Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 21:09:28 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: "Bailed out" is just a phrase. Until it's given some content, one can't talk about the subject intelligently. Based on the very sketchy information I've seen so far, it looks to me like equity holders are being offered far too good a deal. Initially it looks like they come away with 20% of the equity of the reorganized enterprises if profitability is restored. Yes, the economy is in bang up shape! Vote for Palin! She'll kill a few moose. I've now seen a bit more about the proposed plan. Too little too late. And for too generous to the companies' stockholders. Anyone who has been following the story for a few years would recognize that these companies have been heading for a crackup for some time, and Congress has been turning a blind eye, blinded by lobbyists and campaign contributors. The following from one of today's news stories: "Republicans have long pushed for a structured overhaul of Fannie and Freddie. By contrast, Democrats have warned against making major changes until the companies were stabilized. The companies have traditionally had stronger backing from Democrats who ... for years have fended off calls for greater oversight.... Sen. Obama has received $105,849 from donors tied to the companies since he ran for the Senate four years ago, making him the third-largest recipient in Congress and among the top 25 listed in a recent report by the Center for Responsive Politics, which examined contributions dating to 1989. Sen. McCain has not listed in the report, and proponents of overhaul say lobbyists have tried unsuccessfully to win him over." And meanwhile you have Shumer and Frank continue to push for the companies to buy more mortgages, putting them deeper in the hole. Lobbyists apparently had no trouble winning them over. Fortunately, the plan does require both companies to stop their lobbying activities. Hate to tell you, but as a result of the take-over, both companies will be buying even more mortgages. This debacle is a direct result of the removal of regulations in the last seven years. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#2
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 07:58:38 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: Hate to tell you, but as a result of the take-over, both companies will be buying even more mortgages. This debacle is a direct result of the removal of regulations in the last seven years. Oh? Please tell me what regulations on these two companies have been removed in the last seven years to contribute to this result. Oh, and while you're at it, tell me about what regulations governing banks' mortgages have been removed leading to this result. Inquiring minds want to know. You're a good researcher. I'm sure you can do your own investigation of the facts if you're so inclined, which I doubt. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#3
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 08:44:46 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: Oh? Please tell me what regulations on these two companies have been removed in the last seven years to contribute to this result. Oh, and while you're at it, tell me about what regulations governing banks' mortgages have been removed leading to this result. Inquiring minds want to know. You're a good researcher. I'm sure you can do your own investigation of the facts if you're so inclined, which I doubt. That's one I don't have to research, Jon. A big part of my practice over the last several years has been dealing with the OCC, OTS, FRB FDIC and State banking regulators. I published a 50 page article in the field last year. So I know you're full of **** on this one without having to touch the books. Now perhaps you can tell me what changes in the regulations your "investigation of the facts" has revealed to you? I'm glad you think I'm "full of ****." There's been little oversight in the banking/mortgage industry, and the Bush admin. is at fault. Why don't you tell us again how great the economy is doing. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#4
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 09:35:34 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: That's one I don't have to research, Jon. A big part of my practice over the last several years has been dealing with the OCC, OTS, FRB FDIC and State banking regulators. I published a 50 page article in the field last year. So I know you're full of **** on this one without having to touch the books. Now perhaps you can tell me what changes in the regulations your "investigation of the facts" has revealed to you? I'm glad you think I'm "full of ****." There's been little oversight in the banking/mortgage industry, and the Bush admin. is at fault. The current problems with Fan and Fred long antedate the current administration, and can be traced in substantial part to the fact the legislators, and particular Dem legislators, have been in Fan and Fred's pocket for years. As I said before, follow the money--not your left wing nut blogs. So, you think things have gotten better or worse in the last 7 years? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#5
