tkhayes 348 #51 November 7, 2011 So what you are saying then is that these derivatives, designed and sold by wall st helped to fuel the bust? Thanks for helping to make my case, even if I may be mistaken about some of the regulations.... At least it is then an argument for future regulation right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weekender 0 #52 November 7, 2011 QuoteSo what you are saying then is that these derivatives, designed and sold by wall st helped to fuel the bust? Thanks for helping to make my case, even if I may be mistaken about some of the regulations.... At least it is then an argument for future regulation right? I'm not saying that derivatives helped fuel the bust. everyone is saying that. i wish i could take credit for something so obvious. I'm saying you were wrong in your post. you are also wrong to imply Canada avoided the problem because of stricter regulations. They didnt invest in the same securities of their own free will. No regulations prevented it. Do you know anything about how lax the Canadian listing requirements are? they are far more lax than our NYSE and Nasdaq markets, for example. They have less regulation than us, not more. Effective regulation is needed for a fair and orderly market. no reasonably intellegent person would dissagree with that."The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 362 #53 November 7, 2011 Quoteyou are also wrong to imply Canada avoided the problem because of stricter regulations. They didnt invest in the same securities of their own free will. No regulations prevented it. Do you know anything about how lax the Canadian listing requirements are? they are far more lax than our NYSE and Nasdaq markets, for example. They have less regulation than us, not more. My understanding is that in Canada the entity that sold the mortgage must keep it for some period of time (I think a year). No-one will lend money to a mortgagee if they know they have to hold the note and won't get paid. Simple, and effective. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #54 November 7, 2011 QuoteMy understanding is that in Canada the entity that sold the mortgage must keep it for some period of time (I think a year). No-one will lend money to a mortgagee if they know they have to hold the note and won't get paid. Simple, and effective. Don Many US banks do in fact hold onto a substantial portion of their loans. A steady 4-8% does make money in a nice predictable pattern. Looping back to what I said, and weekender followed on in more specifics - it's far more complicated a cause and effect than something that new regulations are going to solve. One consequence of the event, and appears soon to be codified, is that you won't be able to get the home loans as easily as you could. It may in fact be extremely difficult, esp for first time home buyers in expensive markets where the 28%/38% thresholds were commonly exceeded. Regulations have costs, and not just to the evil corporate overlords. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #55 November 8, 2011 http://www.tampabay.com/news/perspective/article1199964.ece great article and says volumes about the mess and the inability of some to see it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #56 November 8, 2011 Quotehttp://www.tampabay.com/news/perspective/article1199964.ece great article and says volumes about the mess and the inability of some to see it. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #57 November 8, 2011 My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #58 November 8, 2011 ? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #59 November 8, 2011 ! My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #60 November 8, 2011 I'm mad. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 806 #61 November 8, 2011 TK, be ready to get the exact opposite response from many. She really made no clarifying points IMO. It's a confused mess of pissed off people, no leadership, no path, just confusion. I still don't understand the purpose nor the goal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #62 November 8, 2011 ? !!!! My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #63 November 8, 2011 Quotehttp://www.tampabay.com/news/perspective/article1199964.ece great article and says volumes about the mess and the inability of some to see it. This ongoing discussion keeps reminding me of the business plan of the underpants gnomes: 1. Collect Underpants 2. ? 3. Profit You keep insisting that #2 isn't important, but if you can't even decide on a #1, and there's no one actually doing anything in step 2, then for the hundredth time, how the fuck do you expect change to occur? Inertia works against getting to step 3. With no effort comes no results. Someone has to decide to champion the cause (whatever it may be) and run with it. It may turn out that the result of OWS was to elevate jobs in the 2012 election discussion, but if so, isn't that already accomplished? Now instead the message may start being distorted by winter, by the problems of the bad element in the crowd, or by more articles pointing out the priviledged status of many of the participants. Or the message may be coopted outright by Labor and turn into something less attractive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #64 November 8, 2011 Hey! My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites