Michel Moore; The Biggest american hypocrite!

No he did not answer.

Bah, how does anyone think that this mess got so intertwined in our financial system? Did ACORN make Wall Street buy bundled subprime mortgages?

Sure.

If this had simply been about bad loans in the mortgage sector, then we could have virtually paid it all off with the TARP funds. It went way deeper. Poor people aren't managing mutual funds.
 
Werbung:
I guess you can say the same thing for people in wall street right.... They Invest! Whenever you invest in something; Whether is opening a new business, or buying or selling stock, you take a gamble. Do you have a crystal ball to tell the future. I don't think that any investor does. People lost. They were aware of risky shifts in the market.
I sure didn't see Mr. Moore making a movie when the stock market was hitting almost 15%.
It's always when shiit hits the fan when people like him take advantage of the poor suffering american people.
As Pandora suggested if he wants to share his thoughts with the Amrican people and the world, then he should make his avalilabe free to everyone. I'm sure that he can find sponsors to cover his costs...
I wouldn't have a problem with that.

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Mike Moore has been making movies in good times and bad all his life--not just when the economy is bad.

We all have to live in a capitalist system because that's the system in the country we live in. You don't work for free do you? Moore campaigns against the abuses in the system. Do you think it's right for the big companies to be bailed out while all the little people get nothing? Moore doesn't, and I don't either. I fail to see how he is taking advantage of anyone, no one is required to see his movie, BUT WE ARE ALL REQUIRED TO HELP PAY FOR THE BAILOUT OF THE CAR COMPANIES AND THE BANKS. Do you think that's alright? Are you truly advocating Socialism for the rich?
 
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Mike Moore has been making movies in good times and bad all his life--not just when the economy is bad.

We all have to live in a capitalist system because that's the system in the country we live in. You don't work for free do you? Moore campaigns against the abuses in the system. Do you think it's right for the big companies to be bailed out while all the little people get nothing? Moore doesn't, and I don't either. I fail to see how he is taking advantage of anyone, no one is required to see his movie, BUT WE ARE ALL REQUIRED TO HELP PAY FOR THE BAILOUT OF THE CAR COMPANIES AND THE BANKS. Do you think that's alright? Are you truly advocating Socialism for the rich?

again, if capitalism is so bad then make the fuccken movie free!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
It seems that Micahel Moore has always taken advantage of America's tragedy in order to make a buck. I find his latest movie even more hypocritical,as he believes that Capitalism is a bad thing for our country.
Just look at his filmography and you'll see how he has bee able to make indecent money at the cost of many of our american's pain:



Liberals are such hypocrites: :mad:

he makes that buck, pointing the camera at those who CAUSE that tragedy, and profit off that tragedy...
 

Moore avoids answering the question about who's really to blame for the mortgage fiasco because he would have to mention Bill Clinton.

He mentions Bill Clinton's culpability. you might want to watch the full 20 minute interview....try again. Glass-Steagal was repealed under Clinton by a Republican Congress. Graham-Leach-Bliley was in the works for over a decade. It was a child of the Greenspan era of deregulation.

Hannity avoids every economic study done, and tries to pin the entire collapse on the CRA which either 100% intellectually dishonest, or 100% stupid. or, i guess it could be 50/50, stupid and dishonest.
 
Hannity avoids every economic study done, and tries to pin the entire collapse on the CRA which either 100% intellectually dishonest, or 100% stupid. or, i guess it could be 50/50, stupid and dishonest.

Perhaps you might want to read this:

Regulatory changes 1995
In July 1993, President Bill Clinton asked regulators to reform the CRA in order to make examinations more consistent, clarify performance standards, and reduce cost and compliance burden.[52] Robert Rubin, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, under President Clinton, explained that this was in line with President Clinton's strategy to "deal with the problems of the inner city and distressed rural communities". Discussing the reasons for the Clinton administration's proposal to strengthen the CRA and further reduce red-lining, Lloyd Bentsen, Secretary of the Treasury at that time, affirmed his belief that availability of credit should not depend on where a person lives, "The only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live." Bentsen said that the proposed changes would "make it easier for lenders to show how they're complying with the Community Reinvestment Act", and "cut back a lot of the paperwork and the cost on small business loans".[36]By early 1995, the proposed CRA regulations were substantially revised to address criticisms that the regulations, and the agencies' implementation of them through the examination process to date, were too process-oriented, burdensome, and not sufficiently focused on actual results.[53] The CRA examination process itself was reformed to incorporate the pending changes.[40] Information about banking institutions' CRA ratings was made available via web page for public review as well.[36] The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) also moved to revise it's regulation structure allowing lenders subject to the CRA to claim community development loan credits for loans made to help finance the environmental cleanup or redevelopment of industrial sites when it was part of an effort to revitalize the low- and moderate-income community where the site was located.[54]

