Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Occupy Wall Street      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 876
Occupy Wall StreetPage 36 of 53    (13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53)

A troll is a troll is a troll is a troll....perhaps providing some rightous proof that's been asked of you on your bullshyte margin craype would be in order at this point.


Gee pk you seem to be continually trolling this thread and avoiding/unwilling providing proof for your bullshyte margin craype...
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 877
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/28/2011 8:42:49 PM
Did any of you ever see one of those Charlie Brown TV specials? That voice you never understand?

Kinda reminds me of some posting here "wah wah wah, wah wah, wah-wah wah wah!"

Same thing, over and over and over. Irish, 3rd request? Forget it, he said that to me 3 days ago and no answers.

"I guess I have to be a bit more specific wah wah, wah-wah wah wa wah wah wa!"
 TuffGuy666
Joined: 11/22/2011
Msg: 878
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/28/2011 8:49:17 PM
Don't forget Clinton signing the Community Redevelopment Act enhancements that Carter original signed and added to the mess. And perhaps WORST of all was Clinton signing the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 which deregulated the credit default swaps (CDS), which enabled mortgage-entangled derivatives to be traded on the open market. Bad, bad, bad!

The subprime bubble was hardly a failure of the "markets." It had govt fingerprints all over it, socialists in both the Republican and Democrat parties. Clinton, Bush, Obama, all good pals with Goldman Sachs and the rest of the international banking cronies on Wall Street. On Obama's watch, the Federal Reserve has created 16 TRILLION new dollars which has gone to the major banks, with 4 TRILLION going to European banks. It doesn't matter who's president. The banksters always win.
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 879
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/28/2011 10:01:05 PM
I'm having a hard time following the reasoning here:

Clinton deregulated some financial transactions - he got government out of the market. So this means that it's the government which caused the collapse? Isn't that what some are calling for? Less government? Isn't that actually an argument for more government?
 Home_for_30
Joined: 2/6/2010
Msg: 880
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 2:19:54 AM
I hope everyone is aware the '99%' of the OWS protesters have no idea what you are talking about in this thread when it comes to all of these laws and acts. Or atleast that's my WAG (Wild A$$ Guess) from the sound bits on youtube, cnn, msnbc. notice I didn't say Fox..haha But I sure do luv their female anchors!
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 881
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 6:16:17 AM
So halftimedad, what was the purpose of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act?
 TuffGuy666
Joined: 11/22/2011
Msg: 882
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 6:54:30 AM
HalftimeDad,

I'm not anti-govt. Govt has a proper role to protect against plunder and promote the general welfare of the country. My point is that the particular set of circumstances that lead to the Perfect Storm was setup by politicians in both major parties beholden to Wall Street banksters and not the public at large.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 883
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 8:29:47 AM
Home for 30, isn't that what we said earlier? If they don't understand compound interest or how to balance a checkbook, how would they understand all this?

BUT you don't have to be smart, to know somethings wrong. If at the end of the day, what people who sold you on something complicated doesn't work at all like they said, you get it.

"luv their female anchors"

Now that's funny! But Ohhh so true! Kudlow gives me a headache with his voice and attitude. He was on extensively at noon, before CNBC revised it's schedule. I turned to Fox Business for an hour, Cheryl Casone, is hawt!

As for the government's fault, no doubt they opened the door with some of these laws. But they were not the ones making the profit, abusing the law. I'm sure they benefited from PAC money, but the big bucks went to the bankers. As I think we demonstrated, they also broke many of the laws, in making the money as well.

Now it's probably me, maybe I am confused or lost somehow. BUT when we enact a law to protect us from certain things. Why is it the day after that the fuking lawyers are looking for loopholes? That's not business, that's chicanery. I thought these blood suckers take an oath to uphold the law and defend their clients. Not aid and abet in advance by looking for ways to skirt the laws.

So in the end, we have a congress, comprised of mostly lawyers , who write the laws, so their pals(other fuking lawyers) can help break them!

Somehow, that doesn't seem quite right.

