PDA

View Full Version : The SEC is going after the ratings agencies.



Chopstick
05-14-2010, 09:41 AM
Now that's what I'm talking about and they ain't playin either. None of this world wide economic meltdown could have happened without the ratings agencies like Moodys, Standard & Poors, et al. You see, large institutions are not allowed to buy bonds that do not have premium ratings. A great many of them will only buy bonds with the AAA rating which is the highest. It is the responsibility of the ratings agency to thoroughly investigate the security they are rating.

Fannie was stuffing 70% sub prime paper into their CDOs and still getting AAA ratings. How the hell did that happen and more importantly, how did it happen thousands of times? It doesn't matter what an investment banker puts into a security. If it gets a junk rating, no large institution is going to buy it. They can't. The people who do buy them know what they are getting and will get a higher premium rate because of the risk they are taking. Companies that insure the debt like AIG with CDSs will be able to assign a proper value to them based on the risk and get an appropriate premium for it or not insure it at all. A AAA rating means that there is virtually no risk that a bond will ever default.

Those CDOs should have never have made it into the market, much less saturate it. The SEC is going after the investment banks also. Personally, I think that the guys at the ratings agencies were getting something under the table from the investment banks to issue bogus ratings. I don't know if we will ever see any of them in jail but at least they are looking in the right direction.

Deeman3
05-14-2010, 10:06 AM
It is now apparent the Euro will fail. Now, our situation is not much better. If we were each spending $2 of each one we "earned" we would quickly be bankrupt. The problem in this crisis is that both those who have worked and saved and those who never bothered to will be in the same bucket soon. Gold may be a slight hedge as it a few good weapons but, in the long run, our money will be exposed as "Ponzi" documents and they will be worth less than plain paper which at least you can still write on. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I hope they punish those responsible for the banking abuses but we have got to start holding someone accountable for the crazy Euorpe/California type spending that is wasting all our futures.

These instruments like CDO's are only a symptom of the crimes, most committed both by financial people but aided mostly by lobbiests and their political croonies. If we just vote them all out, regardless of party, it will be a couple of yearsbefore the news ones can steal as effectively. IMO

pooltchr
05-14-2010, 10:29 AM
Cutting right to the chase, as usual. Good post!

So many people are so concerned with pointing fingers at who is to blame, they fail to see that right now, we are not making the changes that need to be made.

I'm not anywhere near as concerned with who or what caused the problem, as I am with what are we doing to correct it. As of today, I see very little positive action being taken to reign in the government expansion and outrageous spending that lead to the problem in the first place.

Does anyone in Washington do anything other than try to CYA for political gain. Wake up. It's time to reduce the size of government, and cut way back on spending. That does not include new entitlement programs.

Washington! Start doing what you were designed to do, not whatever the hell you want to do!

Steve

Gayle in MD
05-14-2010, 10:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now that's what I'm talking about and they ain't playin either. None of this world wide economic meltdown could have happened without the ratings agencies like Moodys, Standard & Poors, et al. You see, large institutions are not allowed to buy bonds that do not have premium ratings. A great many of them will only buy bonds with the AAA rating which is the highest. It is the responsibility of the ratings agency to thoroughly investigate the security they are rating.

Fannie was stuffing 70% sub prime paper into their CDOs and still getting AAA ratings. How the hell did that happen and more importantly, how did it happen thousands of times? It doesn't matter what an investment banker puts into a security. If it gets a junk rating, no large institution is going to buy it. They can't. The people who do buy them know what they are getting and will get a higher premium rate because of the risk they are taking. Companies that insure the debt like AIG with CDSs will be able to assign a proper value to them based on the risk and get an appropriate premium for it or not insure it at all. A AAA rating means that there is virtually no risk that a bond will ever default.

Those CDOs should have never have made it into the market, much less saturate it. The SEC is going after the investment banks also. Personally, I think that the guys at the ratings agencies were getting something under the table from the investment banks to issue bogus ratings. I don't know if we will ever see any of them in jail but at least they are looking in the right direction. </div></div>

I hope they throw all of them in jail, particularly those who escaped bonuses in hand, and retired.

There is a huge number of documentaries on all of this, available on Frontline's website. Everyone of them, the documentaries, is spell binding to me, at least.

One guy said, well if we didn't like the rating, they knew we'd just go across the street, and pay for what we wanted from another rating agency.

Greed. Pure, greed.

G.

Deeman3
05-14-2010, 10:48 AM
While my post covers a bunch of crooks, it does not only point out the suicu=ise the left has orchestrated but the same that has been done by both sides for over 60 years!

