Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Shovelbaby
2111 Followers
subatomicdoc
2537 Followers
subatomicdoc
2537 Followers
Carly Wilson
3025 Followers
Carly Wilson
3025 Followers
Cecil Helton
12887 Followers
Cecil Helton
12887 Followers
Jeremiah Laments
1491 Followers
badqatAug 15, 2010
Screw the banks. They've gotten bail out after bail out.
soc7Aug 15, 2010
I thought the Tarp to the banks was being repaid to the government (taxpayers). With AIG being the only major player that was still deep in hock.
addiktionAug 16, 2010
Well let see... the major banks, especially the central banks, are in cahoots with the government. In fact they are so tightly knit together that just about any policy pushed into place by these banks makes its way in quickly as the government relies on the fed to print capital so they don't have to increase taxes directly but rather indirectly.
So what you are really saying is screw the system because the system has been scammed since the early 1900's. Its rather sad really considering many of the founders of the US fought hard to free us from the central bank tyranny that we are experiencing now.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
It's beyond sad, it's a travesty.
Closed AccountAug 15, 2010
Don't banks benefit most in anything that has to do with money? I thought that it was understood that no matter which way money flows, it flows from one bank and into another.
soc7Aug 15, 2010
Banks hold these mortgages so I would expect them to be the financial beneficiary and the home owners would still have a place to live and ultimately own. Was that too optimistic?
eastwood24Aug 15, 2010
Banks make the bulk of there money from initial mortgage fees. Specifically, in many cases the underlying loan may be guaranteed by Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Ginnie Mae or an insurance company so when a property is lost because of foreclosure, the bank doesn’t have a vested interest in the loan because they are simply the servicing bank.
Furthermore, the costs associated with that foreclosure process is reimbursed by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae. The bank could, in fact make money when a loan goes into default that is guaranteed by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae because they may have another opportunity to provide financing for the new buyer (and again, that’s where they make money, all those fees you pay when you initially take out a mortgage) and the process begins once again.
Hope this helps clarify.
cubicledroneAug 16, 2010
Banks make their money from interest on the loan. Or, more recently, they make their money from offering 130% equity to someone with no job, income or assets (called a NINJA loan), and then sell it to an investment bank so it can be packaged into a bond, slapped with a AAA rating (equivalent to a U.S. Treasury Bond), chopped up and sold to investors.
The bank (or mortgage company) doesn't give a s**t, because once the loan is sold, they've made their money and it doesn't matter if it disappears up its own ass.
Whose fault is it? Ours. Because we call ourselves a "capitalist" country and don't teach money and finance in schools, and we never have.
charlie6969Aug 15, 2010
I read recently that the banks own over 51% of all buildings/homes, for the first time in many, many years.
I know, I know. citation needed.lol
richmomzAug 16, 2010
That figure sounds a little low - if you include every mortgaged property it's damn near 100% (because let's face it, if you're making mortgage payments on property you don't really "own" it - if you don't believe that try missing a payment and you'll find out who the real owner is).
eastwood24Aug 15, 2010
FTA: "Foreclosures were up 4 percent in July with 325,229 filings, a nearly 10 percent increase over the same month in 2009"
Multiple this amount by average household size and then if you make July the average of the year, then you get roughly 10.5 million people directly affected by foreclosures per year. Does that seem a reasonable estimate for 2010? Man I hope I'm way off.
ghostalkerAug 16, 2010
Is anyone really surprised by this?
I thought not.
matzahmanAug 16, 2010
Sometimes I wish this nation was more socialist.
curtisagAug 16, 2010
Check out Greece, I think you'd like it there.
pintomp3Aug 16, 2010
Greece represents socialism like Somalia represents the free market.
vbullingerAug 16, 2010
^^ Then stop using Somalia as an example. I'd expect you to chime in when anyone says this from now on, pintomp3.
BTW, I'm thumbing you up, as it's accurate.
linuxpersonAug 16, 2010
So wait, pintomp is admitting the Somali does not have a free market?
Stunned.
wtrwlkrAug 16, 2010
you accidentally the e
darkshroudAug 16, 2010
If you can't afford your mortgage anymore and probably couldn't to begin with turn the house over to the bank & rent.