As for GLB act of 99, passed by a republican congress and signed by clinton. This was not the first assualt on Glass Steigal. Since the stock market took off under Reagan, in many years since that market rise, the banks wanted back into the securities business. The fees were huge and they were like kids at the candy store window, looking at all the goodies passing them by!

This was just the first assualt that worked and allowed them in, and had noterity.
 unYOUsual
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 884
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 9:03:24 AM

As for the government's fault, no doubt they opened the door with some of these laws. But they were not the ones making the profit, abusing the law.
What about all of the people who didn't pay their mortgages, there wouldn't have been any toxic assets if the people had paid their mortgages....so in your assessment it is wrong to take advantage of laws to make a profit but it's good to take advantage of laws to get a house you can't afford and have no intention of paying for? Show me proof of any Bankers who "Broke the Law" and didn't get into trouble with the law?
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 885
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 9:47:10 AM
"Show me proof of any bankers who "Broke the Law" and didn't get into trouble with the law?"

HUH? On the face of your question, I could just say, any that were not caught! Kinda like any crook who steals, but is never caught. But I'll play!

First off, with literally billions of transactions taking place, and a very limited staff in enforcement, it would have to stick out. Next according to how justice works in the securities industry, it has to warrant the time, to make a case, and then one that can be PROVED, just like any other court action, and merit the cost.

"What about all of the people who didn't pay their mortgages"

OK unYOU, now I know you have been following along on this thread. If someone sells you a car, and you sign a note you don't understand, and the rate resets, the payment doubles, if it imperils the rest of your life, you might give that car back!

Simple example I realize, but the underlying facts are the same. These people were NEVER going to be in a place to make that payment, once the rate reset. The problem was everyone had gotten paid already, and it wasn't their problem(or so they thought).

The RE broker got their commission, the banker or mortgage company got their fee, the investment banker who bundled it got their fee(until the last year, when sales of bundles fell off a cliff). The only one left at the party was the homeowner, who couldn't afford the payment.

Was that homeowner wrong to sign that note? Absolutely! Again if they didn't understand it, you didn't realize the risk you were taking. No, ignorance is not an excuse, but we have seen more than once over the years, where things were sold, using less than honest tactics.

Go back to the 50's, and the "tin men" those selling aluminum siding. Many ordinary homeowners were bilked out of money, by promises of we will use your house as a model for other homes and pay you a commission, which of course never happened. There are literally dozens of these scams over the last 50 years, the latest and greatest in this field was the famous house flippers(no money down, buy this house and make a 100K a year) advertised late at night on infomercials.

"so in your assessment it is wrong to take advantages of laws to make a profit"

That's NOT what I said. What I said was it is wrong, to try and avert or subvert the law, by technicalities. There are lots of laws that allow people to make money, no problem with that. When you look to bend the law to your will and advantage, it is wrong, at least to me.

"but it's good to take advantage of laws to get a house you can't afford"

No but how many believe promises and reresentations of others or in other words are sold a bill of goods and want to believe them, cause it will make their family happy. You have a junk inbox on your email, right? How many offers do you get a day for 700K checks, cash or credit cards from offshore fraudsters? You do know that a number of people get snagged by them every week? Just because you or I know if something appears to be to good to be true, it generally is, doesn't mean everyone does.

"have no intention of paying for"

I doubt many signed notes, or put down a few bucks with the idea of living there for just a little while. I'm sure most made payments until the rate reset and the payments doubled or whatever.

I wonder how many were told by RE agents, "look make the payments, in 6 or 8 months sell the house for a profit and buy something else" because housing prices were escalating at well over 10% for a few years.

You want to blame the buyer? OK, fine he was wrong. But the person who sold him the house, knew he would never be able to pay it, once the rates reset. The mortgage company or banker knew the same thing. Since they had been paid, wouldn't be there when the sh1t hit the fan, they didn't care and that was wrong as well.

