Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » bush proposes plan to give FED more power!! (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: bush proposes plan to give FED more power!!
turbokid
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for turbokid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i always knew the dollar takedown was by design now i see the agenda, wealth transfer and power consolidation. problem,reaction,solution.
giving more power to the root of the problem to solve that problem is strikingly retarded.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23853415/

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is proposing a sweeping overhaul of the way the U.S. financial industry is regulated.

In an effort to deal with the problems highlighted by the current severe credit crisis, the new plan would give major new powers to the Federal Reserve, according to a 22-page executive summary obtained Friday by The Associated Press.

The proposal would designate the Fed as the primary regulator of market stability, greatly expanding the central bank's ability to examine not just commercial banks but all segments of the financial services industry.

Posts: 678 | From: currently in hiding due to investigation | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ace of Spades
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ace of Spades         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This will end the United States as we know it...

the federal reserve bank is a private bank ownde by the Bank of England......

England will rule the United States once again!

Posts: 2321 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
osubucks30
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for osubucks30     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I just do NOT GET THIS???????? LET THE MARKETS PLAY THIS ALL OUT!!!!! PEOPLE HAVE TO PAY FOR THE STUFF THAT HAPPENED! MAYBE NOT JUST KEEP PRINTING $$$$$$!!!!!!!!!
Posts: 1458 | From: Ohio | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Propertymanager
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Propertymanager     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think we all agree - this is insanity! Give the Fed that caused this entire problem more power - yeah, that's what we need!
Posts: 1577 | From: Ohio | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Highwaychild
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Highwaychild     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's your Bush! And Dick is probably behind the, ummm, Bush... We're screwed.
Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
the dollar takedown is the ONLY way we can pay for our debts from the Iraq war.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Bigfoot
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Bigfoot     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I agree. The manipulation going on is insane and directly related to the balance on our credit card.

--------------------
No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.

Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Machiavelli
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Machiavelli     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ace of Spades:
This will end the United States as we know it...

the federal reserve bank is a private bank ownde by the Bank of England......

England will rule the United States once again!

LoL The Fed is many things but owned by the Bank of England it's not....

--------------------
Let the world change you... And you can change the world.

Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna

Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
buckstalker
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for buckstalker     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If you haven't noticed....the United States are about as divided as you can get...which imo is also by design...


quote:
Originally posted by Ace of Spades:
This will end the United States as we know it...



--------------------
***********************

It's all in the timing...

Posts: 4303 | From: DSA | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Highwaychild
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Highwaychild     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23853415
Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Most sweeping changes since Great Depression
Proposal will give the Federal Reserve new regulatory power


A) the Fed is a private organisation, it should not have ANY regulatory power.

B) read between the lines, if this situation demands the "most sweeping changes since Great Depression" then the situation is probably the same.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rimasco
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for rimasco     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Agreed

--------------------
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication"

Posts: 4005 | From: Shaolin | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ace of Spades
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Ace of Spades         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It seems many don't no much about the Federal Reserve System....Here are some videos

The Money Masters

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936&q=money+masters&tota l=3168&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

The Monopoly Men

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3388799387341337020

FIAT EMPIRE - Why the Federal Reserve Violates the U.S. Constitution

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5232639329002339531&q=federal+reserve&to tal=4690&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553&q=federal+reserve&to tal=4690&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Phenomenon: The Secret of the Federal Reserve

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-70668650671711857&q=federal+reserve+dur ation%3Along&total=267&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=5

Posts: 2321 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Highwaychild
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Highwaychild     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
Most sweeping changes since Great Depression
Proposal will give the Federal Reserve new regulatory power [/b]


That headline is something else isn't it?

It wasn't a month ago I heard the Bushanator saying he didn't see us in a recession that we was in, now trying to get this through.

Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bond006
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bond006     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why are private corporations getting regulatory power over our lives financialy and personaly?


