GOP senators pledge to block all bills until Bush tax cuts extended

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
You must not have made it all the way through. He TALKS about problem with outsourcing.

And by "corporate greed" he means cheating and stealing. Which begs whole question who cares what tax rate is when you can cheat and steal as much as you want and not get busted? e.g. banks knew they were making bad loans and didn't care because the CDOs sold off to investors without disclosing that they were in fact complete garbage and bet against them for more profit. The ones they could not get rid of, when investors started going WTF!?!?, taxpayers were assessed to pay for the losses that the robber created. They are still stealing to this day! Foreclosure Gate for one. And getting loans at almost zero % interest while buying GUARANTEED treasuries at 2% spread. That greed. Give Zebo that deal I won't care what tax rate is.

You and the CDOs. Sorry, but QIBs were largely the ones buying the CDOs, the assumption of risk is on them. The fact that they depended on the agencies was mass delusion, which happens regardless. The banks who bought them should have lost more than just equity, but that's another case.

Foreclosure Gate was a joke man. There was nothing wrong on a huge scale. That's the problem with you, you hang on to shit despite being proven wrong.

If FG were such a huge deal then why are title companies still insuring titles? Why haven't we seen huge cases where foreclosures were overturned? Why hasn't an injunction been filed against MERS?

Because the fucking people don't want to or can't pay their loans, they are deadbeats and should be foreclosed upon.

What I also find amusing is that you sit there saying the "taxpayers" paid for the bailouts. Well, sorry, but considering the "taxpayers" are those who benefited the most, then why are you bitching? They bailed themselves out AND you.
 
Last edited:
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
You must not have made it all the way through. He TALKS about problem with outsourcing.
I must have missed the part where he acknowledged government's failure to provide proper oversight or admission of their cupability in creating an environment that effectively induced the off-shore movement of US industry.
 

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,227
5
76
What I remember is "surpluses as far as the eye can see" being used to justify the Bush tax cuts. Seems that the economists saying this were absolutely wrong. Let the tax cuts expire then. And find all of those economists and politicians and hang them.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Many good points. However it's interesting that he simplistically blames the problem on 'corporate greed' rather than the failure of our government to envision the eventual and certain impact of NAFTA and GATT on our economy.

The impact was quite positive for corporate profits, and that was envisioned. The rest is just acceptable collateral damage to that end.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
Because the fucking people don't want to or can't pay their loans, they are deadbeats and should be foreclosed upon.

Heh. While that's true, it doesn't change the obligations of plaintiffs attempting to foreclose- to prove that they have standing to do so, and to follow the procedures set out by each state.

The sad truth is that bankers were in such a big hurry to offload crap MBS onto investors that they cut a lot of corners, and that now jeopardizes normal foreclosure proceedings.

There are other moral considerations as well. Structuring of MBS sometimes allows servicers to foreclose on properties in circumstances where the investors have already been closed out, their interests reduced to zero. Their MBS is bankrupt, and will remain so. Ownership of the underlying assets has been sold for a nickel on the dollar to cash flush banks like HSBC.

Nobody offered to sell those assets to the actual occupants/ debt holders at that price, now did they? Hell no- they didn't even offer to restructure the deal at current market prices.

Funny how moral hazard at the individual level becomes windfall profit at the corporate level, huh?

People who can't pay their inflated mortgages obviously need to get beat down to preserve the system. If it wasn't that way, everybody would quit paying.

Here's an idea for people hopelessly underwater with monstrous payments in no recourse states having huge backlogs of foreclosures- quit paying, save the money instead. As the Bankstas foreclose on more and more people, by the time they get to you, they'll likely have flooded the market with housing, driving the price thru the floor. When they actually succeed in tossing you out, you may have enough money saved to just pay cash for a lesser dwelling...

It's a strategy that even Banksta scum could admire...
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
The Repubs take control of the House in January, they can pass their tax bill then and make it retroactive to the begining of the month. Problem solved.

