6079 Smith W says

http://www.cnbc.com/id/39055252

brutus smith says

The savings and loan crisis of the 1980s and 1990s (commonly referred to as the S&L crisis) was the failure of 747  savings and loans.

6079 Smith W says

The New World Czar says

RE: Fannie/Freddie: No, not good at all given both the agencies track records to date.

Unsure which one has which function, but one of the FM's has been in charge of distribution of bailout money to financial institutions, while the other is in charge of compliance with already-bailed out institutions...like a pair of bulls running through a glass factory.

6079 Smith W says

brutus smith says

Are you saying Mr. Barr perjured himself czar? Maybe you should let the committee know. 

The New World Czar says

BS, FYI Michael Barr also served in the Clinton administration. Further research of your wiki article draws reference (another opinion) from Paul Krugman, a well-known, left-leaning Keynesian economist/NYT columnist.

Two from the Ivy League left, two vindications, two opinions. In this world, 2+2 is anything you want it to be depending on how one interpret facts and data.

Remember, it's "We The People" and not "Me The President" that make this country great.

brutus smith says

 you must be like sam a, the only thing that is "true" has to be written by a right wingnut blogger. You guys are so funny. It keeps me young.

brutus smith says

Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis

Posted by: Aaron Pressman on September 29, 2008

Fresh off the false and politicized attack on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, today we’re hearing the know-nothings blame the subprime crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act — a 30-year-old law that was actually weakened by the Bush administration just as the worst lending wave began. This is even more ridiculous than blaming Freddie and Fannie.

The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations. As former Fed Governor Ned Gramlich said in an August, 2007, speech shortly before he passed away: “In the subprime market where we badly need supervision, a majority of loans are made with very little supervision. It is like a city with a murder law, but no cops on the beat.

http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/community_reinvestment_act_had_nothing_to_do_with_subprime_cris

That better?

The New World Czar says

Nice cut and paste, BS. Right out Wikipedia, eh? It was the [who?] and [100] that gave it away.

Remember, it's "We The People" and not "Me The President" that make this country great.

brutus smith says

Some economists, politicians and other commentators^[who?] have charged that the CRA contributed in part to the 2008 financial crisis by encouraging banks to make unsafe loans. Government economists, such as those from the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, dispute this contention. The Federal Reserve, having examined the evidence, holds that empirical research has not validated any relationship between the CRA and the 2008 financial crisis^[100]. At the FDIC, Chair Sheila Bair delivered remarks noting that the majority of subprime loans originated from lenders not regulated by the CRA, calling it a "scapegoat" and declaring it "NOT guilty.

The New World Czar says

Lets go back to another source of the problem, aka The Community Reinvestment Act. Started in 1977...whose administration? Defunded and restricted in the 1980's and early 1990's...whose administrations? Revived in the mid 1990's...whose administration?

Remember, it's "We The People" and not "Me The President" that make this country great.

brutus smith says

 My, it's very cold in here.

SamAdams says

Brutus, what's not compassionate? The fact is that Obamacare WILL result in healthcare rationing. That's not MY lack of compassion! Compassion (or a lack of it) also has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that I've had to work for everything I have, and that I expect to continue to need to do so in the future. Do you suggest it's a lack of compassion that would prompt someone from expecting other able-bodied adults to do the same?

Do I have kids? You'd better HOPE I do! They'll grow up to be responsible for themselves so you (and other taxpayers) won't have to be. Too bad there aren't more parents who teach their kids the same!

brutus smith says

SamAdams says

Brutus, I'll never be in a coma for a year. Oh, I'm not immune to major disasters. In fact, the major disaster that applies should I HAVE a major disaster is colloquially known as "Obamacare." I won't survive a MONTH in a coma let alone a year. We have to cut our losses, you know, and those "worthless folk" (the elderly, the terminally ill) are exactly where healthcare "reform" will be looking to make the first cuts. In fact, with the recent failure to approve a new cancer drug because it's "too expensive" to justify the few added months of life, the FDA is already working toward those ends.

Meanwhile, I never said bankruptcy protections SHOULDN'T exist. I just don't think I'll be able to keep my house or even the barely middle class lifestyle I currently have if I exercise them. And since I don't have the RIGHT to those things, I'll just have to work to get them back. If I don't, I won't. Simple, eh? So simple even someone busy living a welfare lifestyle ought to be able to grasp it.

brutus smith says

6079 Smith W says

When we fellow property owning taxpayers eventually help bail out CA, you’ll want to keep the following in mind:

“Broke—and Building the Most Expensive School in U.S. History”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703959704575454013855538920.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion#articleTabs%3Darticle

 Make sure that you view the slide show. The Mao-inspired mural of RFK showering his kindness on the masses is priceless.

6079 Smith W says

bs writes:

“so sam a, God forbid you are in a major accident, in a coma for year, your insurance paid the max, anything extra you had was sold or used to pay medical bills, what should we do with you?”