Funny when you look at it. These people after foreclosure had to scramble to find a place to live, their credit was decimated, they probably will not get another chance to buy a house in their lifetime. What price has any of the others paid for writing this junk? NOT ONE went to jail.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 886
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 10:50:34 AM
Wrist slaps..and nod, nod, wink, wink.
http://www.propublica.org/article/bank-errors-continue-to-cause-wrongful-foreclosures/single
"Regulators have done little to stop the practice, and the "problem appears to be getting worse," said Kevin Stein, associate director of the nonprofit California Reinvestment Coalition [1].

Last month, the coalition surveyed 55 foreclosure-avoidance counselors throughout the state. Collectively they serve thousands of borrowers every month. Almost all of the counselors, 94 percent, reported having worked with clients who'd lost their homes while under review for a modification. About half of the counselors reported this happened "often." This year's totals, which are due to be publicly released next week, are higher than those in the group's survey last year [2].

Regulators have acknowledged the problem but have so far stopped short of solving it, say borrower advocates. More than a year ago, ProPublica reported extensively on how the banks' inadequate systems were causing wrongful foreclosures [3]. " more at link..

Military families also subject to illegal foreclosures.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/29/bank-of-america-illegal-foreclosures_n_1118471.html
"Ten lenders are reviewing close to 5,000 foreclosures of homes belonging to active-duty service members in an attempt to discover if they were carried out improperly, according to data from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, cited by the Financial Times. The OCC's report is based on projections prepared by the lenders and and their consultants. Bank of America said it is reviewing 2,400 foreclosures of homes belonging to active-duty service members and Wells Fargo said it's looking at nearly 900 cases. Citigroup is reviewing 700 foreclosures, the bank said. "
more at link.
Sometimes they are caught
http://www.nassaucountyny.gov/agencies/DA/NewsReleases/2011/031611sweetdeal.htm

http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/
 lotustemple
Joined: 10/23/2011
Msg: 887
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 12:05:24 PM
I don't get the massive scale denial. I know very little of the finance world and have never been in debt yet when i saw so many people getting loans and morgages i succumbed to public pressure and called a loan agency to check it out.

It took less than 5 minutes of not understanding any of the terminology(finance doesn't interest me much) in that phone conversation to ascertain that the interest rate could get much higher in the future which made the idea of getting a loan or morgage beyond ludicrous. Monthly payment could frikken double!!!

Do i have sympathy for the people who got the loans and lost the homes they could not afford in the first place? Unfortunately not. Do i have distain for the unethical practices of the banking industry? Sure do. But people still need to be accountable.

So if occupy wall street wants to be successful it needs to be in full integrity. A loan is a loan, pay up or stop whinning.

Wall street needs to be a two way street with everyone accountable not just corporations.
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 888
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 1:26:37 PM
Ahhhh its not that simple Lotus, what these so called protesters are upset about is the "greed" of the big banks on wall street, they are upset that these bankers are making massive profits and the little guys gets nothing, nada, zip and bupkis.

They are upset at some corporations laying off people while the CEO's are making huge bonuses, some of them are upset because they are struggling for a living and the 1% population isn't, they want more regulations , but fails to understand more regulations will accomplish nothing...... what will more regulations accomplish? except making lawyers and accountants richer because they will figure out ways around the regulations.

The banks lawyers have figured out a way around Basel II and now Basel III, they want the government to provide more regulations on top of the bull shit regulations they came up with in the first place.

They want to blame deregulation but fails to see even though it was Deregulated , the rating agencies, SEC among others were not doing their jobs as industry watch dogs and it goes on and on and on.

New regulations without Transparency isn't going to do squat, and the faster the 99% figures that out , the more pressure they can put on the policy makers.

We should be teaching our children, godchildren, grand children, the youth, teens about Wealth creation , teaching them about how the system works and some of these " young " folks can be a system of change, I have no faith in baby boomer generation for the most part, except for the entrepreneurs, the ones that believe in Capitalism and not this crap about the government / my employers should look after me , people who say " to hell with this working for someone else" Im working for my self, I want to be wealthy I want to contribute to society and profit from it, none of this working for someone who pays me what they think Im worth, therefore struggling financially in life, no financial education etc.


