Dear sandy: Your inane comment ”  In the olden days the banks were very careful about how much they loaned and to whom they loaned. ” illustrates your leftist myopia. It was  demokrat legislation that MANDATED that loans must be made to minority types in order for them to buy shit they couldn’t afford.
The banks had no choice, thanks to barny fag etc that pushed the legislation.

Ugh, when you use words like “inane” in this context, you are just as bad at being stuck in dogma. All the studies I’ve read say the CRA had absolutely nothing to do with the subprime mortages being made that then failed. While it’s easy to think of that as the complete cause, it’s simply not true. It’s a convenient scapegoat.CRA did create an increase in loans being made to people that typically would not get them, mostly to middle income Americans. These aren’t the defaulting loans. Companies like citibank took this opportunity to become completely irresponsible, and became at odds with their own policies. They fought their own loan Q/A department that wanted to decline loans, awarding bonuses to employees that challenged them and forced a loan through. This had absolutely nothing to do with “being forced by mandated legislation” and everything to do with profit. Now if these loans never did default, there wouldn’t be a problem… and that was the assumption. Citibank’s own Q/A was stopping them from making profit.

This is the crux with of the failing logic here. Does one have the personal responsibility to refuse eating a cake filled with calories that will make you fat. Yes, absolutely. If a company makes that cake as unhealthy as possible, markets that cake endlessly on television, bombards you with images of that cake, sends you endless coupons to buy discounted cake, puts that cake in every store so it’s the first thing you see when you walk in, pipes cake smell into the air system so you smell it non stop. Is that company responsible for you eating the cake and getting fat? Yes, absolutely. It’s a shared moral responsibility.

People should not have taken out loans they knew they couldn’t afford. These people, however, were being told that they could afford them, that it’s no problem. These loans were being given by companies that likely knew they’d default. Citibank even sold these loans, then shorted them, betting they would fail.

Nobody is innocent here.

Thank you, Attila. That wasn’t the situation I saw in Portland. This is the problem in trying to snapshot history, you don’t know where to start.

UPDATED: Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad LoansPosted on 03 October 2008 Do you remember how we told you that the Democrats and groups associated with them leaned on banks and even sued to get them to make bad loans under the Community Reinvestment Act which was a factor in causing the economic crisis (see HERE ) … well look at what some fellow bloggers have dug up while researching Obama’s legal career. Looks like a typical ACORN lawsuit to get banks to hand out bad loans.In these lawsuits, ACORN makes a bogus claim of Redlining (denying poor people loans because of their ethnic heritage). They protest and get the local media to raise a big stink. This stink means that the bank faces thousands of people closing their accounts and get local politicians to lobby to stop the bank from doing some future business, expansions and mergers. If the bank goes to court, they will win, but the damage is already done because who is going to launch a big campaign to get the bank’s reputation back?It is important to understand the nature of these lawsuits and what their purpose is. ACORN filed tons of these lawsuits and ALL of them allege racism.Thanks to the IUSB Vision Weblog for providing additional details of this story. We pulled the docket down, but here’s a brief for your summary:Case NameBuycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/InsuranceDocket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011State/Territory IllinoisCase SummaryPlaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs’ suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank’s loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).The parties voluntarily dismissed the case on May 12, 1998, pursuant to a settlement agreement.Plaintiff’s Lawyers Alexis, Hilary I. (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Childers, Michael Allen (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Clayton, Fay (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Cummings, Jeffrey Irvine (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Love, Sara Norris (Virginia)FH-IL-0011-9000Miner, Judson Hirsch (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-9000Obama, Barack H. (Illinois) FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Wickert, John Henry (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-9000UPDATE :  Hotair.com comments on this story HERE .New York Post Article HERE :THE seeds of today’s financial meltdown lie in the Community Reinvestment Act – a law passed in 1977 and made riskier by unwise amendments and regulatory rulings in later decades.CRA was meant to encourage banks to make loans to high-risk borrowers, often minorities living in unstable neighborhoods. That has provided an opening to radical groups like ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) to abuse the law by forcing banks to make hundreds of millions of dollars in “subprime” loans to often uncreditworthy poor and minority customers.Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA – and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN.In fact, intimidation tactics, public charges of racism and threats to use CRA to block business expansion have enabled ACORN to extract hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and contributions from America’s financial institutions .The Woods Fund report makes it clear Obama was fully aware of the intimidation tactics used by ACORN’s Madeline Talbott in her pioneering efforts to force banks to suspend their usual credit standards. Yet he supported Talbott in every conceivable way. He trained her personal staff and other aspiring ACORN leaders, he consulted with her extensively, and he arranged a major boost in foundation funding for her efforts.And, as the leader of another charity, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Obama channeled more funding Talbott’s way – ostensibly for education projects but surely supportive of ACORN’s overall efforts.Under the Clinton administration, federal regulators began using the act to combat “red-lining,” a practice by which banks loaned money to some communities but not to others, based on economic status. “No loan is exempt, no bank is immune,” warned then-Attorney General Janet Reno. “For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement.”The Clinton-Reno threat of “vigorous enforcement” pushed banks to make the now infamous loans that many blame for the current meltdown, Richman said. “Banks, in order to not get in trouble with the regulators, had to make loans to people who shouldn’t have been getting mortgage loans.” This threat combined with the government backing of Fannie and Freddie set the stage for the current uncertainty, because the “banks could just sell the loans off to Fannie or Freddie,” who could buy them with little regard for negative financial outcomes, Richman said.http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=36048  

