Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yep Teratova, dems painted a very nice picture of the housing market then played on peoples emotions "everyone deserves a house". Playing on peoples emotions will get the suckers every time.
I agree J746 but it is up to people to use common sense. The key word is "sell". If there was not a buyer on the other end then the sale doesn't happen. No one put a gun to peoples heads to sign the dotted line and buy. Obviously bankers know the saying there's a sucker born every day. Of course now the buyer now wants to blame everyone else for their own poor choices.
The key is to wise up, not to be the sucker or they WILL take advantage of you. The bankers yesterday and politicians always.
I agree with you there.
Perhaps a required course in schools should be Political, Corporate and Banking Propaganda 101 so people can be better prepared.
The ruling elite along with those in their inner circle though, don't want an informed citizen but rather productive and profitable citizens to either serve in their Corporations and Banks or to serve the Government.
They don't want independent people capable of rational thought thinking of ways to be independent of the system all together.
You hear these days, "Get a Job", "Create Business" or Serve in the "Government Military" instead of go off the grid. Just like in China where they steal their property, they don't want people lazying around while they wait for their crops to grow.
The super rich and corporations are sitting on trillions of dollars. They act like a vac, sucking all the money out of the economy and not putting money back into it. QE was pumping cash into the economy to make create conditions in which investment is better than hording and sitting on vast reserves of cash. It's fine with me if the government stops printing money and lets the economy crash like in the great depression. That way it will level the playing field again, and opportunities will again open up for the middle class to grow. The problem is that too many people are fooled into thinking that corporations and the super rich have nothing to do with the bad economy.
We don't have much money in circulation ... we have to keep printing it... we sent our money to OPEC, China, Japan and of course the illegals send billions back to Mexico.. we are leaking money out and not taking too much money in...
Other countries are getting rich on our money.we buy billions of products .... China lends to us because we give them so much money for their products.. We borrow what they make from us.. it comes back as borrowed money. No way to run an economy.. We have become a lazy country and will grow poor.
Well that's what we have. A lazy uneducated people. I can't figure out why knowing that money is important why people won't at least educated themselves at minimum in personal finance.
The Freddie Mac Scandal Caused Democrats to Circle the Wagons
By June 2003, the Freddie accounting investigation had forced management to admit to having misstated $5 billion of earnings. Of course, many analysts and investors began to look very closely at Fannie’s accounting.
Republicans moved swiftly to enact a stronger GSE regulatory framework… Democrats dug trenches and defended. Please recall – if investors become more skeptical about Fannie’s health, they would not purchase as many of Fannie’s repackaged mortgage securities, at least not at market-low interest rates. That situation would reduce Fannie’s ability to buy mortgages, particularly in the risky subprime market. This was something Democrats wanted to avoid, at severe cost if necessary. One way to counter the increased risk perception was to directly state that, while the government does not guarantee Fannie’s individual securitized mortgage issues, the federal government would, in fact, step in to bail Fannie out if it got into serious financial trouble. During a Congressional hearing, Barney Frank (D-MA) stated,“I think we see entities that are fundamentally sound financially and withstand some of the disastrous scenarios. And even if there were a problem, the federal government doesn’t bail them out.”
At risk for Democrats included the following:
Democrats had changed the law governing Fannie Mae’s mission (the CRA) to pressure management to take more risks, but did nothing to adapt the regulatory structure to the new mission. Allowing the discovery of aggressive accounting at both Freddie and Fannie, without a fight, would place Democrat party at political risk ahead of a Presidential election cycle.
Democrats had appointed Fannie’s senior executives and much of the board of directors, who would had to have been involved with the illegalities – and may easily be publicly viewed as such if no fight had been put up to reframe the issue.
Publicly, Democrats fiercely defended the increased home ownership rates in poor neighborhoods, which were based upon investors having trust in purchasing Fannie’s repackaged mortgages. This easy access to funding would dry up if investors viewed investments in the securities Fannie issued as increasingly risky.
The CRA changes had significantly boosted community organizers, such as ACORN, which were rapidly becoming a Democrat party power base.
Local Democrat-linked political power brokers, such as Valerie Jarrett and friends, were making fortunes in the Chicago subprime housing market, where ACORN was a major player.
Clinton appointee Franklin Raines, and Congressional Democrats moved swiftly with the “best defense is a good offense” strategy. They painted anyone who presented evidence against Fannie Mae as being motivated by politics or greed. The same day auditors released the full Freddie Mac report, Franklin Raines held a press conference in which he accused Freddie of impeding Fannie’s lofty mission by causing “collateral damage.” Fannie’s management changed the Frequently Asked Questions section of the company’s website to include the following statement: “Fannie Mae’s reported financial results follow Generally Accepted Accounting Principles to the letter…. There should be no question about our accounting.” They were wrong.
In October 2003 — less than four months after Freddie’s admission — Mr. Raines wrote a letter to Treasury Secretary John Snow that began,
“Dear John, From the beginning of our discussions, you and I have agreed to avoid disrupting the capital markets by indicating a wish to change Fannie Mae’s charter, status, or mission.“ After complaining about a comment that Raines said a high Treasury official had made about Fannie’s government-extended line of credit, he wrote, “The result of his comment was that trading in our debt came to a halt for an extended period of time. I am disappointed and hope we can change course. Very truly yours, Frank.” Housing Bubble, Financial Crisis – What Happened, Who is Responsible | TJ Hancock
Well that's what we have. A lazy uneducated people. I can't figure out why knowing that money is important why people won't at least educated themselves at minimum in personal finance.
By reading your post, it's clear that you fit that bill.
Throughout all of human history there was only the rich and poor. Creating a "middle class" requires artificial intervention like unions. The truth is most of the world has the rich/poor system.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
