Powered by TypePad

« Senate Health Care Bill Facing The Death Panel? | Main | A Billion Here, A Billion There... »

December 11, 2009

Comments

narciso

I'm suspicious about that connection, hit, because the article, claims a lot, but doesn't have much to substantiate it, and it has Larry Persilly in it, who has defamed her on a couple of continents. I've been wary of assertions without actual facts, but I'll check with my network, above the 48.

narciso

You mean this Kurt Gibson, doesn't seem like a consultant to me, in the LUN

narciso

I'll admit to having skimmed the piece, but 31 K for a 500 million dollar pipeline, and the VP nomination, seems a very cost effective
use of funds

hit and run

All I know narciso is that he's married to an old high school sweetheart...and there's a good chance to rekindle old flames see them both over Christmas.

I'm just intrigueded at the prospect of meeting him without any preconceived notions (except that he's obviously not good enough for [REDACTED]).

Ignatz

--Ig-

Just guessing, but I bet it was a "Bill Of Attainder" approach to the suit that got the ruling as such.--

Perhaps, Mel. But a bill of attainder is not a seperation of powers issue.

narciso

No, he seems very capable a fellow, I reacted poorly to the Post piece, which didn't have a positive slant to it.it's a recommendation to the kind of staff she was able to maintain. You know hit you are not suppposed to weite that out loud (LOL). That will make for an interesting holiday.

By contrast we have an Energy Secretary that didn't that oil and gas was in his purview, who thinks painting roofs and roads white, will solve global warming or
some such. THe guy splits atoms with his mind, apparently

Melinda Romanoff

Ignatz-

Was the ruling under Seperation? Ugh, now I gotta go read the whole thing.

Thanks, I think.

G'night all.

hit and run

narciso:
You know hit you are not suppposed to weite that out loud (LOL). That will make for an interesting holiday.

Well,since my name if Bob Johnson,I don't think anyone will notice. Or Mike Smith,I have a hard time keeping up with who I am any more.

heh.

Ann

narciso:

Late to JOM, as usual, but did you see the Artic fox on Conan?:

Sarah, Sarah, Sarah

She will have everyone eating out of her hand by 2012.

hit and run

Wow. I just came across a new PUK video...quite by accident,or providence*.

http://thevimh.blogspot.com/2009/12/tribute-to-peter-bocking.html>A Tribute to Peter Bocking

It was posted,it should be noted,on Clarice's birthday.

----------------------
*or conspiracy if you believe whatshername.

Sue

Laura Ingraham had Sarah Palin on her show today. Ingraham asked Palin if she would debate Al Gore on climategate. Palin joked and said she didn't know, depended on the venue. She even used the term "wee-weed up". Well, Think Progress has picked up on her saying she didn't know and the comments are hilarious. One is making fun of her using the term "wee-weed up", apparently not realizing she is making fun of Obama. ::grin::

I truly wish Gore would debate Palin. She'd do it. He won't. He won't debate anyone.

Sue

I should have said Gore won't debate anyone...ever again. He was clobbered in all 3 debates by George W. Bush. ::grin::

Clarice

Oh, thank you so much, Hit.

Ann

Hit:

You are the best! You have done more than anyone to memorialize PUK for all of us here at JOM. Thank you!

Even though my eyes are raining again, I am smiling thinking that was posted on Clarice's birthday.

xxxooo

daddy

Hit,


I stuck Kurt Gibson deputy Director in to the ADN search window and got a number of oil story's mentioning him, including 2 from 2009. But Danny Fagan doesn't hate his guts, so naturally I'm unfamiliar with the guy. Fagan did have Levi's publicity manager calling in today who is angry about Sarah getting to sign books on the military Base which will be off limits to civilians, and he wanted to know how come he can't get Levi permission to set up a table on base to sign copies of his Playgirl spread for the troopettes.