I am starting to get a bad feeling for real about this country,my freedom,and it seems like our new lord and masters

Posts: 6008 | From: phoenix az | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Propertymanager
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Propertymanager     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Why are private corporations getting regulatory power over our lives financialy and personaly?
Because the richest people in the world met at Jekyll Island in 1910 to plan our (their) 4th central bank! They've been controlling our money every since!
Posts: 1577 | From: Ohio | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
turbokid
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for turbokid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
just make sure you guys call me when the revolution starts... i'll bring the ammo. [Smile]
Posts: 678 | From: currently in hiding due to investigation | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Highwaychild
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Highwaychild     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think Obamma will get in there and with the Democratic majority try to take it back. I hope he's not the AntiChrist... But If he's not, I think He'll do some good(lol), at least the first 4 years because he will want to get re-elected.
Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Propertymanager
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Propertymanager     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I think Obamma will get in there and with the Democratic majority try to take it back.
You're kidding, right? Obama is a socialist and the central banks of the world have been pushing their socialist agenda for decades. He won't do anything about the Fed.
Posts: 1577 | From: Ohio | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
buckstalker
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for buckstalker     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by bond006:
Why are private corporations getting regulatory power over our lives financialy and personaly?


I am starting to get a bad feeling for real about this country,my freedom,and it seems like our new lord and masters

Because you continue to elect the lying corrupt politicians that are owned by private corporations and who don't give a rats azz about US...you know, politicians like Obama bin lying and Billary "I got shot at in Bosnia" and Bill "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" Clinton and.....

--------------------
***********************

It's all in the timing...

Posts: 4303 | From: DSA | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Highwaychild
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Highwaychild     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The last time a Democrat was in there, we were in ALOT BETTER shape than we are in right now, weren't we?
NOT that I think either Him OR McCain will do any good, just hoping against hope over here...

Posts: 2634 | From: The highway | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bond006
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bond006     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
retired this happened under Bush's watch how did voting for Clinton 8 years ago make Beasr Stearns faillast week?
Posts: 6008 | From: phoenix az | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bond, most economists will tell you that economic cycles are generally accepted at either 4 or 6 years. That means that the policies enacted take 4 to 6 years to have meaningful effects. Clinton and Bush Sr. were benefitting from Reagan's work. And Junior was heir to Clinton's.

Just saying.

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Machiavelli
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Machiavelli     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:


Just saying.

Your "just saying" is strictly opinion. To blame the Bear Stearns collapse on Clinton is not only retarded but totally biased as usual from a right winger... Bear Stearns happened due to Bush Jr. and his policies that affected this country's economic woes as of present and no one else...

--------------------
Let the world change you... And you can change the world.

Ernesto "Che" Guevara de la Serna

Posts: 4669 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
turbokid
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for turbokid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
its not so much bush as it is the fed and their meddling.

"give me control over a country's currency and i care not who makes its laws..."
-M.Rothschild

Posts: 678 | From: currently in hiding due to investigation | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, Mach. My 'just saying' IS my opinion. That's what I thought most postings were. And not to nitpick, but I never even insinuated that Bear Stearns was Clinton's work. Bear Stearns was simply the poster child for all lenders that floated 'liar loans' to people who didn't have the ability to repay them. I personally feel that most of the economic crisis we're passing through is the well deserved repercussions of people who think that because others OFFER you credit, you should ACCEPT.

Still, just saying.

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bond006
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bond006     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bear stearns was bush jr work for the most part deregulation that led to greed and profit motive run wild.

Started with the first republican traitor Ronnie.

As far as loans go why do you think these criminals offered these loans to thoes people, The bankers never ment to sevice the loans they made they did the loans to sell.

I don't blame anybody that applied for the loans and got them they were sold a bill of goods.

I would try it to if I was in the same position.
want my peice of the American dream.

Posts: 6008 | From: phoenix az | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i hate to tell you Dems this, but i DO NOT like the Clintons for VERY good and well thought out reasons:

Clinton, Republicans agree to deregulation of US financial system
By Martin McLaughlin
1 November 1999


An agreement between the Clinton administration and congressional Republicans, reached during all-night negotiations which concluded in the early hours of October 22, sets the stage for passage of the most sweeping banking deregulation bill in American history, lifting virtually all restraints on the operation of the giant monopolies which dominate the financial system.
The proposed Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 would do away with restrictions on the integration of banking, insurance and stock trading imposed by the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, one of the central pillars of Roosevelt's New Deal. Under the old law, banks, brokerages and insurance companies were effectively barred from entering each others' industries, and investment banking and commercial banking were separated.


http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/nov1999/bank-n01.shtml

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Bush's and the Clinbtons are nearly indistinguishable to me in a large number of areas....


