Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

http://tarpon.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/ ... e-lending/

I originally saw this on National Reviews website. Basically Obama is going to force the banks to lend to minorities (no whites allowed) who are low income including on welfare and food stamps and in some cases must give them $15,000 free of charge for a down payment. Not only that, but he is taking over the credit reporting agencies to force them to change the credit scores for blacks and Hispanics so that they can get loans they are not qualified for.
Obama is hell bent on destroying the country once and for all and will not stop until everyone is poor and under government control.

not only is that setting the financial system up for another disaster, that's also raccist. It's discrimatory against us non-minorities.

If true then we'll just have to start throwing the race card, and filing lawsuits, suing banks,etc: as they do.. and push it to the limits... I;ve personally had enough of the Bull$hit coming from Obama and his dog and pony show of liberal space wasters. Race card .protests, whatever it takes to shut him and them up... It's time to take this country back or be lose it forever./

I don't put a lot of stock in a blog that links to a website that collects op-ed pieces.

Now the Business Week link that was posted from the blog about Wells Fargo settling with the government over racially biased home lending is interesting. I've gone through my share of home mortgages but not being a minority I haven't had any exposure to racial bias (that I'm aware of). Of course if someone was presenting me with some crazy lending terms I'd go down the street to another lender. Quote the Business Week article:

Still, "You can't afford to count on government action to protect you during the home-buying process," said Cora Fulmore, a mortgage counselor in Winter Garden who works with many minority clients. "The number one way to do that is to become better-educated and empowered, so you won't be victimized."

Shame on the lenders. They either did or did not provide racially biased lending terms but since they're settling instead of going to court we will never know for sure. The government gets to create some terms of the settlement and the terms call for money to help those who they think were discriminated against so of course it's going to go to minorities. Some may say it's a government shakedown, but the banks don't have enough stones to go against their accuser in court.

How we go from that to this

Yes, believe it or not, the federal government is now starting another initiative to force banks to lend to low-credit-rated blacks and Hispanics — not just anybody but specifically blacks and Hispanics — and is threatening — and already imposing — huge punitive fines if they don’t. Moreover, this time they’re going even further. They’re going to take over the credit rating agencies and force them to change their standards to accommodate blacks and Hispanics so that nobody will have any idea who is a bad credit risk and who is not. In so many words, the government is about impose its will on the whole home-lending market and force another round of bad loans so that the banks are going to be looted once again so that even the federal government may not be able to bail them out this time.

is beyond me.

One day we will all be minorities in this country and all of those benefits will be ours

While the first part of the statement above is true, the second part will involve pigs being airborne.

OakRidgeStars wrote:One day we will all be minorities in this country and all of those benefits will be ours

While the first part of the statement above is true, the second part will involve pigs being airborne.

Ask the whites of South Africa how thats working out.

"Hunted for sport" is our future.

As I said, the original article was on National Review and was talked about by Rush on Friday. The blogger just copied it. It is fact and is coming.

Oh, well if Rush talked about it I'll take that to the bank!

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

marked8 wrote:http://tarpon.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/ ... e-lending/

I originally saw this on National Reviews website. Basically Obama is going to force the banks to lend to minorities (no whites allowed) who are low income including on welfare and food stamps and in some cases must give them $15,000 free of charge for a down payment. Not only that, but he is taking over the credit reporting agencies to force them to change the credit scores for blacks and Hispanics so that they can get loans they are not qualified for.
Obama is hell bent on destroying the country once and for all and will not stop until everyone is poor and under government control.

Our government is the biggest organized crime unit in the world. The whole housing collapse is a result of the government forcing the banks to lend money to people they knew would never be able to pay it back. They called this the community reinvestment act. The liberal Democraps said "its not fair that some can get loans and buy houses when others can't" so they came up with this cluster ---- to make it fair. They forced the banks to make these loans. The banks in turn bundled these loans up, back by Fannie and freddie,and sold them to investors who thought they were making a good investment. Well, we all know how that turned out. When the ---- hit the fan,it was sold to the American people that the banks were evil predatory lenders preying on these hapless minorities. They demonized the banks,demonized wall street,started the whole 1% 99% class warfare game to divide us. Unfortunately there are enough people who believe this BS. And now, as if there hasen't been enough damage done,there goping to do it again this time taking control of the credit reporting agencies and restructuring them so no one knows what credit or ability to repay these minorities have. Say a prayer that we can get these idiots out of office before its too late. With close to 5 million just in the NRA alone coupled with the membership of all the other gun groups,we ought to be able to deal quite a blow. Talk to everyone you can, tell them whats at stake here and encourage them to get out and help vote these morons out of office.

