The end of your post seems similar to what automobile insurance providers have to put up with. In order to do business in a state, they have to also insure people who have no business behind the wheel of an automobile, being alcoholics, or just incredibly bad drivers. Perhaps that is also why insurance companies try to offer all types of insurance – to spread the impending damage.

Regardless of the various ideas, reasons, fixes, and foibles, I believe we are experiencing first hand, the fall of America. As a father and brand new grandfather, I cannot fully express just how pissed off I am.

More middle-aged.

So, it’s my opinion that 80% or more of mortgages in CMOs are probably performing properly. However, it takes a lot of financial sleuthing to discover what is okay and what has failed.

I found another piece of information about the CMO problem that sheds more light on why these instruments are so toxic. It seems that Deutsche Bank (DB) tried to foreclose on 14 mortgages in the USA that it held in a CMO. Some judge told DB that they were not the owners of the moprtgage, which was backed by the value of the property. The judge’s opinion was that DB only owned the income stream from the mortgages. Well, you can imagine what effect that had. You think you have a CMO stocked with mortgages back-stopped by real property, but no, some genius of a judge tells you that you only own the income stream. Wow, talk about devaluing the CMO. What is it really worth if it isn’t backed by the properties? This added to the distrust of the CMOs and I’m not sure that the issue has been resolved. If the CMOs’ owners own only the income stream, then the government bailout is, IMO, on very shaky ground.

Does anyone else know if this issue has been resolved? I personally think this judge was making law, rather than interpreting it. Unfortunately I can’t find the link to the article I found this in, so this is anecdotal.

Jimmy… the subprime stuff wasn’t open to everyone. If you were not a minority, or a woman not living in a minority community, then you were in the old way of review.

So in essence it didn’t lower the standards for everyone. Which is the mistake you’re making. Its COMMUNITY reinvestment act… if you were not in a key community, or not a minority in a key community, then you were SOL…

I do not know the color of your skin or where you or your daughter were living at the time, but I can pretty much be sure that it wasn’t one of the special political neighborhoods, and that you two weren’t connected to the local socialist orgs.

http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/community/community/12c30.html

it was for “technically for low-income, minority, and distressed neighborhoods”

and it had to do with how many they were giving out.

so if you did fit this description, and they had already given out enough to make their quota to avoid the state punishment, you also were SOL.

This is a problem with mandated things, they are not done on solid principals, and so they are not done to serve the whole market, but done to serve the law and the banks purposes. Unlike a real loan vehicle, they don’t hang the sign out for everyone they can get, but only to get their quota, then stop to limit the damage.

This probably was why they kept trying to tweak it all these years. they mandated this bad thing, but the banks did the minimal they could. So they changed it.

In this case, you had to be the first in line to get the benefit, and that probably went to the community organizers and the people that worked with them closely as they informed them to line up while they could.

It also behooved the banks to push those that could be put under a normal loan to be put in that category if they could do that. so even though they migh have been in a minority poor neighborhood, if someone walked in that could pay and cursory examination showed that, there was no mandate to help them get the socialist rate as they didn’t fit that description.

In essence, there are only a few reasons it wouldn’t apply…

You were too successful to be considered for it
You were the wrong color or lived in the wrong neighborhood
They had already made their nut, and didn’t need any more charity cases to keep the man at bay.

You don’t know what the hell your talking about Mitsu.

Your so screwed up that you have it totally backwards and cant tell. You are a perfect example of a useful idiot. your hopped up to do something, and since you’re an idiot as to history, economics, and outcomes, your keepers get to direct you as you believe anything. even if its 180 degrees from validity.

EVERY one of the liberal programs today is about pretending to try to create everything in the short term..

Utopia — cant wait for it to develop on its own in 200 or 1000 years, we have to have totalitarianism to make it now!

Command economy — we cant wait for the slow free market to amble its way to were we want to go, we have to take control and manipulate it to get there FAST…

Of course making a law as to forcing those to make loans to bad risks, while not including how to pay for those risks, favors the long term, right? duh, it favors the short term. the short term goal was to get minorities and the poor into their own houses, long term would be so that they get to keep them.

Mitsu, if you go back through your posts you would find that you have no consistency of definition. Your terms actually have no meaning. You will drum up and say anything valid, invalid, ignorant, or silly, just to make a point. nothing is consistent. Reading you with any sense of memory is like listening to alice talking to humpty dumpty.

‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,’ it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.’
‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master – that’s all.’

Liberals make short term now arguments… we will bring in sex education for six year olds, it will make new socialist man now, in a hurry… not later… of course we don’t know aht it did to hungary, and what it does to the population in the Long term. but we liked the short term arguments and liberals have signed on.

Abortion is sold on a short term argument. The life of the mother now, is the short term argument… the condition of society and its culture and population is the long term argument which they failed and are failing on. (russia has more abortions than babies and is totally in free fall collapse that it cant get out of. Ergo its tryuing to reclaim foreign Russians to populate it).