Delaney clause

The Delaney Clause is a 1958 amendment to the Food, Drugs, and Cosmetic Act of 1938, named after Congressman James Delaney of New York. It said:

"the Secretary of the Food and Drug Administration shall not approve for use in food any chemical additive found to induce cancer in man, or, after tests, found to induce cancer in animals."

The Delaney Clause was invoked in 1959 by the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare when the cancer-causing herbicide aminotriazole was discovered on cranberry plants in Oregon and Washington. Taking place the week of Thanksgiving, the announcement was referred to by many in the cranberry industry as "Black Monday" -- sales plummeted, even though many government officials attempted to defuse the scare by declaring their intention to eat cranberries anyway. This episode is regarded as one of the first modern food scares based on a chemical additive.

The Delaney Clause applied to pesticides in processed foods, but only when residues of a cancer causing pesticide increased during processing; for example when more of a pesticide was present in ketchup than in the raw tomatoes used to make it. (It never applied to pesticides in raw foods.) In 1988 the United States Environmental Protection Agency eased restrictions on several pesticides which posed a "de minimus" risk to humans. This change was challenged by the Natural Resources Defense Council, and over-turned in 1992 by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Pesticide use was removed from the Delaney Clause in 1996 by an amendment to Title IV of the Food Quality Protection Act.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
he also signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996....

as a direct result? we now have cable bills that are ridiculous too..

the Clintons do not look out for the "little-people" at all...


the phrase "largely based on the presumptions of the effectiveness of competition and the success of deregulation.” has become a joke...

Enron? LOL deregulation "to stimulate competition" LOL

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
SeekingFreedom
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for SeekingFreedom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Originally posted by bond006:
Bear stearns was bush jr work for the most part deregulation that led to greed and profit motive run wild.

Glassman already shot this one down.

Started with the first republican traitor Ronnie.

I don't hold Reagan in as high regard as most, but please elaborate.

As far as loans go why do you think these criminals offered these loans to thoes people, The bankers never ment to sevice the loans they made they did the loans to sell.

No crime was commited. They offer a 'bill of goods' as you called it. Noone held a gun to the heads of those who signed up for them.

I don't blame anybody that applied for the loans and got them they were sold a bill of goods.

Why not? They accepted honest obligations and then failed to fulfill their part. That is certainly not something to advocate.

I would try it to if I was in the same position.
want my peice of the American dream.


Most of us do. It's just that some of us want to be able to look at ourselves in the mirror when we get our piece and be able to do so with some matter of pride.

Posts: 1802 | From: Utah | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bond006
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bond006     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Home > News > Boston Globe > Opinion > Op-ed

ROBERT KUTTNER
The dangers of deregulation
By Robert Kuttner | March 17, 2007

THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION and the US Chamber of Commerce picked an awkward moment for their latest assault on financial and consumer-protection regulation. At the very moment that Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson was meeting with Wall Street bigwigs in a high-profile confab this week to call for weakening of the post-Enron Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other investor and consumer protections, the stock market was tanking.

Article Tools
Printer friendly
E-mail to a friend
Op-ed RSS feed
Available RSS feeds
Most e-mailed
Reprints & Licensing
Share on Digg
Share on Facebook
Save this article
powered by Del.icio.us
More:
Globe Editorials / Op-Ed |
Globe front page |
Boston.com
Sign up for: Globe Headlines e-mail | Breaking News Alerts Why is the market so nervous? Mainly thanks to the latest bitter fruit of financial deregulation : the collapsing $1.3 trillion "subprime" mortgage business, which now accounts for one mortgage in three. Here is a textbook case of why financial institutions need to be regulated, to protect both consumers and the solvency of the larger economy.

In the past decade, as regulators discarded rules, shady mortgage banking companies, financed by the bluest-chip outfits on Wall Street, calculated that they could make a lot of money offering bait-and-switch mortgages to poor credit risks. Default and foreclosure rates would be greater, but higher profits would more than compensate for the risks. So the subprime mortgage industry, enabled by the big banks, invented amazing gimmicks. These included not just variable-rate mortgages, but mortgages that were initially interest only, mortgages with introductory teaser rates, mortgages with no down payment. No income verification required! No credit check! Subprime operators targeted people with horrific credit histories and families desperate for housing who could not afford the debt they were taking on. Last year, 60 percent of subprime loans required no meaningful documentation.

