13 hours ago, Mainecat said:

Just have to have that one step up model over your neighbor, co worker or friend.

motor vehicles are the worst investment on the planet

Nothing like having a car or cars you like, you can't take the money to the grave  

[1jkw]

10 hours ago, Highmark said:

That's a serious question.   I'm not against all regulation and a down payment of x% probably would have stopped the whole damn thing.  

Bush actually tried on multiple times to clean up the mess the F&M's were well on their way of creating but Barney Frank and other dems put the stops to it back in 2001.   That too would have stopped it. 

The GOP had both houses when W supposedly tried.

[Mileage Psycho]

11 hours ago, Ez ryder said:

no regulation needed.  just  zero chance of bail out from any party and end bull shit bankrupt laws you borrow you pay . you loose your property bank sells your property you still owe the difference. 

people will deff think hard before becoming overextended . and banks will still be loose on lending because they are covered 

You truly are an endless source of amusement  

10 hours ago, Highmark said:

That's a serious question.   I'm not against all regulation and a down payment of x% probably would have stopped the whole damn thing.  

Bush actually tried on multiple times to clean up the mess the F&M's were well on their way of creating but Barney Frank and other dems put the stops to it back in 2001.   That too would have stopped it. 

Since you brought up Bush I must  post up Bush's speech to HUD circa June 2002  

Quote

 

But I believe owning something is a part of the American Dream, as well. I believe when somebody owns their own home, they're realizing the American Dream. They can say it's my home, it's nobody else's home. (Applause.) And we saw that yesterday in Atlanta, when we went to the new homes of the new homeowners. And I saw with pride firsthand, the man say, welcome to my home. He didn't say, welcome to government's home; he didn't say, welcome to my neighbor's home; he said, welcome to my home. I own the home, and you're welcome to come in the home, and I appreciate it. (Applause.) He was a proud man. He was proud that he owns the property. And I was proud for him. And I want that pride to extend all throughout our country.

One of the things that we've got to do is to address problems straight on and deal with them in a way that helps us meet goals. And so I want to talk about a couple of goals and -- one goal and a problem.

The goal is, everybody who wants to own a home has got a shot at doing so. The problem is we have what we call a homeownership gap in America. Three-quarters of Anglos own their homes, and yet less than 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanics own homes. That ownership gap signals that something might be wrong in the land of plenty. And we need to do something about it.

We are here in Washington, D.C. to address problems. So I've set this goal for the country. We want 5.5 million more homeowners by 2010 -- million more minority homeowners by 2010. (Applause.) Five-and-a-half million families by 2010 will own a home. That is our goal. It is a realistic goal. But it's going to mean we're going to have to work hard to achieve the goal, all of us. And by all of us, I mean not only the federal government, but the private sector, as well.

And so I want to, one, encourage you to do everything you can to work in a realistic, smart way to get this done. I repeat, we're here for a reason. And part of the reason is to make this dream extend everywhere.

I'm going to do my part by setting the goal, by reminding people of the goal, by heralding the goal, and by calling people into action, both the federal level, state level, local level, and in the private sector. (Applause.)

And so what are the barriers that we can deal with here in Washington? Well, probably the single barrier to first-time homeownership is high down payments. People take a look at the down payment, they say that's too high, I'm not buying. They may have the desire to buy, but they don't have the wherewithal to handle the down payment. We can deal with that. And so I've asked Congress to fully fund an American Dream down payment fund which will help a low-income family to qualify to buy, to buy. (Applause.)

We believe when this fund is fully funded and properly administered, which it will be under the Bush administration, that over 40,000 families a year -- 40,000 families a year -- will be able to realize the dream we want them to be able to realize, and that's owning their own home. (Applause.)

The second barrier to ownership is the lack of affordable housing. There are neighborhoods in America where you just can't find a house that's affordable to purchase, and we need to deal with that problem. The best way to do so, I think, is to set up a single family affordable housing tax credit to the tune of $2.4 billion over the next five years to encourage affordable single family housing in inner-city America. (Applause.)

The third problem is the fact that the rules are too complex. People get discouraged by the fine print on the contracts. They take a look and say, well, I'm not so sure I want to sign this. There's too many words. (Laughter.) There's too many pitfalls. So one of the things that the Secretary is going to do is he's going to simplify the closing documents and all the documents that have to deal with homeownership.

It is essential that we make it easier for people to buy a home, not harder. And in order to do so, we've got to educate folks. Some of us take homeownership for granted, but there are people -- obviously, the home purchase is a significant, significant decision by our fellow Americans. We've got people who have newly arrived to our country, don't know the customs. We've got people in certain neighborhoods that just aren't really sure what it means to buy a home. And it seems like to us that it makes sense to have a outreach program, an education program that explains the whys and wherefores of buying a house, to make it easier for people to not only understand the legal implications and ramifications, but to make it easier to understand how to get a good loan.

https://archives.hud.gov/remarks/martinez/speeches/presremarks.cfm