Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bailout Basics
Patriot Post Vol. 08 No. 39 | 26 September 2008 ^ | September 26, 2008 | Mark Alexander

Posted on 09/28/2008 6:01:24 AM PDT by pleikumud

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: screaminsunshine

I don’t mean to change the subject, but the biggest Ponzi scheme of all is Socialist Security.


21 posted on 09/28/2008 6:44:50 AM PDT by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: pleikumud

Just the tip of the iceberg. Bush said the other day “This Sucker is going down”. Once a Ponzi breaks it can not be fixed.


22 posted on 09/28/2008 6:47:08 AM PDT by screaminsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wayoverontheright

No! The fault lies with the citizens..US!! We were not vigilant in protecting our freedom. Now we pay the PIPER!!


23 posted on 09/28/2008 6:49:06 AM PDT by screaminsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TrevorSnowsrap

The community reinvestment act was applicable to all banks, not just Fannie and Freddie. Under the act - or more accurately said - under the regulations created under Clinton, banks could only do things like opening new branches if they were sufficiently fulfilling the needs of all members of their community. This includes the low-income earning people with poor credit history. This regulation led to suits by institutions such as ACORN against banks and institutions for their non-compliance with the regulations. In fact, our boy Obambi was involved in a suit against citibank for similar issues.

Another part of the problem is the state of foreclosure law. Although someone “owns” the mortgage, and it is backed by actual property it takes at least several months and frequently years for a bank to foreclose on the property. During this time, the bank is unable to extract any value from the property.

Additionally, the securitization of mortgages has led to sales and resales of these mortgages. Often, it is unclear who owns the mortgage and it is questionable whether they maintained proper paperwork to preserve their ability to foreclose on the mortgage. This brings us to a position in which the true owner of the mortgage may not be able to foreclose.


24 posted on 09/28/2008 7:05:13 AM PDT by bone52
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: pleikumud

“Think about the added contraction of credit and its impact on the economy.”

What contraction? The Fed needs credit to be used. Consumers want credit. Someone will be the go-between and provide the credit offered by the Fed to the consumers. The markets need credit. They need consumers to use credit. There will be credit. I just refi’d my car at a lower interest rate. I just qualified for a new home at a great rate and the qual was painless. There is credit. Everyone relies on credit. There will be credit.

This whole “crisis” is a scam.


25 posted on 09/28/2008 7:09:32 AM PDT by CodeToad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: plain talk
It sure seems that is possible ... but we don't know that the majority of the $700B is as a result of defaults by unqualified borrowers. We also know middle class people could have gotten over their heads along with speculators flipping houses, etc. these people have not told us who primarily is responsible for this. I sure would like to see some stats

The term "Unqualified borrowers" need not only mean the poor. Those middle class people you mention would be unqualified borrowers also if reasonable borrowing standards were in place.

26 posted on 09/28/2008 7:24:18 AM PDT by Religion and Politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: PAR35; AndyJackson; Thane_Banquo; nicksaunt; MadLibDisease; happygrl; Roy Tucker; GOPJ; dervish; ...

The Money, Banking, and Financial Markets Ping List.

FR Keyword: moneylist

This can be a high-volume ping list at times.

To join, send Freepmail to rabscuttle385.

27 posted on 09/28/2008 7:33:10 AM PDT by rabscuttle385 (No to bailouts, no to amnesty, no to carbon credits, no to Big Government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: screaminsunshine

This is a crisis. It was a Democrat scam, and now the Democrats are in a position to turn it into an even larger scam.


28 posted on 09/28/2008 7:40:12 AM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OnTheStraightTalkExpress

whether they were qualified or not is a separate issue. What I am curious about is the class of people primarily responsible for the loan defaults.


29 posted on 09/28/2008 8:47:29 AM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: TrevorSnowsrap
Even if there were problems with paying back loans the banks/creditors could always take back the property. So where exactly would the loss be?

The problem is twofold. The first has been pointed out to you, value. When the housing bubble burst, it created the situation where the assets had less value than mortgage balances.

The second problem is liquidity. You can't spend a house.

30 posted on 09/28/2008 9:15:25 AM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

It’s probably spread across the whole spectrum.

The poor guy is going to be in over his head with a $50,000 loan, the working class guy at $100,000, the middle class guy at $200,000 & the wealthy guy at a million or more.

The qualification standard was changed (lowered) to help the guy on the low end buy a house & then that changed standard was used throughout the whole spectrum.


31 posted on 09/28/2008 9:34:21 AM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: GoLightly

“The second problem is liquidity.”

Yes, I agree that could become aa issue but again I was asking about the *loss* not whether liquidity could be an issue.


32 posted on 09/28/2008 2:10:32 PM PDT by TrevorSnowsrap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bone52

I appreciate that there so many opionated armchair “econmists” posting here but I wasn’t asking for another “opinion” unless it’s backed with some credentials.

Once again:

“What’s odd about this is I have yet to read of a single economist ascribing this crisis to what is described above.”

Do you have links to credible economists who would agree with your “theories”. It shouldn’t be that so hard to find if it’s so well known and accepted right?


33 posted on 09/28/2008 2:14:23 PM PDT by TrevorSnowsrap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson