Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: LePaul on October 03, 2008, 08:30:00 AM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAuOEdttjZQ
Awesome!
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAuOEdttjZQ
Awesome!
pffft, you should see when my sisters in law get together
-
I wish everyone were as angry at congressmen.
-
I hate the scream & counterscream talking head shows. Frank is a jackaxe; he did have his fingerprints all over this Freddie/Fannie mess. But Bill is a jackaxe too; Frank was right, Bill was boorish.
Now, you want to see what went down? Don't let talking heads spew all over you, do a little research. The evidence is out there.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/dominic-lawson/dominic-lawson-democrat-fingerprints-are-all-over-the-financial-crisis-949653.html
...What is the proximate cause of the collapse of confidence in the world's banks? Millions of improvident loans to American housebuyers. Which organisations were on their own responsible for guaranteeing half of this $12 trillion market? Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the so-called Government Sponsored Enterprises which last month were formally nationalised to prevent their immediate and catastrophic collapse. Now, who do you think were among the leading figures blocking all the earlier attempts by President Bush – and other Republicans – to bring these lending behemoths under greater regulatory control? Step forward, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd....
...Maxine Walters' complaint about previous attempts to bring the great state-sponsored housing finance bodies under stricter control was partly a reference to Bill Clinton's efforts. Last week the former President acknowledged that "responsibility" for the absence of proper regulation rested "with Democrats who were resisting any efforts of Republicans in Congress, and earlier when I was President and tried to impose tighter standards on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac". Then, as now, members of his own party saw all such initiatives as unwonted attacks on the chances for low-earners, and particularly African-Americans, to own their own homes....
That's not Bill O'Reilly blaming the Democrats... that's BILL CLINTON blaming the Democrats.
'Nuff said.
-
I hate the scream & counterscream talking head shows.
I watched about ten seconds of it. If they are going to behave like that I wish they would just beat each other to death and get it over with.
-
http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/fannie_mae_and.html
According to this, it wasn't fm and fm writing bad loans, they were actually writing good loans. The problem was they were buying all the bad loans from the private sector.
Now, I ask you, why would you buy loans that you wouldn't write yourself?
Well, if this is accurate, it becomes quite clear. The government was using fm and fm to bailout the private sector long before they asked for a bailout. But as big as they were, they were not big enough to buy all the bad loans
-
As anyone who worked in the bank world would tell you, Congress put the pressure on banks to give these risky loans or face investigation/fines for not doing so
-
I don't watch much of O'Reilly (the guy get's on my nerves) but I did see that interview and couldn't help but laugh. Barney blamed everyone but himself. As a matter of fact he said HE was the one trying to get things under control.
Funny and sad at the same time.
-
Somebody needs to call these jokers out. O'Reilly probably was a bit over the top but people like Frank NEED to be screamed at. No one is holding them accountable for anything. The fact is that although Frank likes to say he's all for more regulation and John McCain is against it, Frank has been trying to block regulation as far back as 03' (when McCain was pushing for it).
-
As anyone who worked in the bank world would tell you, Congress put the pressure on banks to give these risky loans or face investigation/fines for not doing so
lol, what, by deregulating them? Wow, i'd cave under that pressure for sure
-
http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/fannie_mae_and.html
According to this, it wasn't fm and fm writing bad loans, they were actually writing good loans. The problem was they were buying all the bad loans from the private sector.
Now, I ask you, why would you buy loans that you wouldn't write yourself?
Well, if this is accurate, it becomes quite clear. The government was using fm and fm to bailout the private sector long before they asked for a bailout. But as big as they were, they were not big enough to buy all the bad loans
sixpence,
this is a factually incorrect and poorly researched article. Problems with Fanny & Freddie go way back. Easily two of the most corrupt and poorly run entities in the world. This comment was down below and matches well with audited numbers I've seen elsewhere...
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the country's second-biggest mortgage finance company, together owned a record $6.9 billion of foreclosed homes on March 31, compared with $8.56 billion held by all 8,500 U.S. commercial banks and savings and loans
-
Wow U go Bill!!
-
lol, what, by deregulating them? Wow, i'd cave under that pressure for sure
Sadly the video that explained it quite well got removed from YouTube for the music in it (Warner Brothers asked it to be removed). Go fig.
-
O'Reilly is an ass, but if the U.S. had a House of Commons, I'd elect O'Reilly just for the entertainment.
-
I watched about ten seconds of it. If they are going to behave like that I wish they would just beat each other to death and get it over with.
Yeager speaketh the truth!