Fern

The Democratic Senate can not pass it, the President can veto it id they did. So what does the Republicans passing a bill that doesn't become law matter?
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Heh. While that's true, it doesn't change the obligations of plaintiffs attempting to foreclose- to prove that they have standing to do so, and to follow the procedures set out by each state.

The sad truth is that bankers were in such a big hurry to offload crap MBS onto investors that they cut a lot of corners, and that now jeopardizes normal foreclosure proceedings.

There are other moral considerations as well. Structuring of MBS sometimes allows servicers to foreclose on properties in circumstances where the investors have already been closed out, their interests reduced to zero. Their MBS is bankrupt, and will remain so. Ownership of the underlying assets has been sold for a nickel on the dollar to cash flush banks like HSBC.

Nobody offered to sell those assets to the actual occupants/ debt holders at that price, now did they? Hell no- they didn't even offer to restructure the deal at current market prices.

Funny how moral hazard at the individual level becomes windfall profit at the corporate level, huh?

People who can't pay their inflated mortgages obviously need to get beat down to preserve the system. If it wasn't that way, everybody would quit paying.

Here's an idea for people hopelessly underwater with monstrous payments in no recourse states having huge backlogs of foreclosures- quit paying, save the money instead. As the Bankstas foreclose on more and more people, by the time they get to you, they'll likely have flooded the market with housing, driving the price thru the floor. When they actually succeed in tossing you out, you may have enough money saved to just pay cash for a lesser dwelling...

It's a strategy that even Banksta scum could admire...

Ohh come on, the vast majority get their time in front of a judge with the correct documentation or affidavits that are properly filed. I have yet to see any large scale classes result in injunctions, you won't see it because the burden of proof shows that the deadbeat debtors should be kicked out. You won't see a high turnover rate for foreclosures, ever. Everybody hyperventilated over MERS and/or missing documentation, but in almost all cases the documentation is just fine.

As far as buying up shit loans, if you're in default, you have no assumption of rights to get a workout. In most cases the redefault rate, even with principal reduction, is high. HSBC cash rich? lol.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Not a big deal? Shits in front of congress.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjTZOekaQlE&feature=player_embedded#!

Hell they foreclose on you if you're paying or have your house paid off.
http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/14/thedc-op-ed-one-nation-under-fraud/

60% no big deal?http://financialservices.house.gov/Media/file/hearings/111/Levitin111810.pdf
Many foreclosure complaints are facially defective and should be dismissed because they fail to attach the note. I have recently examined a small sample of foreclosure cases filed in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh and environs) in May 2010. In over 60% of those foreclosure filings, the complaint failed to include a copy of the note. Failure to attach the note appears to be routine practice for some of the foreclosure mill law firms, including two that handle all of Bank of America’s foreclosures.

I can't help it judges are bought and sold like politicians to get elected but due process demands that if you don't come to court with the necessary elements to establish you have a right to property, your complaint should be dismissed immediately.
.

You keep protecting those hiding loses, sucking up most reserve capital, robosigning crooks I don't get it. Oh yeah I forget you're a banker. I'm not worried though, truth always comes out you can't hide these loses forever or all the fraud and racketeering. Benny the B is trying real hard but he will fail because main street is being left out.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Heh. While that's true, it doesn't change the obligations of plaintiffs attempting to foreclose- to prove that they have standing to do so, and to follow the procedures set out by each state.

The sad truth is that bankers were in such a big hurry to offload crap MBS onto investors that they cut a lot of corners, and that now jeopardizes normal foreclosure proceedings.

There are other moral considerations as well. Structuring of MBS sometimes allows servicers to foreclose on properties in circumstances where the investors have already been closed out, their interests reduced to zero. Their MBS is bankrupt, and will remain so. Ownership of the underlying assets has been sold for a nickel on the dollar to cash flush banks like HSBC.

Nobody offered to sell those assets to the actual occupants/ debt holders at that price, now did they? Hell no- they didn't even offer to restructure the deal at current market prices.