What a fantasy! Under ObieCare doesn't the Death Panel have him "offed" at that point? LOL!!!

brutus smith says

 And sam a, in your effort to be funny, it really isn't funny to the people who have lost all they worked for because of a medical disaster. To bad you couldn't be there when a family is evicted from their home, and make some of your SA comments to them. I liked to see their reaction.

brutus smith says

 so sam a, God forbid you are in a major accident, in a coma for year, your insurance paid the max, anything extra you had was sold or used to pay medical bills, what should we do with you?

6079 Smith W says

 @ SamAdams:

Thank you for your sentiments.

Words often repeated to me as a child by my father: "Always expect the unexpected."

I'd like to add: Hope for the best, plan for the worst.

And a U.S. Marine mantra often strikes a chord: Improvise, adapt and overcome.

starryeyes83 says

Funny thing is, even if they pay goes down to  $ 8 bucks an hour, the person (s)   always seem to have money for beer  and smokes... funny how that happens.

SamAdams says

Brutus, I didn't attack your source. I attacked your source's methodology. If you've got a defense for that one, I'm sure statisticians around the world would be fascinated to hear it! I also noted that, even assuming the numbers are perfectly accurate, you STILL can't add the results together the way that you did. So even if your source is the be-all and end-all, YOUR numbers are STILL WRONG.

You asked for my source. I'm sure you'll want documentation I don't have, but I'll tell you anyway: The two studies I cited (involving marijuana as a gateway drug and tampons as the cause of toxic shock syndrome) are used in a class in statistical process control at the University of Pittsburgh by a professor who was showing all of us how NOT to conduct statistical studies.

6079 Smith W and outsider are right yet again. PLAN AHEAD. And take some responsibility for yourself! The government doesn't (and shouldn't) exist to be your mommy. Stop expecting it to be and we'll suddenly see budget surpluses for things the government actually SHOULD be doing (maybe like adding a basic "manage your money" course to high school curriculums or something). Too many people forget that they have the right to the PURSUIT of happiness. The pursuit part is THEIR job.

outsider says

 Why is the government involved in these personal decisions? If I make a bad personal decision is it the governments responsibility to save me from myself? Everyone.. stand on your own two feet. Don't look to the government to be your savior. 

6079 Smith W says

Gardenman says

Maybe I am fortune vs others here but what the Erie County Auditor has mine appraised for is below what I feel it would sell for. Houses in my area are selling for more and they are very similar to mine. So as I say maybe I am fortune.

What is puzzling to me is the home next to me is almost identical and for years it was always $300 more in evaluation. The last appraisel in 2006 it came in $7300 under mine. That was puzzling. Course I would not say something to the Erie County Auditor for you know what would happen....they would not lower me they would raise them and keep me the same. Was even stranger in that full audit in 2006 they came to everyone's house and interviewed whomever. In my neighbor's case it was his high school son.........when the house info was updated on the county auditor;s website it showed one more bathroom and bedroom than the house had..................you guessed IT the high school kid could not count the number of bathrooms or bedrooms correctly. Dad was about ready to send his high school son back to first grade to learn how to count.

I know some who are having trouble with taxes and house payments. Truth is they were the same in school growing up.....never had a dime to their name, could not manage an allowance, spent money like they have it running out their pockets, etc. Today in life they are no better controlling there money either. I think the schools call that consumer education today in my day they called that using your head and common sense.

brutus smith says

 Kinda hard to save money when your pay goes from 15-16 an hour down to 8-10 an hour. But typical Repub, always, always blame the victim.

The New World Czar says

You can use whatever study you want to blame foreclosures on medical issues...but the overall problem is that most Americans in general do a lousy job managing and saving money. Preserved funds, if made available in the first place, could have gone to pay these medical bills (instead of the new car or big screen TV) had these people prioritized in a more responsible manner...the same ones who will never be able to retire due the fact that they didn't put anything away for retirement.

Sorry, no sympathy here for these financially irresponsible lifestyles.

Remember, it's "We The People" and not "Me The President" that make this country great.

brutus smith says

 sam a, with all your drivel, I missed where your source was. Oh wait a minute, you attack my source and didn't provide one. Typical right wingnut Conservative Repub. Provide a source, be credible for once.

SamAdams says

Brutus, your statistical "proof" is about as reliable as the statistical "proof" that marijuana is a gateway drug, or that tampons cause toxic shock syndrome. Using IDENTICAL methodology, I can prove that drinking milk will make you a murderer. These kinds of statistics need to be "normed" before they have any value. Let me explain:

Researchers went out and about, and asked heroin addicts and other hard drug users if they'd ever smoked marijuana. A significant number said that they had. Proof marijuana is a gateway drug? Not exactly. Go out and about in the general public and ask the same question. The number of people who have ever smoked marijuana? Just about the same.

Medical researchers panicked over toxic shock syndrome. To work toward determining a cause, they asked patients if they used napkins or tampons. Over 80% said tampons. Proof tampons cause, or contribute to the cause, or toxic shock syndrome? Nope. Overall, more than 80% of ALL women use tampons.