Then came the morning-after: As higher payments kicked in, people couldn't meet them. Defaults skyrocketed, to an estimated 13 percent of all such loans. At least 25 subprime lenders have gone out of business. The big dogs on Wall Street, who had invested in the subprime operators, took a big hit, too.

It's not clear where this will end. Many low-income families will lose their homes. Innocent investors will suffer the spillover effects on the stock market, and general mortgage rates may have to go up to compensate for these losses of reckless speculation.

But wait. Weren't these subprime lenders doing good works by making it easier for low-income borrowers to become homeowners? Sure -- in the same way that the Mafia helps small-business owners desperate for credit. If the goal is to promote low-income homeownership, there are far better ways that don't put financial markets at risk and don't cause people to lose their homes after a few years.

For instance, the FHA has long had a program of insured loans that require only a 3 percent down payment (and have a much lower default rate). Non profit and public programs like Neighborhood Housing Services offer long-term help to moderate-income homebuyers on credit counseling. If we were serious about promoting first-time homeownership, we would offer subsidized, low-rate mortgages, as we did in the Great Society era, before Reagan and the Bushes gutted social spending.

The subprime mortgage industry had no real commitment to the homebuyer, who was merely a handy means of making a quick buck. Ever since the Wall Street wiseguys invented "securitization" of mortgage loans, a mortgage company with little of its own capital at risk has been able to originate loans and sell them off to middlemen who turn them into bonds. Both the mortgage company and the middlemen make their money on the transactions, and some lucky investor ends up with the bonds and the risks.

Supposedly, the wizards of the private secondary mortgage market, such as Fannie Mae, vet the mortgages to make sure reasonable standards are being met. But Fannie has been reeling from her own scandals, and obviously someone was asleep at the switch.

A spectacular casualty was a subprime lender called New Century Financial, which has now suspended loans. Between 2004 and 2006 its three founders, perhaps seeing the coming abyss, realized $40 million in stock-sale profits, and are now under investigation for possible improper trading and rigged accounting.

Congress is also investigating the entire mess, while mortgage industry lobbyists hope to fend off regulation by using the low-income family as poster child for the industry's misdeeds: Regulation would just hurt the poor.

But before the mid-1970s, this kind of meltdown didn't happen, because there were regulations and prudent credit standards; low-income people got government help rather than private-market scams -- and there were hardly any defaults. How many more financial scandals will it take before we get back to that model?

Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect and a fellow at Demos. His column appears regularly in the Globe.

© Copyright 2007 Globe Newspaper

Posts: 6008 | From: phoenix az | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bond006
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for bond006     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If there was no crime committed why are standard and poors amongst other securities raters being investagated as to how these mortage backed securities of stated subprime realestate got rated at A,AA,,AAA paper and after they were sold some defaulted in less than 6 months on there payout cupons sound like misrepresentation to me time will tell.

As for Reagan he started the first banking deregulation since Roseavelt

Clinton did his job to but I just don't like Republicans I see so many of them locked up still thinking they are morally supeior they make me sick.

Posts: 6008 | From: phoenix az | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by bond006:
Home > News > Boston Globe > Opinion > Op-ed

ROBERT KUTTNER
The dangers of deregulation
By Robert Kuttner | March 17, 2007

THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION and the US Chamber of Commerce picked an awkward moment for their latest assault on financial and consumer-protection regulation. At the very moment that Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson was meeting with Wall Street bigwigs in a high-profile confab this week to call for weakening of the post-Enron Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other investor and consumer protections, the stock market was tanking.

Article Tools
Printer friendly
E-mail to a friend
Op-ed RSS feed
Available RSS feeds
Most e-mailed
Reprints & Licensing
Share on Digg
Share on Facebook
Save this article
powered by Del.icio.us
More:
Globe Editorials / Op-Ed |
Globe front page |
Boston.com
Sign up for: Globe Headlines e-mail | Breaking News Alerts Why is the market so nervous? Mainly thanks to the latest bitter fruit of financial deregulation : the collapsing $1.3 trillion "subprime" mortgage business, which now accounts for one mortgage in three. Here is a textbook case of why financial institutions need to be regulated, to protect both consumers and the solvency of the larger economy.

