S&L you wont believe some of his quotes. i think they go against everything you believe. Check it out.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/38845255
Printable View
S&L you wont believe some of his quotes. i think they go against everything you believe. Check it out.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/38845255
No, not at all. Here are my key take away's.
1.) Yes, Mr. Gross is disallusioned. He spoke with self serving, partisan politicians who most certainly want the solution to be "their" solution. I share his disallusion.
2.) "After all Fannie and Freddie had really blown up because of the private/public nature of their charter, which incentivized execs and stockholders to go for broke with the implicit understanding that Uncle Sam would be there as a backstop should anything go wrong," My point exactly!
3.) "Having grown accustomed to a housing market aided by Uncle Sam, the habit cannot be broken by going cold turkey into the camp of private lending." I agree. It's too big of a mess.
4.) "Taxpayers (s)ould be protected through tight regulation, adequate downpayments, and an insurance fund bolstered by a 50- 75-basis-point fee attached to each and every mortgage," I agree. In fact, we SHOULD have been.
I'm not saying that the government shouldn't be involved in the housing market. I would have said that 77 years ago, but now it's a moot point. I'm perfectly fine with effective (and as minimal as possible) oversight and the provision of a framework by our government. I simply don't believe it can be done (reference point 1), and they've failed so far.
I'm watching Fox News lol. OMG - they have Mary Ann Marsh on who is essentially saying the government needs to make corporations hire and spend. lol. Is there a left wing news outlet? I'd like to watch it, and see if they can make republican's look foolish.
And Havakasha won't reply because............?
Got distracted, travelling a lot etc. No other reason. i will get back to you soon. :)
Well S&L i am pleasantly surprised to see that you understand that govt has a necessary role in th housing market. i quess when he said "the private market,
to my mind, had really lost its claim as the most efficient and judicious arbiter in this particular case" i thought you might have lost it.
When Mr. Gross said "My argument for the necessity of govt backing was substantially based on this commonsensical, psychological, indeed sociological observation that the great housing debacle of 2007-2010 would have a profound influence on homebuyers and mortgage lenders for decades to come" I quess i thought you would disagree and object to govt's continued role since you seem to blame "Govt"for almost all the worlds problems. And when Mr. Gross said "The vested interest lies on Wall street, not newport beach or main street" "Try explaining that to commentators intent on returning to a free market ideology that continues to serve the moneyed interests in the high style to which they are accustomed." I thought you might object to this negative characterization of those at top echelon of the free market system. And yet agin when he called for "rolling fannie and freddie and other housing agencies into ONE GIANT AGENCY and call it the GOVERNMENTAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION quaranteeing a majority of existing and future originations." I really though you were going to run screaming into the wind with your hair on fire. I quess i must have mistaken you for John. Lol. :)
So glad we have managed to meet halfway in our understand of the "large" role that the private markets and non governmental mortgage lenders played in the financial crisis.
Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say it's necessary. Why would you believe it is necessary for government to play a role in housing? I don't believe it's necessary at all. That should have been clear.
In regards to the rest of your points.
1.) "The private market, to my mind, had really lost its claim as the most efficient and judicious arbiter in this particular case". I disagree with this commentary.
2.) "My argument for the necessity of government backing was substantially based on this commonsensical, psychological, indeed sociological observation that the great housing debacle of 2007-2010+ would have a profound influence on homebuyers and mortgage lenders for decades to come." Yes, this debacle will have influence for years to come. When trillions of dollars simply disappear, it will obiously have an impact. Why did trillions disappear? that's really the question. My answer is pseudo demand from the ability to secure easy money (all sponsored by....?).
3.) "The vested interest lies on Wall Street, not Newport Beach or Main Street," he said. "Try explaining that to commentators’ intent on returning to a free market ideology that continues to serve the moneyed interests in the high style to which they are accustomed." I don't agree with this commentary.
It's really simple Lloyd. 77 years of government "policy" (make that "failed policy"), is the root cause of this. Do you understand root cause? They government enabled banks to take risks, and even took that risk off the banks books. The governments role is complicit. That's why we had to bail them out too. You are one stubborn m'fer. The VERY FIRST MBS was issued by none other than our government.
Oh i thought mr. gross said it was and it thought you agreed.
So i was right when i originally said you werent going to like some of the things Mr. Gross posited. :D
Im sorry S&L but i just dont agree with your "root cause" analysis. Problems were created by private markets and govt. How you can even separate those 2 out is WAY BEYOND ME. Who is stubborn? Remember Mr. Poole whenever you
get too carried away with your govt is the root cause of all evil type of arguments. It will cleanse your soul.
77 years LOL. Mr Poole wasn't even born when the nonsense started LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
Hey, please do me the favor of elaborating on why it is necessary for government to be involved in housing. I want to understand why democrats want government to manage things. I've done some research, but still haven't come to something I can understand.
That is going to require a VERY long response. Give me some time to do it justice. i have to move on with my day right now.
Remember this little tibit. If you left everything to the free market i believe
what is happening today with regard to what i would crony capitalism (more and more inequality in income and savings, and a middle class that is suffering. A simplfication of course but a start) would be that much worse. Govt serves a useful purpose in protecting consumers (our) interests at the VERY LEAST.
Have a good day. Its always enjoyable talking.
Why do you always look for government to protect you? Why can't you protect yourself? It's a rhetorical question. The other thing is why would you want our government to protect you when they've demonstated how badly they perform.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
I dont ALWAYS look for govt to protect me. Thats silly. Your smarter than
that.
S&L if you can t answer why you might want govt to protect you as in consumer protection, SEC, environmental protection. workplace safety, etc. etc. etc. then i dont know why we should even engage in discussions.
Govt is run by people. So is the free market. They both **** up and they
both do somethings well. Come on S&L please stop with the silly everything
about govt is bad mantra, Ever hear of the idea of checks and balances? Well it applies to the relationship between citizens, corporations and govt as well.
Here's a list of failures by the US Government.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/inves...les/full_list/
Sorry to distract you from John.
What do you think of Ayn Rand?
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/11/13/...ment-failures/
I will check Ayn Rand out when i get a chance. Alan Greenspan was a disciple of hers. Not that there is a direct correlation but during his term at the head of the federal reserve he sure did get a lot of things wrong in his analysis of the economy.
The other stuff on govt failures is just plain boring. We all know the govt messes up just as the private markets do. Your tilting way too far in one direction for some funny reason.
The funny reason is simply to offer a contrarian point of view to your belief that the private sector and free markets are the problems, but at least above you recognize the government messes up - we're making progress LOL (I'm taking one from your book lol).Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
The problem with the government messing up is that they are accountable to no one - maybe in theory.... For example, Barney Frank is on record saying Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac aren't a problem, and now he's the chairman of the finance committee. I'm not trying to bust balls on that issue, but to demonstrate how a guy f's up and gets a promotion. If you or I f up at work; we're probably hitting the bricks. Congress is full of that. Mistake after mistake after mistake and no accountability. And to make matters worse, we accept it otherwise we'd throw the bums out. The polictial system that runs our government is corrupt. I think you agree in that you frequently site the role of corporate lobbiests to govenment.
This is why I question why anyone would want more government involvement in anything.
BTW, here's one of the failures. You might agree.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/inves...es/entry/1052/