So who's to blame? The Banks or the Consumers?

[SocialResponsibility]

So.....who's at fault for the bubble bursting?

Ill get this out of the way up front. I am a banker, Commercial Loan Officer. So while I dont deal with consumer products aka mortgages, I obviously have an opinion.

I remember in Stockton (ground zero for this shit), everyone and they mama was trying to buy a house to get some equity out of by taking a HELOC out, or sitting on it then selling it. Shit was crazy round here. $150K houses going for $350K. I sat back and said "NO FUCKING WAY". Wasnt hard to tell the market was articfically inflated. But it didnt stop anyone. Janitor making 30K a year buying a $300K house.

So is it the janitors fault for buying something deep down he knew he couldnt afford, or was it the Banks fault for meeting the demand?

Speak on it. Yall already know my opinion.

 

[Timm]

Peep Bill Clinton's community re investment act, I'm not blaming him single handedly for the economy going to shit, but he played a major role

 

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Peep Bill Clinton's community re investment act, I'm not blaming him single handedly for the economy going to shit, but he played a major role

Bill Clinton didn't have a Community Reinvestment Act.


Bill Clinton modified an existing Community Reinvestment Act of 1977.

In reality Bill Clinton modified it to a lesser degree than George Bush as can be seen by the significant increase in sub-prime lending during the Bush years, preceding the crash.

http://media.photobucket.com/image/...radek/subprime-mortgage-origination-volum.jpg

 

[KillaKali]

i feel bad for 99% of american citizens that dwell about this. they (because they are educated by the SAME system that craeted this) thinks by dwelling & analyzing on stat after stat, they think they'll get to some sort of better understanding about the whole crisis. in other words, putting the blame game on names will have an infinite possibilities with infinite opinions about things that we'll never actually "know". no different than the blah blah blah currency analyzer on CNN or sum other bogus news station really just misleading & misguiding the viewers (as you all should know by now). dont you see that set's up a perfect scenario where we as the listener has an "OPINION" that may be completely contrary to the actuality of it all? not only that, but once again furthers us from coming together and EVER making some sort of concrete understanding about it because we're too busy bickering about our opinions? in that case, no one will ever see anything, just microscopic its & bits of a topic that must be evaluated on a bigger whole picture in order for the situation to be seen at it's capacity.

 

[2532sea]

i saw the same type of stuff when i was in seattle. average homes in the suburbs there average out to be $300k-$350. some people couldnt afford the payments so they had to rent some rooms out and ended up being a pain for the home owner. i think its both sides that made a mistake. not enough money to pay morgages and the bank knowing how much they make a year and still letting these people buy.
if people know they're on a tight budget, they shouldnt look at long term commitments like a house that cost $300K +

 

[Fucky McFuckerson]

Do you blame the crack dealer or the crack buyer? I guess it depends on how you feel about economic structure and the pcyhe of human beings.

 

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Do you blame the crack dealer or the crack buyer? I guess it depends on how you feel about economic structure and the pcyhe of human beings.

I think that this scenario is particularly unique in the fact that almost everyone played a bit of the crack buyer all the way to the top.


It is scary because it seems everyone was buying into a concept that we were collectively selling each other that was/is unrealistic and unsustainable.

 

[Timm]

Bill Clinton didn't have a Community Reinvestment Act.


Bill Clinton modified an existing Community Reinvestment Act of 1977.

In reality Bill Clinton modified it to a lesser degree than George Bush as can be seen by the significant increase in sub-prime lending during the Bush years, preceding the crash.

http://media.photobucket.com/image/...radek/subprime-mortgage-origination-volum.jpg

Bush had absolutely nothing to do with it, the fact that it picked up during his years in office is because it was catching on

 

[SocialResponsibility]

Do you blame the crack dealer or the crack buyer? I guess it depends on how you feel about economic structure and the pcyhe of human beings.

The pchye of human beings is altered on crack and hence I dont think this is a valid comparison, although I see where you are going with it.

People signed loan docs and bought houses under an unaltered mindstate and with complete control of what was going on.

 

[Fucky McFuckerson]

The pchye of human beings is altered on crack and hence I dont think this is a valid comparison, although I see where you are going with it.

Wouldn't you say the thought of money does the same thing to people? If you answered yes, then its beyond valid.

