A Sign of Things to Come?

Gonna kill, kill, kill, kill, kill the poor…
kill kill kill kill kill the poor…
kill kill kill kill kill kill kill tonight!

In the story, the judge bailed out the couple, that’s who got bailed out. Did you happen to miss that somewhere within your verbal stuper?

You don’t think this is a Socialist action? Really? Making a gigantic clusterfuck of a mistake and taxing everyone else to pay for it isn’t Socialist? Did the hammer in your avatar hit you in the head, or are you naturally this ignorant?

So you are upset because a banker acted like a banker and lied to you? You were expecting something else? You thought he was looking out for YOUR best interest, moreso than his? Ryan, young cousin, if the lips are moving he is lying. Better yet, if he is breathing and blinking, he is lying. That thinking will do you justice when dealing with bankers and real estate people, for the most part.

I do not agree with a huge bonus for people responsible for this shit, not at all. If it were up to me, they would all be indicted on fraud charges, I would throw the book at them. They would be rubbing elbows with Bernie Maddoff, cleaning the prison kitchen for a whopping 12 cents per hour.

You think I don’t know what I am talking about? The problem is greed, and how people do not want to spend within their means. They HAVE to have the big house, even if they cannot afford it. But some banker comes along, who intends on playing with that greed, and offers you “the deal of a lifetime.” And because you so badly want the big house, you forget all common sense and personal responsibility and make a bad purchase. Should the banks have renegotiated the mortgage? If they were nice then yes, but remember these are the same people who gave you a shitty mortgage to begin with. Did you miss that ? You did business with a shark, and you come back to think he is now a saint? Why don’t you show some personal responsibility and use an intelligent manner to pay for whatever it is you want? Oh no, no one wants to talk about that now do they.

Kill the poor? Dude my family came here with $500 cash in 1980, and the clothing on our backs, and spoke less English than an illegal alien jumping the border. Both my brother and I went to college, while both my parents worked their asses off. We all did our part to succeed, so being poor does not limit you so much as your desire or lack of it. I have seen so many people considered “poor” who MADE THEIR OWN LUCK. Many of them immigrants who didn’t even speak the language, yet did better than those who did. You are the master of your destiny, but seeing how you want everyone else to help you, I bet you would not understand that now would you.

The bank was lying its ass off in the face of court orders, so how do you think they were with this couple? This is a matter of contract law, not social activism.

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

At any rate, no matter how bad somebody wants a loan, if the banks say no, they can’t have it. Trying to lay all the blame on homeowners (and we’ve already covered the fact that subprime loans were not primarily to blame, but maybe your were sleeping) is laughable.

[/quote]

That is actually not true, they were required to govbe loans to minorities to fulfill their quota

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
In the story, the judge bailed out the couple, that’s who got bailed out. Did you happen to miss that somewhere within your verbal stuper?

You don’t think this is a Socialist action? Really? Making a gigantic clusterfuck of a mistake and taxing everyone else to pay for it isn’t Socialist? Did the hammer in your avatar hit you in the head, or are you naturally this ignorant?
[/quote]

Wait a minute, socialism is stupid and unfair, but not everything that is stupid and unfair is automatically socialism.

It may be in the spirit of socialism but not socialism.

It is not systemic and does not adress the collective control of resources.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
In the story, the judge bailed out the couple, that’s who got bailed out. Did you happen to miss that somewhere within your verbal stuper?

You don’t think this is a Socialist action? Really? Making a gigantic clusterfuck of a mistake and taxing everyone else to pay for it isn’t Socialist? Did the hammer in your avatar hit you in the head, or are you naturally this ignorant?[/quote]

So you’re telling me that I’m wrong about what I believe? All I know is, I’m a socialist, and that’s not the kind of thing I support or that any socialists I know support (which includes Marx and Engels [not that I personally know them, of course, but it’s not a “Marxist” policy]). Social democrats, sure, but not socialists. I guess what I’m saying is read a book, instead of taking Fox New’s word on what is socialism.

This is actually a good question. It’s not an accurate reflection of my sentiments, but it does make a good point. No, I’m not upset that bankers lied. What I am saying is, capitalism leads to this sort of thing inevitably. It is systemic. I am saying I don’t support this system. I don’t feel like you can honestly blame the bankers for acting the way that the system more or less compels them to act.

This is beside the point.

But why? Most of them didn’t really do anything illegal. That’s why I don’t support the system. This sort of thing happens and is really inevitable under capitalism. Even if you are forward thinking and somewhat averse to excessive risk, hell, even if you correctly spot the bubble, it doesn’t really matter that much.