Suspect another ethics allegation to follow any day now.

hit and run

The allergens in the air are really,really bad here tonight too,Ann....

narciso

Of course, Ann wouldn't miss it for the world, Shatner looked like he was sucker punched, or he could really have been acting for once, Did you get my email?

I saw that Think Progress link, Sue, they didn't realize she was toying with them, they
are a humourless bunch aren't they.

hit and run

I did coerce hit and run jr to sit through the "US Mail" video tonight.

Unbelievably happy,that made me*,being able to share with him in at least elementary terms who PUK was.

------------------
*hit and run jr is watching Star Wars The Clone Wars tonight,so,like Yoda,I am talking.

Elliott

Bob? Bob Johnson?

narciso

Ah, Rex Butler, the gift that keeps on taking, surely they can't be serious and don't call me shirley. The difference between
a political figure who treats the soldiers and airmen as props, and one who appreciates
both their service and their mission.

I've seen that the falafel lady who Sarah said, wanted her to be "Cleavage czar," tp which she rejoins inthe book "I'll get right on it" is at it again.

daddy

Hit,

Thanks for that Peter Link. I think from hearing it a few times thats its the old Rodger's and Hart standard "Blue Moon". Definitely thats it at the start and end, and I think he's just having fun wearing it out in all sorts of ways in the middle. Very nice to hear. Thanks very much.

hit and run

Elliott:
Bob? Bob Johnson?

Just like Tiger,you are?

Buxom blonde,head to the first tee,you do?

Sue

I saw that Think Progress link, Sue, they didn't realize she was toying with them, they
are a humourless bunch aren't they.

I thought they were just stupid. Why on earth would they think Al Gore would mop the floor with anyone in a debate?

Ann

narciso:

Yes, I got your wonderful email. Thanks, but it really did make my day, knowing I was able to send you Sarah's autographed book. You deserved one!

I hope you get to meet her one day.

Elliott

A Jedi craves not these things.

hit and run

A path to the dark side these thing are.

narciso

You welcome Ann, btw, Letterman is finding out that revenge is best served warm like
a baked Alaska.

Ann

Phrases golf announcers won't be able to use anymore:

I have to compliment you guys for making me laugh so hard. I even read them out loud to my husband and he was doubling over.

Ride-Her cup was a fav!!

I know I should be thwacking but I am laughing instead. Which considering all the other news is a good thing.

And you guys put SNL to shame.

Sheesh, one minute I am tearing up over PUK and the next minute I am laughing out loud.
I hope the new government health care covers my addiction to JOM!

hit and run

Phrases golf announcers won't be able to use anymore:

VERNE LUNDQUIST: We now take it to Dottie Pepper on 15...Dottie...

DOTTIE PEPPER: ...

VERNE: Dottie?

DOTTIE: ...

VERNE: He never hit on you,did he Dottie?

DOTTIE: ...

VERNE: David Feherty on 17...over to you.

DAVID FEHERTY: Oh,yeah,he grabbed my arse once,but we were all just caught up in the moment. It didn't mean anything.

PETER KOSTIS: Me too,Verne,he had a strong top hand grip.

VERNE: ...

BOBBY CLAMPETT: I saw what he did to Peter,but he really finished with a shortened follow through.

VERNE: ...

GARY MCCORD: I asked him to twirl my moustache,if you know what I ....

VERNE: Ahem...Phil Mickelson is about to tee off on 3. He's 12 strokes off the lead but...

FEHERTY: He said strokes...

CLAMPETT: heheheh

MCCORD: heheheh

KOSTIS: He can stroke with the best of....

VERNE: Stop it.

MCCORD: What?

FEHERTY: It's a loooooong stroke

VERNE: No,really. Stop.

CLAMPETT: It may be shortened,but he really finishes with a high follow through...

VERNE: We now break this broadcast of the PGA Invitational for the CBS exclusive CBS exclusive of the made-for-TV version of the classic children's story of Heidi.

TIGER WOODS: Oh,I totally did her.

MCCORD: Nice stroke.