None of these politicians, to my knowledge, has earned our trust. Throw them all out and start over. Some on here will try to point out how bad it was vs. how bad it is and who caused it.

I repeat myself, they are all corrupt. Waste is so ingrained in their souls, we have little chance of overcoming them.

If Obama had really thrown out the lobbiests, stopped pork spending and made health care a reasoned reply to the bad systems faults, he would be re-elected and rightly celebrated as a hero in history. He has chosen to just press plitics at the expense of our good like many beofre him. He is enjoying the fumes of the office so much, even the left knows he has abandoned them as well as us. I hope we use the coming elections to change the players on both sides. Instead we will focus on side issues and report more on how Gay the new court nominee is and how we can "solve" the immigration issue by somehow allowing more to enter giving little preference to those already here and less to our own citizens. It is all about votes, right? I hope we can show them there are still people willing the go to the polls and make real change, if real candidates appear.

Chopstick
05-14-2010, 10:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is now apparent the Euro will fail. Now, our situation is not much better. If we were each spending $2 of each one we "earned" we would quickly be bankrupt. The problem in this crisis is that both those who have worked and saved and those who never bothered to will be in the same bucket soon. Gold may be a slight hedge as it a few good weapons but, in the long run, our money will be exposed as "Ponzi" documents and they will be worth less than plain paper which at least you can still write on. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I hope they punish those responsible for the banking abuses but we have got to start holding someone accountable for the crazy Euorpe/California type spending that is wasting all our futures.

These instruments like CDO's are only a symptom of the crimes, most committed both by financial people but aided mostly by lobbiests and their political croonies. If we just vote them all out, regardless of party, it will be a couple of yearsbefore the news ones can steal as effectively. IMO </div></div>

Absolutely correct. The CEO of Deutsche Bank went on German TV last night and said he didn't think that Greece was going to payback their debt. There are just buying time. Schwarzenegger is coming out with a budget that cuts all kinds of entitlement programs and the Dems are having a fit about it.

I don't care if they are a Democrat or Republican, the constitution doesn't grant the government the authority to spend one dime on any entitlement program and anyone who proposes or signs such a bill is in violation of the law and should be arrested. Fire em all and start over.

Gayle in MD
05-14-2010, 10:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is now apparent the Euro will fail. Now, our situation is not much better. If we were each spending $2 of each one we "earned" we would quickly be bankrupt. The problem in this crisis is that both those who have worked and saved and those who never bothered to will be in the same bucket soon. Gold may be a slight hedge as it a few good weapons but, in the long run, our money will be exposed as "Ponzi" documents and they will be worth less than plain paper which at least you can still write on. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I hope they punish those responsible for the banking abuses but we have got to start holding someone accountable for the crazy Euorpe/California type spending that is wasting all our futures.

<span style="color: #000066">One of the things that hurt all of us, and our economy, was OIL PRICES, two wars, no government oversight of Wall Street, or the no bidders in Iraq, and politicians being bought by Lobbyists.

What do you think the result of the RW Supreme court's latest decision on what corporations can now spend to buy the representatives they want, is going to be?

I really do not understand how you guys can overlook the corporate/Republican link, the Republican deregulation policies which led to all of this, and their subsidizing the same thieves that have stolen form us for years.

I hate to think of what these oil companies are going to do to us to pay for their own stupidity, but you can easily look and see which party has been protecting the bankks and OIL....Who blocked the fast track this week, for raising the financial liability on the Oil Corps? A Republican, from Alaska, Murkowski.

Big business is robbing all of us, with a pass from Republicans all the way. Wasn't Spitzer going after Wall Street when he was busted?

All of it happend on Bush's watch, with a Republican running the Fed, and Republicans in charge of all of the financial oversight....who said that fraud in the financial and banking industry, didn't worry him! Greenspan.</span>

These instruments like CDO's are only a symptom of the crimes, most committed both by financial people but aided mostly by lobbiests and their political croonies.

<span style="color: #000066">K. Street Lobbyiss trippled in the first year of Bush et al. I think we've already seen the current president, AND Barney Frank, say exactly what you are saying, over and over again. It is undeniable, Republicans have blocked e very attempt to come down on tightening restrictions, on the financial and banking industry, as well as the oil industry.</span>



If we just vote them all out, regardless of party, it will be a couple of yearsbefore the news ones can steal as effectively. IMO </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">If only! The repubs will be bought and paid for before we ever vote! Who owns the most media channels? Who dug this hole in the first place? Didn't they promise their usual small government BS, and less spending the last time they had the majority?

