![]() |
There's just nothing quite like capitalism
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:49:05 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:
That doesn't excuse the lenders. "There's a sucker born every minute". There's lots of blame to go around. The real lenders were the bond holders. They thought they were buying a sure thing and didn't ask too many questions. And then there were the whole army of middle men who were making money hand over fist, starting with the local mortgage brokers, all the way up to the investment banks, bond rating companies, and bond insurers. They didn't ask many questions either. |
There's just nothing quite like capitalism
|
There's just nothing quite like capitalism
|
There's just nothing quite like capitalism
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 06:27:41 -0500, HK wrote:
wrote: On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:20:56 -0500, HK wrote: Lots of those upside down loans, at least out here, were speculators. Counting on a 20% / year growth. A few out here are stuck with 5+ houses. Good. They ought to be stuck, but good. the problem is that a lot of them really don't have much money in the game and they just walked away leaving that long list of banks holding useless paper and a house they can't sell. The 60 minutes piece pointed out these loans were consolidated so many times it is hard to figure out exactly who actually does own any given house in forclosure. As I said before, big builders were getting huge blocks of money from fund operators and they lent it out through their in house mortgage company. The fund holds all the paper but the individual investors have a hard time sorting them out when the fund fails. Sure it is a problem, but the multi-house buying speculators should pay a penalty in addition losing the little bit of money they "invested" in hopes of using borrowed money to make a killing. Perhaps that penalty will merely be being forced into personal bankruptcy. Harry, should everyone *except* the homeowner who got himself into the situation pay a penalty? -- John H |
There's just nothing quite like capitalism
John wrote:
"John H." wrote in message . I *knew* it was Bush's fault! At least now someone admits the economy *was* growing. That's the first I've heard that. -- John H Yes the last 7 years have been a great economy - here are some stats to back it up: http://www.bartcop.com/bush-econ-chart.gif But Bush did help establish a "Sh'ite Democracy" in Iraq and did help put Hamas in charge of the Palestinians! |
There's just nothing quite like capitalism
|
There's just nothing quite like capitalism
|
There's just nothing quite like capitalism
"HK" wrote in message
... wrote: On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 07:44:45 -0500, HK wrote: There was a recent foreclosure court case in Ohio, I believe, that was dismissed because the bond/fund holders suing for foreclosure couldn't prove that they owned the mortgages. I read about that one, it was worth a giggle. There's little question the mortgage business needs to be regulated as it once was. I think that once that story gets around that part of the mortgage problem will self regulate. Fund investors will demand more accountability about where their money is going. Self regulation is the "Bush" approach, and either results in no regulation at all or incompetent regulation. Chinese toys, anyone? Or how about prescription drugs that are manufactured in China and sold here, without factory inspections? How about the lack of inspection of food? Self-regulation is little more than PR. And then there's stuff like this: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/us...html?th&emc=th How coal companies are regulated, ya know? It's beyond me why citizens of WV didn't tie that judge to a tree in bear country and cover him with peanut butter. |
There's just nothing quite like capitalism
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... wrote: On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 07:44:45 -0500, HK wrote: There was a recent foreclosure court case in Ohio, I believe, that was dismissed because the bond/fund holders suing for foreclosure couldn't prove that they owned the mortgages. I read about that one, it was worth a giggle. There's little question the mortgage business needs to be regulated as it once was. I think that once that story gets around that part of the mortgage problem will self regulate. Fund investors will demand more accountability about where their money is going. Self regulation is the "Bush" approach, and either results in no regulation at all or incompetent regulation. Chinese toys, anyone? Or how about prescription drugs that are manufactured in China and sold here, without factory inspections? How about the lack of inspection of food? Self-regulation is little more than PR. And then there's stuff like this: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/us...html?th&emc=th How coal companies are regulated, ya know? It's beyond me why citizens of WV didn't tie that judge to a tree in bear country and cover him with peanut butter. Hey! This is Romneyville..Foch the Workers! |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:23 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com