TIGER: She was freaky.

FEHERTY: You really put the cock in Peacock...

VERNE: That's the wrong damn network you...

::scrambled signal::

FADE TO http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid34875844001?bctid=47596276001>REEBOK COMMERCIAL

FEMALE VOICE (tight shot on female breasts): "Stupid butt. Gets all the attention now...she's so tight,so pretty...so...stupid..."

ANNOUNCER: "Make your boobs jealous,with the shoe proven to tone your butt more than regular sneakers...."

::scrambled signal::

Tiger: I'm Tiger Woods and I sooooo approved this ad.

pagar

Corruption wins again!

There is a federal judge that actually claims to believe this?

The public will not suffer harm by allowing the plaintiffs to continue work on contracts duly awarded by federal agencies...

LUN

pagar

Fraud within fraud-How did that happen?

Organized Crime in Charge of EU Carbon Trade, Police Say

Meanwhile, people wonder why they are getting poorer.

Captain Hate

Jenny Sanford spent some time at the LUN, where many of our friends and family remember her as one tough, no nonsense girl.

Swanky girls school; OMG my fantasy image of Jenny just went to eleven.

LOL pagar; was that your original on the CBS broadcast or did you steal it? If it's yours you should probably have that twat Jim Nantzy-boy in a coma sucking on his binky.

Somebody wrote to Bill Simmons that Tiger should just go the professional wrestler heel route to the max. Divorce Elin, start dressing in black and openly banging all the strange he can get his hands on. He's have women showing up to the tourneys booing him and guys would secretly be cheering for him. Meanwhile he could even more openly be a prick to his opponents. It might be the greatest thing ever.

pagar

Captain H, I can't figure out which CBS broadcast?

But it did cause me to check my LUN on the organized crime post. The one posted in the original post is wrong. Hopefully this one is correct. LUN

anduril

Who's to Blame--Clinton or Bush? A picture can be worth a thousand words. Yes, the legal structures were put in place beginning with Carter and were expanded by Clinton, but for Clinton's two terms the rate remains flat before exploding during Bush's two terms. GOPers need to be honest about Bush:

anduril

Re Just War Theory, here's a brief article by George Weigel, a guy who knows something about it: The Just-War Tradition: Obama’s Oslo speech presumes too much about a centuries-old intellectual tradition.

Captain Hate

Captain H, I can't figure out which CBS broadcast?

Sorry pagar, I meant hit; no I hadn't been drinking then either :fingerguntohead:

Porchlight

I think my comment got lost in TypePad - anyway, Ras down to -16 today, a new low. Only 25% strongly approve. Strongly disapprove is 41%, a number that seems untouched by Obama's Afghanistan and Nobel speeches. 46-53 overall.

narciso

Look when you can't deliver, you're going no place, I was in the drugstore, and I came across the textbook progressive, has a pre-existing condition, graduate student would be journalist, and she was frustrated as all could be. She doesn't buy the Medicare expansion wedge, and all these other strategies, she blames the Democrats and the insurance companies, She wants reform, now, yesterday if possible of course.She probably hates Beck with a white hot passion, kind of the way we feel about Olbermann, but the tide is turning, the souffle is curdled

Rocco

Photobucket

"No loan is exempt, no bank is immune. For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement"...Attorney General Janet Reno

CRA

anduril

What flavor Koolaid is it today, Rocco? If the CRA was the cause of the housing bubble--in the sense of forcing banks to make bad loans--it would have happened sooner. No, something happened in the Bush years that led to the bubble, and that "something" was Bush and Rove deciding to buy off Hispanic votes, in the Sand State particularly. That was corrupt.

Look, I know this is a distinction that's hard for a lot of people to make, but try to follow this. I'm not a supporter of CRA--I've always thought it was a bad idea. But the fact that CRA that was passed by Dems was a bad idea doesn't make the Gramm deregulation a good idea just because it was pushed by GOPers. The simple fact is that Rocco and other simpleton Koolaid drinkers don't really know what this is all about and don't want to know--but that graph that I got via a conservative website isn't lying. There were and still are other alternatives. The country is lost if conservatives can't face up to and learn from past mistakes.

