bobbo says:

Facing crap overload. Must take enema or die from dittohead nausea syndrome. No medicine at hand. What to do???

Extreme Pain. World browning out.

Whew. Thanks Alfie, your posts on this thread cleaned out my colon.

Your word for the day is – – “Inference.” Try to learn a new word each day. Then use it in a sentence.

George says:

I think it’s not a coincidence that the stock market fell during a long harsh winter.

My guess is that things will get much better when it gets warmer. Things will be all right late spring, when the sunshine and the warmth of the sun bring people closer.

The closer you are, the more confident you get. Markets = Confidence.

bobbo says:

#86–zero==”Said? It is ACTIONS that speak, not words. ROFL” /// Thats rich on so many levels. Doesn’t matter what anyone says or doesn’t say, its how BigFatIdiot characterizes actions by HIS words.

And of course, that little disconnect is the key to a dittohead.

Take the aluminum hat off your head, turn off the radio. You should be able to decompress after you get your GED.

MikeN says:

Train from Anaheim to Las Vegas, where is Disneyland again?

bobbo says:

#90–Alfred==”Bobbo…characterizing words gains no currency…if its an improbable analysis.” /// Exactly and that is my problem with your posts. You know what you are doing, I know what you are doing, we all know what you are doing. Course, that excludes Paddy who thinks you are right on the mark.

You simply are too transparent. I assume you can argue a conservative, fiscally responsible position. In such exposition, the words and ideas of Rush Limbaugh will not appear.

Show us you can do better. Until then, your postings are just turd paddies waiting to be disposed.

Olo Baggins of Bywater says:

Obama’s actions tanked the market…and he says he won’t respond to its decline…that likely means he wants it to tank.

Alfred…You’re making my point. Read what you just wrote and then click up to post #67.

Mr. Fusion says:

#92, Lyin’ Mike,

Train from Anaheim to Las Vegas, where is Disneyland again?

I don’t believe there is a direct train from Anaheim to Las Vegas. I know there isn’t one mentioned in the Stimulus Bill. Boss Limpdick thinks there is and told everyone there is. But there isn’t.

#93, Lyin’ Mike,

Regarding CRA, this was strengthened under Clinton, and even Fusion’s description reveals the problem – Banks being pressured to lend to poor people.

The banks were NOT pressured to lend to anyone they would not have lent to otherwise. They were forced to lend to minorities with the same situations as non-minorities in other parts of a city.

If the bank was not prepared to lend to someone in those circumstances, then they didn’t have to make the loan at all. If they would make a similar loan though, to a white person, they then had to extend the same practice to the minority,

I read a report that claimed CRA loans were a safer investment than similar loans to non-minorities that the banks preferred to make. But I bet Boss Limpdick tells you something different. And I bet Boss Limpdick is lying again too.

LibertyLover says:

#102,

The banks were NOT pressured to lend to anyone they would not have lent to otherwise. They were forced to lend to minorities with the same situations as non-minorities in other parts of a city.

And THAT is the crux of the problem. Every loan rejection was a potential lawsuit against the bank from either the applicant or the federal government, whether the rejection was legit or not.

Was it cheaper to give the loan and pass it up to the FMs or fight it in court?

Subprime lending started off as a good idea – helping Americans buy homes who couldn’t previously afford to.
[…]
But as certain lenders and brokers began to see how much money could be made, they began to lower their standards. Some appraisers began inflating their estimates to get the deals done. Some borrowers started claiming income they didn’t have just to qualify for the loans, and some were engaging in irresponsible speculation

BHO, 2007

Under the Clinton administration, federal regulators began using the act to combat red-lining, a practice by which banks loaned money to some communities but not to others, based on economic status. No loan is exempt, no bank is immune, warned then-Attorney General Janet Reno. For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement.

This threat combined with the government backing of Fannie and Freddie set the stage for the current uncertainty, because the banks could just sell the loans off to Fannie or Freddie, who could buy them with little regard for negative financial outcomes, Richman said.

Media Circus, 03 October 2008

Anybody who doesn’t see a connection between the CRA and the current drop is blind. Is it the only cause? Of course, not. However, you can’t ignore its impetus in creating the housing bubble.

I predicted last year the stock market would drop to pre-Clinton CRA levels (the start of the housing bubble). About 500 more points and I’ll be correct. I am beginning to think it may go further than that due to all the spending the government is about to engage in.

LibertyLover says:

#107,

So all these failed mortgages are dumb poor people who jumped onto the Democrat-created housing bubble? Then why are so many white-collar middle-class people losing their houses?

Nope. As I said, “Is it the only cause? Of course, not. However, you can’t ignore its impetus in creating the housing bubble.”

Combine that with the jobs going overseas and the Fed keeping interest rates artificially low, you have a toxic stew of loans that didn’t have anything to back them up.

You can’t create money just because you want it. You have to have something backing it up or your money is worth less than the paper its printed on. (which is interesting in and of itself — a dollar bill costs 6c to make. The dollar has lost 95% of its buying power since the Fed was incorporated.)

Common_Sense says:

Here’s a tip on getting insight from Cramer.

1 – Read his book.
2 – Never watch his TV show.

Seriously. He’s a smart guy, and understands a lot. But the purpose of his show is just like Rush Limbaugh or Rachel Maddow — designed to attract viewers. In Rush’s case, it’s to be incendiary (though not to the Coulter extreme) and appeal to people who want to feel righteous. In Maddow’s, it’s to be snide to appeal to people who want to feel intellectually superior. For Cramer, this is by being hard-charging opinionated about anything and everything to appeal to people who want to take shortcuts. In all cases, the entertainment factor is what keeps people coming back. All three of them have dropped the ball at providing truly balanced, insightful coverage of news or analysis.

In each case, the effort it takes to separate the signal from the noise isn’t worth it, if the purpose is to gain insight. (Though, personally, I watch/listen to all three of them for the sheer entertainment of it, so they’re clearly good at what they do!)