Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:01 AM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,382,404 times
Reputation: 768

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Nope. Not at all. The ratings agencies can only go by the GSEs' saying the loans met their lending standards. We have since found out that both the GSEs' lending standards were too low and their "automated underwriting" system over-approved loans by 65%, with all that extra 65% being too high-risk that manual underwriting would have rejected.
The law can not require you to brake the law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:02 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,922 posts, read 44,739,907 times
Reputation: 13666
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
That is now it is supposed to work. You make bad investments you lose.
The problem was the GSE MBS with their government-backed guarantee. Privately-issued MBS buyers did lose. No government guarantee on those.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:05 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,922 posts, read 44,739,907 times
Reputation: 13666
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
The middle and lower classes can't afford the current inflation.
Agree with that, as well. Inflation is an invisible tax on the middle class and poor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:08 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,922 posts, read 44,739,907 times
Reputation: 13666
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianEcon View Post
That is why we need to up the minimum wage a lot.
That's more artificial interference, which ALWAYS has unintended negative consequences.

What NEEDS to happen is for the US to lower and even rid its glut of no/low-skill workers. That glut is depressing no/low-skill job wages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:11 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,922 posts, read 44,739,907 times
Reputation: 13666
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianEcon View Post
The law can not require you to brake the law.
What laws were broken? Did Eric Holder miss something?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:24 AM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,382,404 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
That's more artificial interference, which ALWAYS has unintended negative consequences.

What NEEDS to happen is for the US to lower and even rid its glut of no/low-skill workers. That glut is depressing no/low-skill job wages.
As long as you are willing to be the first to be eliminated go ahead and advocate that.


That was Hitler's answer to Germany's problems.






Yes there will be negative unintended consequences to a massive increase in the minimum wage. But if we print money and hand it out to everyone and subsidize the creation of small businesses then those will be felt more by the top than the bottom and we will be putting people to work. Work is a good thing. I want it. I don't have it.


Supply Vs. demand for labor. We are in a demand limited economy, supply side economics wont do anything for it.
Quote:
Demand for labor is off so eliminate the workforce. (Paraphrase)
And you say my solution is bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:25 AM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,382,404 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
What laws were broken? Did Eric Holder miss something?
Fraud. It is illegal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:28 AM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,110,357 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by ContrarianEcon View Post
My gripe is the FED does not directly control wages, congress has a law that does directly do that. With too much debt and not enough income, the FED can't loan out enough money to drive wages higher. QE isn't doing it. We are on the edge of a slowdown. That scares the crap out of me.
That's what fiscal policy is for. QE is simply to make it easier for folks and businesses to gets loans.

Read up on fiscal vs monetary policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:38 AM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,110,357 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Nope. Not at all. The ratings agencies can only go by the GSEs' saying the loans met their lending standards. We have since found out that both the GSEs' lending standards were too low and their "automated underwriting" system over-approved loans by 65%, with all that extra 65% being too high-risk that manual underwriting would have rejected.
Nope. It's cute you still think if you lose a tooth and put it under your pillow, the tooth fairy will leave you some money.

You simply don't understand what happened and can't look past the articles you keep quoting over and over again. Keep trying as no one seems to agree with you, from both sides of the aisle. No one is buying the "gubmit" forced these financial institutions into doing illegal and shady dealings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2016, 10:39 AM
 
3,792 posts, read 2,382,404 times
Reputation: 768
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
That's what fiscal policy is for. QE is simply to make it easier for folks and businesses to gets loans.
More than that it is to force loaning to happen when the market doesn't particularly want it to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post

Read up on fiscal vs monetary policy.
Passingly familiar with the theory.


What we've had is monetary policy only, we need less government spending. We need an alternative to conventional fiscal policy solutions.


Higher wages and smaller government.


Up the minimum wage a lot, we can print $1 trillion one time only. Use that to subsidize the creation of small businesses. Short term high inflation so up the rates to control that. More ability to take on debt so we get economic growth, and some form of protectionism. My favorite is to require everyone to pay US minimum wage or higher to export to the US. In that case we need less domestic inflation to stabilize things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top