CRA Thought Experiment:

Imagine, if you will, that the discredited far right meme is actually correct: Assume that the CRA was a prime cause of the mortgage, credit and housing related crises.

Yes, he typed, it was all the CRA’s fault. (Stay with me here).

Assume arguendo that CRA legislation forced banks into making high risk, ill advised loans. And, let’s further assume a huge percentage of these government mandated mortgages have gone bad. The buyers who could not legitimately afford these homes or otherwise qualify for other mortgages have defaulted, and these houses are either in default, foreclosure or REOs.

What would this alternative nation look like?

Given the giant US housing boom and bust, this thought experiment would have several obvious and inevitable outcomes from CRA forced lending:

1) Home sales in CRA communities would have led the national home market higher, with sales gains (as a percentage) increasing even more than the national median;

2) Prices of CRA funded properties should have risen even more than the rest of the nation as sales ramped up.

3) After the market peaked and reversed, Distressed Sales in CRA regions should lead the national market downwards. Foreclosures and REOS should be much higher in CRA neighborhoods than the national median.

4) We should have reams of evidence detailing how CRA mandated loans have defaulted in vastly disproportionate numbers versus the national default rates;

5) CRA Banks that were funding these mortgages should be failing in ever greater numbers, far more than the average bank;

6) Portfolios of large national TARP banks should be strewn with toxic CRA defaults; securitizers that purchased these mortgages should have compiled list of defaulted CRA properties;

7) Bank execs likely would have been complaining to the Bush White House from 2002-08 about these CRA mandates; The many finance executives who testified to Congress, would also have spelled out that CRA was a direct cause, with compelling evidence backing their claims.

So much for THAT thought experiment: None of these outcomes have occurred.

Zero.

In reality, the precise opposite of what a CRA-induced collapse should have looked like is what occurred. The 345 mortgage brokers that imploded were non-banks, not covered by the CRA legislation. The vast majority of CRA covered banks are actually healthy.

The biggest foreclosure areas aren’t Harlem or Chicago’s South side or DC slums or inner city Philly; Rather, it hs been non-CRA regions — the Sand States — such as southern California, Las Vegas, Arizona, and South Florida. The closest thing to an inner city foreclosure story is Detroit – and maybe the bankruptcy of GM and Chrysler actually had something to do with that.

narciso

WE don't say it's the only factor, Anduril, but it is a significant one, god you are becoming as dense as sylvia. The CRA was the mechanism for enabling the sub prime crisis, and regular greed got in the way. when Bush
tried to reverse it, we saw what happened

Rick Ballard

Rocco,

Then Goldman-Sachs and Merrill used the mandated CRA's as a yummy crap sandwich filler

One of Goldman's trades with AIG involved a financial vehicle called South Coast Funding VIII. South Coast was one of many pools of bonds backed by individual homeowners' mortgage payments that Wall Street turned into collateralized debt obligations or CDOs.

Merrill Lynch, now part of Bank of America Corp., underwrote the South Coast CDO in January 2006 by stuffing it with packages of home loans originated by firms such as Countrywide Financial Corp., the big California lender.

Once a CDO debt pool is assembled, it is sliced into layers based on risk and return. Merrill sold the safest, or top layer, of deals like South Coast to large banks, including in Europe and Canada.

The banks wanted protection in case the housing market tanked. Many turned to Goldman, which effectively insured the securities against losses. Then, to cover its own potential losses, Goldman bought protection from AIG, in the form of credit-default swaps.

Goldman charged more than AIG for the protection, so it was able to pocket the difference, making millions while moving the default risks to AIG, according to people familiar with the trades.

and collected "insurance" from Uncle Sugar for the outbreak of credit cholera which followed. That leaves us with the age old conundrum of "whom shall be hanged first?". I'm perfectly content with letting them draw lots, as long as no money is wasted on blindfolds and cigarettes.