The argument for no fault divorce over fault divorce is short term versus long term.

The argument for welfare is short term fix now, and the long term outcome is destruction of family…

Basically the whole science of making a communist state is to get people to become progressive and more liberal in their choices, making them choose short term goals while believing or rather disbelieving long term outcomes that conservativism say is the outcome (and blame conservatives for not wanting the short term good because they are mean, not because they can see consequences).

In fact, long term is looking at consequences… and the left is decidedly against examining consequences. It serves their purpose of changing us into a communist state, of which they are nto very secretive about.

Because their wrongdoing was the DIRECT outcome from state intervention, while the ENRON situation was the INDIRECT outcome from state intervention.

In this case, they would question them and find out that they were following the policies as set forth by the Dems in the Carter admin, and the adjustments in the Clinton admin.

And the outcomes would be a direct result of such policies.

In the Enron thing, the situation was artificially created by the collision of anti market laws. However, unlike this situation leaders could choose not to take advantage of the situation that the laws created. In this case choice was created by ignorance of the implications of the laws, and what outcomes would be if you did certain things. All the other firms didn’t see the implications, and Enrons leaders saw that they could play round robbin and make more with the same material than if they couldn’t do this. What they really got snagged for is playing one market control over another.

This created the situation that if they sold power outside their market they could get more for it than if they sold it in market. What seemed even better to them was that by doing so, they could buy it back and pocket the difference. If the market was a free and open one, this false set of steps would not exist. It took a mandate from the state to create this condition by force of law, and then they took advantage of it.

In todays subprime, the state mandated directly the actions that caused the problems. They HAD to loan to bad risks, and they HAD to now consider a good loan that was still being paid in good state, as a zero on the balance because no one would buy it today.

Perfected democrat The “professional” banking, political, government and financial community, on the other hand, were largely and knowlegeably complicit in this pyramid game. At that leve it is all about incompetence and political and financial opportunism…

What your forgetting to ask is which came first… did the junk vehicles that allowed them to make loans to the poor that was being mandated exist before the mandate or after? The point is that we are forgetting that they LOST money on this. that these greedy people were forced to accept a losing deal.

Capitalism is mutuial benefit. when the state mandates that you have to find a way to sell to the poor, or your not allowed to sell to anyone in the area, then what do you do?

Well in this case, it seems that you ignore the law that mandates that they do this, and blame the guys for inventing a way to accomplish it since the state wont let them not do it.

In essence the state said… you either loan money to these poor people who cant pay, or get out of the loan business in this state.

They really had no choice other than what they did!! they withdraw all business in say NY state, and they go belly up… they stay in business in NY state, and they do business for 20 years then go belly up. the twenty years of something with the same end is a better deal, and that’s what they did.

Meanwhile, everyone that said for 20 years that we are under economic false flag warfare is called a tin hatter, and no one will listen. Except that so many of them are right, and now we the average people are now talking the same subject and its not tin hat.

MITSU,
Nouriel Roubini has been quite prescient on this for some time now. His prescription is that an RTC-like approach is not going to suffice: what we need is a New Deal-style HOLC

Socialist economists basically call doom doom doom till they are right then claim prescience. But how much prescience does it take to know that the rules of command economy ends up causing crisis? Its well documented for 100 years to the point that one could honestly say that the side that ignores it is an enemy.

However, Mitsu, you are no friend of America. your statements for a long time have shown that. so why would your advice at all be whats right? by defintino its what is wrong!!!

It was a new deal style law that created this mess!!! In other words, if it wasn’t for crypto communism creating a false mind as to why poor people don’t get loans, and backing that up with the force of a gun, they wouldn’t have done this.

The same thing happened in soviet russia when they mandated that the shop keepers sell stuff at a loss. Soon the shelves were bare… and the same thing is happening in Venezuela, as the shelves go bare as they try to mandate prices in which the person doing business cant support all their customers with their own money.

It’s the same thing here… the state mandates that these loans go out at a loss. If it wasn’t for too many of them, the financial industry would have kept doing it subsidizing the poor with the profits from wealthier deals, just as the poor are subsidized by the higher premiums on insurance holders in medicine.

Ultimately Mitsu, the New Deal things were unconstitutional, and if your going to suggest the same, your suggesting unconstitutional fixes that have been found to cause crisis which then ushers in more poison.

In a nutshell neo, we are in this shape precisely because of people like mitsu, who poison the waters with unconstitutional options and solutions designed to cause the very problems that they pretend to be fixing (ether purposefully or in ignorance).

Only a ignorant person or one with ulterior motives would suggest new deal type things, as they didn’t work when they were tried, and they made things worse, so one has to ask why suggest that non fix now?

