McCarthyism is back

[zinfamous]

Because a decentralized banking system fosters competition and innovation while mitigating risk. Because the banking system is not just a third party, it is thousands of third parties, in competition with each other to provide the best products and services to their customers, and each individually taking on the risks of their lending decisions and policies. Moving to a single central bank will remove any incentive to act in the interests of customers due to lack of competition (which is that taking care of people thing) and would amplify the effects and risks of poor policy decisions. It would also be so powerful as to certainly be prone to massive corruption.

dude, there's like 3 banks now.

I'm not saying your argument is wrong or bad, but we've got like....3 banks left.

 

[Vic]

I suggest looking into the findings from the financial crisis inquiry commission as you are repeating Republican talking points.

Government policies and the subprime mortgage crisis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

You’ll note that the largest failed banks did not fall under CRA guidelines.

How in the F was I repeating Republican talking points by blaming the Republican party for the housing crisis?
And no where did I mention the CRA as I absolutely do not blame the CRA and have said so here repeatedly in the past.

 

[Vic]

dude, there's like 3 banks now.

I'm not saying your argument is wrong or bad, but we've got like....3 banks left.

Yes, which is why I want them to be broken up, not consolidated.

 

[ivwshane]

No, the issue that you don't lecture doctors on how to do their jobs, do you? Seriously.
And yes, bad public policy can negatively affect by job. Just like bad public policy can negatively affect any industry.
Reasonable regulation is something I'm very much in favor of. Dodd-Frank isn't perfect but has been very successful, both for consumers and the industry.
Look, I agree with the Democrats on certain things but this constant demonization of the banking industry is just stupid. You guys act like we're all a bunch of Mr Potter's from It's a Wonderful Life, but the reality is that we're the home of one of the last great factory jobs in America. Millions of Americans work in the banking industry, most in what are basically white collar factory jobs, and we are probably the last industry in America where someone can get a job right out of high school and work their way up to the top.
Stop attacking us.

That is incorrect, I don’t think of you or most people in the banking industry as a bunch of “mr potters”, you like most Americans, are just doing your jobs and doing what you’ve been told to do and that is where the problem lies. Greed feeds your industry (all industries really the difference is what’s an acceptable level versus any negative
) which is why you have low level employees at places like Wells Fargo opening false accounts, because their management is putting pressure on them to reach quotas.

The point I’m making with all of this is that removing the middleman in the loan process isn’t some commie idea and the reasoning behind it isn’t unfounded.

As I’ve said, the idea of the middleman being cut out from the loan process is never going to happen but more regulation and control is definitely needed.

 

[ivwshane]

How in the F was I repeating Republican talking points by blaming the Republican party for the housing crisis?
And no where did I mention the CRA as I absolutely do not blame the CRA and have said so here repeatedly in the past.

You are getting emotional over this which shows your attachment to the industry versus your attachment to do the right thing.

You didn’t mention the CRA but it’s the CRA that bush used to push its policy. You, like republicans, are blaming government policy when that wasn’t the cause.

 

[Vic]

The only reason you guys freak out about the fake accounts scandal 5 years later is because Wall Street got screwed more than the consumers. Stumpf pitched them for decades on Wells' cross-selling magic. Entire books were written about his 'genius.' And boy was Wall Street pissed when it turned out to be all BS to pump up WFC. And the Dems rushed in to capitalize on that.
But this must be why I blamed Wall Street for the housing crisis, and I got attacked for pushing Republican talking points.

 

[Vic]

You are getting emotional over this which shows your attachment to the industry versus your attachment to do the right thing.

You didn’t mention the CRA but it’s the CRA that bush used to push its policy. You, like republicans, are blaming government policy when that wasn’t the cause.

No, Bush's policies to reduce lending standards had nothing to do with the CRA. Countrywide and other subprime lenders did zero CRA loans. But they did have strong backing from Wall Street and the Republicans then in power in govt.

 

[ivwshane]

No, Bush's policies to reduce lending standards had nothing to do with the CRA. Countrywide and other subprime lenders did zero CRA loans. But they did have strong backing from Wall Street and the Republicans then in power in govt.

You are only making my point stronger.

 

[ivwshane]

The only reason you guys freak out about the fake accounts scandal 5 years later is because Wall Street got screwed more than the consumers. Stumpf pitched them for decades on Wells' cross-selling magic. Entire books were written about his 'genius.' And boy was Wall Street pissed when it turned out to be all BS to pump up WFC. And the Dems rushed in to capitalize on that.
But this must be why I blamed Wall Street for the housing crisis, and I got attacked for pushing Republican talking points.

I used Wells Fargo as an example because a) it’s a well known case b) it is a perfect example of management pushing unrealistic quotes on low level employees and what happens when those employees try to meet those quotas. I could have used AT&T or other cellphone companies and their use of cramming (fraudulently adding features to customer accounts to meet quotas).

