| Author |
|
Marc Baptiste
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3633
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 9:04am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
HILL-A-RY! HILL-A-RY!
Edited by Marc Baptiste on 03 September 2008 at 9:20am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Al Cook
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 December 2004
Posts: 12735
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 9:10am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
It's also good things that the Congressional elections are held immediately
after the Presidential elections, so that you can pick your congress based on
the President, and that the Congressional period lasts the same length as
the President's, so that that check-and-balance doesn't get disrupted part
way through and allow some President-and-Congress combo the ability to
destroy America.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Zhang
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12843
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 9:18am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
I was born in Red China. My parents could have been branded "class enemies" just because they came from a wealthy background. They knew of people who were paraded around and executed for being "rich". It makes me laugh when I hear people fret about "Socialism" in America. Democrats are teddy bears compared to the real thing. If anything, GWB and his loony-tune evangelical, pro-war folks would fit right in a Marxist-Leninist world. Same personalities. Same fanatic madness.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Keith Elder
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1973
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 11:16am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Joe: It makes
me laugh when I hear people fret about "Socialism" in America.
Democrats are teddy bears compared to the real thing. If anything, GWB
and his loony-tune evangelical, pro-war folks would fit right in a
Marxist-Leninist world. Same personalities. Same fanatic madness.
How can you make such a good point, and then absolutely ruin your point in the next sentence?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Monte Gruhlke
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 03 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3299
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 11:28am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
If we executed people for being rich in the USA, then it would be very important to learn if being rich meant earning $250,000 or more per year, or by earning $5,000,000 or more per year.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Knut Robert Knutsen
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 September 2006
Posts: 7374
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 11:48am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
The idea that Democrats are socialists is ludicrous. Especially since when many Americans say "socialist", they mean communist. But even the western European Social Democrats, who operate within democratic frameworks, are quite a bit to the left of the democrats on these issues.
While it may be true that Democrats are "closer" to socialism than Republicans are, it is in the sense that Manhattan's West side is closer to LA than the East side is.
Hey, personally I'd love for the Democrats to be socialists. But they're not. In our context they're merely "compassionate conservatives".
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 12:38pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Rich wrote:
| Except (as an example) Georgia state senator Vincent Fort didn't find it to be so 'clean', nor did he feel resigned to let the industry run its course. In 2001, he pushed -and passed- reform legislation to the on going sub-prime practices in his state. And in the years between 2002 and 2006 industry lobbyists backed by one of the nation''s largest subprime lenders poured tens of millions of dollars to push back. Ultimately they won. But my point being, there was in fact a generous amount of malfeasance in action through it all. And there were manipulations that could have been brought to bare. |
|
|
Ah, GAFLA. Are you fucking serious? "Ultimately?" No. The only provisions you could possibly be touting (restrictions on loan flipping, economically unjustifiable loans, liability, foreclosure, etc) were amended just FIVE MONTHS later. The amended act was, then, just one more of hundreds of anti-predatory lending laws already on the books nationwide. Anything following was spectacle.
Look, you want to revamp RESPA, the Graham Bliley Act, or anything else, more power to you. You want yet another new federal predatory lending law? Get busy. I might even support the effort with a buck or two. But, a word to the wise, learn about what you're talking about. At the very least, learn more than the legislators in Georgia whose predatory lending law was so ineptly constructed that the federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency immediately claimed pre-emption and almost immediately exempted federally chartered banks from that laws' purview; that the state followed suit by exempting state chartered banks; and which was amended in less than FIVE months because elements like its 'unlimited liability' claim (as opposed to a determinable dollar amount and due diligence) had placed the state of Georgia in the position of not having ANY large entity willing to handle mortgage loans originating in the state...with the exception of federally backed Freddie Mac, and they didn't handle "high-cost loans" in Georgia the first place. And, even they had problems with the "low-cost" buys from the state. How is Freddie Mac or Fanny Mae supposed to size a loan which carries "unlimited liability" for an undetermined time for even a misspelled word? Just how do you get that through your buyer's compliance shop? The Georgia law was so poorly constructed that even the definitions of 'annual percentage rate,’ ‘creditor,’ ‘home loan,’ and ‘points and fees’ had to be amended.
And what happened? Well, since most all mortgage loans made by traditional lenders are sold in the secondary market, the secondary market all but closed its doors to Georgia. The national buyers of mortgage loans even changed their underwriting standards to require lenders to agree to provide for a "take back" on ANY loans made under GAFLA, even if it was years after the loan was closed, sold or even paid off. With fewer national companies willing to buy mortgage loans originated in Georgia, the end result was a reduction of overall credit availability from traditional lenders. Tell me, was the reduced competition in the mortgage market a good deal for borrowers in Georgia?