Clarice

Rick, we don't offer the about to be executed cigarettes any longer. It's bad for the health donchaknow?

Ignatz

Once again I find myself mostly in agreement with a guy who I wish I wasn't.
Ritholz is wrong a lot of the time and improperly mimimizes the CRA's impact, but neither was it the prime mover.
It is possible for asset bubbles to form in the absence of a monetary or credit bubble but it isn't common and it has not happened in the last several we have had.
Their basis lies in the Fed's idiotic and at times mutually exclusive dual mandates of a stable currency and full employment. The latter should be deep sixed permanently.
The Fed is the prime mover in what occurred with housing through the credit bubble it created and maintained after 9/11.
OTOH, Bush's role was no greater and probably less than the CRA's. He jaw boned and encouraged greater access to housing but he also fought for reform of Fannie and Freddie, so the scales are decidely mixed. Much more occurred, but on balance Bush was probably about a wash as was Clinton.
But at bottom, none of the dead beat borrowers, the CRA, shady mortgage brokers, vampire squids, AIG, Clinton, Bush, ACORN or anyone else could have done the things they did without funding by the Fed.
With excess credit or money (essentially it's free and there is no immediate cost to risking free money) there will be excesses, period.
Without it, people can dream up any number of scams or good intentioned stupidities they want, but they can't bring the system to its knees, because a lack of excess money makes one guard what one has much closer. It's no longer free and there is an immediate cost to wasting it.

Rocco

Rick

Merrill Lynch, now part of Bank of America Corp., underwrote the South Coast CDO in January 2006 by stuffing it with packages of home loans originated by firms such as Countrywide Financial Corp., the big California lender.

So Countrywide was California's big lender. That seems to validate anduril's California Buyers with Zero Down Payment graph. And who were Countrywide's biggest donors?

anduril

Strange--the WSJ article doesn't mention the CRA. Not much of a rebuttal of the blog that I linked. What's up with that? Maybe this helps explain, from Wikipedia:

Some legal and financial experts note that CRA regulated loans tend to be safe and profitable, and that subprime excesses came mainly from institutions not regulated by the CRA. In the February 2008 House hearing, law professor Michael S. Barr, a Treasury Department official under President Clinton, stated that a Federal Reserve survey showed that affected institutions considered CRA loans profitable and not overly risky. He noted that approximately 50% of the subprime loans were made by independent mortgage companies that were not regulated by the CRA, and another 25% to 30% came from only partially CRA regulated bank subsidiaries and affiliates. Barr noted that institutions fully regulated by CRA made "perhaps one in four" sub-prime loans, and that "the worst and most widespread abuses occurred in the institutions with the least federal oversight". According to Janet L. Yellen, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, independent mortgage companies made risky "high-priced loans" at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts; most CRA loans were responsibly made, and were not the higher-priced loans that have contributed to the current crisis. A 2008 study by Traiger & Hinckley LLP, a law firm that counsels financial institutions on CRA compliance, found that CRA regulated institutions were less likely to make subprime loans, and when they did the interest rates were lower. CRA banks were also half as likely to resell the loans. Emre Ergungor of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland found that there was no statistical difference in foreclosure rates between regulated and less-regulated banks, although a local bank presence resulted in fewer foreclosures.

During a 2008 House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing on the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the financial crisis, including in relation to the Community Reinvestment Act, asked if the CRA provided the “fuel” for increasing subprime loans, former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines said it might have been a catalyst encouraging bad behavior, but it was difficult to know. Raines also cited information that only a small percentage of risky loans originated as a result of the CRA. Bob McTeer, president of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank from 1991 to 2004, said “There was a lot of pressure from Congress and generally everywhere to make homeownership affordable for poor and low-income people. Some mortgages were made that would not have ordinarily been made.” He also said “When a bank made a decision to purchase mortgaged-backed securities, they would somehow determine if some of them were in zip codes covered by the CRA, and therefore they could get CRA credit.”

