Pete

Johnson City, TN

#76552 Apr 17, 2013
Overtaxed wrote:
<quoted text> Helping underwater homeowners was exactly what I wanted government to do. I thought that would have not only stopped the forclosure crisis but bailed the banks out in the process. You may remember the scathing attacks I got from some of our friends on the right because I proposed that very thing on this thread ! I guess I could go back and find some of them but....suffice to say the coherant ones went something like this. You want my tax dollars to help the lazy S.O.B. next door who bought more house than he could afford and went on expensive vacations while I stayed home .....Well, you get the idea and so did the politicians. Instead of helping American homeowners they bailed out the bunch that caused the problem to begin with. That caused MUCH less ire than helping the poor slob who lost his shirt in a declining housing market, but...that is the way it is in today's America.
Hey OT. I fully agree there were some greedy loan shark mortgage lenders and banks during this time. They paid the ultimate price though, they are no longer in business. That is another subject though. I disagree that the taxpayers should have bailed out the homeowners though. My reason has nothing to do with politics, but simple ethics. For instance, if the government were to have done this, imagine the family who rents a small apartment or house and continues to rent simply because they made a responsible choice to not commit to an easy loan during the housing boom years because they felt there was a chance they could not repay the loan. Imagine this same family living next to or knowing of another family with less income living in a nice, larger home that they own strictly due to the government's assistance with the mortgage payments. One family is being penalized for making a responsible choice and the other is being rewarded for financial irresponsibility. It is much better to reward personal accountability rather than incent personal irresponsibility because the repercussions associated with irresponsibility are what teach us to be responsible. When we incent irresponsibility, someone else has to pay for it. Sooner or later, if we continue this practice, we get to a point where the price for irresponsibility exceeds the amount the responsible ones can pay. This results in a crisis. Our situation today in my opinion is ... Houston, we have a problem.
Pete

Johnson City, TN

#76553 Apr 17, 2013
Overtaxed wrote:
<quoted text> Helping underwater homeowners was exactly what I wanted government to do. I thought that would have not only stopped the forclosure crisis but bailed the banks out in the process. You may remember the scathing attacks I got from some of our friends on the right because I proposed that very thing on this thread ! I guess I could go back and find some of them but....suffice to say the coherant ones went something like this. You want my tax dollars to help the lazy S.O.B. next door who bought more house than he could afford and went on expensive vacations while I stayed home .....Well, you get the idea and so did the politicians. Instead of helping American homeowners they bailed out the bunch that caused the problem to begin with. That caused MUCH less ire than helping the poor slob who lost his shirt in a declining housing market, but...that is the way it is in today's America.
Regarding the banking industry, it was actually mortgage lenders who were eager to make the quick buck and write easy loans. Some banks did engage in mortgage lending, but not all. Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae were actually forced to make some loans to certain minorities by our beloved government. These two entities were ultimately bailed out by the government. Most mortgage lenders and banks engaging in shoddy mortgage practices ultimately went out of business. The banks not engaging in mortgage lending suffered a big downfall not due to deviousness, but stupidity. They invested in securities backed by these shaky loans. The loans turned out to be bad, the securities turned out to be worthless, and the banks lost tons of cash. Some of these banks, mostly the smaller ones, simply went out of business. Some that were deemed "too big to fail" were bailed out by the government, i.e. the taxpayers. Our government later proudly proclaimed that most of our loans to these banks had been repaid with interest and the taxpayers are once again "whole." In other words, the government saved the day. However, what the government didn't say was that most of the bailed out banks were allowed to reclassify themselves as commercial banks. Commercial banks are allowed to borrow money from the Fed at the discount rate. Therefore, the banks converting to commercial bank status borrowed money from the Fed at the discount rate, i.e. approximately .3% and repaid the government loan that was costing somewhere around the prime rate, i.e. 3.5%. Yes, the government was paid back, but with government funds from the Fed. In short, the government basically got screwed out of approximately 3% in interest payments and the money wasn't paid back at all. Why the government allowed this to happen is beyond me. Why they misled the nation on exactly what was happening is beyond me as well. The one person who held the most responsibility for this happening was Barney Frank. Now he has disappeared. Wonder why?

There are many entities to blame for the housing crisis. Mortgage lenders, politicians and mortgagees were all at fault. It was the Perfect Storm for lack of a better term. However, banks who never engaged in mortgage lending aren't the traitors everyone believes. Yes, a lot were pretty stupid, but they simply put a lot of money at risk and got burned.