Obama had no choice but to spend. He's doig a fine job, as all indicators show, even slightly beter employment numbers of late.

Voting all of them out isn't the answer. Voting the obstructionists to progress, and tighter regulatory oversight out, makes far more sense to me, since the charts from the government all prove that Republicans grow the government, spend more money, and all suffer under them, except for the top one percent. That's a fact.

What you got from Republicans in control for decades, is just exactly what you see right now.

G.</span>

Chopstick
05-14-2010, 10:59 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
There is a huge number of documentaries on all of this, available on Frontline's website. Everyone of them, the documentaries, is spell binding to me, at least.

<span style="color: #000099">I am a fan of Frontline. I have posted some of their material before. No one seemed to show any interest. The latest one I saw was titled "Obamas Deal" about the health care bill. It turns out that the health care bill was not written behind closed doors by the Pelosi/Reid crew. It was written by the heath insurance companies. How is that going to save us money? What a mess it turned out to be.</span>

One guy said, well if we didn't like the rating, they knew we'd just go across the street, and pay for what we wanted from another rating agency.

<span style="color: #000099">Now that you mention it, I heard that too.</span>

Greed. Pure, greed.

G. </div></div>

Gayle in MD
05-14-2010, 11:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
There is a huge number of documentaries on all of this, available on Frontline's website. Everyone of them, the documentaries, is spell binding to me, at least.

<span style="color: #000099">I am a fan of Frontline. I have posted some of their material before. No one seemed to show any interest. The latest one I saw was titled "Obamas Deal" about the health care bill. It turns out that the health care bill was not written behind closed doors by the Pelosi/Reid crew. It was written by the heath insurance companies. How is that going to save us money? What a mess it turned out to be.</span>

One guy said, well if we didn't like the rating, they knew we'd just go across the street, and pay for what we wanted from another rating agency.

<span style="color: #000099">Now that you mention it, I heard that too.</span>

Greed. Pure, greed.

G. </div></div> </div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">They aren't finished with it yet. What would you rather have done, for the previous eight years, spent money to help our seniors and kids, and Middle Class, who are dying because they have no H.C. insurance, or spend in all in the Middle East, forcing democracy down another country's throats, and going after contracts for oil.


Now, we have the top one percent of the GLOBAL greedy Wealthy. They have no loyalty to ANY country. And Bush and Cheney have been in bed with them since before Bush one ever got into office.

Health care had to be address, if our economy is going to ever have a future shot for average people.

It was bad timing, but he knew it was his only shot.

It was really more a matter of moving peole to realize that we cannot compete on the global market, unless we address our own Health Care Costs. They are crucial to our future.

I admit, he has done a lot of spending, most of it though, he had no choice about. Like think about all the jobs that would be gone, if he hadn't spent money on saving our automobile industry, millions more would be out of work.

President's have paid lip service to solving the greedy health care and pharmaceutical industry for decades. I pay my medical Oncoligist $800.00.00 for ten minutes, every four months. WTF? That's crazy!

I told her, I'm not going to come to see you every four months, unless I am having problems. I dropped the radiology oncologist, completely. She wanted me back in her office, every four months, too, another $800.00 for ten minutes. For what? They can't see through my breast tissue. My second tumore didn't show up anywhere, after two mammos, ultrasound, and MRI!

I can go to my surgeon, for a breast exam, and get mammos twice a year, and be just as well covered for detecting anything new.

It's highway robbery.

WE will see far more lowering the boom on crooks, under Obama, and a Democratiic majority, than you will EVER see under the deregulatory Republicans, I can assure you of that!

Salazar is going to do a top to bottom reform on oil rigs and platforms, and our laws and regulatory agencies. Do you really thing THAT would ever happen with Bush, and a Republican majority?

"I will not tolerate more finger pointing and irresponsibility."

President Obama....


Do you think you'd ever even hear that from a Republican? NO WAY!

Americans have been gouged far too long by corporations who have us all by the ass. We have to have health care, meddicine, we have to have oil and gas, but take a look at CEO profits compared to just twenty years ago, compared to their employees share of the pie. Take a look at the precentages of their profits, all going to the top CEO's. Unions? LMAO. Reagan took care of that!

Take a look at health insurance costs, compared to twenty years ago, pharmaceuticals, tax havens, loop holes for the very wealthy.

The chasm between the very rich and the middle class grows whenever Republicans are running the show, the Gov. charts prove it.

G.</span>

Deeman3
05-14-2010, 11:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD
The chasm between the very rich and the middle class grows whenever Republicans are running the show, the Gov. charts prove it.