Gosh--who controlled Congress during most of these years of excess? And when Bush became president why didn't he make this a priority?

Here's more on Phil Gramm's role:

In 1999 the Congress enacted and President Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, also known as the "Financial Services Modernization Act". This law repealed the part of the Glass-Steagall Act that had prohibited a bank from offering a full range of investment, commercial banking, and insurance services since its enactment in 1933.

Who did Gramm go to work for after he left the Senate, and how much did he make?

NOT coincidentally, it was only in 1999, after repeal of Glass-Steagall that BofA offered the first 500million in zero down loans to low and middle income borrowers. Without repeal of Glass-Steagall most of this wouldn't have happened and that WSJ article wouldn't have been written.

The simple fact is that CRA played a minor role, not a direct role, in the housing bubble.

anduril

Thanks for the input, Rocco and Ignatz. Here are two articles--each perhaps somewhat tendentious but offering valuable insights:

Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis

Finally, keep in mind that the Bush administration has been weakening CRA enforcement and the law’s reach since the day it took office. The CRA was at its strongest in the 1990s, under the Clinton administration, a period when subprime loans performed quite well. It was only after the Bush administration cut back on CRA enforcement that problems arose, a timing issue which should stop those blaming the law dead in their tracks. The Federal Reserve, too, did nothing but encourage the wild west of lending in recent years. It wasn’t until the middle of 2007 that the Fed decided it was time to crack down on abusive pratices in the subprime lending market. Oops.

Here's the point: the reduced supervision was part of the deal that Gramm did to pass the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Republicans were largely at the controls while all this was happening--they may not be sole proprietors, but they do have one helluva an ownership stake in this issue. Let's be honest.

The True Origins of This Financial Crisis

IN 1992, AN AFFORDABLE housing mission was added to the charters of Fannie and Freddie, which--like the CRA--permitted Congress to subsidize LMI housing without appropriating any funds. A 1997 Urban Institute report found that local and regional lenders seemed more willing than the GSEs to serve creditworthy low- to moderate-income and minority applicants. After this, Fannie and Freddie modified their automated underwriting systems to accept loans with characteristics that they had previously rejected. This opened the way for large numbers of nontraditional and sub-prime mortgages. These did not necessarily come from traditional banks, lending under the CRA, but from lenders like Countrywide Financial, the nation’s largest sub-prime and nontraditional mortgage lender and a firm that would become infamous for consistently pushing the envelope on acceptable underwriting standards.

Compare that with Ritzholz' points in his thought experiment.

I'm perfectly comfortable with most of what Ignatz is saying--even if my agreement makes Ignatz uncomfortable.

anduril

However, I would add that the Fed's post 9/11 policy was in part politically motivated and found favor with the party that was running Washington until 2006. Don't kid yourself that the Fed doesn't play politics.

Ignatz

--even if my agreement makes Ignatz uncomfortable--

Your agreement doesn't make me uncomfortable. Your frequent anti-social episodes do, such as this pointless and graceless attack:

"The simple fact is that Rocco and other simpleton Koolaid drinkers don't really know what this is all about and don't want to know"--

All he did was link a mid 90s article by CATO regarding the flaws in the CRA idea, flaws you agree it has, and post a cartoon of Janet Reno and a quote by her from the same period. As he subsequently demonstrated he has not had a drink of Kool Aid of any flavor by posting info supportive of your point.
If you were not bent on being such a colossal ass you would at this point beg his forgiveness for calling him a simpleton Kool Aid drinker and go do a few acts of penance rather than merely thanking him for his input after he graciously ignores your insult.

anduril

Bush's role was no greater and probably less than the CRA's. He jaw boned and encouraged greater access to housing but he also fought for reform of Fannie and Freddie, so the scales are decidely mixed.