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff222.html

so this is just another failure of a command economy (communist), not a failure of the free markets, who have been decidedly and markedly less free since our soviet revolution in the 60s to a socialist state, over a state of free men and expansive outcomes.

the truth is that if the market wasnt being manipulated and forcing bankers to do things not in their interest, the general person wouldnt need to know that they are part of a agretized group that eventually will mean X to the population. even if all those homeonwers knew that this would happen and they were a part of it, they wouldnt have stopped doing what they did.

Keynes eventually discredited himself, when he denied his own ideas validity.

the basic reason we dont know what works at the higher level, is that you have free market capitalists battling command economy communists, and so the choice is between the hard truth and the sweet lie.

what has happened here is the collision of two efforts by communists who call themselves democrats and who clearly state that they are opposed to the capitalist system.

the big question is why do we let people who hate the system and want it changed to a failing command economy, make policy?

its like giving out id cards to sabateurs and ignoring all their actions because they have permission.

we know so little that we dont realize that a graduated tax or a progressive tax is unconstitutional and a soviet plank that we are committed to (among many many others we are ignorant of).

we dont even realize that the argument going on is between a free market economy and a soviet style command economy.

even worse, we dont realize that one side is trying to run the beast into the ground so that i can claim that it was broken to start with. all they ask is that we let them drive without limits for a little while and they will show you how fragile it is.

huge companies would not be possible without state protection. the process of helping create these monsters is a process of centralizing and creating a command ecnomy out of a free market one. and crisis along the way is freindly to the cause as it allows one to exploit the ignorance that one si generating in the still powerful general population (but soon to be inconsequential).

in this way, you manipulate things to be centralized, then at a later date its easier and safer to nationalize them.

the classic is the oil industry.. they hobble it and keep it small. that serves to drive up prices and allow them to get a mandate to change things their way whiel promising to fix things in excahnge for the mandate. meanwhile, this hobbling has the effect of putting all the work in the hands of a few companies.

if one were to convert to a command economy, one would want to nationalize 4 companies to get the end result, not 4,000 companies (or more).

the free market is antithesis to the commnand economy and so is antithetical to this centralizing project.

if you look at democratic policies they are all related to command economy changes, and crisis used for justification (exploiting our short term views and our ignorance).

even the PC effort is there to make being stupid seem more cache than smart… that being ignorant and a luddite is better than being a geek… and so on and so forth…

meanwhile, we are operating as if there is no such thing as economic warfare… and that all conflicts against us have stopped, and so on.

well, guess what? we are being set up that we are at the mercy of the chinese now. if the oil states and the chinese states refuse to accept dollars or debt, we no longer have the manufacturing capacity to create wealth to climb out of the hole.

the economic body, when healthy can take all manner of ticks on it. in fact its the simple fact that its so robust that we thought we could get the best of both worlds… free market productivity, and command economy socialism…

but we cant… eventually the parasites make for an anemia…

we are suffering command economy anemic episodes and we cant tell that the cure they propose is another dose of desease!!!!

forcing bankers to make bad loans, while having them account that assets that cant be sold have zero value, is a recipe for a bad ending.

their actions say that they understand capitalism so well, that they can work over 40 years to put thing in place that will hurt it later on, and hide their actions in time.

Carter a decidedly very communist president… had his seed watered by Clinton, another VERY communist president, and forced to flower. while other VERY leftist groups set the book keeping change.

as long as they keep making small adjustments that take years to propigate and cause crisis they can orchestrate a failure, and the crisis necessary for forcing a command economy as a response to the crisis.

their meddling will not be seen as the reason, and so it will not be removed. what will happen is that the crisis is planting the seeds for the further erosion of the system 10 years or more from now.

we USED to be taught all this stuff… but that was when history was history not social studies… and personell offices were not changed into soviet style human resources… and so on.

the US is either going to return to the values that founded and gave it strength, or it will become a communist state…

its already a VERY communist state as we passed the 50% mark a few years ago!

when we no longer can operate, it will be time for the fire sale, and the rest of those enemies we call freinds to move in, eradicate the present residents and replace them with their own.

all because we think that more control will lead to fewer crisis than the control had already caused crisis.

they have painted exit on the entrances and have set the buiulding on fire, and we are all running deeper into our own ends delclaring that this is the way to our rescue!

“The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them. – lenin”

“The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.” – lenin

of course we dont knwo these histories so well either… so we cant even fathom that these points are coming true…

that our only method of denial was how fast they happened, not whether they are happening. as if fast rot is real and slow rot is false.

…first ascertain exactly the position of the various capitalists, then control them, influence them by restricting or enlarging, facilitating or hindering their credits, and finally they can entirely determine their fate. lenin

The surest way to destroy a nation is to debauch its currency. lenin

the communist party in the US stopped putting up candidates because they couldnt distinguish their platforms from those of the democratic party…

well, i guess that lettig communists set economic policy is working as well for america as it is working for the russisns this past 100 years…