You’ve personalized an attack on an industry as an attack on you (it’s similar to people who I get offended at “black lives matter” by responding with “all lives matter”. Your defensiveness has stymied your ability to see the issue in an unbiased light.

Anyways, I explained my point for even bringing this up, it’s up to you if you want to acknowledge it or not (that doesn’t mean agree/or disagree).

 

[Vic]

I used Wells Fargo as an example because a) it’s a well known case b) it is a perfect example of management pushing unrealistic quotes on low level employees and what happens when those employees try to meet those quotas. I could have used AT&T or other cellphone companies and their use of cramming (fraudulently adding features to customer accounts to meet quotas).

You’ve personalized an attack on an industry as an attack on you (it’s similar to people who I get offended at “black lives matter” by responding with “all lives matter”. Your defensiveness has stymied your ability to see the issue in an unbiased light.

Anyways, I explained my point for even bringing this up, it’s up to you if you want to acknowledge it or not (that doesn’t mean agree/or disagree).

I don't even know where you're going with all this. I can confirm though that Wells is a shitty place to work.
Look, while you are wanting to consolidate the banking industry, there are many new and innovative smaller companies that are trying to completely disrupt the traditional models in order to democratize banking. Many of these are minority-owned and their entire goal is to bring equality to the industry. And what they're doing would cease to exist if all of banking were consolidated under the govt, and the Republicans won the next election.

 

[ivwshane]

You haven’t read anything I posted.

 

[HomerJS]

What a piece of garbage Kennedy and almost all Republicans are.

 

[NWRMidnight]

The housing crisis absolutely was not caused by bad policy (I assume you mean public policy not industry wide policies). Banks lowered their lending standards, that wasn’t what the public policy said to do. They then bundled those low quality loans and sold them where they were rated incorrectly (fraudulently in my opinion). The industry built a house of cards and made a shit ton of money and most made out like bandits when it all came crashing down and then more unscrupulous people picked up the broken pieces while millions of Americans got screwed and lost their home.

Actually it was, it was all the results of the deregulation that happened or I should say, started, in the early 80's that lead us to the 2008 housing crisis. It was all created by bad policies. If the bad policies.. aka deregulation where never implimented, the housing crisis of 2008 would never have happened.

They really didn't lower their lending standards, they manipulated people's income to show they earned more than they did to qualify them for housing above their real affordability. Which caused a dramatic increase of people buying homes, driving up the prices to an unrealistic level. Then they issues loans over the current value of the house to cover all the closing costs, etc. When the market crashed. many people ended up being upside down on their mortgages that they realistically couldn't afford to begin with, and where already underwater from the start. Causing many to just walked away from them.

You are right about fraud. They puposesly manipulated and falsified people's income to qualify them for houses outside their affordability range In an inflated marked brought on by such fraud.

 

[MrSquished]

Actually it was, it was all the results of the deregulation that happened or I should say, started, in the early 80's that lead us to the 2008 housing crisis. It was all created by bad policies. If the bad policies.. aka deregulation where never implimented, the housing crisis of 2008 would never have happened.

They really didn't lower their lending standards, they manipulated people's income to show they earned more than they did to qualify them for housing above their real affordability. Which caused a dramatic increase of people buying homes, driving up the prices to an unrealistic level. Then they issues loans over the current value of the house to cover all the closing costs, etc. When the market crashed. many people ended up being upside down on their mortgages that they realistically couldn't afford to begin with, and where already underwater from the start. Causing many to just walked away from them.

You are right about fraud. They puposesly manipulated and falsified people's income to qualify them for houses outside their affordability range In an inflated marked brought on by such fraud.

There was more to it than that, the fact that they could bundle up these mortgages and sell them vis a vi financial derivatives is what really made them blow up. That risk was taken because of that ability and those loans were created because they could be sold as these financial instruments to Wall Street, marked AAA, and that created the feeding frenzy for more. That was from deregulation of the Glass-Steagall act at the end of Clinton's term. It was sponsored by 3 republicans and passed overwhelmingly in both Houses, with the holdouts almost all being Democrats. Clinton could have vetoed it symbolically but he didn't. His own Secretary of the Treasury Rubin was for it so I doubt he would have done shit anyway.

 

[MrSquished]

I am not an expert on banking systems, but as far as I am aware Europe has a central bank for countries with the euro, certain countries have their own central banks, and Europe has over 6,000 private banks. I was not aware they could not co-exist together.

Anyone? Is having a Central Bank and having a robust private banking system mutually exclusive? From a layman's eyes it seems it's happening in Europe as we speak.

 

[ivwshane]

Anyone? Is having a Central Bank and having a robust private banking system mutually exclusive? From a layman's eyes it seems it's happening in Europe as we speak.

Take a guess why it doesn’t happen here.