I know people who had to do this and they were able to upgrade. You also won't be hurt further when the market continues not to recover and home values drop again.
cubicledroneAug 16, 2010
If you can't afford your mortgage anymore, you probably could to begin with back when the payment was 1/4th of what it was now because the interest rate hadn't been reset yet.
If you can't afford your mortgage anymore it's because you couldn't refinance like the loan guy said you would be able to because house prices dropped by half.
If you can't afford your mortgage anymore it's because banks and mortgage companies were giving 130% loan-to-equity funding to people who left the income box blank on their application.
Good luck turning your house over to the bank. Some insurance company in Japan probably owns the loan by now and has it filed under "American f**kups."
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jdenzerAug 16, 2010
"If you can't afford your mortgage anymore and probably couldn't to begin with"
Are you talking about people who have < 5years on their mortgage or those > 15 years? I am just trying to get a clarification to your statement. It seems that people automatically assume that those who foreclose or fall behind on there mortgage, are people who couldn't afford from the beginning.
scythefwdAug 16, 2010
If you can't afford your mortgage anymore, you probably could to begin with back when the payment was 1/4th of what it was now because the interest rate hadn't been reset yet.
A lot of the loans that fit this description were interest only. If you have to pay the interest up front and the principle after you have paid off the interest, you can't afford it. The interest rate is within 2 points of what they were at the height of the bubble (2006). If you couldn't afford any upwards adjustment in your interest rate, you couldn't afford the load. If you couldn't afford the payment when the principle is added in, you couldn't afford the load.
Basically, they could afford the payment, but they couldn't afford the load because while the interest rate hadn't been reset yet, it was going to be.
dino451Aug 16, 2010
e
goffy59Aug 16, 2010
What do you expect from the fractional reserve banking system?
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Failure. Fraud. Abuse.
akhomesteadAug 16, 2010
and wouldn't even mind fractional reserve if we didn't have a central bank that could cover them when their fractions got to low. If they went out of biz and everyone lost their money, it wouldn't take long before banks would be keeping more reserves around or people wouldn't be using them.
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
Very valid point, FRC isn't inherently going to fail if it has accountability, however when it's manipulated by central banks that can print unlimited currency at the expense of a whole nation, well. The proof is in the pudding at this point.
sangjmoonAug 16, 2010
The problem is that all the "help" congress gives just adds complexity to the whole mess opening loopholes and outright doors for abuse not only by the banks but also by borrowers. Our entire economic mess had its roots with congress making it easier for people who normally wouldn't qualify for home loans to get them. The real solution is for congress to peel back all the laws to "help" us and go to what Canada has which is very strict and allows no avenue of abuse. As a side effect, it eliminates the need for pseudo agencies like Fannie Mae. However, it requires congress to change its entitlement attitude, and that may be the greatest barrier since congress uses these favors to buy votes from the ignorant.
astrixxAug 16, 2010
The big bank shareholders of the federal reserve have hijacked the world. They want to get rid of us "useless eaters" and everything must go to them. WAKE THE f**k UP AMERICA.
stuffradioAug 16, 2010
If the US bank system were more like Canada, the Banks wouldn't have needed a bailout in the first place. There are 0 bank casualties from the Recession in Canada.
bluesmann353Aug 17, 2010
But Canada doesn't borrow foreign funds for a war machine with questionable returns.
leepiiAug 16, 2010
Recently read an article on foreclosures in Florida. The "stimulus" funds were used to hire a retired judge back so he could run a foreclosure court. He says he is doing between 50 to 100 cases a day. There are over 33,000 cases on his docket.
steelchickenAug 16, 2010
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
akhomesteadAug 16, 2010
it's because both bosses still have to answer to the same owners.
punkrockgeoffAug 16, 2010
Just another payoff to the big banks sponsored by your fellow taxpayers and most likely their children as well...
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
How's that hope and change working out for you?
Closed AccountAug 16, 2010
I'm somewhat surprised by the lack of Obama apologists on this thread. I guess even they know they can't blame Bush for this one!
eshlan2Aug 17, 2010
what a surprise, really, banks will benefit? I think the government cares more about people and this will never happen.
Every single elected official cares about his/her pocket people......don't be surprised. As they say, money talks.