Funny how moral hazard at the individual level becomes windfall profit at the corporate level, huh?

People who can't pay their inflated mortgages obviously need to get beat down to preserve the system. If it wasn't that way, everybody would quit paying.

Here's an idea for people hopelessly underwater with monstrous payments in no recourse states having huge backlogs of foreclosures- quit paying, save the money instead. As the Bankstas foreclose on more and more people, by the time they get to you, they'll likely have flooded the market with housing, driving the price thru the floor. When they actually succeed in tossing you out, you may have enough money saved to just pay cash for a lesser dwelling...

It's a strategy that even Banksta scum could admire...

Has nothing to do with rush. Why do you hide docs or not bring them to court? because you committed fraud on them to get hairdressers $750k HOUSES. Then investors with real money can sue the fuck out of you.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/business/24gret.html

Let review what really went down instead of LK's bankers version.

1. Banks made loans they knew could not be paid back. Citibank's Chief underwriter tells us this when he testifies under oath that Citi knew "60% of loans were defective in 2006 and 80% defective in 2007." Defective means not worth a shit, junk, garbage gonna default in bankers lingo. This is fraud by inducement.
http://fcic.gov/hearings/pdfs/2010-0407-Bowen.pdf

2. But they did not care. Why? Because they could unload them by slapping AAA on them and blowing sunshine up peoples behind in the form of MBS to your pensions, 401k, pers and whatnot. When you sell garbage to someone intentionally concealing it's garbage that's fraud too.

3. Problem is people who bought all that trash and paid good money for it were not getting returns expected because they were trash. Bankers still held too many. So market started going crazy some firms fell apart and whatnot.


4. Banks threaten us with "tanks in the streets" and extort us for about 700 billion bucks.

5. They get about 700 billion dollars but they don't buy up bad paper they instead got more money to speculate with (buy DOW low, commodities or insider trading that is blowing up now).

6. Instead accounting board, FASB, is extorted by Obama to shore up the bad paper; Marking these loans which everyone garbage at whatever the banks wished, instead of at their actual value which is about 40% after lawyers, Realtor, fees, restoration to the property.

7. But all this hocus pocus does not make the problem go away, as the bad paper is still there and the losses are still real. Cash flow problems are kicking with people not paying for two years and with no intention of paying. Can't pretend forever.

8. So they start going to court either as servicer or holder to get cash. But they sure as shit can't show the original note it might be shown original W2 was altered by the banks etc etc etc. MBS's who have been trying to get original note have also been stiff armed for years now. And they will never show it if they can help it because they would be sued into the ground for #1 and #2 above. Not to mention a pattern of fraudulent conduct gets to racketeering. So they come empty handed just with their word. aka "lost note affidavit"

9. Banks start fraudulently robosigning for judges to see, sometimes dated after foreclosure date claiming they own loan or acting as servicer
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2010/10/faulty-paperwork-lending-institutions-have.html


This is NOT about deatbeats, technicalities, or sloppy paper-work it's about doing their damnedest to hide all the fraud from from investors so they are not sued. From Feds they should be worried too but way Feds are aiding and abetting bankers seem to have little to worry about at the moment. If we ever got a President with BALLS there would certainly be some bankers in the penitentiary.
 
Last edited:

SolidSnake42

Senior member
Feb 9, 2010
261
0
0
Anyone who thinks that cutting taxes during a war is a good thing are full of shit. So increase spending of fights a non-winnable war and then cut the taxes that go towards the government to help fight the war? Doesn't fucking work. I really don't feel like being owned by the Chinese in 20 years because of how much we have to pay back.
 

Onceler

Golden Member
Feb 28, 2008
1,262
0
71
I think that there should be no taxes whatsoever except a sales tax. You don't buy anything you don't get taxed.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
I think that there should be no taxes whatsoever except a sales tax. You don't buy anything you don't get taxed.