What caused the housing crisis is behind us. Now is the time to look ahead of us. I don't think this can happen again due to a lot of reforms. Now we must ease the way for the housing industry to recover responsibly. This involves efficient regulations, ethical lending practices AND personal accountability.

As always, this is just my opinion and I realize it may differ from yours. I don't intend to always take the opposite side of your posts. I am just offering another viewpoint for the same problem. I will also say I enjoy our discussions and appreciate your courtesy.
Honestly

Beechgrove, TN

#76554 Apr 17, 2013
Did not Obama tell someone to ease up o the loan qualification for low income people. Sounds like we jumping back into the frying pan again. Oh MY
Hey

Cookeville, TN

#76555 Apr 17, 2013
So the story is that 9/11 was not an inside job because it would be absurd to think the government could pull off such a organized event.Trillions of dollars at their disposal,an army,navy,airforce,technolgy,s ecret service,cia,seals,etc,etc- but a few cave dwelling towel heads could pull it off?
Do you suppose we could get them over here to fix the economy and cure cancer.

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Smyrna, TN

#76556 Apr 17, 2013
Pete wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey OT. I fully agree there were some greedy loan shark mortgage lenders and banks during this time. They paid the ultimate price though, they are no longer in business. That is another subject though. I disagree that the taxpayers should have bailed out the homeowners though. My reason has nothing to do with politics, but simple ethics. For instance, if the government were to have done this, imagine the family who rents a small apartment or house and continues to rent simply because they made a responsible choice to not commit to an easy loan during the housing boom years because they felt there was a chance they could not repay the loan. Imagine this same family living next to or knowing of another family with less income living in a nice, larger home that they own strictly due to the government's assistance with the mortgage payments. One family is being penalized for making a responsible choice and the other is being rewarded for financial irresponsibility. It is much better to reward personal accountability rather than incent personal irresponsibility because the repercussions associated with irresponsibility are what teach us to be responsible. When we incent irresponsibility, someone else has to pay for it. Sooner or later, if we continue this practice, we get to a point where the price for irresponsibility exceeds the amount the responsible ones can pay. This results in a crisis. Our situation today in my opinion is ... Houston, we have a problem.
kinda like the welfare system, huh Pete?

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Smyrna, TN

#76557 Apr 17, 2013
On a more serious note, 60-70 possibly dead in West, Texas Fertilizer plant explosion. This is a sad week for this Country. And the week is only half over.:-(

“IMNTBHO”

Since: Dec 10

Smyrna, TN

#76558 Apr 17, 2013
This had to be scary for this couple.

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#76559 Apr 18, 2013
Hey wrote:
<quoted text>
333 and 333 equals 666 in my conspiracy class and that's a bad sign. A very bad sign.
Clapping my hands,wiggling my toes, and raising my eyebrows Sweet Pea.
Crazy about me huh?
I'm crazy about you in spite of the fact you can't do math...that "Sweet Pea" brings back some unpleasant memories, though...that's alittle troubling. I might have to cancel that "crazy about you" thing just anytime, now.

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#76560 Apr 18, 2013
Hey wrote:
<quoted text>
So how much y'all wanna bet, on that what you don't know about, cause you weren't there?
$10,000 sound good?
Pay Pal work for you?
Now, you think you can go back in time? You're just a little bit on the crazy side, aren't you, Hey?

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#76562 Apr 18, 2013
SexySassySenior wrote:
<quoted text>Now, you think you can go back in time? You're just a little bit on the crazy side, aren't you, Hey?
Should be a perfect match for you then dear.
Overtaxed