This is true, but mainly irrelevant. This type of scenario, despite what you’ll hear in many right-wing publications, was responsbile for only a small minority of defaults. It really wasn’t that big of an issue. Furthermore, it sort of presents a problem for you, as capitalism depends on this type of consumption to survive. So you’re sort of stuck.

This was not really diercted at you.

See, that’s where you misunderstand. I DON’T want others to help (as in welfare, publicaa bailouts, etc.). Socialists are against welfare. Social democrats are not, but socialists are.

[quote]orion wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

At any rate, no matter how bad somebody wants a loan, if the banks say no, they can’t have it. Trying to lay all the blame on homeowners (and we’ve already covered the fact that subprime loans were not primarily to blame, but maybe your were sleeping) is laughable.

That is actually not true, they were required to govbe loans to minorities to fulfill their quota[/quote]

You were probably asleep, but I already covered this, it was a tiny fraction of cases and it didn’t matter at any rate.

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
orion wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

At any rate, no matter how bad somebody wants a loan, if the banks say no, they can’t have it. Trying to lay all the blame on homeowners (and we’ve already covered the fact that subprime loans were not primarily to blame, but maybe your were sleeping) is laughable.

That is actually not true, they were required to govbe loans to minorities to fulfill their quota

You were probably asleep, but I already covered this, it was a tiny fraction of cases and it didn’t matter at any rate.[/quote]

Well then, they did it because government changed the incentive structure by creating a market for mortgage credit default swaps by backing Fanny May and Freddie Mac.

[quote]orion wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
orion wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

At any rate, no matter how bad somebody wants a loan, if the banks say no, they can’t have it. Trying to lay all the blame on homeowners (and we’ve already covered the fact that subprime loans were not primarily to blame, but maybe your were sleeping) is laughable.

That is actually not true, they were required to govbe loans to minorities to fulfill their quota

You were probably asleep, but I already covered this, it was a tiny fraction of cases and it didn’t matter at any rate.

Well then, they did it because government changed the incentive structure by creating a market for mortgage credit default swaps by backing Fanny May and Freddie Mac.
[/quote]

I knew there had to be another way to let the market off scot-free and pin this on government! I can’t wait till you guys come to power here.

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
orion wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
orion wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

At any rate, no matter how bad somebody wants a loan, if the banks say no, they can’t have it. Trying to lay all the blame on homeowners (and we’ve already covered the fact that subprime loans were not primarily to blame, but maybe your were sleeping) is laughable.

That is actually not true, they were required to govbe loans to minorities to fulfill their quota

You were probably asleep, but I already covered this, it was a tiny fraction of cases and it didn’t matter at any rate.

Well then, they did it because government changed the incentive structure by creating a market for mortgage credit default swaps by backing Fanny May and Freddie Mac.

I knew there had to be another way to let the market off scot-free and pin this on government! I can’t wait till you guys come to power here. [/quote]

Well of course you cant because then youll have a job and would want to keep your money!

Yeah, that was cheap.

[quote]orion wrote:Well of course you cant because then youll have a job and would want to keep your money!

Yeah, that was cheap.[/quote]

Don’t apologize, I love this.

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
orion wrote:Well of course you cant because then youll have a job and would want to keep your money!

Yeah, that was cheap.

Don’t apologize, I love this.

[/quote]

Mebbe, but usually when I cannot insult somneone intelligently, why bother.

Sometimes however you just have to dust off the classics.

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
orion wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
orion wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

At any rate, no matter how bad somebody wants a loan, if the banks say no, they can’t have it. Trying to lay all the blame on homeowners (and we’ve already covered the fact that subprime loans were not primarily to blame, but maybe your were sleeping) is laughable.

That is actually not true, they were required to govbe loans to minorities to fulfill their quota

You were probably asleep, but I already covered this, it was a tiny fraction of cases and it didn’t matter at any rate.

Well then, they did it because government changed the incentive structure by creating a market for mortgage credit default swaps by backing Fanny May and Freddie Mac.

I knew there had to be another way to let the market off scot-free and pin this on government! I can’t wait till you guys come to power here. [/quote]

Also, and I think this answers the question behind the question, of course people make mistakes but the markets corrects them, sometimes brutally.

That is good, because it makes people learn from their mistakes.

When you bail them out every time they only learn that when they fuck up they can come cry to Mommy, and people should grow out of that at a certain age.

