another meaningful win for Dems last night

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

It was government regulation that led to people who could not afford to pay for a home loan to get one. That led to bad mortgage notes which were bundled in with good ones and then sold to unknowing suckers. Without the plethora of bad notes, the corrupt bundling would not have occurred.

Your position isn't supported by the facts. CRA loans actually have had a much lower default rate historically. I think this was discussed years ago on this very site.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Your position isn't supported by the facts. CRA loans actually have had a much lower default rate historically. I think this was discussed years ago on this very site.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-c...s-guide-2009-6

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-c...s-guide-2009-6

I see your reference is a financial gossip blogger who was fired from businessinsider shortly after the piece was authored.

Touche indeed

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I see your reference is a financial gossip blogger who was fired from businessinsider shortly after the piece was authored.

Touche indeed

I see you didn't refute a thing he said. There are plenty of other sources that say the same things. I chose Business Insider because it is a left leaning publication. Maybe that's why they fired him.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I see you didn't refute a thing he said. There are plenty of other sources that say the same things. I chose Business Insider because it is a left leaning publication. Maybe that's why they fired him.

BI isn't left leaning as much as just catering to a younger demographic. Don't need to refute anything he's said, it's all in the archives in this forum.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

BI isn't left leaning as much as just catering to a younger demographic. Don't need to refute anything he's said, it's all in the archives in this forum.

Oh . . . in the archives . . .al-l-l-righty then! I like your debate style. And, yeah, Business insider is left leaning. It's in the google archives.

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Not fixated on anything. There were two different programs discussed here, though limped together by some. I agree completely about political hacks taking care of the bankers. There is no way to keep corrupt people out of banking since money corrupts and attracts corrupt people to banking. Only defense is regulation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch

The more that government is centralized and the less it is limited, the greater the connection between the banks and the government--so the more that regulations become favorable for the central banks. It was government regulation that led to the housing bubble, and government stimulus that created the following stock bubble that is now experiencing a correction which is not finished and may get worse and create a new financial "crisis." And that will lead to more regulation to save the ability of government to borrow money by saving the big banks.

And so will continue the growth of that symbiotic relation between our expanding government and the banking system. The real defense against that is a free market in which poor or corrupt banking policies actually lead to failure instead of government protection and greater wealth for the bankers.

If our government regulations protected a free market rather than supporting its cash cow, that would be, as you put it, the "only defense."

Originally Posted by scottw

this can't be correct...democrat politicians would never work in conjunction with evil businesses to rig the system in their favor...they are only concerned for the "little guy" and therefore all of the regulation that they propose and support and pass must naturally fix all that is wrong with the world....can't possibly be the reason for or contribute to any such failures...more government=freedom and fairness for all...ideally...we move to one, government run banking system(after healthcare gets done)...then there will be no more greed and pillaging and profit by those running things

Originally Posted by detbuch

It was government regulation that led to people who could not afford to pay for a home loan to get one. That led to bad mortgage notes which were bundled in with good ones and then sold to unknowing suckers. Without the plethora of bad notes, that corrupt bundling would not have occurred or been far less destructive.

more reason to not vote for Democrats and their liberal policy, and more reason to vote for more liberties and freedoms and free market

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Your position isn't supported by the facts. CRA loans actually have had a much lower default rate historically. I think this was discussed years ago on this very site.

"Historically" is not the point. In a moment of spare time, I delved into the archives to see if the President's new economic advisor had an opinion about the CRA's effect on the great recession. Larry Kudlow, (very respected, not fired from his job) said this little tidbit:

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/28/are-...-villains.html