Problem: these two are mutually exclusive. Bush's jawboning carried the day--as he wanted it to, for political reasons. He and Rove thought homeownership by hook or by crook was the ticket to a permanent GOP majority. Instead of cracking down on ACORN and vote fraud in general, they thought they could make those issues irrelevant through homeownership.

ITYS: In my last incarnation at JOM I was harping on the Fed issue as well as Glass-Steagall. No one wanted to listen. Then as now.

Captain Hate

Can we please get this thread back on topic with pictures illustrating how hawt Jenny Sanford is?

anduril

Actually, Rocco's use of the CATO cartoon was intended to invalidate, without argumentation, the points that I was making with the help of Ritholtz. His further comment:

So Countrywide was California's big lender. That seems to validate anduril's California Buyers with Zero Down Payment graph. And who were Countrywide's biggest donors?

addresses only the graph and not, or not directly, the larger CRA issue. His closing sentence re Countrywide's biggest donors suggests to me continued resistance to a balanced reappraisal. While Chris Dodd and another Dem Senator had their hands all over that aspect, the biggest single recipient of campaign contributions (as opposed to sweetheart mortgages) was a GOP Rep. However, my idea was to give Rocco perhaps more credit rather than less than he deserved.

Ignatz

--No one wanted to listen.--

Suggest it is the messenger not the message.
Apologize to Rocco.

Have to run. Better things to do on my birthday than argue with you. Toodle-oo.

anduril

Ballard = troll.

Pofarmer

Without the CRA, you don't have the mechanism's formed that led to the relaxed lending standards which lead to the crash. Glass-Steagal would have been irrelevant.

mockmook

Is Bush still Prez? What a vortex we have here...

anduril

Pofarmer, ask Ignatz for his opinion on that. While many have implicated CRA (and, again, I'm NOT a supporter of CRA) in the overall relaxation of lending standards, I don't believe you can draw a direct relationship. The fact is, the really relaxed standards followed Glass-Steagall and the whole thing was fueled by the Fed. My major point is that it wasn't just Dems who thought they could use CRA for political benefit--it was Republicans, too. Conservatives need to understand this if there's to be any hope of reform. Simply circling the wagons isn't sufficient. That's how the GOP lost Congress--enough people saw through their duplicity and fiscal irresponsibility.

Here's more from Wiki:

According to San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank Governor Randall Kroszner, the claim that "the law pushed banking institutions to undertake high-risk mortgage lending" was contrary to their experience, and that no empirical evidence had been presented to support the claim.[98] In a Bank for International Settlements (BIS) working paper, economist Luci Ellis concluded that "there is no evidence that the Community Reinvestment Act was responsible for encouraging the subprime lending boom and subsequent housing bust," relying partly on evidence that the housing bust has been a largely exurban event.

The other way to look at it is that without Glass-Steagall repeal and Fed recklessness, CRA would have been irrelevant. The crash might have been more along the lines of the S&L scandal--bad enough, but not THIS bad.

anduril

Suggest it is the messenger not the message.

And how immature is that? Anyway, I learned my lesson last time around--it IS the message.

hit and run

Happy Birthday Ignatz!

pagar

More friends of George Soros and the problems they caused in the real estate/banking circles.

"How allies of George Soros helped bring down Wachovia Bank"

LUN

Every bit of the problems in real estate/banking always come back to leftists-leftists who believe you can loan money to people don't demonstrate the ability to repay it and not expect the breakdown of the system. Witness Barack Obama and his lawsuit against Citibank.

"It is important to understand the nature of these lawsuits and what their purpose is. ACORN filed tons of these lawsuits and ALL of them allege racism."

Link

Leftists=fraud

Clarice

Haooy birthday, Ignatz!

Rocco

Thank you Ignatz and Happy Birthday

Thomas Collins

Happy Birthday, Ignatz. See LUN for the song.