[quote]JLu wrote:
So when the bank couldn’t afford to stay afloat they should’ve thrown in the towel? Or do the expectations for being accountable for your actions and being responsible only apply to normal citizens and not corporations like banks?[/quote]

No they should have filed for a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, paid off all their outstanding debt and went back to business if they still had any assets. The government funded Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has gave moral hazard to the banks. If they were responsible for their actions too. None of this would happen, yes banks would go broke, but customers would only do business with sturdy banks that use good practices, have low over head costs, and do not risk more than they can afford.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Gregus wrote:
The Judge is right. They slamed the people with interest rates that made their mortgage unplayable. The borrower in good faith asked pleaded and begged the bank for a reduction in interest so they could stay in their home. A home that is Modest and the people honest but fell prey to bad lending practices. You know bad things can happen to good people.

The Bank in Question got paid for their losses via Government bailouts and gladly took the money and now they were after more. They would rather foreclose then loose a few hundred dollars per month on a lower interest rate.

So again for a few hundred dollars monthly they refused to help and would rather foreclose and throw a family out on the street.

I applaud the Judge for this specific scenario. Ive dealt with Banks before and their Officers and CFO’s. You have no idea how close to organized crime they are. They hold all the cards and they know it. I would rather default and talk to John Gotti about me having a hard time with payments because there is better chance to a inkling of humanity in him then a BANK. LOL! Isn’t that Obvious?

Sorry but I have to totally disagree.

People should know how bad an interest only loan is, and they still went along with it. They signed their name on the dotted line regarding the loan, and if they were not fully informed it is their own fault. I am not saying the bankers are saints, but you need to be on the defensive with your money issues. If you are dumb enough to get an interest only loan, then you should be held responsible for it. Why the bankers didn’t re-structure the loan is simple to understand, but then again they are not obligated to. Should we all get bailouts when we make bad decisions? I am glad my family taught me better than that, to fall for such stupidity.

You need to be your own banker, doctor, lawyer, accountant, etc, because no one values your own money and well being more than YOU.[/quote]

Interest only loans are something tricky. They are useful tool if you know how to use them, example:

10 year Interest only loan, is what my father has on his current house.

If he pays them the interest, plus pays off part of the principle (about the same as 30 year mortgage), a ten year interest only can then be refinanced after nine years and you’ll basically make a 12 year (9+3 years of payments) interest only mortgage and pay about half of what you would for a thirty year mortgage without the balloon payment at the end.

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
In the story, the judge bailed out the couple, that’s who got bailed out. Did you happen to miss that somewhere within your verbal stuper?

You don’t think this is a Socialist action? Really? Making a gigantic clusterfuck of a mistake and taxing everyone else to pay for it isn’t Socialist? Did the hammer in your avatar hit you in the head, or are you naturally this ignorant?

So you are upset because a banker acted like a banker and lied to you? You were expecting something else? You thought he was looking out for YOUR best interest, moreso than his? Ryan, young cousin, if the lips are moving he is lying. Better yet, if he is breathing and blinking, he is lying. That thinking will do you justice when dealing with bankers and real estate people, for the most part.

I do not agree with a huge bonus for people responsible for this shit, not at all. If it were up to me, they would all be indicted on fraud charges, I would throw the book at them. They would be rubbing elbows with Bernie Maddoff, cleaning the prison kitchen for a whopping 12 cents per hour.

You think I don’t know what I am talking about? The problem is greed, and how people do not want to spend within their means. They HAVE to have the big house, even if they cannot afford it. But some banker comes along, who intends on playing with that greed, and offers you “the deal of a lifetime.” And because you so badly want the big house, you forget all common sense and personal responsibility and make a bad purchase. Should the banks have renegotiated the mortgage? If they were nice then yes, but remember these are the same people who gave you a shitty mortgage to begin with. Did you miss that ? You did business with a shark, and you come back to think he is now a saint? Why don’t you show some personal responsibility and use an intelligent manner to pay for whatever it is you want? Oh no, no one wants to talk about that now do they.

Kill the poor? Dude my family came here with $500 cash in 1980, and the clothing on our backs, and spoke less English than an illegal alien jumping the border. Both my brother and I went to college, while both my parents worked their asses off. We all did our part to succeed, so being poor does not limit you so much as your desire or lack of it. I have seen so many people considered “poor” who MADE THEIR OWN LUCK. Many of them immigrants who didn’t even speak the language, yet did better than those who did. You are the master of your destiny, but seeing how you want everyone else to help you, I bet you would not understand that now would you. [/quote]

I am still waiting for the lynching, I am all for libertarian and capitalistic values. I am also for fucking up the government officials who created this mess, who the fuck thought up the FDIC (I know you do not have to explain)? I say lynch them on the outskirts of the FED building and let them hang until dusk.