G.[/color</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Absolutely the same no matter which party is running the show. You won't admit it but the Dems were just as much in control and did not fight any lobbies in Bush's or Obama's time. </span>

Gayle in MD
05-14-2010, 12:16 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD
The chasm between the very rich and the middle class grows whenever Republicans are running the show, the Gov. charts prove it.

G.[/color</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Absolutely the same no matter which party is running the show. You won't admit it but the Dems were just as much in control and did not fight any lobbies in Bush's or Obama's time. </span> </div></div>

This president is fighting them. The banks, Health Insurance, and the oil companies.

Are you going to deny that deregulation is overall a Republican policy? Because there is o denying, the Middle Class always suffers under the Republicans. The charts prove it.


The financial disaster happened under Republican majority, and a Republican President.

Many economists stateded that we had been in a recession for a full year, before the Bush Administration admitted it.

The deal with the Bank bailouts was written, by Paulson, now what did I read, a whole year before the colapse?

I'll try and find it. It was a good source, I do recall.

The damage had alredy happened, before dems got control. since then, I have seen them trying to push through legislation to tighten all of it up, while the Republicans on everything, vote NO.

Now, surely you must heard heard McConnels BS, after he got back from his week in New York, with the banks?

You can see for yourself, who just blocked raising financial liability on this oil spill, A Republican.

Greenspan, A Republican.

Paulson, same thing.

Bush put the lobbyists in charge of regulating everything. LMAO. How much more obvious could it be?
Kennedy screamed about America's health costs for decades.

Carter warned us decades ago about our circumstances if we did not address technology for renewable fuels, annd use conservation methods, to cut usage.

Reagan took the solar panels off the White House.

You say they're no different, I say they are, and I'm older than you are, and have become a snapdraggon, so you have to be nice to me.

G. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

pooltchr
05-14-2010, 12:43 PM
Playing the age card?????????

LMAO!

Steve

LWW
05-14-2010, 12:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Fannie was stuffing 70% sub prime paper into their CDOs and still getting AAA ratings. How the hell did that happen</div></div>

Because Johnson, Raines, and Gorelich were certifying it as AAA paper by co-signing for it with Uncle Sam's good name.

How the hell did that happen?

Obama, Waters, Frank, Dodd, et al were running interference for Raines, Johnson and Gorelich.

How the hell did that happen?

Raines, Johnson and Gorelich were kicking small fortunes of FANNIE/FREDDIE money into the campaign coffers of Obama, Waters, Frank, Dodd, et al.

Who appointed Raines, Johnson, and Gorelich to these positions? William Jefferson Clinton.

Where are they now? Most are working for the Obama regime.

Who's fault does the O-cult claim this all is?
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/1aaaabushitler.jpg

LWW

LWW
05-14-2010, 12:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The financial disaster happened under Republican majority, and a Republican President.

G. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif</div></div>

No, it didn't.

LWW

Gayle in MD
05-14-2010, 01:59 PM
[quote]-risk mortgage loans and lending/borrowing practices
In the years before the crisis, the behavior of lenders changed dramatically. Lenders offered more and more loans to higher-risk borrowers,[71] including illegal immigrants.[72] Subprime mortgages amounted to $35 billion (5% of total originations) in 1994,[73] 9% in 1996,[74] $160 billion (13%) in 1999,[73] and $600 billion (20%) in 2006.[74][75][76] A study by the Federal Reserve found that the average difference between subprime and prime mortgage interest rates (the "subprime markup") declined significantly between 2001 and 2007. The combination of declining risk premia and credit standards is common to boom and bust credit cycles.[77]

In addition to considering higher-risk borrowers, lenders have offered increasingly risky loan options and borrowing incentives. In 2005, the median down payment for first-time home buyers was 2%, with 43% of those buyers making no down payment whatsoever.[78] By comparison, China has down payment requirements that exceed 20%, with higher amounts for non-primary residences.[79]

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>
Growth in mortgage loan fraud based upon US Department of the Treasury Suspicious Activity Report Analysis.The mortgage qualification guidelines began to change. At first, the stated income, verified assets (SIVA) loans came out. Proof of income was no longer needed. Borrowers just needed to "state" it and show that they had money in the bank. Then, the no income, verified assets (NIVA) loans came out. The lender no longer required proof of employment. Borrowers just needed to show proof of money in their bank accounts. The qualification guidelines kept getting looser in order to produce more mortgages and more securities. This led to the creation of NINA. NINA is an abbreviation of No Income No Assets (sometimes referred to as Ninja loans). Basically, NINA loans are official loan products and let you borrow money without having to prove or even state any owned assets. All that was required for a mortgage was a credit score. [6]