Anthony Natale, Jr

TM-YOU ARE UGLY & REPULSIVE W/ THAT COMMENT. LIKE LETTERMAN STYLE. YOU ARE TO GOOD TO LOWER YOUR STANDARDS FOR HITS>

narciso

Happy birthday, Ignatz, as usual most is baaed on fraud like the 1993 Fed study on 'redlining' Rathke's efforts in pushing forward the CRA revisions, one could also credit SarBox in reducing the number of other
issues

cathyf
Without the CRA, you don't have the mechanism's formed that led to the relaxed lending standards which lead to the crash.
While the CRA certainly helped a lot it's not the only mechanism. The fundamental problem is that in real estate the big risk is locational, and there is no way to diversify away location risk without losing the locality of proper credit evaluation.

I also think that it is hard to overstate the importance of the Boston Fed study which "found" non-existent racism in mortgage lending. It's still not clear whether the Fed researchers were dishonest or massively incompetent, but the fact was that no one expected the Fed to be either -- and so CRA risk was not properly appreciated and priced into the bonds.

Ignatz

Back for a quick look.

--And how immature is that? Anyway, I learned my lesson last time around--it IS the message.--

It's not immature at all. The problem is you, not your message. I and other people have made many of the same points you have, in many cases in stronger terms than you have, but we haven't done it by being complete and profound asses to anyone who doesn't instantly bow and scrape at our undeniable perspicacity and instantly renounce their own opinions as the lowly worm like workings of diseased and feeble minds.
You don't seek to persuade or inform or even to argue. You seek fealty.
That makes communication nearly impossible and drowns your legitimate points in the noise of your own ego.
I hope you can alter your methods to comform more closely with social norms as you have a lot of useful things to say.

One last thing, when it was pointed out you had baselessly insulted Rocco, you impugned him further by clairvoyantly divining his motive for posting an article on the CRA written ten years before the housing bubble even started.
Do the decent thing and apologize.


Thanks for the well wishes everyone else.
Off to trim the tree. One of the perks of timberland; you get to go out and cut your own tree.

Elliott

Happy birthday, Ignatz!

Ann

Haooy birthday, Ignatz!

from me too! :)

Clarice comes up with the funniest words.

anduril

I and other people have made many of the same points you have, in many cases in stronger terms than you have, but we haven't done it by being complete and profound asses to anyone who doesn't instantly bow and scrape at our undeniable perspicacity and instantly renounce their own opinions as the lowly worm like workings of diseased and feeble minds.
You don't seek to persuade or inform or even to argue. You seek fealty.

Pure paranoia.

anduril

You don't seek to persuade or inform or even to argue.

Just amazing.

anduril

You don't seek to persuade or inform or even to argue. You seek fealty.

...

I hope you can alter your methods to comform more closely with social norms as you have a lot of useful things to say.

This is totally contradictory--how could I possibly "have a lot of useful things to say to say" if I "don't seek to persuade or inform or even to argue?" Obviously your intolerance for differences in personal style is something that goes very deep for you--since you can't discuss it without self contradiction--but, sorry, that's your personal problem and I won't get involved in it.

Captain Hate

Happy birthday Ignatz!!

glasater

What Ignatz says in every last comment on this page and always--mostly:)

Happy Birthday Ignatz!! What a Christmas present you were to your parents however many years ago.

Jane

Happy Birthday Ignatz!

We must be related - I have 4 other birthdays in my family this week. Don't tell anyone else, but you are my favorite.

Ignatz

--What a Christmas present you were to your parents however many years ago.--

Yeah. Saved them a bundle on birthday presents over the years. :)

--Don't tell anyone else, but you are my favorite.--

What a sweet thing to say, Jane. To protect my ego I won't check back through any old threads to see if you've said that to anyone else. :)

Melinda Romanoff

Happy Birthday Ignatz!

I hope the wind is at your side today, and the chain stays oiled.

Back later.

Elroy Jetson

I wished Jenny Sanford was getting a divorce to pursue a relationship with me.
I love her!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame