Obama Boosts CRA Authority To Force Banks To Make Low-Income Loans

Quote from Radeck : Really? last time i checked the unemployment rate (doctored as it is by the Obama hacks in government) is actually the same or even slightly worse today than when Obama took office. Please let us know what these "vast improvements" are

Probably 100 times the number of jobs being advertised now vs. Jan, 2009.

Jobs are being added regularly (over 4M) rather than 750K jobs lost in Dec 2008.

You're welcome.

Quote from 124nic8 : Probably 100 times the number of jobs being advertised now vs. Jan, 2009. Jobs are being added regularly (over 4M) rather than 750K jobs lost in Dec 2008. You're welcome.

12M are without work (an underestimated number), and adding 4M after losing millions more than that is hardly a "vast" improvement. The economy isn't even creating enough jobs to keep up with population growth....but that's ok...i wasn't expecting a real answer anyway.

Quote from Radeck : 12M are without work (an underestimated number), and adding 4M after losing millions more than that is hardly a "vast" improvement. The economy isn't even creating enough jobs to keep up with population growth....but that's ok...i wasn't expecting a real answer anyway.

We are gaining jobs, not bleeding at a huge rate as in Dec 2008.

That is a vast improvement whether you recognize it or not.

but that's ok...i wasn't expecting you to acknowlege reality.

Quote from OhNoItsDEVO : If the info I presented in the OP is wrong, I apologize. The thread should be closed.

Huge respect.

There hasn't been a single person who could answer these questions.


1. What was the total balance of securitized CRA mortgages.

2. What was the total balance of securitized CRA mortgages that were eventually put into CDOs.

3. What was the total balance of securitized CRA mortgages that were put into CDOs which had CDS issued against them.

4. What was the static pool losses on securitized CRA mortgages.

5. What was the total balance of securitized CRA mortgages that were either first-issue RMBS, CDOs or Synthetic CDOs that were sold into SIVs, SecArb, or multi-seller conduit securitizations.

5. What was the overall terms of securitized CRA mortgages, for example, were they No/Low doc? IO? Option-Arm? Teaser rate?


Until those can be answered, which I have never seen them answered, then the correlation between CRA and the mortgage crisis is dubious at best. The overall volume of CRA mortgages to the entire universe of subprime mortgages during the bubble years was minuscule. Further, I don't think CRA mortgages, for the most part, were sold into securitizations, which was the primary vehicle for leveraging the mortgages and ultimately drove borrowing costs, underwriting/rating fees and CDS ridiculousness.

Quote from 124nic8 : Do you think racism is the exclusive province of actions which are mitigation for past racism?

Mitigation of racism? Wouldn't that be the same thing as delayed racism with a new target?

Racism is showing favor or disfavor for one or more races in any action. You can not combine one pro white racist action with one pro black racist action and expect resolution. Two wrongs still do not make a right.

Quote from jplayland : Mitigation of racism? Wouldn't that be the same thing as delayed racism with a new target?

Yes, but it is not racist oppression of a minority.

Note, that the bad part is oppression.

Quote : Racism is showing favor or disfavor for one or more races in any action. You can not combine one pro white racist action with one pro black racist action and expect resolution. Two wrongs still do not make a right.

Except that reparation is not a wrong, it is a justified penalty for a wrong.

Quote from jplayland : Mitigation of racism? Wouldn't that be the same thing as delayed racism with a new target? Racism is showing favor or disfavor for one or more races in any action. You can not combine one pro white racist action with one pro black racist action and expect resolution. Two wrongs still do not make a right.

Quote from 124nic8 : Yes, but it is not racist oppression of a minority. Note, that the bad part is oppression. Except that reparation is not a wrong, it is a justified penalty for a wrong.

You seem to have fogotten you are dealing with a poster that has consistently been for inter-generational justice as defined by shared skin color and not by whether or not the person alive today is even related to those affected by the policies of yesteryear.

Quote from 124nic8 : Yes, but it is not racist oppression of a minority. Note, that the bad part is oppression. Except that reparation is not a wrong, it is a justified penalty for a wrong.

Oppression is bad.

So is enforcing penalties on someone who did not commit a wrong action and who only possibly benefited from that wrong action.

Quote from Xygonn : You seem to have fogotten you are dealing with a poster that has consistently been for inter-generational justice as defined by shared skin color and not by whether or not the person alive today is even related to those affected by the policies of yesteryear.

No, it is entirely clear that minorities whom are alive today, WERE/ARE affected by the official policies of years past.

And are still affected by unofficial policies of today in some parts of the country.

And I'll thank you to refrain from your erroneous characterizations of my views.

Quote from yourlefthand : Oppression is bad. So is enforcing penalties on someone who did not commit a wrong action and who only possibly benefited from that wrong action.

There is no doubt that the white majority benefitted from centuries of free labor of blacks.

Quote from 124nic8 : No, it is entirely clear that minorities whom are alive today, WERE affected by the official policies of years past. And are still affected by unofficial policies of today in some parts of the country. And I'll thank you to refrain from your erroneous characterizations of my views.

It's not erroneous. You said you are OK with Affirmative Action (AKA) preferential treatment based on race because of the decades of slavery and discrimination they were subjected to. Why backpedal now?

Quote from 124nic8 : There is no doubt that the white majority benefitted from centuries of free labor of blacks.

So it's OK to give blacks preferential treatment? How can you say that and then accuse Xygonn of erroneously characterizing your views?

Quote from andyfico : It's not erroneous. You said you are OK with Affirmative Action (AKA) preferential treatment based on race because of the decades of slavery and discrimination they were subjected to. Why backpedal now?

It is erroneous:

Quote : not by whether or not the person alive today is even related to those affected by the policies of yesteryear.

If persons alive today are not affected, then reparations are not justified.

But it is clear they ARE affected.

Just cause you don't understand, does not mean my statement is wrong.

Quote from andyfico : So it's OK to give blacks preferential treatment? How can you say that and then accuse Xygonn of erroneously characterizing your views?

Clearly you don't understand, so I'll thank you for staying out of my discussion with Xygonn.