Mind you most of the 99% can you tell you what happen in X factor last week, or who won the Superbowl last year or who Tony Soprano Underboss is.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 889
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 2:05:19 PM
Amen to most of your post CDN!!!!!

Does anybody teach their kids "pay yourself first"? This is a simple concept, anyone even those who dislike my posts will get. When you get that first job, right from that first paycheck, put 10% in savings! Never touch it, unless of course, you suffer unspeakable illness, or some other tragedy. Put that in savings, even before you pay your bills(if your bills won't allow that, you're spending too much damn money!) And never ever touch that money, not for a new I-phone, Ipod or TV or anything frivilous, that is YOUR future, not money to buy a new car, sofa or any other sh1t!

As that nest egg grows, begin to learn how to invest it, to get a better return. NO ONE is gonna take care of you BUT YOU! No one is gonna make you money but YOU! You want better, than you better learn how to get it, and there is no easy way.

One other thing about that post:

"Mind you most of the 99% can tell you what happen in X factor last week, or who won the Superbowl last year or who Tony Soprano Underboss is."

I have often said on here(not this forum but many others) WTF is so important about voting for or watching American Idol? More people vote for american idol than the president of the united states!!!!!!!!!!

Is freakin Kim Kardashian gonna pay your rent? Is Tosh.0 gonna pay the electric?

WTFU!! No TV star or sports team or video game is gonna give a shit when your out on the street. Now most of you will dismiss thi comment as a rant, or some bogus statement, cause it does not line up with how you want to spend your time, or live your life. FINE!!! But as Billy Joel says "don't come b1tchin to me", when everything turns to garbage and you have zippity do dah!!

More OT: some of you (I will hope, and pray) should check out "the occupied amendment dot org", this strikes at part of the heart of this mess we have in this country. Read it, if you agree support it, if not, oh well.

On other news that may make some of you very happy. I have heard from some people who say there is talk about ALL the occupy movements discussing a washington march, and maybe a longer term demonstration. No I have no details, or dates or even am sure if it will or could happen.

This would be the perfect time for the leap to the next level.

Off topic: Again CDN, it's not that we want someone to make less, for their talents and give it to us.(or them, I got mine already) We want them to do their freakin jobs, enforce the laws as they were written. To put it another way, if someone was raping your sister, or you, you'd want them put away, right? Well how long will we have to endure these guys committing the same rape over and over and over, and waltzing away scott free every freakin time?
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 890
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 2:17:02 PM

some of you (I will hope, and pray) should check out "the occupied amendment dot org", this strikes at part of the heart of this mess we have in this country.

Very good. This is very similar, I think, to movetoamend dot org, which I had posted earlier in this thread.

I agree that it is at the heart of the matter. And for the anti-union folks, I believe it would limit their clout in elections as well.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 891
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 3:02:55 PM
Lots of stuff about removing 'corporate personhood'

I understand the point that because of the protections given were also extended to mean they could participate in political free speech through contributions and political advertising. It does go pretty crazy with the amount of money.

How much of those rights would you want removed that are unrelated to campaigns?

Should it be allowed that the government, state or federal, can change the charter of a company? They don't like insurance companies so they would be free to change how the insurance company operates. If they can tell insurance company then why not auto makers, then ice cream shops.

What about intellectual property? Contracts? Lawsuits?

I read this part on the website posted:
"Making clear that corporations, as well as entities formed to represent corporations — are not real, living people with rights protected by our Constitution. They are entities established under our laws and thus subject to our laws."

Well, does that mean you would create a new constitutional entity called 'a corporation'? Because there are a lot of parallels between a person and a corporation and that’s not all bad. It looks to me like the problem is with 'Mega Corporations'. I can have my own carpet cleaning corporation and I really want my freedom to run my business the way I want to run it left alone.

It all sounds good on protest signs and chants but there are consequences.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 892
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 3:08:09 PM
Here's an interview with Scott Olsen, the marine hit by a tear gas cannister in Oakland during a police riot.
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/11/28/18701164.php
Kinda painful to watch in that his speech was literally taken away after the impact and he is still recovering. Time will tell if his TBI will have long term repercussions.