Thorn Hill, TN

#76563 Apr 18, 2013
Pete wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey OT. I fully agree there were some greedy loan shark mortgage lenders and banks during this time. They paid the ultimate price though, they are no longer in business. That is another subject though. I disagree that the taxpayers should have bailed out the homeowners though. My reason has nothing to do with politics, but simple ethics. For instance, if the government were to have done this, imagine the family who rents a small apartment or house and continues to rent simply because they made a responsible choice to not commit to an easy loan during the housing boom years because they felt there was a chance they could not repay the loan. Imagine this same family living next to or knowing of another family with less income living in a nice, larger home that they own strictly due to the government's assistance with the mortgage payments. One family is being penalized for making a responsible choice and the other is being rewarded for financial irresponsibility. It is much better to reward personal accountability rather than incent personal irresponsibility because the repercussions associated with irresponsibility are what teach us to be responsible. When we incent irresponsibility, someone else has to pay for it. Sooner or later, if we continue this practice, we get to a point where the price for irresponsibility exceeds the amount the responsible ones can pay. This results in a crisis. Our situation today in my opinion is ... Houston, we have a problem.
My reasoning FOR bailing out mortgagees is one of ethics as well "Pete". I understand your position and it has merit but I think mine does as well. The biggest damage done to average Americans in the great recession was the loss of jobs....but a close second would be the loss of equity in their homes. When thousands upon thousands of houses are forclosed on across the nation the result is a free-fall of housing values. Average Americans have one basic asset and that is the equity stored in their homes. By choosing to bail out banks instead of mortgagees our government allowed that asset's value to collapse when mortgage assistance for a large swath of those underwater mortgages would have placed a floor under home values....Not one as high as it had been, but a floor, none the less, AND in the process bailed out the banks...basicially a two for one bang for our buck. Instead, the banks got the bailout and every homeowner (even those with no mortgage) got the dirty end of the mop...not very ethical when we helped pay for the bailout is it "Pete" ?
Here is one more thing, by saving the big banks but not supporting mortgagees, government actually weakened small banks who found their loan portfolios underwater too. This part of the crisis isn't over...as small banks are holding a ton of OREO that is over valued on their books and IF the real value were used would show them to be insolvent. Even with the push to zero interest, many of these banks will eventually fail. In the interum, they have curtailed lending to such an extent that some folks...even those with stellar credit, are having a hard time getting loans.

Overtaxed

Thorn Hill, TN

#76564 Apr 18, 2013
Pete wrote:
<quoted text>
As always, this is just my opinion and I realize it may differ from yours. I don't intend to always take the opposite side of your posts. I am just offering another viewpoint for the same problem. I will also say I enjoy our discussions and appreciate your courtesy.
Well, my friend, what good is a discussion when everyone agrees ! If you disagree with me, by all means I want to hear about it and why. If I was always right...it would require an appointment and a fee to get my opinion !! Chuckles !!!
Overtaxed

Thorn Hill, TN

#76565 Apr 18, 2013
Pete wrote:
<quoted text>
Regarding the banking industry, it was actually mortgage lenders who were eager to make the quick buck and write easy loans.
Somewhere...a few thousand posts ago...I wrote about a friend I grew up with, who got a job as a loan officer in a small local bank. Eventually she went to work for Countrywide Mortgage Co. She was doing alright there...when the housing bubble began, since they paid salary plus commission and Countrywide was writing a lot of loans. She told me she followed the rules set out by the company and seldom bent those rules...even a little. When the bubble began to heat up, she was called on the carpet by her boss for TURNING DOWN TOO MANY LOANS. She told me that she brought him back the files of a bunch of loans she had denied and showed him why. And she was told "Are they breathing ? If they are... they qualify".
She relates that she made more in a few months than she had in a few YEARS and was promoted to a senior loan officer.
I couldn't understand WHY any mortgage company would engage in this behavior until I began to read about what happened to these loans AFTER they were made. They were packaged, and sold in bulk to investment banks which submitted them to the ratings agencies and turned them into investment vehicles. Some of these loans were turned in to the ratings agencies multiple times UNTIL they got favorable A or B tranch ratings. THEN those same investment banks bet against the success of these investment grade securities at insurance agencies like AIG.
You are right when you say that places like Countrywide are gone...but the others, well after the bailout they are as big or bigger than ever, thanks to the generosity of the American taxpayer.
Would Countrywide have engaged in this behavior if anyone was minding the store at the SEC ? I don't think so !
Hey

Cookeville, TN

#76566 Apr 18, 2013
SexySassySenior wrote:
<quoted text>
Now, you think you can go back in time? You're just a little bit on the crazy side, aren't you, Hey?
That was a joke.Someone says whem were we ever not doing crap stuff and I say how bout 3 months way back when.Ha,Ha,Ha.
Seen any of those Zombies lately?Do you suppose they were hanging out in 1776,Sugar Babe? Do you like Sugar Babe better? How about Zombie Girl?
Hey

Cookeville, TN

#76567 Apr 18, 2013
SexySassySenior wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm crazy about you in spite of the fact you can't do math...that "Sweet Pea" brings back some unpleasant memories, though...that's alittle troubling. I might have to cancel that "crazy about you" thing just anytime, now.
Wait a minute.What about my math?So 333 plus 333 does not equal 666?