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:27:41 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: The current problems with Fan and Fred long antedate the current administration, and can be traced in substantial part to the fact the legislators, and particular Dem legislators, have been in Fan and Fred's pocket for years. As I said before, follow the money--not your left wing nut blogs. So, you think things have gotten better or worse in the last 7 years? In this area, what we've seen over the last 7 years is a continuation of trends long in the offing. When it comes to assessing blame, we have a huge cast of characters, beginning with individuals who thought real estate purchases involved all reward and no risk. The cast includes: Home buyers who believed it was ok to lie about their ability to pay mortgages because their homes could only keep going up. Real estate brokers who persuaded them of the above. Appraisers whose income depended on referrals from brokers, and were willing to do whatever it took to come in with appraisals that would yield a commission to the referring broker. (I was looking at one of those deals just last week.) Mortgage brokers who made enormous amounts but were paid only when mortgages were closed, and were more than happy to encourage the borrowers to lie, telling the customer that "everybody does it.". Banks willing to buy the mortgages without looking too closely at the documentation because they could resell them immediately to a greater fool. Mortgage buyers who bought from the banks without looking very closely because they could sell the mortgages in a securitized bundle. Investment bankers who deluded themselves and investors into thinking that financial engineering could remove the risk of defaults. Rating agencies who got paid to give ratings after telling the investment bankers what to put into the package. "Structured finance" lawyers who should have known better, but didn't ask the right questions. Auditors who never bothered to check transaction documents in auditing financial statements (a few months ago I got a relatively prominent auditing firm fired by a client for that very reason). Regulators who hadn't a clue about accounting issues. One thing that might help the situation is a few very prominent prosecutions for mortgage fraud by home buyers. But I don't see that happening. The underlying problem is the same as the one that caused the pension problems of the 70s, the S&L crisis of the early 90s, the dot com bubble of 2000, current issues with skyrocketing medical costs, and the social security problem--a misalignment of risks and incentives: the belief that you can get something for nothing and somebody else is gonna pay for it. And that has been the Dem mantra since forever. All very interesting, but you didn't answer my question: "So, you think things have gotten better or worse in the last 7 years?" If you think things have gotten better, then Bush and the Republican Congress can take the credit. If things have gotten worse, then you can blame the Democrats. Seems fair to me. LOL -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#6
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:31:12 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: All very interesting, but you didn't answer my question: That's because I didn't want to let you play your little game of trying to change the subject as soon as it's shown you know nothing about the subject under discussion. Dave, that was the original question. I asked you if the economy was better or worse. You haven't answer to date. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#7
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 14:14:21 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: Dave, that was the original question. Perhaps you wish it were so. You've been wandering all over the place. When I pointed out that you've been claiming the economy has been continuously in the crapper for the last 8 years, you tried to drag in the seizure of Fan and Fred. Since I know at least a bit about mortgages and banking I picked up on that nonsense. I take it that kitchen is a bit too warm for you. Actually, you started saying it: Not entering. Remember, Ganz is the one who's been claiming the economy has been constantly in the crapper for the last 8 years. I responded as follows: Yeah, the job numbers and inflation index that just came out prove me wrong! LOL Worst employment numbers in five years. Inflation on the rise. The mortgage crisis getting worse, with no end in sight. Drill, drill, drill... that'll fix it. So, I ask again.... is the economy better or worse? This is not a difficult question. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#8
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 8 Sep 2008 14:48:02 -0500, Dave wrote:
