Bank Reform

[61 Electric Bron-Yr-Aur]

Leave the banks alone. Breaking up the Big Four would be detrimental because many of the services they provide can't be replicated at a smaller financial institution.


Also, who's to say the smaller banks couldn't all succumb to what the big banks did this time around, thus, instead of 4 in trouble, it'd be 10-12.

Also, we should leave them alone because the economy can't afford the denial of loans to legitimate applicants.

 

[Deuce]

So what you're saying is we should allow the conditions that created this recession to continue?

 

[61 Electric Bron-Yr-Aur]

So what you're saying is we should allow the conditions that created this recession to continue?

It's a once in a lifetime thing.

If the housing bubble doesn't bust, we hear none of this.

 

[Gipper]

So what you're saying is we should allow the conditions that created this recession to continue?

What conditions?

First of all, the government's first problem was their hyper-intervention in the first place. I would have no problem with Freddie and Fannie folding because of their practices. On top of that, if banks take a bath because they issued loans they had no business in issuing, that's fine. Even on top of that, if some young dumb couple with a combined household income of 40K bought a 750,000 dollar house with 2% down and they get foreclosed on, leaving them homeless, I'm fine with that too.

Government's job isn't to subsidize stupidity.

 

[61 Electric Bron-Yr-Aur]

What conditions?

First of all, the government's first problem was their hyper-intervention in the first place. I would have no problem with Freddie and Fannie folding because of their practices. On top of that, if banks take a bath because they issued loans they had no business in issuing, that's fine. Even on top of that, if some young dumb couple with a combined household income of 40K bought a 750,000 dollar house with 2% down and they get foreclosed on, leaving them homeless, I'm fine with that too.

Government's job isn't to subsidize stupidity.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. 5-star post.

 

[Mach]

Even on top of that, if some young dumb couple with a combined household income of 40K bought a 750,000 dollar house with 2% down and they get foreclosed on, leaving them homeless, I'm fine with that too.Government's job isn't to subsidize stupidity.

But, that's not the issue. What happened is that they pitched this:

$40k/year combined income
2% down
$750K house
Which should be obviously absurd to anyone to back.

as the equivalent of this
$300K combined income
10% down
$750K house

Fraud has many faces, and none of them are acceptable.