I've obey the rules, and did what was expected of someone to suceeded if this society for the last 65 years.
and to have a half breed to tell me and my
ancestor where all wrong burn me up.
When he want help support his on family
members.

regarding your explanation of the events, again...truly...where do you get this stuff?

The housing market bubble was created by the expansion of the CRA? This regulation didnt even apply to most loans

http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/community_reinv.html

I know your explanation fits neatly with the world view you have based on your personal experience. I was in the military too. And I can tell you, your experiences have nothing to do with a basis for an explanation for the causes of this crisis.

Further, "social justice" has more to do with people who, through no fault of their own, end up in crisis. They use the system, get back on their feet, and move on.

In any event, pointing to the CRA as a source for the financial crisis we experienced is a misinformed approach.

Snarky,

Come on, you expect someone at POPTECH to accurately depict any of the "Social Justice" agenda. They are neck deep in the movement. They are very accomplished in their industries, but they are not mainstream in thought and are tight with the unintended consequences crowd, though they do seem to at least examine the first level of unintended consequences, which is better than most Left and Left-of-center politicians.

I would use them as a source, but would always extend the research far beyond their words. Just as Pravda used to be very informative in telling about events in the USSR, you just had to know how to filter it.

It wasn't the loans to "poor black folk" it was the fact that "poor black folk" were used as the excuse to pass all this stuff. My post just set up the political environment that the bills were passed in. Most of the people that benefited were White Upper Middle Class or Rich. Since all posts are limited to 500 words, I couldn't go into all the laws, rules and regulations that led to this state of affairs. But your argument doesn't go back far enough. The chain of events starts with the founding fathers not finding a way to abolish slavery in the original constitution and ends with the recession and liquidity collapse.

Bernake raised the interest rates to deal with the problems of Bush(43)'s deficits. Note that I leave out a long macroeconomics lesson in connecting the two events, but you can't take several trillion dollars out of the economy and expect the money supply to remain constant.

I agree that was the spark in the powder keg, but to ignore the "social justice" inputs that created the powder keg is like looking at a piece of sculpture from only a photograph of it.

Solutions that come from the "social justice" lobby will cause problems just as bad in the future. I don't care about a person's race in this either (I personally know many more white ne'er-do-wells than black ones), I care about every individual being a productive citizen. I spent 24 years in the USAF and saw people who came from utter poverty with no opportunity at all at home become some of the most productive individuals in the unit. The difference was they were out of the environment that produced their problems. It isn't about race, it is about getting up in the morning and working your tail off every day to make something of yourself. When this is done on a societal level, most of the "social justice" problems will take care of themselves.

Owen
Very well thought out explanation. Good Job

Let’s see, the recent debacle in market liquidity was caused by “toxic assets”. What are these “toxic assets” anyway? They are overly complicated (to the point of fraud I would say) financial instruments which bundled mortgage debt into an investment instrument. They were given a veneer of legitimacy because a government sponsored enterprise (GSE) issued them with a wink and nod federal backing. How did we get here? After civil rights passed, black banks and credit unions couldn’t compete in underwriting loans to the highly-qualified black professional class. As a result, these banks’ profits were sucked. Eventually these banks and credit unions either went out of business or were bought out. After the race riots of circa 1968 to 1972, many banks saw their inner city portfolios trashed and red lined whole neighborhoods as too risky for investment . This accelerated the flight of the black middle class to the suburbs and destroyed of what was left of the inner cities. In the Carter administration, congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act forcing these banks to at least lift the red line provisions. This led to some abuses, but didn’t lift the banks’ lending requirements, so the system didn’t collapse, but it did open the door for what happened later. In the Clinton years, congress expanded the Community Reinvestment Act to the point that banks had to drop their lending requirements in order to comply. Of course it also gave them the ability to pass those bad loans off to the GSEs. This led to unsustainable growth in housing prices, poised for just one thing to bring them down- the unprecedented budget deficits passed by congress under Bush (43). The deficits sucked money out of the economy and triggered the predictable recession. The only problem is, once the economy slowed down, people couldn’t make their payments which led to liquidity problems for the banks which led to an extreme tightening of the credit markets which led to people selling investments (stocks, bonds and homes) to try to stay liquid which drove the price of those items down sharply. So all of this was caused by the manner in which the Civil Rights Act was implemented and some misguided attempts to “correct” it. Of course, some would now call me a racist for saying this, but I am looking only at the economic outcome. Any community would have problems if the entire professional class is suddenly removed from it, and that was precisely the unintended consequence of the Civil Rights Act. The Community Reinvestment Act was an attempt to force businesses to correct that unintended consequence, even though most of the money and profits were running around the suburbs. The only way money will be invested in the inner city is for the hard working and industrious inhabitants to make it worthwhile for capitalists to invest there. That there is a shortage of hard-working and industrious inhabitants is something that only individuals can correct, one face in the mirror at a time.

on wall street you may hear the grunts of the bear and the snorting of the bull........but yesterday the braying of the jackass from d.c..........was heard................oh crap is that racist???????????

this is what clinton did away with. if our congress wanted to fix our problems, why didn't they just repeal its repealing?

but its more that that,

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/its_dead_jim/

Obummer has never ran a kool-aid stand now he's going to tell big biz how to sucks eggs?

Wall Street IS Obama's territory. What in the HELL would make you think otherwise. You just proved you have literally no clue what all this is about. You know Neal I thought you were starting to understand what is going on, but you have failed me and ALL of the rest of your listeners. You need to get on board before the train leaves.

It always amazes me how much "corporate love" is shown by many on this blog. It seems to me that so many people, including Mattisben trust corporations 100% and the government 0%. To many in this group, the large corporations can do no wrong. They operate in a free marketplace after all, and they are to be trusted 100% and will never do anything to hurt the people or society. Boortz listeners, love their corporations, the way they operate, the way they treat their customers and shareholders, and the way they compensate their executives and so called "talent" even if these CEOs drive their companies (and shareholders) into the ground, while we bail them out with our taxpayer dollars. And corporations, along with their executives are no longer held accountable for their actions. Gotta love it.

why no mention of Bush and his socialist sympathies at the end of his admin. paving the road for Komrad Obama and the legalized plunder we see now? It's always important to remember Bush in what we see now and America's march to fascsim in full swing with Obama. No sense in the whole, 'Bush isn't president anymore' weak excuse, anyone with a brain knows the American govt system moves slowly, and what the last president does has direct effect on the next 2 presidents at least.

but i would do what the chinese capitalists would do to the fraudsters. a bullet in the back of the head.

the market is free just like we are free. not one bit.

Putting Congress in charge of regulating the free market is like putting a fox in charge of hen house security. We need to oust all incumbents with a mandate to outlaw lobbyists in DC.

Jack is exhibiting his "fairness" greed. Everyone has a greedy tendency. I personally have a greedy desire to breathe. A truly free market will adjust itself to eventually prohibit monopolies. The existence of monopolies is mainly spurred by the creation of false "shortages" through government regulation. See New York rent control for a prime example. Again, a truly free market will adjust itself.

Some businesses will do anything to maximize profits and minimize costs. As a result some businesses will deceive, lie, pay other off, produce unsafe goods and services, produce products that harm the environment or people, collude with other companies to fix prices, eliminate the competition, etc. This is why regulation is needed. To make sure companies play fair. Greed is a very powwerful force, even in a so-called free market place. And if companies can get away with it, they will do anything to maximize profits and grow ever bigger and more powerful. Something is wrong when some companies are more powerful than small nations.

Obama on Wall Street. That gives me another example of an oxymoron. Kind of like "honest politician".