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:27:41 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: The current problems with Fan and Fred long antedate the current administration, and can be traced in substantial part to the fact the legislators, and particular Dem legislators, have been in Fan and Fred's pocket for years. As I said before, follow the money--not your left wing nut blogs. So, you think things have gotten better or worse in the last 7 years? In this area, what we've seen over the last 7 years is a continuation of trends long in the offing. When it comes to assessing blame, we have a huge cast of characters, beginning with individuals who thought real estate purchases involved all reward and no risk. The cast includes: Very good job of listing the entire chain of shame. Home buyers who believed it was ok to lie about their ability to pay mortgages because their homes could only keep going up. Two subdivisions here. Those who were buying homes to live in that they could not afford with trick mortgages and no down payments. Strongly encouraged by liberal politicians. No skin in the game. Those who were simply speculating, in many cases signing pre-construction deals with neither the means nor the desire to close the deal, simply intending to resell before they had any skin in the game. Real estate brokers who persuaded them of the above. Appraisers whose income depended on referrals from brokers, and were willing to do whatever it took to come in with appraisals that would yield a commission to the referring broker. (I was looking at one of those deals just last week.) Mortgage brokers who made enormous amounts but were paid only when mortgages were closed, and were more than happy to encourage the borrowers to lie, telling the customer that "everybody does it.". Once again, no skin in the game. Banks willing to buy the mortgages without looking too closely at the documentation because they could resell them immediately to a greater fool. Hey, no skin in the game. Mortgage buyers who bought from the banks without looking very closely because they could sell the mortgages in a securitized bundle. No skin in the game. Investment bankers who deluded themselves and investors into thinking that financial engineering could remove the risk of defaults. Rating agencies who got paid to give ratings after telling the investment bankers what to put into the package. "Structured finance" lawyers who should have known better, but didn't ask the right questions. Auditors who never bothered to check transaction documents in auditing financial statements (a few months ago I got a relatively prominent auditing firm fired by a client for that very reason). Regulators who hadn't a clue about accounting issues. One thing that might help the situation is a few very prominent prosecutions for mortgage fraud by home buyers. But I don't see that happening. The underlying problem is the same as the one that caused the pension problems of the 70s, the S&L crisis of the early 90s, the dot com bubble of 2000, current issues with skyrocketing medical costs, and the social security problem--a misalignment of risks and incentives: the belief that you can get something for nothing and somebody else is gonna pay for it. And that has been the Dem mantra since forever. No skin in the game. |
#9
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Frank Boettcher" wrote in message
... On 8 Sep 2008 14:48:02 -0500, Dave wrote: On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:27:41 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: The current problems with Fan and Fred long antedate the current administration, and can be traced in substantial part to the fact the legislators, and particular Dem legislators, have been in Fan and Fred's pocket for years. As I said before, follow the money--not your left wing nut blogs. So, you think things have gotten better or worse in the last 7 years? In this area, what we've seen over the last 7 years is a continuation of trends long in the offing. When it comes to assessing blame, we have a huge cast of characters, beginning with individuals who thought real estate purchases involved all reward and no risk. The cast includes: Very good job of listing the entire chain of shame. Home buyers who believed it was ok to lie about their ability to pay mortgages because their homes could only keep going up. Two subdivisions here. Those who were buying homes to live in that they could not afford with trick mortgages and no down payments. Strongly encouraged by liberal politicians. No skin in the game. Those who were simply speculating, in many cases signing pre-construction deals with neither the means nor the desire to close the deal, simply intending to resell before they had any skin in the game. Real estate brokers who persuaded them of the above. Appraisers whose income depended on referrals from brokers, and were willing to do whatever it took to come in with appraisals that would yield a commission to the referring broker. (I was looking at one of those deals just last week.) Mortgage brokers who made enormous amounts but were paid only when mortgages were closed, and were more than happy to encourage the borrowers to lie, telling the customer that "everybody does it.". Once again, no skin in the game. Banks willing to buy the mortgages without looking too closely at the documentation because they could resell them immediately to a greater fool. Hey, no skin in the game. Mortgage buyers who bought from the banks without looking very closely because they could sell the mortgages in a securitized bundle. No skin in the game. Investment bankers who deluded themselves and investors into thinking that financial engineering could remove the risk of defaults. Rating