another meaningful win for Dems last night

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

It was government regulation that encouraged and coerced the cheap and reckless loans.

That's complete nonsense, it was deregulation that allowed lending and securities to become one in the same.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

That's complete nonsense, it was deregulation that allowed lending and securities to become one in the same.

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.

[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

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