"Charles Momsen" wrote in message
...
During the Depression (the one started in 1929) my grandfather went down
to the bank and bought the mortgage on his farm for about 7 cents on the
dollar.

So why 700 Billion $ and all these laws?

Wouldn't it be better (and simpler) to give people with mortgages the
opportunity to buy their mortgage for pennies on the dollar?

It may not fix every problem, but it would certainly be of great benefit
and reduce the cost of housing.

An over simplification:
First of all, the world plus dog needs to understand that the word "banks"
is being used incorrectly. If the institution originating the loan(s)
does/did not have the word "bank" in their name, they are/were not a bank.
One example, Countrywide, the biggest mortgage originator which has gone
broke, was not a bank. Another example, Washington Mutual, is not a bank.
The former was a mortgage company and representative of those firms most
responsible for originating subprime loans (known among bankers as "liar
loans"). The latter was a savings and loan association, representative of
another non-bank group who made substantial subprime loans.

Regulations and capital requirements kept most national and state chartered
banks out of the subprime business, though politicians and the FED
encouraged all financial institutions to make loans to LOW INCOME people.
And some banks did make subprime loans, but immediately sold them in the
secondary market to investors like FreddieMac, FannieMae, hedge funds, and
private investors. These secondary firms sliced and diced and packaged the
loans and used them as collateral to issue MBO's (i.e., mortgage backed
securities). They then used the cash to buy even more mortgages, and
repeated the cycle, and all the participants were getting rich. (Towards
the end, the MBO's were so hashed up, that no one can figure out what they
are worth, if anything. Thus the MBO's became unmarketable. Since they
became ill-liquid (couldn't be readily sold), the house of cards came
tumbling down. I.e., a liquidity crisis.

Honest originators made the loans based on criteria set by the purchasers.
I.E., "formula" loans. They counseled customers to avoid adjustable rates
("gambler" loans). There were thousands of dishonest brokers who encouraged
borrowers to roll the dice, and there were millions of dishonest borrowers
who lied on their applications (you know who you are). But, the more
serious problem were honest, but perhaps greedy, people who bought more
house than they could afford by taking out low rate, adjustable loans. When
their rate went up, they could no longer make the payments.

They defaulted and now we have a world wide problem.

Those to blame:
borrowers
brokers
lenders
investors
regulators
politicians

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:37:32 -0600, "Charles Momsen"
said:

Contesting a Foreclosure Lawsuit -- Who Owns the Mortgage?
April 22, 2008, 10:41 am
Posted by Admin in Legal Information

I had seen the substance of that article a few weeks ago. At least he got
one or two things right amid his collection of misinformation.

About 6-9 months ago there was an article in the WSJ about some guy in
Indiana using the same ploy. Apparently he had stayed in his foreclosed home
for quite a while, years if I remember correctly. Do you remember the story?

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 11:43:10 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:


By his own admission. He advises bank regulators!

I suppose you could say that. In the same sense that defense counsel
advises
the prosecution.


You didn't say this? I thought you did.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:12:03 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

a modification. That's in part why the Dems want a judge to decide how
much
to steal from those pension funds, (and ultimately their pensioners)
etc.
when there's a bankruptcy.


I guess it isn't true then that banks made iffy loans to people who
couldn't
really afford them.

I'm sure you must have witnessed how the banks put guns to peoples' heads
to
force them take the money, and to lie on their applications.

Of course I exaggerate a bit. It was the mortgage brokers who were putting
those guns to peoples' heads.

Since the regs were pretty much dropped, I guess you
can't blame them for being greedy!

Which regulations are you referring to, Jon? Inquiring minds want to know.


Well, some probably came pretty close to doing that... people about to lose
their homes, people who needed to refi so they can stay in the house...

We've already gone through which regs.... suggest you do a google search!


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:34:29 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

By his own admission. He advises bank regulators!

I suppose you could say that. In the same sense that defense counsel
advises
the prosecution.


You didn't say this? I thought you did.

I think you'll find I said in substance that I often have to persuade them
of the error of their ways.


So, what you're saying is that you didn't advise them when you were
persuading them! I got it. LOL

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:34:29 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

By his own admission. He advises bank regulators!

I suppose you could say that. In the same sense that defense counsel
advises
the prosecution.


You didn't say this? I thought you did.

I think you'll find I said in substance that I often have to persuade them
of the error of their ways.


Does that also mean you think the fundamentals of the economy are sound? I
hope so!

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:37:43 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

We've already gone through which regs.... suggest you do a google search!

I recall someone's trying and failing miserably to make the argument
you're
seeking to make.


Me too! You!! LOL

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:37:43 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

Well, some probably came pretty close to doing that... people about to
lose
their homes, people who needed to refi so they can stay in the house...

Why were they about to lose their homes? Why did they need to refinance?
Ah,
of course...somebody held a gun to their heads when they financed the
first
time, or when they decided to pull the equity out.


Just like the bumper sticker I saw a few days ago:

NRA - If you absolutely, positively must kill it by morning....

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On 24 Sep, 20:31, "Charles Momsen" wrote:


Dave, when the government does it, it's not stealing. It's for the common
good.

What rubbish!

The Government doesn't act for the "common good". Each member
acts in a way that he thinks will get him/her re-elected.

Unfortunately, idiots like you, will vote for the party that
makes you *think* that you are better off. If credit is easy,
you will borrow money to buy things that you cannot really
afford. It isn't just homes that is causing the current problems,
it is autos, fridges, furniture, Evos and anything else that you are
buying on a credit card.

If you are stupid enough to think that they have your interests
at heart, then you deserve what you get.


Regards


Donal
--

Capt. JG wrote:

I'm not at all sure that bankruptcy was what the OP had in mind.
Your interpretation is extremely twisted and dishonest. You sound like
someone connected with banks.



By his own admission. He advises bank regulators!




I might have missed something, but I don't think that's what Dave said,
he did say something more like he deals with them, whether pro or con
was not mentioned.

Cheers
Marty