Hudson might be a very fine journalist, but it still doesn't say ANYTHING about Matt as a journalist... What is there NOT to convince you? As Madoff would say, facts are facts.... That is his style, Denner already explained it to you why strong language is justified...
Again, I explained it that Average Joe has the right to be stupid or not understand finance. As a result he might lose his house and go bankrupt. But! A professional financial service such as a bank or a mortgage company shouldn't be as stupid as Average Joe because they might also go bankrupt in the process if they lend money to unqualified buyers. And since we bailed banks out on a scale 10 times bigger than Average Joes, who is the stupider??? P.S.: You are STILL not dealing with the article...
What is not a fact? The guy being fired for trying to do his job at the SEC and going after insider traders? The big guys getting away with murder because of their connections? The prosecutors getting chummy with the very people who they are supposed to prosecute??? The giant conflict of interest also known as the revolting door?? Show me a factual mistake from the article! Matt can write better articles while snorting coke from a whore's ass, than you could ever understand... By the way I am reading his book, and I advise to read specially the 2nd chapter, The biggest asshole in the Universe, it is about Greenspan, obviously.
Save your energy Pekelo, Krazy Karl is a Bernanke fanboy and Goldman Sachs cheerleader. If you disagree with the Fed saved the world and Goldman is doing "God's work" thesis, then you are an ignorant, tinfoil hat wearing wingnut...according to Karl.
If you still believe in justice and nonsense concepts like supply & demand, then you should not be reading about wall street or any financial news.
What if the lenders make you sign a pile of documents where the the first couple of pages on the front are for a fixed rate loan but buried later in the pages upon pages of the loan is another document that details an adjustable rate mortgage with pre-payment penalties and a huge fee. Once you sign the document, and after you leave, the lenders just throw the top couple of pages in the trash. Oops, you have an ARM and you are screwed. Is that okay for a lender to do that? It happened. Also, forging signatures and using wite-out were staples in the lending industry.
There are certainly cases where there are deadbeats trying to get loans they shouldn't have. But many lenders used fraud and intimidation to knowingly bankrupt people.
Yes it does. If you compare and contrast the two, Matt Taibbi doesn't even come close in terms of journalistic integrity. So by just showing a real journalist and not a biased editorialist, I have shown how Taibbi is weak and ineffective. People who have to scream to get their point across are generally people not worth listening to.
If I lend a bum on the street $100.00 who I know has no income, with the agreement that he will pay me back monthly...who should I blame when he does not pay me back? you see the majority of the people on this planet will almost always take that carrot, if all they have to do is sign. Specially when it is 100% legal. Fianacially resposible people are a rare species nowadays. The lenders knew this, but since 1) it wasnt their own money and 2) they were looking at their short term commission..it wasnt really their problem.