Criminal intent is very hard to prove especially when there wasn’t very much of it. I think most of the banks are guilty of greed but not breaking laws. I believe most of the litigation left for the banks will play out in their favor in the coming years.
Lister, a good many insurance agents are not guilty of breaking a law, however, you and I both know agents who have “fudged” on an ap, accidnetally looked the other way when faced with an ethics dilemma. Most of those agents were guilty of GREED, if an individual or a synthetic individual cannot resist the temptation to look the other way in that case, they are willfully breaking the law that gives them license to conduct business.
The investors were just as guilty of greed as the banks originating and repackaging the loans. It will be very difficult to prove that the banks materially misled the investors who themselves were sophisticated enough to analyze and understand the risks they were taking.
The consumer played no part in this? “loan me more, loan me more….”. What would the economy look like if everyone banked with a local institution and lived within their means? The consumer is ultimately responsible for where their dollars go. Disgusted with big business? Shop local, bank local, be satisfied with the lifestyle you can afford.
Some of them were blatantly irresponsible, sure. But for those who are now upside down on their homes, but paying their mortgage payment every month, no. The banks who were making the loans failed to underwrite responsibly and the investors who supplied the cheap money to finance the loans failed to properly price the systemic risk of a worldwide decline in real estate values. The reckless lending (spurred on by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) is what caused the housing bubble, and now the (responsible) consumers and taxpayers are paying the costs. Screw or be screwed is the lesson here. God bless America!
Criminal intent is very hard to prove especially when there wasn’t very much of it. I think most of the banks are guilty of greed but not breaking laws. I believe most of the litigation left for the banks will play out in their favor in the coming years.
Hey, I’m upside down but current on my payments! How do I get in on this deal? Do I stop paying my mortgage?
Lister, a good many insurance agents are not guilty of breaking a law, however, you and I both know agents who have “fudged” on an ap, accidnetally looked the other way when faced with an ethics dilemma. Most of those agents were guilty of GREED, if an individual or a synthetic individual cannot resist the temptation to look the other way in that case, they are willfully breaking the law that gives them license to conduct business.
The investors were just as guilty of greed as the banks originating and repackaging the loans. It will be very difficult to prove that the banks materially misled the investors who themselves were sophisticated enough to analyze and understand the risks they were taking.
The consumer played no part in this? “loan me more, loan me more….”. What would the economy look like if everyone banked with a local institution and lived within their means? The consumer is ultimately responsible for where their dollars go. Disgusted with big business? Shop local, bank local, be satisfied with the lifestyle you can afford.
Some of them were blatantly irresponsible, sure. But for those who are now upside down on their homes, but paying their mortgage payment every month, no. The banks who were making the loans failed to underwrite responsibly and the investors who supplied the cheap money to finance the loans failed to properly price the systemic risk of a worldwide decline in real estate values. The reckless lending (spurred on by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) is what caused the housing bubble, and now the (responsible) consumers and taxpayers are paying the costs. Screw or be screwed is the lesson here. God bless America!