-
lol, what, by deregulating them? Wow, i'd cave under that pressure for sure
you better be careful with this. the pendulem do swingeth the other way and before you know it the tax and spend liberals will pile on so damned many regulations it will strangle free enterprize again.
The trick is to find the minimum necessary regulation.
-
sixpence,
this is a factually incorrect and poorly researched article. Problems with Fanny & Freddie go way back. Easily two of the most corrupt and poorly run entities in the world. This comment was down below and matches well with audited numbers I've seen elsewhere...
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the country's second-biggest mortgage finance company, together owned a record $6.9 billion of foreclosed homes on March 31, compared with $8.56 billion held by all 8,500 U.S. commercial banks and savings and loans
Even if they do, that doesn't mean they were bad loans. And you don't provide a source for your information, do those foreclosed homes include what they bought from the private sector?
Here is what the article said:
"Start with the most basic fact of all: virtually none of the $1.5 trillion of cratering subprime mortgages were backed by Fannie or Freddie. That’s right — most subprime mortgages did not meet Fannie or Freddie’s strict lending standards. All those no money down, no interest for a year, low teaser rate loans? All the loans made without checking a borrower’s income or employment history? All made in the private sector, without any support from Fannie and Freddie.
Look at the numbers. While the credit bubble was peaking from 2003 to 2006, the amount of loans originated by Fannie and Freddie dropped from $2.7 trillion to $1 trillion. Meanwhile, in the private sector, the amount of subprime loans originated jumped to $600 billion from $335 billion and Alt-A loans hit $400 billion from $85 billion in 2003. Fannie and Freddie, which wouldn’t accept crazy floating rate loans, which required income verification and minimum down payments, were left out of the insanity"
"It’s certainly fair to criticize Fannie and Freddie over real issues that contributed to their downfall. The companies had numerous accounting problems and inadequate safeguards covering their own investment portfolios. Those weaknesses came home to roost when the real estate market cratered. Fannie and Freddie purchased billions of dollars of subprime-backed securities for their own investment portfolios and got hit just like every other investor."
That source I posted is from businessweek, if you have a source that proves that wrong, by all means share it.
-
According to this, it wasn't fm and fm writing bad loans, they were actually writing good loans. The problem was they were buying all the bad loans from the private sector.
Now, I ask you, why would you buy loans that you wouldn't write yourself?
The article you reference is incorrect and the author does not understand how Fannie and Freddie operate.
Fannie and Freddie are prohibited by their charters from offering loans to the general public. Neither of the GSE's writes any loans directly. They never have. The GSE's set the underwriting guidelines for their programs and they make their own proprietary loan underwriting software systems (Desktop Underwriter for Fannie and Loan Prospector for Freddy) available (and mandatory) for issueing approvals for all the loans they buy.
What happened between 2004 - 2007 is that Fannie and Freddie dramatically expanded the types of loan programs they would purchase to include all sorts of stuff that is classified as "Alt-A" and Subprime. These loans were huge contributors to housing prices rising.
Now, both of the GSE's have not only eliminated all of those products, but the underwriting criteria on all of their traditional programs has gotten CRAZY strict. Where we are now is not a return to lending as it was before this all began.... its a return to non-lending as it was heading into the Great Depression.
Barney Frank certainly deserves plenty of blame. As does just about every other Congressman and Senator who has served since 1977. The REAL roots of this mess trace back to the Govt. getting involved with forcing the GSE's to manipulate loan guidelines with the stated objective of increasing low income, minority and poor credit individuals home ownership opportunities. Lending should be about maximizing returns while minimizing losses.... standard good business practices. The key is in evaluating the borrowers ability to repay the loan.... not in evaluating the borrowers skin color or low income status.
NOTE: Fannie and Freddie DID do all sorts of loans during 2004 - 2007 that would be classified as "Alt-A".... and some as subprime (though the GSE's did not buy loans with primary credit scores under 580 and very few loans with a score under 620). Both of the GSE's had wildly popular "SISA" loan programs.... "Stated Income, Stated Assets". These programs did require that the borrower have excellent credit scores... 700+ in general.... but they did not require any documentation at all relative to the borrowers income or assets. The borrower did have to prove that he/she was employed but thats about it.
As to Fannie and Freddie no longer doing crazy adjustable rate interest only type loans...... Well, you can get an interest only adjustable rate mortgage backed by Fannie or Freddie TODAY. In fact, there is a whole range of such products on offer and for some people they represent an excellent choice.
Fang
-
thank you fang...
-
woot fang, nice to see ya back somewhere!