If voting could change anything it would be illegal Mr. Zerodown1.

Kreutz wrote:If voting could change anything it would be illegal Mr. Zerodown1.

Good point.

I think I'm more interested in the consequences of the coming tidal wave of municipal bankruptcies. I have no idea what those consequences might be, but I can't see scores or hundreds of cities, counties, even states going bankrupt and it not being pretty damn dire.

Kreutz wrote:If voting could change anything it would be illegal Mr. Zerodown1.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Voting Obama's @ss out of office could damn sure change one thing: It would keep him from appointing another Sotomayor or Kagan to the Court. That's all I need to know.

Hmm, I have to wonder how much of this is ultra-right-wing fear mongering. Obama "taking over" credit reporting agencies sounds like bunk to me. The government kowtows to the financial machine - hence the subprime crisis in the first place. It's far easier to issue an "executive order" that somehow bypasses Congress to grant loans to everyone and then pressure the Fed to back that direction.

The financial system did prey on those lower on the socio-economic scale. Then again, they also preyed on those in the middle/upper middle class wanting to live in homes that only the upper class could buy. A blind eye was given to it all.

Mindflayer wrote:Hmm, I have to wonder how much of this is ultra-right-wing fear mongering. Obama "taking over" credit reporting agencies sounds like bunk to me. The government kowtows to the financial machine - hence the subprime crisis in the first place. It's far easier to issue an "executive order" that somehow bypasses Congress to grant loans to everyone and then pressure the Fed to back that direction.

The financial system did prey on those lower on the socio-economic scale. Then again, they also preyed on those in the middle/upper middle class wanting to live in homes that only the upper class could buy. A blind eye was given to it all.

If someone had told you before hand that Obama was going to legalize 2 million illegal aliens and threaten to fire ICE officials who follow the law, would you have believed it?:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07 ... er-policy/

marked8 wrote:

Mindflayer wrote:Hmm, I have to wonder how much of this is ultra-right-wing fear mongering. Obama "taking over" credit reporting agencies sounds like bunk to me. The government kowtows to the financial machine - hence the subprime crisis in the first place. It's far easier to issue an "executive order" that somehow bypasses Congress to grant loans to everyone and then pressure the Fed to back that direction.

The financial system did prey on those lower on the socio-economic scale. Then again, they also preyed on those in the middle/upper middle class wanting to live in homes that only the upper class could buy. A blind eye was given to it all.

If someone had told you before hand that Obama was going to legalize 2 million illegal aliens and threaten to fire ICE officials who follow the law, would you have believed it?:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07 ... er-policy/

Or how about...

If someone had told you before that the President of the United States would seal every record he could think of to hide his citizenship status, would you have believed it?

If someone had told you that the President of the United States would FORGE an official state birth document and release it to the country as his own, would you have believed it?

If someone had told you that the President's Cabinet would be involved in a federally illegal gun-running scheme to funnel guns into Mexico that would later be used to attempt to impose "gun control", would you have believed it?

If someone had told you that the President of the United States was going to appoint a tax cheat to the Secretary of the Treasury, would you have believed it?

If someone had told you that our Senate would refuse to pass a budget bill for an entire presidential term, would you have believed it?

That's all for now - this deserves its own thread. Who has some more of these "Would you have believed" scenarios to share?

allingeneral wrote:Or how about...

If someone had told you before that the President of the United States would seal every record he could think of to hide his citizenship status, would you have believed it?

If someone had told you that the President of the United States would FORGE an official state birth document and release it to the country as his own, would you have believed it?

If someone had told you that the President's Cabinet would be involved in a federally illegal gun-running scheme to funnel guns into Mexico that would later be used to attempt to impose "gun control", would you have believed it?

If someone had told you that the President of the United States was going to appoint a tax cheat to the Secretary of the Treasury, would you have believed it?

If someone had told you that our Senate would refuse to pass a budget bill for an entire presidential term, would you have believed it?

That's all for now - this deserves its own thread. Who has some more of these "Would you have believed" scenarios to share?

+1 to all the above

Rick:

Those are some good ones. I just find Obama taking over credit agencies as out there, since the gubmint is firmly in the back pocket of the Street. More like the banks will push the administration to turn a blind eye as they start the subprime lending spree again, knowing they will get bailed out and make billions in bonuses later on. More collusion then confrontation, if you will.