During one of the Congressional hearings addressing the proposed changes in 1995, William A. Niskanen, chair of the Cato Institute, criticized both the 1993 and 1994 sets of proposals for political favoritism in allocating credit, for micromanagement by regulators and for the lack of assurances that banks would not be expected to operate at a loss to achieve CRA compliance. He predicted the proposed changes would be very costly to the economy and the banking system in general. Niskanen believed that the primary long term effect would be an artificial contraction of the banking system. Niskanen recommended Congress repeal the Act.[55]

Niskanen's, and other respondents to the proposed changes, voiced their concerns during the public comment & testimony periods in late 1993 through early 1995. In response to the aggregate concerns recorded by then, the Federal financial supervisory agencies (the OCC, FRB, FDIC, and OTS) made further clarifications relating to definition, assessment, ratings and scope; sufficiently resolving many of the issues raised in the process. The agencies jointly reported their final amended regulations for implementing the Community Reinvestment Act in the Federal Register on May 4, 1995. The final amended regulations replaced the existing CRA regulations in their entirety.[56] (See the notes in the "1995" column of Table I. for the specifics)

[edit] Legislative

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act#Regulatory_changes_1995


So who removed all the regulations from the banking system in order to make loans more available to low lifes, I ask? Republicans weren't in control of the white house in 1995!!! Although, the liberal media wants everybody to think that the demise of our economy was as result of the republican run congress.
 
Perhaps you might want to read this:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act#Regulatory_changes_1995


So who removed all the regulations from the banking system in order to make loans more available to low lifes, I ask? Republicans weren't in control of the white house in 1995!!! Although, the liberal media wants everybody to think that the demise of our economy was as result of the republican run congress.

Within your cut and paste, lies my point...

"The only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live."

The CRA didn't FORCE banks to give out bad loans. You should read the CRA... and post the actual legislation that FORCES banks to give bad loans.

the repealing of Glass-Steagal, and allowing the commercial and investment banks to merge made giving bad loans PROFITABLE for large financial institutions as they were now able to bundle and sell these loans as financial products (derivatives). the Deregulation gave the banks the profit motive to give bad loans. It didnt matter if the loans were given to people who couldn't pay them, because the loan itself became profitable as a PRODUCT. And that Product was rated by agencies that the financial institutions were allowed to hire themselves (again because of deregulation)... so of course these products received triple A ratings, where sold by the hundreds of thousands... and thus began the collapse of our system.

Neither the CRA or the (name of the bill escapes me at the moment) bill that repealed Glass-Steagal) are the cause of the collapse separately... but COMBINED they are definitely a factor. the problem with the rhetoric today is that both sides are so driven towards placing blame on the other side that the miss the boat completely.

BOTH SIDES ****ED UP THIS ECONOMY OVER THE LAST 40 YEARS. That includes the prides of the left and right Clinton and Reagan.

our banking system and financial institutions, have found that it is more profitable to take excessive risk and make unrational decisions. The model for successful free market economics begins to fall apart when the profit motive is driven by practices that are NOT in the best interest of the system. The system is based on risk, sure... but if you offset, and offset, and offset that risk with complicated financial products and manuevering.... and you artificially eliminate the risk... the system is bound to collapse, as it has. Massive bubbles and busts are the future of our economic system if heavy regulation isn't implemented to make the PROCEDURES toxic, so that they aren't reinstituted again.

i should note, that i despise Geithner and Summers... and wish that Volcker had a larger voice in this administration.
 
For the love... let's try some facts AND data. Notice the date -

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020617.html

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
June 17, 2002

Fact Sheet: President Bush Calls for Expanding Opportunities to Homeownership

Today's Presidential Action

# Today, President Bush announced a new goal to help increase the number of minority homeowners by at least 5.5 million before the end of the decade. The President's aggressive housing agenda will help dismantle the barriers to homeownership by providing down payment assistance, increasing the supply of affordable homes, increasing support for self-help homeownership programs, and simplifying the home buying process & increasing education. The President also issued "America's Homeownership Challenge" to the real estate and mortgage finance industries to join in his effort to increase the number of minority homeowners by taking concrete steps to tear down the barriers to homeownership that face minority families.

