question for the libs on here
True or False.
Congress forcing the mortgage industry to make homeownership "affordable" for all led directly to the issue at hand? Not to mention redlining .... FHA loans for those with 3% down and good credit have existed for a long time. But that wasn't good enough. |
you could have just sent PMs to Cali and Ma'ake.
|
Quote:
|
I'm a conservative.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=4064549 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I don't mean this as a rude question, I am just trying to get where you are coming from. Do you have a history in consumer lending? |
Is it a market inefficiency for a company to have a policy not to hire niggers, FM?
|
FM, while you are (maybe) replying to my other posts, here are some related thoughts. I am a strong believer in the power of free markets, but we have plenty of examples where they have not fixed racial problems:
- Most economists I have read agree that slavery in the antebellum South was not economically sound (it would have been more efficient to pay workers). Why did it continue? - It certainly would have been more profitable for businesses during the Jim Crow area to serve all people, regardless of their color, yet they didn't. Why did the market not fix that? - In the specific case of redlining, why did poor white areas not get redlined nearly as much as comparable black areas? I'll tell you right now, it was not because they paid their loans better. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I used to be of the opinion that a business could do whatever it wanted. If it wanted to hang a sign out front "NO COLOREDS", that was ok. Not hire minorities? Ok. No mortgages to blacks? Ok. I argued the market would take care of it. I'm not of the same opinion anymore. |
Quote:
But before we gett to far afield into redlining, the premise of my post is that the government forcing banks to make risky loans is what started this. Agree or not? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Even though it's a war zone full of crack houses, etc.? |
Quote:
I'm not smart enough to say what exactly the cause of all of this is, but I am also not dumb enough to lay all the blame on one thing. I've worked at Banks for about 8 years, all in consumer lending, and while the government gives us a lot of direction and regulations, they've never forced us to make bad loans. The marketing and sales people try to make us do that a lot more than the government. My opinion is that the massive growth in the mortgage CDO market did a whole lot more to cause this than the government (and the fault that the government has is not in getting rid of redlining). Large investors (pushed by investment houses) created a huge demand for CDOs, the investment houses pushed that demand down to the consumer banks and mortgage brokers, who sold a bunch of loans to people who couldn't afford them (who are also not faultless in this). The brokers who made these loans were motivated much more, IMO, by the fact that they could make a lot of money selling them than they were by the government hoding a gun to their heads. |
Quote:
Being sort of hickish and definitely not urban, you've never actually witnessed urban renewal. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
And you continue to race bait. I NEVER said anything about "black" areas. I said that private businesses should be able to choose areas to lend in or not based on real socioeconomic data. If those areas happen to be predominantly black, that is irrelevant. |
Quote:
Is that what you are advocating? Do you think these banks exist in a vacuum, getting no benefit from the govt. and the fed? |
Quote:
How about data that says foreclosures are 50% higher in the area. Or that 50% of homeowners are behind in their payments. Or that crime is astronomical so responsible people don't want to live there? All valid factors IMO. |
Quote:
Yeah, you can get away with espousing these views in the church. But try going around to other places, and get away with saying "there is no racism in redlining." Maybe you can get SU to argue for you. He seems to live fascism these days. |
Quote:
It' not in home loans per se, but I built a model a few years ago that dealt with assigning credit ratings to thos who receive collect calls from correctional facilities (I'm not kidding). Not surprisingly, demographic data including location was a big part of that model. It resulted in reducing bad debt by over 40% and there is a patent on it. Good enough? Which part of your grant-unded research has to do with this, IT, or any other host of things you think you seem to think you know all about? |
Quote:
I hope it's not too insulting for me to interpret your own work for you. |
Quote:
I have never said location should be the ONLY criteria. |
I love it.
For 6 years all major decisions in this country were decided by one party. They claim the economy we enjoyed for 8 years during Clinton's years were because of Reagan. They claim the rough start to this decade was because of Clinton and his inability to reel in the tech bubble. And now ya'll are blaming the market correction, credit crunch, and subprime woes, of the past 12 months on the Dems who less than 2 years ago took control. |
Quote:
I didn't realize you were against redlining. You sneaky dog. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:06 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.