And that plan would plummet the country into huge poverty. You should be a better citizen and get informed so you support better policy, not terrible policy.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
And therein lies the rub.

What rub? Maximizing corporate profits leads to bigger paychecks for executives and higher dividends. On top of that, conservatives decided to tax both of those less. It's not a rub, it's intentional result of conservative economic policies.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
What rub? Maximizing corporate profits leads to bigger paychecks for executives and higher dividends. On top of that, conservatives decided to tax both of those less. It's not a rub, it's intentional result of conservative economic policies.

Well, yeh- it's been class warfare for 30 years, with middle class "conservative" chumps swallowing the whole chorizo...

It's a different kind of "trickledown" than they were led to expect, that's all...
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Well, yeh- it's been class warfare for 30 years, with middle class "conservative" chumps swallowing the whole chorizo...

It's a different kind of "trickledown" than they were led to expect, that's all...

Yep, and they keep asking for more.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,976
141
106
all taxes are income confiscation. democrats love to punish achievers. Today it's the "rich" tomorrow the definition of "rich" is changed to punish YOU.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
26,359
12,500
136
What I remember is "surpluses as far as the eye can see" being used to justify the Bush tax cuts. Seems that the economists saying this were absolutely wrong. Let the tax cuts expire then. And find all of those economists and politicians and hang them.

And they call Psychology a pseudo science.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
democrats love to punish achievers. Today it's the "rich" tomorrow the definition of "rich" is changed to punish YOU.

95% of what is said here about liberals is wrong or lies. I can't remember the other 5%.
 

Jimmah

Golden Member
Mar 18, 2005
1,243
2
0
all taxes are income confiscation. democrats love to punish achievers. Today it's the "rich" tomorrow the definition of "rich" is changed to punish YOU.

Well then I guess you don't need roads, military, power infrastructure, water infrastructure, police, firefighters, SS, EI, etc...

If you're so foolish to actually believe this, please feel free to move to a different country, I hear Somalia is nice this time of year.

It's rather amusing to see to idiots come out of the woodwork on this forum, those who want it all yet do not want to pay for it. Just an FYI, a 2$ loaf of bread costs more to the person on min. wage than it does to someone making over 250k, yet they recieve the same benefits of society. The higher class should be paying more, since they do not pay an equal amount compared to one in the middle class.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
What I remember is "surpluses as far as the eye can see" being used to justify the Bush tax cuts. Seems that the economists saying this were absolutely wrong. Let the tax cuts expire then. And find all of those economists and politicians and hang them.

You're right that was the argument - and the fact they're still pushing for them with massive deficits shows how they only used that as a cover for enriching the rich.

But I remember it being less economists who said we'd have surpluses, and more Republican politicians and right-wing think tank propagandists.

It wasn't 'good politics' to say the 8 years of Clinton declining deficits would be changing, not a way to win an election predicting problems.

While the Democrats weren't racing to say things would get bad, they did advocate policies that were better like the 'lockbox' and not huge tax cuts for the rich.

But hey, the lie about Gore and the Internet were more important to some voters.

That's why the campaign consultants get the big bucks, knowing how to get people to vote wrongly.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Well then I guess you don't need roads, military, power infrastructure, water infrastructure, police, firefighters, SS, EI, etc...

If you're so foolish to actually believe this, please feel free to move to a different country, I hear Somalia is nice this time of year.

It's rather amusing to see to idiots come out of the woodwork on this forum, those who want it all yet do not want to pay for it. Just an FYI, a 2$ loaf of bread costs more to the person on min. wage than it does to someone making over 250k, yet they recieve the same benefits of society. The higher class should be paying more, since they do not pay an equal amount compared to one in the middle class.

The right-wingers have finally sputtered a response to the Somalia point - 'but that's a poor country and we're a rich one, so you can't compare them.'

They miss the irony that their dream 'small government' in Somialia should be, by their theory, creating great wealth and freedom out of that poverty - and isn't.

That the wealth we have is from our 'big government' history.