Georgia didn't think so, and changed its law.
Rich wrote:
| But my point being, there was in fact a generous amount of malfeasance in action through it all. And there were manipulations that could have been brought to bare. |
|
|
No, Rich. The point you were attempting to make is that the Bush Administration orchestrated a "host" of deregulation measures and that Republicans, going as far back as the Dutch uncle, were responsible for the subprime crisis...irrespective, I suppose, of the fact that subprime refinancing experienced its largest historical increase of 900% under President Clinton and Andrew Cuomo and saw the largest measure of deregulation in the finance sectors' history under President Clinton and Roger Rubin. Further, your point was that foreclosures and job loss were the sum of that crisis. Rich, you were mistaken on every point. No, your only genuine point was the effort to say that Republicans were 'bad'...your problem was that you were more than just a little hazy on exactly what they did that should make them so bad.
Now, you want to claim that you were merely suggesting "nonfeasance"? If that had been the case, I doubt I'd have bothered.
Alright, Rich, what would YOU have had the Fed do? Increase interest rates? Increase our efforts at mitigating inflation or leave off such extreme manipulation and let it run its course? Either direction would surely have served to mitigate, or even negate, the possibility of a lending bubble. Oh, yeah. Just not in the manner you seem to think. 'Being tainted by the Austrian School, I'm even sympathetic in a theoretical sort of fashion. But, Rich, do YOU understand the ramifications of any such ideas? They are extreme in promise of consequence. I doubt you want to go there, and it certainly wouldn't help any of your so-called points.
So, would you suggest legislation to erect a stronger barrier between the primary and secondary mortgage markets? How would we accomplish that? Should we return to allowing overseas financial markets to fill the gap of buying up sub-prime packaged loans? What would this solve towards any number of attendant questions? How about the executive branch? What could President Bush have done by way of your suggested "manipulations"...under law, of course? What exactly are those "manipulations" which you're suggesting...and have you thought out the unavoidable complications?
As something like the the Federal Trade Commission Act obviously isn't good enough for you, what's your workable alternative? As it is, we have more than 72 sweeping federal laws and related regulations (Including the FTCA, Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act, and RESPA), and 13 federal agencies. Then, there is the little matter of our Republic, as 50 states--all with various state laws and even local ordinances--jostle with the Feds for autonomy in regulating lending laws within their jurisdiction.
As far back as 2004, for example, the federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, with congressional mandate and Executive branch support, issued a ruling that broadly impacted the current regulatory and supervisory scheme for mortgage lending at the national level. How did that go over? The National Governors Association, the National Association of Attorneys General and the National Conference of State Legislatures all promptly opposed the proposal. Vigorously, to say the least. The OCC eventually worked out a compromise, but this example should help illuminate the difficulties to which you seem oblivious.
Rich, regulation IS obviously necessary; but it has to be smart, effective regulation. This is NOT the arena for precipitate or "feel good" moves along the lines of your nebulous suppositions.
Welcome to the forum, Rich, and this thread in particular. You should fit right in...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 12:43pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Rich wrote:
| So Michael, construct how this works? (If you would, please. |
|
|
As it didn't touch on anything I had to say, Rich, I'll pass on stepping on Keith's points.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Bruce Buchanan
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 June 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 4797
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 12:44pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Geez, Michael...it's so much easier to blame Bush for everything. Saves lots of reseach and typing and the like.
(Blasted skin rash. If only Bush wasn't in favor of poison ivy...)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Jodi Moisan
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 February 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6808
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 12:59pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Hey Joel, I wanted to say that while I don't agree with you a lot, you are a guy that will apologize when you over step and get personal. That's pretty cool!
I can't believe any one would have Al on ignore, he is one of my bright spots on the board. When Talley and Al get going, it is worth the price of admission.
This just in:McCain was not in the "cone of silence" for the Saddlebeck Forum of Faith. Yeesh what a cheater.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 1:27pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Smiling, Bruce. Ain't that the truth...
And if that doesn't work, I can always just blame America.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 03 September 2008 at 1:32pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Hadn't you heard, Jodi?
McCain spokesperson Nicolle Wallace, a former CBS News consultant, told
the Times last night that "[t]he insinuation from the Obama campaign
that John McCain, a former prisoner of war, cheated is outrageous."
I'm going to get awfully tired of hearing about Hanoi in every statement from the McCain campaign. They should have just said, "Hey, we're running a campaign, why don't you take a shot at making sense of our schedule."
Edited by Michael Myers on 03 September 2008 at 1:33pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
|
|
Topic Closed)
