kallend 2,184 #26 January 28, 2011 Quote Quote Quote It was not that complicated... Money was loaned to people who could not pay it back.... Pretty simple and then the snowball kept rolling.... I read that Canada did not have the same problem because they required people who were borrowing money to be able to pay it back. What an interesting concept. i have never understood that. the absolute worst part? the policy still exists. sound banking practices says "if you probably won't be able to pay back the loan, you don't get one." political practice ? "we want everyone to get a loan, so the govt will guarantee those improbable loans" the beauty of it ? turns out the govt has no money. it is all taxpayer money. when the home loan system starts collapsing, who jumps in ? the govt with more taxpayer money... so, i am paying my home loan. the home loan of a person who shouldn't have one, and the fat bonus of the banker who lent the money. anyone remember the last time ? the S&L scandal ? the practice continues. stay tuned for our next fiasco. It had to START someplace, and here is the beginning..... the rest is just the icing on the cake. They took bad loans, repackaged them and then sold the "new" money instruments as investments. A house of cards... Dropping one card is quite different from toppling a house of cards. The home loans were but one card, on which the financial industry and the get-rich-quick whiz kids on Wall Street had built the rest of the house, courtesy of people like "I AM The Deregulator" McCain (fresh from the S&L Crisis), Gramm, Rudman and Bliley.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #27 January 28, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote It was not that complicated... Money was loaned to people who could not pay it back.... Pretty simple and then the snowball kept rolling.... I read that Canada did not have the same problem because they required people who were borrowing money to be able to pay it back. What an interesting concept. i have never understood that. the absolute worst part? the policy still exists. sound banking practices says "if you probably won't be able to pay back the loan, you don't get one." political practice ? "we want everyone to get a loan, so the govt will guarantee those improbable loans" the beauty of it ? turns out the govt has no money. it is all taxpayer money. when the home loan system starts collapsing, who jumps in ? the govt with more taxpayer money... so, i am paying my home loan. the home loan of a person who shouldn't have one, and the fat bonus of the banker who lent the money. anyone remember the last time ? the S&L scandal ? the practice continues. stay tuned for our next fiasco. It had to START someplace, and here is the beginning..... the rest is just the icing on the cake. They took bad loans, repackaged them and then sold the "new" money instruments as investments. A house of cards... Dropping one card is quite different from toppling a house of cards. The home loans were but one card, on which the financial industry and the get-rich-quick whiz kids on Wall Street had built the rest of the house, courtesy of people like "I AM The Deregulator" McCain (fresh from the S&L Crisis), Gramm, Rudman and Bliley. Dont forget the Fannie and Freddie are sound crowd"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TriGirl 349 #28 January 29, 2011 Quote Quote It was not that complicated... Money was loaned to people who could not pay it back.... Pretty simple and then the snowball kept rolling.... sound banking practices says "if you probably won't be able to pay back the loan, you don't get one." political practice ? "we want everyone to get a loan, so the govt will guarantee those improbable loans" the beauty of it ? turns out the govt has no money. it is all taxpayer money. when the home loan system starts collapsing, who jumps in ? the govt with more taxpayer money... the practice continues. stay tuned for our next fiasco. Throw in the property developers who just saw more dollar signs with larger projects. The company that build my house went bankrupt, as did the parent company that took over. About 1/3 of the community stayed empty (meaning no houses built) for about 4 years. Now we have foreclosed or abandoned homes that need a little work, but people can now get a custom built home for half the price! So, even though they're building there again, my neighbors are still in a housing/financial crisis (those who need to sell) because they still won't be able to sell their houses for probably the next five years. See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus Shut Up & Jump! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