The kid grew up 30 miles from the Olsens I grew up with.
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 893
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 3:23:50 PM
Aries, guess which company benefited greatly from the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act? If you said Citigroup you would be correct.

The government shouldn't be allowed to be in bed with any industry, because of these three geniuses , Gramm a Economist,( Im coughing as Im posting this), tells you something there, Leach a professor of Public and International and chaired the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services for 6 years and Bliley a life long politician( thank God for his government pension eh) these three genius was responsible for the act named after them, and the 99% protesting out there wants the government bureaucrats like the aforementioned to produce more legislation ?
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 894
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 3:26:55 PM
Only "paraded" by one poster who had it wrong. Of course that is meat enough for the predators of anything left of far right to get rabid over...

Meanwhile the velociraptor ranchers of Wall Street played real games with other peoples lives and investments and profited mightily.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-29/how-henry-paulson-gave-hedge-funds-advance-word-of-2008-fannie-mae-rescue.html

BTW...what of the over 70% of debt accrued under Republican presidents, 2/3rd of national debt ceiling rises accrued under Republican presidents with veto powers since 1960, and the 3/4 reduction in corporate taxes paid in the same period. It's like debt appears by spending alone, without any possible connection to income. Pay no attention to the wizards behind the curtain. Also watch out for the flying monkeys.
 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 895
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 3:47:43 PM
Ice, this is getting confusing. Before, you said that OWS was barking up the wrong tree and should be demonstrating in Washington instead of Wall Street. Now, you are saying that looking to Washington for policy change is futile.

Would you please clarify your advice and critique?
 Cdn_Iceman
Joined: 12/1/2010
Msg: 896
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 4:17:20 PM
No Fly, I said the protesters should be protesting Washington, because all the problems start there.... I'm not a fan of Wall street, I couldn't care less about them, yeah the financial industry makes up about 25% of S & P so I get it. Ive invested on Wall street before and I'm not sure if I'm going to do in the future, I don't know if they have to give up the Proprietary trading, more bail outs which I want to avoid any of those idiot banks run by idiot mangers that brings the value to Zeroooooo and f ucks the little guy on Main street.

If you really really and I mean really look into the financial industry , you will see they are either following the regulations or finding ways around the legislation, which Ive often said, what is the point of new legislation, especially legislation without transparency ?

I don't support any political parties, Democrats or Republicans, Tea Party or who ever, the reality is as soon as they get in bingo, they find out that is not how politics works, most politicians when they first arrive they are eager to do things and produce changes, but as soon as they sit in Congress or in the house , they find out the hard way its all a game.

Its all Bull shit as far as I'm concerned, I asked Half time dad what was the purpose of the GLB act?

All it did was to make it legal for Citicorp to merge legally with The Travellers group, which clearly violated the Bank holding act 0f 56 and parts of Glass Stegall act as well, they( Citigroup) did this one year before the act was passed, was Travellers/Citicorp ever fined,prosecuted they clearly broke the law?why were they granted a temporary waiver? well skip ahead to 2008 we all know what happened there.

Yet the 99% want to blame the ass holes on Wall Street for this? who's idea was it for the The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000? Guess who were the dominant dealers in the market? you guessed it...Banks and securities firms with commercial bank dealers holding by far the largest share thanks to the GLB act.

Even though they were deregulated they were still supervised by their federal regulators under general “safety and soundness” standards which is like having a 12 year old fat kid doing security guarding a Candy store.

I am seriously sick of Idiot and corrupt politicians, crony capitalist Wall street ass holes, Moron and weak Regulators, Rating agencies, lobbyist etc.
 CoolBreezez
Joined: 8/20/2006
Msg: 897
view profile
History
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 4:34:49 PM
Oyvay has basically hit the nail on the head.


