I’m sure that when (or, perhaps, if) the statistics are ever revealed, it will become painstakingly obvious to even the most hard-core lib that the failure rate on these CRA loans was way, way higher than on conventional loans (i.e., those made to people who actually qualify for them under normal, conservative banking rules.)
Left-wing activists never wish to admit that putting minority students who wouldn’t qualify under normal criteria into an Ivy League school (via Affirmative Action) will result in lower grades and higher drop-out rates for them. Similar failures will result from giving home loans to people who don’t qualify for them.
Abraham Lincoln famously asked the following question: “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg.” And calling someone a Harvard student doesn’t necessarily make him a Harvard student, nor does saying that someone is qualified for a loan (by lowering the standards) make him qualified for a loan.
You’re applying logic here; understand that when banks didn’t lend to certain “communities”, they were racist; after lending to them, they were called racist because they couldn’t pay the money back. There is no winning here...it’s always somebody else’s fault (and gets who gets screwed to compensate for the defaults?)
Abraham Lincoln famously asked the following question: “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg.”
Heh, an excellent way to make the point.