Background on the President's Homeownership Agenda

Buying a home is the biggest single investment most people will make in their lives. Homeownership is a cornerstone of America's healthy, vibrant communities, and benefits individual families by helping them build stability and long term financial security. But sadly, homeownership is out of reach for many Americans -- especially for minority families. For millions of these families, homeownership is a distant, unreachable dream.

President Bush has a comprehensive agenda to help increase the number of minority homeowners by at least 5.5 million before the end of the decade.

While the overall homeownership rate has reached an all time high of nearly 68 percent, the statistics show a clear and persistent homeownership gap:

* Despite increases in minority homeownership during the decade of the 1990s, large persistent gaps between non-Hispanic whites and minorities remain and have narrowed only slightly;

* According to HUD, in 1994 the minority homeownership rate was 26.8 percent below the rate for white households;

* The African-American homeownership rate was 27.5 percentage points below the white rate, and the Hispanic rate was 28.8 percentage points below the white rate;

* The second quarter Census data for 2002 shows that non-Hispanic whites have a 74.3% homeownership rate, while African-Americans have a 48% rate and Hispanics a 47.6% rate; and

* Asian-Americans and other races have a 53.7% homeownership rate.

A new report from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) -- which analyzed the most recent homeownership data from the U.S. Census Bureau -- highlights the many barriers that prevent minority families from owning their own home. The barriers include:

* A lack of inventory of affordable single-family housing available for sale in many areas where a majority of residents are minority families;

* A need for down payment assistance, which affects minority families to a greater extent than non-Hispanic whites because they have less accumulated wealth that can be used to help children with down payments;

* A lack of access to affordable mortgage credit;

* A lack of understanding of the homebuying process;

* Weak credit histories, often arising from a poor understanding of financial matters and where financial counseling is required;

* A lack of information about available homeownership programs in the community; and

* Language difficulties or cultural differences.

It doesn't have to be this way. The President's agenda will help tear down the barriers to homeownership that stand in the way of our nation's African-American, Hispanic and other minority families by:

# Providing Downpayment Assistance. The single biggest barrier to homeownership is accumulating funds for a down payment. The President has proposed $200 million annually for the American Dream Downpayment Fund to help roughly 40,000 families a year with their down payment and closing costs.

# Increasing the Supply of Affordable Homes. The President wants to dramatically increase the supply of homes available to low and moderate income families. The President has proposed the Single-Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit, which will provide approximately $2.4 billion to encourage the production of 200,000 affordable homes for sale to low and moderate income families.

# Increasing Support for Self-Help Homeownership Programs. The President's budget triples funding for organizations, such as Habitat for Humanity, that help families help themselves become homeowners through sweat equity and volunteerism in their communities.

# Simplifying the Home Buying Process & Increasing Education. When buying a home today a buyer faces a confusing and complicated process. The President and HUD want to empower homebuyers by simplifying the home buying process so consumers can better understand and benefit from cost savings. The President also wants to expand financial education efforts so that families can understand what they need to do to become homeowners.

The President also believes that government alone can't close America's homeownership gap. It is critical that our government challenge the private sector to take concrete steps to tear down the barriers to homeownership that face minority families. The President is issuing "America's Homeownership Challenge" to the real estate and mortgage finance industries to join in his effort to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million families by the end of the decade. Many organizations have already responded to the President's challenge by committing to:

# Substantially increase by at least $440 billion, the financial commitment made by the government sponsored enterprises involved in the secondary mortgage market, specifically targeted toward the minority market;

# Launching twenty-five different local initiatives across the nation, geared toward eliminating the specific homeownership barriers faced by minority families in those communities;

# Raising $750 million in below-market-rate investments by 2007, which will work in collaboration with local homeownership initiatives and be targeted to heavily minority program areas;

# Pursuing strategic partnerships in 20 top housing markets between homebuilders, lenders, local officials, and community leaders to develop approaches that address the local challenges to building homes for minority families living in urban centers;

# Establishing faith-based housing partnerships between the participants and at least 100 churches, mosques, synagogues, and other faith-based institutions;

# Aggressively developing new mortgage products so that conventional market alternatives are available to combat the predatory loan products that are disproportionately targeted to minorities;

# Creating new mortgage products to meet the unique needs of recent immigrants;

# Dramatically expanding financial education efforts for minorities, providing financial counseling to at least 380,000 minority families, and taking measures at the local level to reduce predatory lending; and

# Establishing multilingual, consumer-oriented internet Web sites designed to help minorities overcome barriers to homeownership, including creation of a central data bank of affordable housing programs made available to real estate agents when working with clients.

