Scam???? I(using it as a metaphor), did not make Mr. Lunchbucket come to me trying to buy a house bigger than his salary. He come to do that. I did my job. So, now you are telling me that because I was good at my job, that I should not get paid??? YOU came to ME for a loan. I made the sale, and now that thing have gone badly for YOU, you want ME to live like YOU. BS.
I think your statement is right on target for most people - - they recognize that they may have taken personal financial actions in the past that weren't too smart in retrospect - - but don't like the idea that it seems that others are playing by different rules now. How about Joe&Jane Lunchbucket who pays their bills but are struggling - - - while at the same time fat cats are getting bailouts and bonuses, and those who shouldn't have been approved for a loan in the first place may get 'government relief' that Joe&Jane will end up paying for ? - - - "Personal responsibility" should apply to everyone equally. As a nation we went on a cheap money Fed induced and China financed spending/gambling spree and now we all have to pay for that.
Oh, I see. A dumazz comes to me to get a loan. I give him paperwork to sign. He signs it. But, because he doesn't know what he signed I should feel bad about that. We Must Protect the Stupid. Is that what you are saying? If you are, then why in the world do you trade?
Com'on man, get a wee bit of intellectual honesty. Everybody just came to you, unsolicited? Bull fucking shit. The scammers were relentless with direct mail, telemarketing, and other forms of advertising to solicit business. Then they knowingly hustled the ignorant in to what they knew was a bad deal in the long run. Listen, I'm not saying that those that took the loans have no responsibility, they do. The ones that promoted the bad deals also have some responsibility for running the hustle. Instead it's just on to the next scam, and to add insult to injury, they want a government loan to ramp it all up again.
I agree. Succinctly stated. Both parties were equally at fault, but only one side had/has to suffer for this mess. Funny you mention that. I got a letter yesterday in the mail that implied it was from the VA...plain white envelope with the perforated tamper proof seal, etc...even had the disclaimer of something like $500,000 penalty and/or 5 years imprisonment for misuse, etc. I was sitting here like "fuck I am about to get recalled or some shit" and open it up...it's a fucking VA refi offer. The entire letter was set up to look like official VA correspondence. Only in extremely tiny print did it say they were a Federal Savings Bank, but even at that point, they worded it so it sounded as if they were the bank for the VA or something. Definitely the best attempt at a scam loan advertisement I've seen thus far. Most just try to get you hyped up for a refi...this made it sound official, etc. I only read it in the first place to make sure I wasn't getting recalled or hadn't been identified as someone who got a bad Anthrax vaccination strain or something lol, but many people are out there and could be taken advantage of by this shit. Bank make shit tons of profit on discount points, etc on these VA loans and they are way less risky because they are backed by the gummint. They LOVE to make VA loans. I just thought it was a good example of the kind of thing you were pointing out in your post. Not everyone got into trouble for their greed, lots of people got ripped off by lenders misrepresenting themselves. Granted, in the end, it's still the buyers responsibility to make the decision and perform due diligence...but still...that kind of scam work is a little over the top and should be punished.
I trade because I have the ability to do so on a professional basis. Lets say that I was the average Joe Schmuk futures trader. The FCM is the one who does due diligence on each prospective client to determine whether they meet the financial criteria. If Joe does not, then Joe is advised he should not trade. If they still open the account for him, they can be ultimately sued by Joe. There is a fudiciary respnsibility by the FCM to Joe whether he is approved or not. If you KNOWINGLY wrote loans to people who would have a tough time making payments based on the financials provided, then you are accountable. If your job never exposed you to their financials and you blindly wrote loans, then you should not be held accountable. Point being that there were MANY brokers who knew some people should not be getting these loans and wrote them anyway.
THE GOVERNMENT TOLD ME TO MAKE THE LOANS !!!!!! Do you seriously think that I, in my right mind would make a loan to someone with a marginal net worth?? I charge them 24% because I know that they are unlikely to complete the contract Now, the whole damn sector is in trouble. Nobody wants to be accused of racism or classism, so yeah, I sent emails, and flyers to people according to zip code. I believe in equal opportunity for everybody. So I gave them the loans. They defaulted, as my models told me they probably would. I go the government because it thier idea in the first damn place. Now, when I get the money to keep my business up, I am going to give loans to people who are truly credit worthy. But, this will likely exclude some segments of the population. Later, I will get very nasty emails about who my loans go to. Well, I ain't racist or classist, so I will lower my standards( again), to give loans. When these people default(again), are you going to blame me??
I happen to know that retail brokers do not ask for proof of income or assets to open an account. They do make you sign a waiver saying that if you are a piker, then it ain't their fault.
You'll get no argument from me that the government has had as much of a part in this as anyone. maybe more so. Yes, Barney, Dodd and their pals were pushing the lenders, and the lenders being smart people came up with creative ways to make it happen. NINJA loans come to mind. Repubs played their hand as well. Now it all blows up, as all these "smart" people knew it would. The unwashed masses get the hose and the "smart" people keep their fortunes and move on. We keep hearing about having to retain the "best and the brightest". It was the best and the brightest that came up with all the creative ways to satisfy the government, who are assumed to be the best people we the people can vote for. My question is this...at what point does integrity play a part? When does that banker stand up and say, Mr. Government, if I make loans to these people, I'll have to commit fraud to make it happen, and I'm not willing to do that. I'm smart enough to figure out a scam to make it happen, but I'm unwilling to do that. At what point does our government say, you're right Mr. Banker, that kind of business we can't do? We have to figure out another way. At what point do we as a people say, I'm unwilling to fuck my fellow man just to make a buck. As I re-read what I've just written, I'm saying to myself, now that is some really naive shit. But you know what? Until we bring some integrity back in to the mix, "smart" won't be enough to fix the problems we create for ourselves. I fear we're already there.