agencies who got paid to give ratings after telling the investment bankers what to put into the package. "Structured finance" lawyers who should have known better, but didn't ask the right questions. Auditors who never bothered to check transaction documents in auditing financial statements (a few months ago I got a relatively prominent auditing firm fired by a client for that very reason). Regulators who hadn't a clue about accounting issues. One thing that might help the situation is a few very prominent prosecutions for mortgage fraud by home buyers. But I don't see that happening. The underlying problem is the same as the one that caused the pension problems of the 70s, the S&L crisis of the early 90s, the dot com bubble of 2000, current issues with skyrocketing medical costs, and the social security problem--a misalignment of risks and incentives: the belief that you can get something for nothing and somebody else is gonna pay for it. And that has been the Dem mantra since forever. No skin in the game. You may not have skin in the game, but millions do. Some, for sure, deserve what they get, being speculators. A huge number were bamboozled by predatory lending practices. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
#10
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Capt. JG" wrote in message ... "Frank Boettcher" wrote in message ... On 8 Sep 2008 14:48:02 -0500, Dave wrote: On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:27:41 -0700, "Capt. JG" said: The current problems with Fan and Fred long antedate the current administration, and can be traced in substantial part to the fact the legislators, and particular Dem legislators, have been in Fan and Fred's pocket for years. As I said before, follow the money--not your left wing nut blogs. So, you think things have gotten better or worse in the last 7 years? In this area, what we've seen over the last 7 years is a continuation of trends long in the offing. When it comes to assessing blame, we have a huge cast of characters, beginning with individuals who thought real estate purchases involved all reward and no risk. The cast includes: Very good job of listing the entire chain of shame. Home buyers who believed it was ok to lie about their ability to pay mortgages because their homes could only keep going up. Two subdivisions here. Those who were buying homes to live in that they could not afford with trick mortgages and no down payments. Strongly encouraged by liberal politicians. No skin in the game. Those who were simply speculating, in many cases signing pre-construction deals with neither the means nor the desire to close the deal, simply intending to resell before they had any skin in the game. Real estate brokers who persuaded them of the above. Appraisers whose income depended on referrals from brokers, and were willing to do whatever it took to come in with appraisals that would yield a commission to the referring broker. (I was looking at one of those deals just last week.) Mortgage brokers who made enormous amounts but were paid only when mortgages were closed, and were more than happy to encourage the borrowers to lie, telling the customer that "everybody does it.". Once again, no skin in the game. Banks willing to buy the mortgages without looking too closely at the documentation because they could resell them immediately to a greater fool. Hey, no skin in the game. Mortgage buyers who bought from the banks without looking very closely because they could sell the mortgages in a securitized bundle. No skin in the game. Investment bankers who deluded themselves and investors into thinking that financial engineering could remove the risk of defaults. Rating agencies who got paid to give ratings after telling the investment bankers what to put into the package. "Structured finance" lawyers who should have known better, but didn't ask the right questions. Auditors who never bothered to check transaction documents in auditing financial statements (a few months ago I got a relatively prominent auditing firm fired by a client for that very reason). Regulators who hadn't a clue about accounting issues. One thing that might help the situation is a few very prominent prosecutions for mortgage fraud by home buyers. But I don't see that happening. The underlying problem is the same as the one that caused the pension problems of the 70s, the S&L crisis of the early 90s, the dot com bubble of 2000, current issues with skyrocketing medical costs, and the social security problem--a misalignment of risks and incentives: the belief that you can get something for nothing and somebody else is gonna pay for it. And that has been the Dem mantra since forever. No skin in the game. You may not have skin in the game, but millions do. Some, for sure, deserve what they get, being speculators. A huge number were bamboozled by predatory lending practices. OH PLEASE! Spare us the liberal victim mentality all the time, why don't you! Wilbur Hubbard |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Obama admits poor judgement over his kids | ASA | |||
Successful shakedown | General | |||
anyone successful using [3/8"] G40 instead of BBB chain ? | Cruising | |||
The Successful LLC | Power Boat Racing | |||
The Successful LLC | Power Boat Racing |