People signed loan docs and bought houses under an unaltered mindstate and with complete control of what was going on.

Exactly...the thought of MORE money.

 

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Bush had absolutely nothing to do with it, the fact that it picked up during his years in office is because it was catching on

Since I made a claim and provided evidence to back it up, rather than just throw out unsubstantiated claims, why don't you try and back up that Bush had nothing to do with it, with some evidence.

When you make that claim, the burden of proof is on you.

Here are the facts I have provided:

1) Clinton did not create the Community Reinvestment Act (which you stated he did)

2) The amount and rate of sub-prime mortgages increased drastically during same time period of the Bush administration (I provided the graph as evidence)

Now you claim that the increase in sub-prime mortgages during the Bush years had nothing to do with Bush but rather just happened to "catch on" during that time period. - Evidence?

Why was there a delay between the sub-prime mortgage influx and whatever caused it?

 

[Fucky McFuckerson]

Timm = braindwashed douchebot 17 year old. Is it really worth your time to "debate" with him?

Besides, he is trolling you. Dont feed him.

 

[Timm]

yeah dont fee me

 

[Timm]

Since I made a claim and provided evidence to back it up, rather than just throw out unsubstantiated claims, why don't you try and back up that Bush had nothing to do with it, with some evidence.

When you make that claim, the burden of proof is on you.

Here are the facts I have provided:

1) Clinton did not create the Community Reinvestment Act (which you stated he did)

2) The amount and rate of sub-prime mortgages increased drastically during same time period of the Bush administration (I provided the graph as evidence)

Now you claim that the increase in sub-prime mortgages during the Bush years had nothing to do with Bush but rather just happened to "catch on" during that time period. - Evidence?

Why was there a delay between the sub-prime mortgage influx and whatever caused it?

I'm going to need some sources for every piece of information you just posted but anyway,

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6

But anyway if you want to be nit picky about my Clinton Statement do some research on the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act and get back to me

 

[Fucky McFuckerson]

Timm
This message is hidden because Timm is on your ignore list.

FTW

 

[Timm]

I love how people always have to re iterate that I'm on ignore, it's quite obvious that they read my messages. Sup pukokeki, still mad about being run off world star hiphop for being a "racist wigger" ?

 

[Mr. Nice Guy]

I'm going to need some sources for every piece of information you just posted but anyway,

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6

But anyway if you want to be nit picky about my Clinton Statement do some research on the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act and get back to me

You fucking geekball.

These are taken directly from your sorry excuse for a source:

What's more, What's more, George W. Bush was a major proponent of the kind of mortgages that banks had started making under the CRA. He urged low-to-no doc mortgages and the elimination of downpayments, just like the CRA regulators had long done. “We certainly don't want there to be a fine print preventing people from owning their home,” the President said in a 2002 speech. “We can change the print, and we've got to.”

Making matters worse, President Bush pushed hard for lax lending standards. He wanted to expand minority and low income home ownership far beyond what the CRA required. So he pushed even harder for the broadening of these lending standards.

 

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Rerro? Timm?

Do you think I came into this discussion having not read about the CRA, The Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, and even your excuse for an article source posted above?

I never said Bill Clinton had nothing to do with the modification of the original CRA (reread my post) only that based on the amount and rate of sub-prime mortgages and the proliferation of those lending practices into the general market, that GW had a greater impact on the situation.

I don't know if you are posting this gobbledygook as a distraction, but so far you have posted no evidence to support your opinion or your claim that it was Bill Clinton's Community Reinvestment Act (as you previously stated).

 

[Fucky McFuckerson]

And Timm gets OWNED yet again. Baffling.

 

[JoMoDo]

The issue comes down to the flaw of human nature at it's most rudimentary element (in my opinion)-- which is greed.

I put 1/5th of the responsibility on the Investors/2ndary market that makes funds available

I put 1/5th of the responsibility on the mid-level sales/managers/broker shops/appraisers/realtors ect who were pushing through their services with no intention on benefit the consumer

I put 1/5th responsibility on the consumers who sat down and signed their name on a contract and agreed to encompass the debt (my signature is my written word which is my bond)

I put 2/5th's responsibility on the regulations/enforcement (or lack their of) on a national/federal political level. Ever since 1996 when the republicans took over congress deregulation hit 5th gear without even slowing down.

The Gramm-Leachy-Bliley act is a perfect example.