Since: Feb 13

Guild

#76568 Apr 18, 2013
Great News!

After months of politicing by Obama and Crazy Uncle Joe - Harry Reid forced a Gun Control vote yesterday... the U.S. Senate voted it down 54 - 46.

In an epic FAIL

The Feinstein Amendment to ban 157 semi-automatic weapons and high (regular) capacity magazines...massively failed 60-40.
Bayless

South Pittsburg, TN

#76569 Apr 18, 2013
Hey wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait a minute.What about my math?So 333 plus 333 does not equal 666?
If you turn that 666 upside down it's 999 kinda like Herman Cain's pizza deal or something

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#76570 Apr 18, 2013
Overtaxed wrote:
<quoted text>Somewhere...a few thousand posts ago...I wrote about a friend I grew up with, who got a job as a loan officer in a small local bank. Eventually she went to work for Countrywide Mortgage Co. She was doing alright there...when the housing bubble began, since they paid salary plus commission and Countrywide was writing a lot of loans. She told me she followed the rules set out by the company and seldom bent those rules...even a little. When the bubble began to heat up, she was called on the carpet by her boss for TURNING DOWN TOO MANY LOANS. She told me that she brought him back the files of a bunch of loans she had denied and showed him why. And she was told "Are they breathing ? If they are... they qualify".
She relates that she made more in a few months than she had in a few YEARS and was promoted to a senior loan officer.
I couldn't understand WHY any mortgage company would engage in this behavior until I began to read about what happened to these loans AFTER they were made. They were packaged, and sold in bulk to investment banks which submitted them to the ratings agencies and turned them into investment vehicles. Some of these loans were turned in to the ratings agencies multiple times UNTIL they got favorable A or B tranch ratings. THEN those same investment banks bet against the success of these investment grade securities at insurance agencies like AIG.
You are right when you say that places like Countrywide are gone...but the others, well after the bailout they are as big or bigger than ever, thanks to the generosity of the American taxpayer.
Would Countrywide have engaged in this behavior if anyone was minding the store at the SEC ? I don't think so !
<<yawning>>

The boring ignorance just rambles on and on and on with no end in sight. I doubt anyone even reads all this mess.
Overtaxed

Thorn Hill, TN

#76571 Apr 18, 2013
Nuh_ wrote:
Great News!
After months of politicing by Obama and Crazy Uncle Joe - Harry Reid forced a Gun Control vote yesterday... the U.S. Senate voted it down 54 - 46.
In an epic FAIL
The Feinstein Amendment to ban 157 semi-automatic weapons and high (regular) capacity magazines...massively failed 60-40.
Truthfully, I don't know if this is "great news" or not...Just as with most issues, there are many reasons to support this legislation and many reasons to oppose it.
I see no reason why a owner of a main street gun store has to subject his customers to a background check, but a person selling at a gun show, or on the internet doesn't....BUT, I have serious issues with the right to privacy issue on the mental health part of the legislation, and who will make the determination that a person is mentally ill enough to be denied the right to buy a gun legally.
I am quite sure that if God Forbid, I was a parent or grandparent of one of those kids at Newtown....I would NOT see this defeat as "great news".
I am all in for a limit to magazine size and outlawing the owneship of those already in private hands. If a person needs 30 or 50 rounds to shoot something, they are either blind or a lousy aim.
Overtaxed

Thorn Hill, TN

#76572 Apr 18, 2013
Really Sassy wrote:
<quoted text>
<<yawning>>
The boring ignorance just rambles on and on and on with no end in sight. I doubt anyone even reads all this mess.
Yes, I'm sure discussing issues is boring for you...especially when we could be discussing Linda, her children, her home, her car, her screen name, and the other great contributions you have made to the thread with your enlightened viewpoint.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jonesborough Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
NutriMost - New Diet Scam (May '14) 9 hr Tracie 551
help 11 hr jack campbell 1
News Still no horses allowed the Tweetsie Trail (Aug '14) 11 hr Wyatt Earp 103
act call center johnson city tn (Oct '10) 13 hr bross1 318
Good Eats 13 hr Wilbur 19
seen anyone 18 hr wondering 1
Kristien Harris Crawford "Home Wrecker" 18 hr roymullins38 6

Freeze Watch for Washington County was issued at March 27 at 3:13AM CDT

Jonesborough Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Jonesborough People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]