You want to blame the buyer? OK, fine he was wrong. But the person who sold him the house, knew he would never be able to pay it, once the rates reset. The mortgage company or banker knew the same thing. Since they had been paid, wouldn't be there when the sh1t hit the fan, they didn't care and that was wrong as well.


And there's even more to the sordid game of hot potato. A least some of these guys knew they had a hunk of poop on their hands. So bundle it up in nifty and opaque investment securities (Mortgage backed securities) and get the ratings agencies to stamp them AAA security grade.

And who buys this type of investments? Why the poor unsophisticated investor, who wants security in exchange for a modest return. As well as the risk averse pension funds of same investor. After all their guaranteed by large insurers like AIG- how can they go wrong? Risk gurus saying the whole thing has practically no chance of going bad due to the fact that house prices NEVER drop! Financial innovation at its finest!

Until- well basically the moon did turn blue- and then the whole massive game unravelled. The banks who had piles of these investments and mortgages on their books got caught holding the bag. This caused them to go bankrupt over night and the whole financial system was about to go down the drain. Who was big and powerful enough to save them?

Why the government of course. So the governments of countries had to backstop these banks to the tune of TRILLIONS of dollars. In doing so, the smaller ones (Ireland, Iceland, Greece) have now themselves been placed in jeopardy. So then the bigger countries and everyone has to save them and their bonds.

So who ends up paying?Why the taxpayer of course. That's who the government really is after all. So the same poor slub who pays his taxes, thought he was investing carefully and had a nice little safe pension, sees his taxes go up, government services go down and his investments and pension go down the toilet and he may not have a job anymore. Meanwhile- the guys back on Wall Street, still get their bonuses, lay off all their employees, companies go bankrupt and nobody goes to jail for misrepresenting anything.

This is why we have OWS. The system has slowly become rigged and no justice has been served. The people in government are either at least incompetent or at worse in bed with the financiers. So basically something needs to change. OWS is fragmented and disorganized but at least its a start.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 898
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 5:10:44 PM
Oh boy...is this another hit n git post????


Yeah, the buyer was sort of wrong, the seller was sort of wrong, the broker was sort of wrong, the mortgage broker was sort of wrong, the bundler was sort of wrong, AIG was sort of wrong....................

BUT........ Had not the politicians.... (spit on the ground here, PUTUWEEE), FORCED the loans to be made, all of the above who were all sort of wrong, would never had the "opportunity" to make the series of mistakes that led to where we are now.


Are you serious? The government forced people to purchase these loans? This statement is worse than the margin post from last night…remember…and we are still waiting for you to substantiate that bullshyte claim about margins being the cause of the mortgage crisis;



PK:
You missed the point.............. Leading up to the crash, some were controlling huge positions with as little as 4% of the purchase value............ So, why not gamble? When you have more money that YOU can lose, you will be a little more circuspect in pushing the "buy" button. Maybe the answer would be have to have at least 40% of the purchase value.


irish:
It's not that I doubt the voracity of the statement...but proof please...because I've never heard that insufficient funds/margin call was an issue in any way shape or form with the current CDO mess.


 flyguy51
Joined: 8/11/2005
Msg: 899
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 5:35:07 PM

... FORCED the loans to be made...

You emphasize the word "forced" as if that is precisely the word for what happened, but I, too, would like to see substantiation for that word choice. As I understand it, banks were heavily encouraged to make shaky loans with the penalty for noncompliance being a lack of favoritism, greasy palms, and general cooperativeness from government.

Of course, the banks were only too willing to go along with this very lucrative arrangement. Had they really ALL been against it, they could have FORCED the government's hand.

Example: I remember back in the 80's when Californians actually voted in a law requiring car insurance companies to lower their premiums-- I cannot remember the specifics. The point is, none of the insurance companies liked the new law, so they all simply IGNORED it. Government then repealed the law because it had obviously failed. It let me know at a young age who really makes the rules.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 900
Occupy Wall Street
Posted: 11/29/2011 5:39:04 PM

Are you now saying that all of the margin calls were actually met? And what happened when they weren't met?


paul you threw out numbers and percentages...now prove it or shut up.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Occupy Wall Street