And now back to YOUR stats. Yes, researchers asked about underlying causes for foreclosures. They probably got something like the numbers you're quoting. But researchers didn't ask ME. I'm not in foreclosure, but have I had significant medical expenses, a divorce, a job loss, or a death in the last few years? Actually, try 3 out of the 4. And yet, I'm NOT losing my house. Gee, I wonder why not?

Maybe I'm still managing because, as 6079 Smith W so eloquently put it, I WASN'T so dazzled by the sunshine that I didn't expect a rainy day to come eventually. And sure 'nuff, a couple did. Or maybe it's because I actually took a good hard look at income, savings, the potential for unexpected expenses, and did some good hard thinking before I signed anything.

And Brutus, one more thing: Even legitimate stats can't be added together the way that you did. There's no way from what you report to determine which are mutually exclusive and which overlap. So your 62% would be completely bogus even if the numbers you added together weren't.

brutus smith says

 Andddddd your point isssss????  You know, I would pay big money to watch you try to kick some big dude in the knee. ROFLMAO!

Repubs and 6079 have nothing, nada, zilch.

6079 Smith W says

@ bs:

2008?

Data is like fish; the fresher the better otherwise it tends to stink.

brutus smith says

6079 Smith W says

brutus smith says

 Do you have a source that states how many foreclosures were caused by "ignorant people" ? All I've seen is that 62% of foreclosures were caused by medical bills. Another big chunk was job loss. That leaves very few do to ignorance.

6079 Smith W says

Huron Co. Auditor Tkach has publicly stated that they do not use foreclosures and short sales in determining the market value of a property for tax purposes. I wonder if other counties are similar?

Housing ain't coming back until private lending gets back into it. Much of the activity is govt. generated.

The Federal Reserve has been buying the mortgage backed securities issued by Fannie and Freddie and both of the GSEs have unlimited access to the U.S. Treasury.

I've written this before: I bought a house in April and my loan has been sold twice! The last time was to Freddie Mac, but we're still sending our mortgage payments to the most recent lending institution.

A disturbing article:

 http://www.businessinsider.com/pending-home-sales-reconfirm-the-market-is-crashing-2010-9

IMO, the U.S promotes too much home ownership. Some people should rent. Where's the rent subsidy?

Ultimately a house is a money pit. It's not an investment, it's a place in which to live.

SamAdams says

In an unfortunate number of cases, the "underwater" status of mortgages has less to do with banks, loss of real estate value, or even over-valuation in the first place. It has to do with two kinds of people: Those who decided to purchase more house than they could comfortably afford (even in the "good times"), and those who decided to purchase a house when they were nowhere near financially ready to buy at all.

Thanks to Democrats in Congress in general, and Barney Frank and Chris Dodd in specific, people were able to buy homes with little or no down payments enabling them to buy houses they, to put it bluntly, had no business buying. And thanks to the same two idiots in Congress, that's one thing that wasn't fixed when all of those new banking regulations were recently put into effect.

My heart goes out to those who struggle to pay their mortgages because of job loss or some competing financial crisis. But I have no sympathy whatsoever to people who were ignorant enough to think they could scrape together a sky high mortgage payment every month as long as their exhorbitant overtime pay continued, or who had low-paying jobs but were offered special "deals" by banks they didn't have the common sense to see through. Buying a house is a major thing in the lives of most, and you'd think more people would do more research before getting themselves on the hook for thirty years.

I do hope that banks are lending more wisely these days, and that low interest rates prove helpful for buyers and re-financers alike. Unfortunately, the hands of many financial institutions are still tied by attitudes like Chris Dodd's. Senator Dodd actually said -- on the record -- that if down payments were required, people who couldn't afford houses wouldn't be able to get them. Well, duh. And isn't that as it should be? As long as banks are forced to lend to people who would otherwise be considered poor risks, we're going to see banks and homeowners alike in trouble (not to mention the VERY underwater status of the effectively government-run Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). And as long as SOME banks and homeowners are in real trouble, everybody else will have to collectively pay the price.

P.S. There's mention made here of over-valuation by local government entities so as to maximize property taxes. That's a case of classic government greed that's well worth fighting, but it's not taxes alone that make the vast majority of underwater homes unaffordable.

looking around says

I agree with Salvatore, I do battle with the auditors office everytime they jack my taxes up. I don't mind paying my fair share but a simple search of what other houses in my neighborhood sold for recently indicates there is no reason to reaccess mine at an increased value. The old saying is if they think it's worth that much I will sell it to them and move elsewhere. Untill the economy rebounds they have to tighten their belts like everyone else.

theotherside says

Get free local counseling from national company. check out www.apprisen.com for more details on obtaining free housing counseling to help you get back on track. Avoid scams by investigating companies first through the Better Business Bureau and remeber never pay for something you can get for free.

Salvatore says

I pay property taxes way over what my house is really worth on the market. Forget the auditor's office. You pay a private appraiser hundreds to get a true apprasial and get your taxes lowered but 3 or 6 years later, the outside appraisers working for the county appraise your house for far more than your house is worth. Check out some past and present public political figures. Why are their houses appraised below the market value? If you have connections in the auditor's office, you pay less property taxes. I pay more taxes to make up the difference for those who avoid paying their fair share.

grianjelly says