Thank you. I didn’t realize all this was happening.

thank you. What I don’t understand is why we got so many underwater properties in Portland with a very small minority population. The homes I see that never sell were previously owned by whites.

UPDATED: Obama Sued Citibank Under CRA to Force it to Make Bad LoansPosted on 03 October 2008 Do you remember how we told you that the Democrats and groups associated with them leaned on banks and even sued to get them to make bad loans under the Community Reinvestment Act which was a factor in causing the economic crisis (see HERE ) … well look at what some fellow bloggers have dug up while researching Obama’s legal career. Looks like a typical ACORN lawsuit to get banks to hand out bad loans.In these lawsuits, ACORN makes a bogus claim of Redlining (denying poor people loans because of their ethnic heritage). They protest and get the local media to raise a big stink. This stink means that the bank faces thousands of people closing their accounts and get local politicians to lobby to stop the bank from doing some future business, expansions and mergers. If the bank goes to court, they will win, but the damage is already done because who is going to launch a big campaign to get the bank’s reputation back?It is important to understand the nature of these lawsuits and what their purpose is. ACORN filed tons of these lawsuits and ALL of them allege racism.Thanks to the IUSB Vision Weblog for providing additional details of this story. We pulled the docket down, but here’s a brief for your summary:Case NameBuycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/InsuranceDocket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011State/Territory IllinoisCase SummaryPlaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs’ suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank’s loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).The parties voluntarily dismissed the case on May 12, 1998, pursuant to a settlement agreement.Plaintiff’s Lawyers Alexis, Hilary I. (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Childers, Michael Allen (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Clayton, Fay (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Cummings, Jeffrey Irvine (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Love, Sara Norris (Virginia)FH-IL-0011-9000Miner, Judson Hirsch (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-9000Obama, Barack H. (Illinois) FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000Wickert, John Henry (Illinois)FH-IL-0011-9000UPDATE :  Hotair.com comments on this story HERE .New York Post Article HERE :THE seeds of today’s financial meltdown lie in the Community Reinvestment Act – a law passed in 1977 and made riskier by unwise amendments and regulatory rulings in later decades.CRA was meant to encourage banks to make loans to high-risk borrowers, often minorities living in unstable neighborhoods. That has provided an opening to radical groups like ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) to abuse the law by forcing banks to make hundreds of millions of dollars in “subprime” loans to often uncreditworthy poor and minority customers.Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA – and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN.In fact, intimidation tactics, public charges of racism and threats to use CRA to block business expansion have enabled ACORN to extract hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and contributions from America’s financial institutions .The Woods Fund report makes it clear Obama was fully aware of the intimidation tactics used by ACORN’s Madeline Talbott in her pioneering efforts to force banks to suspend their usual credit standards. Yet he supported Talbott in every conceivable way. He trained her personal staff and other aspiring ACORN leaders, he consulted with her extensively, and he arranged a major boost in foundation funding for her efforts.And, as the leader of another charity, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Obama channeled more funding Talbott’s way – ostensibly for education projects but surely supportive of ACORN’s overall efforts.Under the Clinton administration, federal regulators began using the act to combat “red-lining,” a practice by which banks loaned money to some communities but not to others, based on economic status. “No loan is exempt, no bank is immune,” warned then-Attorney General Janet Reno. “For those who thumb their nose at us, I promise vigorous enforcement.”The Clinton-Reno threat of “vigorous enforcement” pushed banks to make the now infamous loans that many blame for the current meltdown, Richman said. “Banks, in order to not get in trouble with the regulators, had to make loans to people who shouldn’t have been getting mortgage loans.” This threat combined with the government backing of Fannie and Freddie set the stage for the current uncertainty, because the “banks could just sell the loans off to Fannie or Freddie,” who could buy them with little regard for negative financial outcomes, Richman said.http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=36048  

I don’t mean to sound rude………but you sound like the “coming” part of his comment.

Lol…certainly not my intention, but perhaps someone has their head in the gutter.