Ignore Ron Paul are the new marching orders?

[aldante]

[quote=briansd1]RP being consistently wrong is not confidence inspiring.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve and letting individual banks issue notes does not make me feel financially secure.

I think that it’s important to change strategies to match new facts and realities. Isn’t it stupid to insist that the earth is flat when all the evidence points to it being round?[/quote]

Really Brian!:

http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-26/ron-paul-on-the-housing-bubble-july-2002/

I can’t speak to how you FEEL….but this does speak to RP being right.

[briansd1]

Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble. The free markets gone wild caused the bubble and housing collapse.

It was a combination of incentives that inflated the bubble. Brokers and producers all along the production line were paid to originate and securitize. The toxic loans were sold off and passed on. When those mortgages blew up en masse, the “producers” had long been paid already.

[briansd1]

Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble. The free markets gone wild caused the bubble and housing collapse.

It was a combination of incentives that inflated the bubble. Brokers and producers all along the production line were paid to originate and securitize. The toxic loans were sold off and passed on. When those mortgages blew up en masse, the “producers” had long been paid already.

[briansd1]

Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble. The free markets gone wild caused the bubble and housing collapse.

It was a combination of incentives that inflated the bubble. Brokers and producers all along the production line were paid to originate and securitize. The toxic loans were sold off and passed on. When those mortgages blew up en masse, the “producers” had long been paid already.

[briansd1]

Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble. The free markets gone wild caused the bubble and housing collapse.

It was a combination of incentives that inflated the bubble. Brokers and producers all along the production line were paid to originate and securitize. The toxic loans were sold off and passed on. When those mortgages blew up en masse, the “producers” had long been paid already.

[briansd1]

Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble. The free markets gone wild caused the bubble and housing collapse.

It was a combination of incentives that inflated the bubble. Brokers and producers all along the production line were paid to originate and securitize. The toxic loans were sold off and passed on. When those mortgages blew up en masse, the “producers” had long been paid already.

[aldante]

[quote=briansd1]Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble.[/quote]

I will point out that you did not address the larger point which is that RP was completely correct about the housing collapse – while collecting the “kooky uncle” moniker at the same time.
Which by the way is the most mystifying thing about this whole post. While being right he is portrayed by the media as being kooky. What kind of episode of Twilight Zone are we in?
Brian are you maintaining that private securitziation could have reached those insane levels with out the backstop of the GSE’s? That sounds like a “world is flat” comment given the evidence.

[aldante]

[quote=briansd1]Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble.[/quote]

I will point out that you did not address the larger point which is that RP was completely correct about the housing collapse – while collecting the “kooky uncle” moniker at the same time.
Which by the way is the most mystifying thing about this whole post. While being right he is portrayed by the media as being kooky. What kind of episode of Twilight Zone are we in?
Brian are you maintaining that private securitziation could have reached those insane levels with out the backstop of the GSE’s? That sounds like a “world is flat” comment given the evidence.

[aldante]

[quote=briansd1]Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble.[/quote]

I will point out that you did not address the larger point which is that RP was completely correct about the housing collapse – while collecting the “kooky uncle” moniker at the same time.
Which by the way is the most mystifying thing about this whole post. While being right he is portrayed by the media as being kooky. What kind of episode of Twilight Zone are we in?
Brian are you maintaining that private securitziation could have reached those insane levels with out the backstop of the GSE’s? That sounds like a “world is flat” comment given the evidence.

[aldante]

[quote=briansd1]Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble.[/quote]

I will point out that you did not address the larger point which is that RP was completely correct about the housing collapse – while collecting the “kooky uncle” moniker at the same time.
Which by the way is the most mystifying thing about this whole post. While being right he is portrayed by the media as being kooky. What kind of episode of Twilight Zone are we in?
Brian are you maintaining that private securitziation could have reached those insane levels with out the backstop of the GSE’s? That sounds like a “world is flat” comment given the evidence.

[aldante]

[quote=briansd1]Yes, really.
We’ve been here before. The GSEs where not the problem in the housing bubble. They were only minor players.

The private securitization of mortgages are what inflated the housing bubble.[/quote]

I will point out that you did not address the larger point which is that RP was completely correct about the housing collapse – while collecting the “kooky uncle” moniker at the same time.
Which by the way is the most mystifying thing about this whole post. While being right he is portrayed by the media as being kooky. What kind of episode of Twilight Zone are we in?
Brian are you maintaining that private securitziation could have reached those insane levels with out the backstop of the GSE’s? That sounds like a “world is flat” comment given the evidence.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]RP being consistently wrong is not confidence inspiring.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve and letting individual banks issue notes does not make me feel financially secure.

I think that it’s important to change strategies to match new facts and realities. Isn’t it stupid to insist that the earth is flat when all the evidence points to it being round?[/quote]
Wrong to you, right for others. Consistency and predictability is much better than flip flopper.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]RP being consistently wrong is not confidence inspiring.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve and letting individual banks issue notes does not make me feel financially secure.

I think that it’s important to change strategies to match new facts and realities. Isn’t it stupid to insist that the earth is flat when all the evidence points to it being round?[/quote]
Wrong to you, right for others. Consistency and predictability is much better than flip flopper.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]RP being consistently wrong is not confidence inspiring.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve and letting individual banks issue notes does not make me feel financially secure.

I think that it’s important to change strategies to match new facts and realities. Isn’t it stupid to insist that the earth is flat when all the evidence points to it being round?[/quote]
Wrong to you, right for others. Consistency and predictability is much better than flip flopper.

[an]

[quote=briansd1]RP being consistently wrong is not confidence inspiring.

Abolishing the Federal Reserve and letting individual banks issue notes does not make me feel financially secure.

I think that it’s important to change strategies to match new facts and realities. Isn’t it stupid to insist that the earth is flat when all the evidence points to it being round?[/quote]
Wrong to you, right for others. Consistency and predictability is much better than flip flopper.

[Author]

Posts