Did the Poor Cause The Crisis?

slate.com

The United States continues to be riven by heated debate about the causes of the 2007-09 financial crisis. Is government to blame for what went wrong, and, if so, in what sense? In December, the Republican minority on the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, weighed in with a preemptive dissenting narrative. According to this group, misguided government policies, aimed at increasing homeownership among relatively poor people, pushed too many into taking out subprime mortgages that they could not afford.

This narrative has the potential to gain a great deal of support, particularly in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and in the run-up to the 2012 presidential election. But, while the FCIC Republicans write eloquently, do they have any evidence to back up their assertions? Are poor Americans responsible for causing the most severe global crisis in more than a generation?

Say that again? Some poor people took out mortgages they couldn't afford in the United States and this brought about the worldwide financial crisis?

Couldn't be Wall Street could it? Couldn't be the banks that bundled these questionable mortgages and sold them? Naah. Poor Charlie down the street got in hot water with his mortgage, lost his house, and that is why you and I have no job. It's all Charlie's fault! Simple, huh?

There is absolutely no limit to what the rich and powerful will do to preserve that power. They want to give tax cuts to people who don't need them and pay for them with money from cutting social programs for the poor. The poor have pretty much always been the scum of the earth to those who are prosperous -- and in their minds completely worthy -- whereas who would care about those who are not winning in the Darwinian struggle for existence? Might as well dump all blame on them for absolutely everything that goes wrong in the country, meanwhile taking a can of soup to the local food bank from time to time to show how beneficent they are.

Anybody see some self-serving motive in this notion of blaming the poor for toppling the economies of the world?

Go figure.

reply to post by Sestias


No, the rich caused the crisis by implementing the monetary system in the first place

The poor are just those that suffer in a flawed system that was bought upon them whether they wished it or not.

This is a sick twist on it. Wow. Should people maybe have known better? Yes. But you know? For the most part when you buy a home, you rely on everyone from the real estate agent, to the appraisers, to your bank or mortgage company and your closing attorney to be upright, honest and professional. When you have any or all of these people colluding with the crooks who were pushing them? The "poor" person really doesn't stand a chance. Utter hogwash.

reply to post by Sestias


the banks created this mess by lending to people that could pay, then packaging those loans as secure investments, which they then pledged multiple times to raise the collateral.

the Federal reserve system helped wreck the US by printing money, out of thin air, and loaning that to the government plus interest. You can't print your way out of debt if each dollar printed ADDS TO THE DEBT.

the poor people are the last to be blamed on this one, they wanted a house. The greedy banks and governments used this to make trillions in profits while laying all of the losses on the tax payers.

Eat the rich

The right wing in America has always blamed the poorest and most vulnerable for whatever woes exist at a given time. The Wall Street and Bankster fat cat bastards, as well as a pro-corporation, anti-worker government that failed to regulate them, are to blame for the Great Recession.

The Republicans claim to be the champions of personal responsibility, yet they run as far away as possible from it whenever their policies and philosophies have devastated countless families, which is often.

I'm still fuming so much about this, I came back to add...the people will know better now, so the jig is up. And if the people had half a clue, they'd realize a well-timed, well-planned financial revolution might just be the only thing to bring these crooks to their knees and implement a new credit/lending structure. How would they like it if we all turned crook on them and no one made a mortgage or credit card payment again? If we really messed up their little credit rating system? Probably the only thing they'd understand.

Even out of all of this all they're probably going to get is some silly fine or a slap on the wrists!

Its both.

By forcing banks to lend to sub-prime candidates, the government forced banks to lend money in the form of mortgages to those that were likely (based on credit score and history) to default on those loans. The fact that these were sub-prime made them undesirable debt notes that no one wanted to back or buy. Here's where the corrupt bankers come in. In order to sell and trade these notes, they created the famous derivatives that were basically small pieces of all these sub prime mortgages mixed with prime mortgages, packaged together to make the risk look minimal to the buyer (China?). The bankers get their money and whoever (fund managers, pension managers, municipalities, China, etc.) bought the derivatives are left holding the bad debt bag.

Star & Flag

In 2008 when the talking heads started that brainwashing scheme to blame “Charlie”, I was taken back by how many people I knew that had bought into that LIE.

The foreclosure rate had not increased from its historical levels and the everyday common folks in this country were told to blame the poor and they did. It was unbelievable to me that people would even think that it was plausible that home defaults in the US could create a world-wide financial crisis. Especially when foreclosure rate had not increased at that time.

Why could my friends not see that this was a BANK ROBBERY, largest ever done, and the thieves got away with it and still are.

This has nothing to do what so ever with the housing market, it is all about the derivatives scheme.

Any manager of a fund who invested in derivatives should go to jail for theft. Placing a bet on an investment yield and then calling that bet an investment should be illegal. You have better odds at the black-jack table.