Another example is the interest-only adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM), which allows the homeowner to pay just the interest (not principal) during an initial period. Still another is a "payment option" loan, in which the homeowner can pay a variable amount, but any interest not paid is added to the principal. An estimated one-third of ARMs originated between 2004 and 2006 had "teaser" rates below 4%, which then increased significantly after some initial period, as much as doubling the monthly payment.[80]

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>The proportion of subprime ARM loans made to people with credit scores high enough to qualify for conventional mortgages with better terms increased from 41% in 2000 to 61% by 2006. However, there are many factors other than credit score that affect lending. In addition, mortgage brokers in some cases received incentives from lenders to offer subprime ARM's even to those with credit ratings that merited a conforming (i.e., non-subprime) loan.[81</span>]

Mortgage underwriting standards declined precipitously <span style='font-size: 20pt'>during the boom period.</span> The use of automated loan approvals allowed loans to be made without appropriate review and documentation.[82] In 2007, 40% of all subprime loans resulted from automated underwriting.[83][84] The chairman of the Mortgage Bankers Association claimed that mortgage brokers, while profiting from the home loan boom, did not do enough to examine whether borrowers could repay.[85] Mortgage fraud by lenders and borrowers increased enormously.[86] In 2004, the Federal Bureau of Investigation warned of an "epidemic" in mortgage fraud, an important credit risk of nonprime mortgage lending, which, they said, could lead to "a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis".[87][88][89][90]

So why did lending standards decline? In a Peabody Award winning program, NPR correspondents argued that a "Giant Pool of Money" (represented by $70 trillion in worldwide fixed income investments) sought higher yields than those offered by U.S. Treasury bonds early in the decade. Further, this pool of money had roughly doubled in size from 2000 to 2007, yet the supply of relatively safe, income generating investments had not grown as fast. Investment banks on Wall Street answered this demand with financial innovation such as the mortgage-backed security (MBS) and collateralized debt obligation (CDO), which were assigned safe ratings by the credit rating agencies. In effect, Wall Street connected this pool of money to the mortgage market in the U.S., with enormous fees accruing to those throughout the mortgage supply chain, from the mortgage broker selling the loans, to small banks that funded the brokers, to the giant investment banks behind them. By approximately 2003, the supply of mortgages originated at traditional lending standards had been exhausted. However, continued strong demand for MBS and CDO began to drive down lending standards, as long as mortgages could still be sold along the supply chain. Eventually, this speculative bubble proved unsustainable. NPR described it this way:[91]

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>The problem was that even though housing prices were going through the roof, people weren't making any more money. From 2000 to 2007, the median household income stayed flat. And so the more prices rose, the more tenuous the whole thing became. No matter how lax lending standards got, no matter how many exotic mortgage products were created to shoehorn people into homes they couldn't possibly afford, no matter what the mortgage machine tried, the people just couldn't swing it. By late 2006, the average home cost nearly four times what the average family made. Historically it was between two and three times. <span style='font-size: 23pt'>And mortgage lenders noticed something that they'd almost never seen before. People would close on a house, sign all the mortgage papers, and then default on their very first payment. No loss of a job, no medical emergency, they were underwater before they even started. And although no one could really hear it, that was probably the moment when one of the biggest speculative bubbles in American history popped.</span></span> [/quote</span>]

It was not Fannie and Freddie. The sub prime market was being operated in an entirely different manner than EVER before in our history, and particularly, it was a whole different chapter in financing than we had ever seen previously, with shadow operations growing in the entire financial industry.

Before Democratic ever took control, the damage was done, and it was all done by predatory lenders, and in fact, to a greater degree after Fannie and Freddie got out of the subprime market, in 03, and huge Wall Street financial and Invesment banks, and predatory mortgages companies, like CountryWide, all jumping in with both feet, under far more loosely regulatory oversight, UNDER BUSH, than had ever been witnessed, mostly from late 03 through 07, when the warnings has begun to surface, bells went off, which they, Bush and the Republicans, and Bush's economic appointees all ignored completely. Bush's desire to wait if possible unil he could blame someone else, Republicans, in their quest for re-election. Hence, the Shadow Banking and lending and speculating, and gambling Industres were allowed to continue, in spite of plenty of warnings. e"ven the FBI, warning as early as 2004!

Oh, the Free Market will take care of everything, Yeh, right!

G.