SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: ChanceIs who wrote (164742)11/15/2008 11:38:45 PM
From: Pogeu MahoneRead Replies (2) | Respond to of 306849
 
Cut the bullshit
No one ever forced a bank to make a loan that could not be repayed.
Ask yourself, How do banks work? Certainly Not by giving loans they cannot collect.

These loans were given out and then promptly sold so when it was not be payed back the bank did not care. It was then the next guys problem. No ethics comes into play but what do you expect from greedy bankers?
If the bank that sold the loan had to keep it on their books this would never have happened. You will buy any stupid justification to not blame this on bush and his republican legislature.
Bankers did not have to ignore 100 years of standard banking practices.
These stupid greedy bastards cut their own throats and the worlds, no law forced them to do it. They thought they were cute and only they would do the dirty. Surprise ,surprise as this toxic sludge fills every bank in the world other then Israels.

edit
none of this was ever challenged by any bank in court
because they know how riduculus they would look



To: ChanceIs who wrote (164742)11/16/2008 1:50:15 AM
From: Skeeter BugRespond to of 306849
 
chancels, clinton was partly at fault, but not for the reasons the republican spokes holes have told you.

it was under clinton's watch that phil gramm put in legislation to make the credit default swaps unregulated... and clinton supported the idea.

bush had 6 years to fix it and failed.

bush also thought home ownership for people who couldn't save, didn't have a social security number and had bad credit was fantastic, too - and said as much. i heard his words.

remember - compassionate conservatism?

bush even spoke of his buddy in texas who was offering people with low income, no ssn, no down payment and bad credit homes just as good as everyone else.

this *is not* a demican vs republicrat issue - both parties are corrupt and inept.



To: ChanceIs who wrote (164742)11/16/2008 5:53:52 PM
From: Dan3Respond to of 306849
 
Re: Home ownership rose dramatically under Clinton.

Incomes, particularly real income for the lower and middle classes, rose dramatically under Clinton, meaning more people could afford to own homes.

Vs. the situation under Bush, where incomes fell (adjusted for inflation) except for the very rich.