But get back to poor Charlie.
This is divide & conquer at its fundamental level. Point a finger at “X” , place the blame on “X”, have your minions in the MSM do the cheerleading and you have successfully diverted the attention of the sheeple.

I watched Jesse Ventura bust in on all those little scared manicured BigMoney girly men, on Conspiracy Theory. According to the Rebublicans and "personal responsibility" rightwingnuts in general, someone need to call Jesse to come over and bust in on me, instead. I don't know if he'd fit in my apartment though, it's awfully little.......

reply to post by phishybongwaters


You are still buying into the diversion. This had nothing to do with bad loans...That is the lie they want you to believe.

This is a created event to secure the wealth of the worldi nto a few hands.

Wouldn't have been a problem if they wouldn't have been upping peoples interest rates. Flexiable rates and greed is what happened. Got you in for 4% then 2 years later wanted 7% people couldn't afford it

Read this book: 'The Monster: How a Gang of Predatory Lenders and Wall Street Bankers Fleeced America — and Spawned a Global Crisis'
seattletimes.nwsource.com...

Therein is all the proof that this crises was done by greedy subprime lenders who lied and deceived people in those loans, and wall street firms that made securities out of all those deceptive and bad loans, and they did it for one reason—profit, not to help poor people get houses.

The idea that this was done to help poor get houses in a lie because they all ready had houses and were suckered to take out subprime loans on their mortgages.

That is just typical republicans lies and distortions they peddle to protect the rich and greedy

reply to post by mikellmikell


That wouldn't have been a problem if people took the higher fixed-rate loan when the opted for the lower adjustable-rate loan. Did people think it would just keep going down and they could keep refinancing? What part of adjustable did they not understand. They took a gamble on interest rates and lost. Plenty of people got fixed-rate mortgages and the problems only affected the value of their home, not their payment.

So .... we have to blame someone
to discuss this topic?








Ten years ago I heard a story on NPR saying that the crime rate was going down because Abortion was a good thing.

A few days later I heard the story repeated all over the place. Not looked into. Not verified. Just passed along like a popular meme of self empowerment.

But acording to demographics, there is no one to blame.

Not that blaming some group or other isn't still fun,

Just that no one is having children, so
literally there is no one to blame.


David Grouchy


U.S. Birth Rate Hits All-Time Low

Does anyone remember the protests to the banks about NOT lending money that poor people could not afford?

blogs.wsj.com...

www.dollarsandsense.org...

www.nytimes.com...

scienceblogs.com...

So, while ACORN and unions were protesting that banks WERE NOT GIVING loans, now it's the banks fault for giving the loans?

How about a little personal responsibility folks? Huh? C'mon! The people who defaulted are not the ones responsible?

Just another viewpoint kids, don't get upset.

Both are at fault but there is a problem with terminology. "POOR" encompasses 2 distinctly different groups.

The LAZY self important gimme crowd that hides among the truly poor and deserving of help are the issue as much as the criminal banksters and the feds for allowing it in the first place. That crowd is why benefits and help are at an all time low and not reaching the folks that truly need it. If the PC crowd wants to admit it or not, its true.. the system is completely skewed by this lazy entitled segment... and its huge.

IMO the "rich" have set up this vicious cycle with including or allowing the lazy generational welfare folks to be included in with the truly poor so welfare/benefits/federal hand outs can be snatched back, cut, and whatever it takes to get rid of the "useless eaters" because they are a drain on the finances of the rich/feds/bank crowd. This would be the reason to axe the middle class.. then there would be 2 distinct classes.. poor and rich. Slave and master. I think it all fits in with the controlled demolition of the "American way of life" and our country as it has been in the past... ( erosion of freedom, etc). The New America should be quite the Frankenstein.

2nd line

DOWN WITH THATCHER!

I'm in agreement with most the above the banksters have been running a con
and those who thought it was a good deal/steal fell for it.

in reality this is nothing new, the banksters have been around since antiquity and since mesopotamian times have repeatedly gutted and destroyed nearly every civilization/culture since.

and they can't blame muslims, for all it's faults islam is the only abrahamic religion left that proscribes usury.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

in reality this is nothing new, the banksters have been around since antiquity and since mesopotamian times have repeatedly gutted and destroyed nearly every civilization/culture since.

Tell that to the people who think that the NWO is a new concept or a relatively new one. Its just a new label for the same old game thats changed to fit our modern society.

Damned public school revisionist history education ! Keep em ignorant and they wont see it coming. ,Worked like a charm.

reply to post by Advantage


yup
NWO= SOSh [different shovel]

divine right of kings=the will of the people=[this is what you voted for]

new age=mystery babylon=syncretistic mishmash [with new flavors]