Quite bluntly the leftists see curtailing govt largess as racist, kinda lets you know where their values are doesn't it?
Like these examples? Polls in 2012 A June 6 CNN/ORC International poll showed that a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage being legalized at 54%, while 42% are opposed.[10] A May 22 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed that 54% of Americans would support a law in their state making same-sex marriage legal, with 40% opposed.[11] A May 17-20 ABC News/Washington Post poll showed that 53% believe same-sex marriage should be legal, with only 39% opposed, a low-water mark for opposition in any national poll so far.[12][13] A May 10 USA Today/Gallup Poll, taken one day after Barack Obama became the first sitting President to express support for same-sex marriage,[14] showed 51% of Americans agreed with the President's endorsement.[15] A May 8 Gallup Poll showed plurality support for same-sex marriage nationwide, with 50% in favor and 48% opposed.[16] An April Pew Research Center poll showed support for same-sex marriage at 47%, while opposition fell to an all-time low of 43%.[17] A March 7-10 ABC News/Washington Post poll found 52% of adults thought it should be legal for same-sex couples to get married, while 42% disagreed and 5% were unsure.[18] A March survey by the Public Religion Research Institute found 52% of Americans supported allowing same-sex couples to marry, while 44% opposed.[19] A February 29 - March 3 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found 49% of adults supported allowing same-sex couples to marry, while 40% opposed.[20]
Believe or not, I am an "at conception" lifer. However, I still cannot bring myself to ban abortion even if I had the power to do so. That is between them and their higher power, and it would simply create an underground economy. Keep it above ground, where we can see it. Entitlement, if you are equally against farm subsidies AND welfare, then I am cool with that too. The GOP seems a bit slanted about that these days. If the GOP really want to be fiscal hawks, kill ALL entitlements. But they won't do that, will they? Worse I would bet that IF the GOP were willing to slash and burn ALL waste, ALL pork, and ALL crony capitalism, you would be amazed at how many people would sign on, I think.
Ah now AAA, that's bias showing. And frankly I am a bit surprised, being the populist that you seem to be, that you would side with the banks. Why would the banks settle if they were innocent? It can't be to get on with their lives can it?
The banks can be put under all kinds of pressure by the regulators. Also, current management can just write it off as something someone else did, take a charge and move on, versus have it go on for years, racking up millions in legal fees and maybe lose and end up with a huge judgment against them. Our legal system makes the one in pakistan look good. Tell me if you don't think the basic element in the case is absurd: that they charged minorities "too much." Even more absurd, the banks didn't originate the mortgages themselves. Independent brokers did. I agree that a lot of these brokers were dirtbags and the banks knew it and looked the other way. Any classical economist would look at this set of allegations and say all it proves is that minorities are unable or unwilling to comparison shop effectively. If broker A wants to put you in an unfavorable mortgage, wouldn't the rational thing to do be to go to broker B and see what he was offering? Why is the bank's fault if you are too dim to do that? Of course, there is another explanation, one that I suspect is closer to the truth. These mortgages were secured with fraudulent documentation. The borrowers had no bargaining power because the broker was usisng bogus numbers to get them the mortgage. The banks were at least somewhat aware of it, but didn't really care because they were securitizing the mortgages and selling them off. They'd rather pay a fine than have all this come to light.
Your assertion is reasonable, of course. But the banks still know that someone working at WalMart had no business living in Alpharetta( an affluent zip in Atl.) Hell, everyone else knew it, why didn't BAC or WFC?? Instead, they became institutional level predatory pay day loan type joints. The were, in fact gouging unqualified borrowers whom they knew were likely to default. Get extra money for as long as they could hold up, and then get the property when they inevitably defaulted. Surely you don't defend this, do you?
and freedie and/or fannie people were sleeping with barney frank. Also note the mortgage brokers typically got 1 to 2 points on a loan. with the toxic loans they got 3 to 5 points. Can you imagine... 100% loan to value on no docs. Brokers gets 5 points Wall street syndicators get there big cuts... and some buyer for a big institution comes along and buys it? (the sell side must have been bribing the buy side the way the way mozilo bribed democrats like Chris Dodd with loan discounts or worse.)
We covered this ground last year, in a different AAA fantasy thread. Fannie and Freddie do not even make the top 25 list for subprime. "Here's a fresh reminder from Forbes Magazine (of all places) as to who the real villains are in the current recession: " It is clear to anyone who has studied the financial crisis of 2008 that the private sectorâs drive for short-term profit was behind it. More than 84 percent of the sub-prime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending. These private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year. Out of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006, only one was subject to the usual mortgage laws and regulations. The nonbank underwriters made more than 12 million subprime mortgages with a value of nearly $2 trillion. The lenders who made these were exempt from federal regulations." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis "Securitization accelerated in the mid-1990s. The total amount of mortgage-backed securities issued almost tripled between 1996 and 2007, to $7.3 trillion. The securitized share of subprime mortgages (i.e., those passed to third-party investors via MBS) increased from 54% in 2001, to 75% in 2006.[85] A sample of 735 CDO deals originated between 1999 and 2007 showed that subprime and other less-than-prime mortgages represented an increasing percentage of CDO assets, rising from 5% in 2000 to 36% in 2007.[104] American homeowners, consumers, and corporations owed roughly $25 trillion during 2008. American banks retained about $8 trillion of that total directly as traditional mortgage loans. Bondholders and other traditional lenders provided another $7 trillion. The remaining $10 trillion came from the securitization markets. The securitization markets started to close down in the spring of 2007 and nearly shut-down in the fall of 2008. More than a third of the private credit markets thus became unavailable as a source of funds.[105][106] In February 2009, Ben Bernanke stated that securitization markets remained effectively shut, with the exception of conforming mortgages, which could be sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."
What the heck? You suggesting it was okay that Barney Franks lover to be the board at Freddie or Fannie That it was okay that Dodd was getting subsidized loans loans from country wide. That creeps like Barney Frank and Maxine Waters were not getting on t.v. during hearings and demanding banks kiss their asses and do stupid things? -- Fannie and Freedie were in the alt a and interest only market. They were as stupid as and corrupt as the wall street banks.