Mindflayer wrote:Rick:

Those are some good ones. I just find Obama taking over credit agencies as out there, since the gubmint is firmly in the back pocket of the Street. More like the banks will push the administration to turn a blind eye as they start the subprime lending spree again, knowing they will get bailed out and make billions in bonuses later on. More collusion then confrontation, if you will.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The idea of the government being in the back pocket of Wall Street reminds me of that limerick about the lady and the tiger:

A smiling young lady from Niger
Who went for a ride on a tiger
They returned from the ride
with the lady inside
and the smile on the face of the tiger.

Wall Street would be the lady, and the government the tiger. Obama's tiger has already started eating the lady. The government intervention will, if the "progressives" get their way, eventually become ever-increasing defacto government control. When we get to a financial industry controlled by the same people who control Social Security and the US Postal Service, we'll be another Greece.

Banking institutions, including good, sound, responsibly run community and regional banks were absolutely forced to make these "sub-prime loans under the "Community Investment Act" that the bank examiners would have busted their asses for under normal circumstances. Some of the high-flying, push-everything-way-past-the-edge-of-the-envelope crowd decided to take advantage of this government-created loophole in the precepts of sound banking practices and create subsidiaries and other entities to specialize in this sewage of the financial industry. The government was too stupid to recognize the danger or bowed to political operatives who just didn't care. The result was just what one should expect of politically-motived social engineering. Now even the good, sound institutions that at all times operated responsibly are being forced to "eat" the financial consequences.

Odd…in ’08, our leader told us that this was “predatory lending”. Funny how things change over time…

Ramps Up Risky Subprime Auto Loans To Drive Sales

Mon, Jul 30 2012 00:00:00 E A01_A1MON
By DAVID HOGBERGDAVID HOGBERG12655 Beatrice Street
Los Angeles
CA
90066
USA

INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILYInvestor's Business DailyInvestors.com delivers unique stock investment research, education and stock tips for new or seasoned investors, combined with daily business and financial news.askibd@investors.com310-448-6600WilliamO'Neil12655 Beatrice StreetLos AngelesCA90066USA12655 Beatrice StreetLos AngelesCA90066USA
President Obama has touted General Motors (GM) as a successful example of his administration's policies. Yet GM's recovery is built, at least in part, on the increasing use of subprime loans.
The Obama administration in 2009 bailed out GM to the tune of $50 billion as it went into a managed bankruptcy.
Near the end of 2010, GM acquired a new captive lending arm, subprime specialist AmeriCredit. Renamed GM Financial, it has played a significant role in GM's growth .

View Enlarged Image
The automaker is relying increasingly on subprime loans, 10-Q financial reports shows.
Potential borrowers of car loans are rated on FICO scores that range from 300 to 850. Anything under 660 is generally deemed subprime.
Subprime Key Driver
GM Financial auto loans to customers with FICO scores below 660 rose from 87% of total loans in Q4 2010 to 93% in Q1 2012.
The worse the FICO score, the bigger the increase. From Q4 2010 to Q1 2012, GM Financial loans to customers with the worst FICO scores — below 540 — shot up 79% to more than $2.3 billion. The second worst category, 540-599, rose 28% from about $3.4 billion to $4.3 billion.
Prime loans, those above 660, dropped 42% to $676 million.
GM Financial provides just over 8% of GM's financing. Prior to 2006, GM's captive lending arm was GMAC, but GM sold a controlling stake in 2006. GMAC later renamed itself Ally Financial and continues to provide the bulk of GM's financing.
At the peak of the credit crisis and recession in late 2008, Ally announced that it would move away from subprime lending.
By spring 2010 GM's new management, led by North American executive Mark Reuss, wanted to move back into subprime, fearing that GM couldn't compete.
Subprime lending in cars is not as risky as in housing. Car loans are cheaper, so customers have an easier time making payments. When they do go into default, the cars can be repossessed and sold to recover some of the loss.
"The subprime market grew as a result of the recession," said GM spokesman Jim Cain. "Our experience, however, is that with proper management they are very good risks."
He points to GM's credit losses which have not risen above 5.5% since late 2010.
Nevertheless, since it acquired GM Financial, GM has seen its subprime loans grow from about 4.8% of sales in Q4 2010 to 8.2% in Q1 2012. The industry average is about 6%.