Wow, look at that, down payment assistance, giving money to Freddie and Fannie (when Cons wanted reign them in?), getting money from the capital market to keep the cycle going... why that's exactly what got us into this mess.

I thought all that crap was the Dems' and ACORN's ideas. Why is Bush (he was President in 2002, right?) pimping that?

Then what happened AFTER this Presidential initiative? Why the subprime mortgage EXPLODED.

subprime-mortgage-portion-of-market.jpg


Yeah, Carter and Clinton's fault. Sorry, data had to intrude.
 
For the love... let's try some facts AND data. Notice the date -

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020617.html



Wow, look at that, down payment assistance, giving money to Freddie and Fannie (when Cons wanted reign them in?), getting money from the capital market to keep the cycle going... why that's exactly what got us into this mess.

I thought all that crap was the Dems' and ACORN's ideas. Why is Bush (he was President in 2002, right?) pimping that?

Then what happened AFTER this Presidential initiative? Why the subprime mortgage EXPLODED.

subprime-mortgage-portion-of-market.jpg


Yeah, Carter and Clinton's fault. Sorry, data had to intrude.

I'm in the mortgage industry. I know a little more of when the rules change.....


Take a look at this article:

As always, the liberals and the media point fingers of this fiasco to Bush and the Reps. but it was the liberals who opposed of a reform in the mortgage industry 5 years ago. All these libs were in the pockets of Freddie and Fannie Mae.
 
I'm in the mortgage industry. I know a little more of when the rules change.....


Take a look at this article:

As always, the liberals and the media point fingers of this fiasco to Bush and the Reps. but it was the liberals who opposed of a reform in the mortgage industry 5 years ago. All these libs were in the pockets of Freddie and Fannie Mae.

An accounting scandal under Franklin Raines? What was the total damage $10 -16 billion?

Wow, that surely sounds like we need nearly $1 trillion to fix, no?

Save the whole "I work in the mortgage industry" BS, especially when you are bereft of any thing except a Youtube video.

Fannie only seriously expanded its position in subprime market under Daniel Mudd, Raines' successor, in 2004.

I presented the Presidential initiative of the President AT THE TIME. We see what happened to the volume in the subprime market AFTER the dinner bell was rang. The securitized subprime loans didn't magically end up in our financial system. Wall Street bought them, so they could book paper profits to justify their massive bonuses because they made their numbers and the clients' money "grew".

Don't worry, they were all guilty. The Democrats didn't do anything to help matters, but the GOP held sway in Congress, since Clinton, and had the White House. Do not pretend the GOP was powerless the whole time. Bush laid out an initiative that was the playbook of what created this mess. I posted it. It's in black and white. There's no getting around it.

Let's face facts, Bush needed something to move so it looked like the economy was growing so the GOP could continue to claim "tax cuts worked."
 
An accounting scandal under Franklin Raines? What was the total damage $10 -16 billion?

Wow, that surely sounds like we need nearly $1 trillion to fix, no?

Save the whole "I work in the mortgage industry" BS, especially when you are bereft of any thing except a Youtube video.

Fannie only seriously expanded its position in subprime market under Daniel Mudd, Raines' successor, in 2004.

."

Fannie Mae and Freddie mac were already having issues prior to 2004. Don't give this **** about this companies imploded after Raines. This is why the republicans wanted to inplement more regulations and were turned down by the dems. Including your gay buddy; Barney Frank.
 
Werbung:
Fannie Mae and Freddie mac were already having issues prior to 2004. Don't give this **** about this companies imploded after Raines. This is why the republicans wanted to inplement more regulations and were turned down by the dems. Including your gay buddy; Barney Frank.

Like I said, a $10 billion dollar problem. They can't underwrite loans that DO NOT EXIST.

You can hem and haw all you want, but as I said the President's plan was presented and we see the results.

The GOP wanting to "fix" anything was like Br'er Rabbit asking not to be thrown in the briar patch.
 
Back
Top