In the past decade, as regulators discarded rules, shady mortgage banking companies, financed by the bluest-chip outfits on Wall Street, calculated that they could make a lot of money offering bait-and-switch mortgages to poor credit risks. Default and foreclosure rates would be greater, but higher profits would more than compensate for the risks. So the subprime mortgage industry, enabled by the big banks, invented amazing gimmicks. These included not just variable-rate mortgages, but mortgages that were initially interest only, mortgages with introductory teaser rates, mortgages with no down payment. No income verification required! No credit check! Subprime operators targeted people with horrific credit histories and families desperate for housing who could not afford the debt they were taking on. Last year, 60 percent of subprime loans required no meaningful documentation.

Then came the morning-after: As higher payments kicked in, people couldn't meet them. Defaults skyrocketed, to an estimated 13 percent of all such loans. At least 25 subprime lenders have gone out of business. The big dogs on Wall Street, who had invested in the subprime operators, took a big hit, too.

It's not clear where this will end. Many low-income families will lose their homes. Innocent investors will suffer the spillover effects on the stock market, and general mortgage rates may have to go up to compensate for these losses of reckless speculation.

But wait. Weren't these subprime lenders doing good works by making it easier for low-income borrowers to become homeowners? Sure -- in the same way that the Mafia helps small-business owners desperate for credit. If the goal is to promote low-income homeownership, there are far better ways that don't put financial markets at risk and don't cause people to lose their homes after a few years.

For instance, the FHA has long had a program of insured loans that require only a 3 percent down payment (and have a much lower default rate). Non profit and public programs like Neighborhood Housing Services offer long-term help to moderate-income homebuyers on credit counseling. If we were serious about promoting first-time homeownership, we would offer subsidized, low-rate mortgages, as we did in the Great Society era, before Reagan and the Bushes gutted social spending.

The subprime mortgage industry had no real commitment to the homebuyer, who was merely a handy means of making a quick buck. Ever since the Wall Street wiseguys invented "securitization" of mortgage loans, a mortgage company with little of its own capital at risk has been able to originate loans and sell them off to middlemen who turn them into bonds. Both the mortgage company and the middlemen make their money on the transactions, and some lucky investor ends up with the bonds and the risks.

Supposedly, the wizards of the private secondary mortgage market, such as Fannie Mae, vet the mortgages to make sure reasonable standards are being met. But Fannie has been reeling from her own scandals, and obviously someone was asleep at the switch.

A spectacular casualty was a subprime lender called New Century Financial, which has now suspended loans. Between 2004 and 2006 its three founders, perhaps seeing the coming abyss, realized $40 million in stock-sale profits, and are now under investigation for possible improper trading and rigged accounting.

Congress is also investigating the entire mess, while mortgage industry lobbyists hope to fend off regulation by using the low-income family as poster child for the industry's misdeeds: Regulation would just hurt the poor.

But before the mid-1970s, this kind of meltdown didn't happen, because there were regulations and prudent credit standards; low-income people got government help rather than private-market scams -- and there were hardly any defaults. How many more financial scandals will it take before we get back to that model?

Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect and a fellow at Demos. His column appears regularly in the Globe.

© Copyright 2007 Globe Newspaper

good post

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

Posts: 21062 | From: Fort Worth | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
buckstalker
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for buckstalker     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
Originally posted by bond006:
Bear stearns was bush jr work for the most part deregulation that led to greed and profit motive run wild.

Glassman already shot this one down.

Started with the first republican traitor Ronnie.

I don't hold Reagan in as high regard as most, but please elaborate.

As far as loans go why do you think these criminals offered these loans to thoes people, The bankers never ment to sevice the loans they made they did the loans to sell.

No crime was commited. They offer a 'bill of goods' as you called it. Noone held a gun to the heads of those who signed up for them.

I don't blame anybody that applied for the loans and got them they were sold a bill of goods.

Why not? They accepted honest obligations and then failed to fulfill their part. That is certainly not something to advocate.

I would try it to if I was in the same position.
want my peice of the American dream.


Most of us do. It's just that some of us want to be able to look at ourselves in the mirror when we get our piece and be able to do so with some matter of pride.

Great post...

--------------------
***********************

It's all in the timing...

Posts: 4303 | From: DSA | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share