Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 11, 2008 at 8:00 PM in reply to: Thank you Clinton for the Sub-Prime Boom! 1999 NYT Article #286307October 11, 2008 at 8:00 PM in reply to: Thank you Clinton for the Sub-Prime Boom! 1999 NYT Article #286326
patientrenter
ParticipantVeritas, I’m OK with prostitution. But I am not OK with corruption that ends up costing taxpayers and others trillions in losses. That’s what happened here. Corruption flowed to the Dems through Fannie and Freddie, and corruption flowed to the Reps through NAR, mortgage brokers etc. And there was lots of shared corruption too. Goldman and other banks up to their knees in this were more Dem than Rep, and there were Reps getting money from Fannie/ Freddie.
October 11, 2008 at 8:00 PM in reply to: Thank you Clinton for the Sub-Prime Boom! 1999 NYT Article #286350patientrenter
ParticipantVeritas, I’m OK with prostitution. But I am not OK with corruption that ends up costing taxpayers and others trillions in losses. That’s what happened here. Corruption flowed to the Dems through Fannie and Freddie, and corruption flowed to the Reps through NAR, mortgage brokers etc. And there was lots of shared corruption too. Goldman and other banks up to their knees in this were more Dem than Rep, and there were Reps getting money from Fannie/ Freddie.
October 11, 2008 at 8:00 PM in reply to: Thank you Clinton for the Sub-Prime Boom! 1999 NYT Article #286354patientrenter
ParticipantVeritas, I’m OK with prostitution. But I am not OK with corruption that ends up costing taxpayers and others trillions in losses. That’s what happened here. Corruption flowed to the Dems through Fannie and Freddie, and corruption flowed to the Reps through NAR, mortgage brokers etc. And there was lots of shared corruption too. Goldman and other banks up to their knees in this were more Dem than Rep, and there were Reps getting money from Fannie/ Freddie.
patientrenter
ParticipantHereWeGo, I agree with you. But do you think that people who wrote a check for $700,000 for an ordinary middle-class home are not also fully responsible?
I think there was a very widespread readiness to borrow, with almost no commitment to repaying, unless repaying was painless because the house price went up. House prices were in Monopoly Money. Everything else was in real money. I knew many people who thought nothing of adding another few hundred thousand dollars to their house price budget, and then would buy cheaper ice cream to save $0.75. That’s because they never planned to repay the loan from their income. I think our problem isn’t fixed until that mindset changes. Many economists, regulators, politicians, and ordinary people still haven’t come to terms with the fundamental, painful, truth: House prices aren’t right-sized until almost all buyers can actually pay off the loan out of their income.
patientrenter
ParticipantHereWeGo, I agree with you. But do you think that people who wrote a check for $700,000 for an ordinary middle-class home are not also fully responsible?
I think there was a very widespread readiness to borrow, with almost no commitment to repaying, unless repaying was painless because the house price went up. House prices were in Monopoly Money. Everything else was in real money. I knew many people who thought nothing of adding another few hundred thousand dollars to their house price budget, and then would buy cheaper ice cream to save $0.75. That’s because they never planned to repay the loan from their income. I think our problem isn’t fixed until that mindset changes. Many economists, regulators, politicians, and ordinary people still haven’t come to terms with the fundamental, painful, truth: House prices aren’t right-sized until almost all buyers can actually pay off the loan out of their income.
patientrenter
ParticipantHereWeGo, I agree with you. But do you think that people who wrote a check for $700,000 for an ordinary middle-class home are not also fully responsible?
I think there was a very widespread readiness to borrow, with almost no commitment to repaying, unless repaying was painless because the house price went up. House prices were in Monopoly Money. Everything else was in real money. I knew many people who thought nothing of adding another few hundred thousand dollars to their house price budget, and then would buy cheaper ice cream to save $0.75. That’s because they never planned to repay the loan from their income. I think our problem isn’t fixed until that mindset changes. Many economists, regulators, politicians, and ordinary people still haven’t come to terms with the fundamental, painful, truth: House prices aren’t right-sized until almost all buyers can actually pay off the loan out of their income.
patientrenter
ParticipantHereWeGo, I agree with you. But do you think that people who wrote a check for $700,000 for an ordinary middle-class home are not also fully responsible?
I think there was a very widespread readiness to borrow, with almost no commitment to repaying, unless repaying was painless because the house price went up. House prices were in Monopoly Money. Everything else was in real money. I knew many people who thought nothing of adding another few hundred thousand dollars to their house price budget, and then would buy cheaper ice cream to save $0.75. That’s because they never planned to repay the loan from their income. I think our problem isn’t fixed until that mindset changes. Many economists, regulators, politicians, and ordinary people still haven’t come to terms with the fundamental, painful, truth: House prices aren’t right-sized until almost all buyers can actually pay off the loan out of their income.
patientrenter
ParticipantHereWeGo, I agree with you. But do you think that people who wrote a check for $700,000 for an ordinary middle-class home are not also fully responsible?
I think there was a very widespread readiness to borrow, with almost no commitment to repaying, unless repaying was painless because the house price went up. House prices were in Monopoly Money. Everything else was in real money. I knew many people who thought nothing of adding another few hundred thousand dollars to their house price budget, and then would buy cheaper ice cream to save $0.75. That’s because they never planned to repay the loan from their income. I think our problem isn’t fixed until that mindset changes. Many economists, regulators, politicians, and ordinary people still haven’t come to terms with the fundamental, painful, truth: House prices aren’t right-sized until almost all buyers can actually pay off the loan out of their income.
October 11, 2008 at 7:40 PM in reply to: Thank you Clinton for the Sub-Prime Boom! 1999 NYT Article #285958patientrenter
ParticipantThe NAR, mortgage brokers, and others had many Republicans in their ranks who wanted the Fannie and Freddie party never to stop. But Freddie and Fannie are the Democrats’ babies. Both parties are fully to blame for what happened. So are the borrowers and the intermediaries (like the mtg brokers and inv bankers and rating agencies etc.)
October 11, 2008 at 7:40 PM in reply to: Thank you Clinton for the Sub-Prime Boom! 1999 NYT Article #286251patientrenter
ParticipantThe NAR, mortgage brokers, and others had many Republicans in their ranks who wanted the Fannie and Freddie party never to stop. But Freddie and Fannie are the Democrats’ babies. Both parties are fully to blame for what happened. So are the borrowers and the intermediaries (like the mtg brokers and inv bankers and rating agencies etc.)
October 11, 2008 at 7:40 PM in reply to: Thank you Clinton for the Sub-Prime Boom! 1999 NYT Article #286272patientrenter
ParticipantThe NAR, mortgage brokers, and others had many Republicans in their ranks who wanted the Fannie and Freddie party never to stop. But Freddie and Fannie are the Democrats’ babies. Both parties are fully to blame for what happened. So are the borrowers and the intermediaries (like the mtg brokers and inv bankers and rating agencies etc.)
October 11, 2008 at 7:40 PM in reply to: Thank you Clinton for the Sub-Prime Boom! 1999 NYT Article #286295patientrenter
ParticipantThe NAR, mortgage brokers, and others had many Republicans in their ranks who wanted the Fannie and Freddie party never to stop. But Freddie and Fannie are the Democrats’ babies. Both parties are fully to blame for what happened. So are the borrowers and the intermediaries (like the mtg brokers and inv bankers and rating agencies etc.)
October 11, 2008 at 7:40 PM in reply to: Thank you Clinton for the Sub-Prime Boom! 1999 NYT Article #286300patientrenter
ParticipantThe NAR, mortgage brokers, and others had many Republicans in their ranks who wanted the Fannie and Freddie party never to stop. But Freddie and Fannie are the Democrats’ babies. Both parties are fully to blame for what happened. So are the borrowers and the intermediaries (like the mtg brokers and inv bankers and rating agencies etc.)
patientrenter
ParticipantWe’ve had a certain kind of economy in this country since WW2. If we’ve become a country where repaying debt is considered equivalent to enslavement, or only really obligatory if the debt was used to purchase assets, and only if the assets have risen in value, then we will have a different kind of economy in the future.
People elsewhere have been lending us lots of their money. Would you lend your retirement savings to the neighbor who says he might pay you back if the bets at the races all go his way?
-
AuthorPosts
