Freddie Mac CFO Apparently Commits Suicide

[BDashe 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

you dont want to get into a pissing contest like this in these forums homie...

listen to lawrocket on this one.

I have a VERY low tolerance for crooks.. even the white collar ones...

Clearly. Thankfully you're not the head of state, or anything of importance. May your moral soapbox be forever cloaked in a delusion of golden suds.

DAYUM its a good thing you are a skydiver.... that is one mighty high horse that you are going to have to get off of some day.

Hmmm... not sure exactly what it is you think I am preaching to be considered on a high horse, other than having called you out on yours. I apologize if it stings.

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

you dont want to get into a pissing contest like this in these forums homie...

listen to lawrocket on this one.

I have a VERY low tolerance for crooks.. even the white collar ones...

Clearly. Thankfully you're not the head of state, or anything of importance. May your moral soapbox be forever cloaked in a delusion of golden suds.

DAYUM its a good thing you are a skydiver.... that is one mighty high horse that you are going to have to get off of some day.

Hmmm... not sure exactly what it is you think I am preaching to be considered on a high horse, other than having called you out on yours. I apologize if it stings.

No snaps for you .. you socially fabulous thang you.

Great failure should have appropriate consequences.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcO4MMzdYE8&feature=related

[piper17 1]

Yep...follow the money.

The money trail certainly seems to lead to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. I wonder if they will have the decency to hang themselves.

"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

[billvon 2,471]

>The same people who preach compassion and understanding
>are laughing at this. Such assholes!

And the people who preach war are apparently hoping for more death:

>The money trail certainly seems to lead to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.
>I wonder if they will have the decency to hang themselves.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Yep...follow the money.

The money trail certainly seems to lead to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. I wonder if they will have the decency to hang themselves.

Another poster with variable ethics I see. I see you only blame the Dems and not the thieveing republiscums who were in charge of the house at the time and led the way. The politicians opened the door for those who have no ethics... all it matters is how rich they could get.

Scumbag lawyers... unscrupulous "sales" people... and ethically challenged executives are far more at fault than the victims of their scams who thought and were led to believe by those people that with the low interest rates that they could afford a home.... which they have now lost.

I just think that those who benefited the most should lose it all since they were dealing in fraud.

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

And the people who preach war are apparently hoping for more death:

Who are you quoting there?

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[billvon 2,471]

You, then Piper17.

[Butters 0]

Quote

Scumbag lawyers... unscrupulous "sales" people... and ethically challenged executives are far more at fault than the victims of their scams who thought and were led to believe by those people that with the low interest rates that they could afford a home.... which they have now lost.

Victims ...

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[TomAiello 25]

Quote

And the people who preach war are apparently hoping for more death:

>The money trail certainly seems to lead to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.
>I wonder if they will have the decency to hang themselves.

Honestly, I'd read piper17's post as hyperbole, meaning that he had exaggerated his response in an obviously ridiculous way (by referring to people hanging themselves) in order to make a point.

It appeared to me that he was saying that wishing for people to commit suicide, or even rejoicing in it, was absurd, and he was illustrating that point by switching the target to people who another poster might be more likely to empathize with (presumably because they shared some political viewpoints--although in this case it's not exactly clear what the deceased's political affiliation or views were).

But I dunno, it is the internet. People miss sarcasm and hyperbole all the time here, so maybe I just read some in where it wasn't intended.



Also, I'll go a bit further than what I read into his post:

Rejoicing in a person's suicide is morally reprehensible, and I greatly hope that those who express such sentiments are, themselves, engaged in exaggeration for the sake of internet argument, and in person are better human beings than the appearance they present here.

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

And the people who preach war are apparently hoping for more death:

>The money trail certainly seems to lead to Chris Dodd and Barney Frank.
>I wonder if they will have the decency to hang themselves.

Honestly, I'd read piper17's post as hyperbole, meaning that he had exaggerated his response in an obviously ridiculous way (by referring to people hanging themselves) in order to make a point.

It appeared to me that he was saying that wishing for people to commit suicide, or even rejoicing in it, was absurd, and he was illustrating that point by switching the target to people who another poster might be more likely to empathize with (presumably because they shared some political viewpoints--although in this case it's not exactly clear what the deceased's political affiliation or views were).

But I dunno, it is the internet. People miss sarcasm and hyperbole all the time here, so maybe I just read some in where it wasn't intended.



Also, I'll go a bit further than what I read into his post:

Rejoicing in a person's suicide is morally reprehensible, and I greatly hope that those who express such sentiments are, themselves, engaged in exaggeration for the sake of internet argument, and in person are better human beings than the appearance they present here.

Fuck no man..since so many American executives have such a lack of moral fibre... and a lack of ethics..perhaps a dose of japanese management style is a step forward for them. This is a failure on such a massive scale... if they sought to win so big and failed so massively.... the only solution is to open some veins. A lot more of them should exercisethe option.

[BDashe 0]

Quote

Fuck no man..since so many American executives have such a lack of moral fibre... and a lack of ethics..perhaps a dose of japanese management style is a step forward for them. This is a failure on such a massive scale... if they sought to win so big and failed so massively.... the only solution is to open some veins. A lot more of them should exercisethe option.

Ahhh, you need to realize the only execs that you know of are the ones that make the news... which just happen to be the ones that screw up. You're not going to hear about the 95% of em that actually are doing their jobs, or trying to.

Sex sells, and g*d d*mn me if the 95% of americans that make less than an exec salary don't think that painting their boss' boss' boss as a b@stard is dead sexy.

what percentage of news is uplifting? you're not going to hear about the majority of people working hard and trying to do good, youre going to hear about what gets ratings from the masses...

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Scumbag lawyers... unscrupulous "sales" people... and ethically challenged executives are far more at fault than the victims of their scams who thought and were led to believe by those people that with the low interest rates that they could afford a home

That's like blaming unscrupulous drug dealers, manufacturers, and the CIA for a drug problem. Or blaming the breweries for a drinking problem.

These people were led to believe that they could afford a home? Well, yes - until the mortgage adjusted after three years. In the DOZENS of people I have met with I have YET to see a disclosure statement that did not precisely list EXACTLY what the payments would be.

With only a few exceptions they said that they thought that the value of the home would increase and they would sell it to make a profit or refinance for a lower rate. The exceptions admitted that they just weren't thinking or that they were living with a boyfriend/girlfriend and they broke up.

When you see a Truth-in-Lending disclosure that says that your payments will be $4,120.59 starting May 1, 2007 and you are making $5k per month claiming the "victim" is not gonna work for me. I had one lady who started up a business. She bought her house in 1982, I think. IN 2003, she refinanced and pulled out about $55k. In 2004 she did it again and pulled out $75k. In 2005 she refinanced TWICE pulling out $125k and $290k!

I saw her in late 2007. The last $160k she took out was GONE in less than two years. Gone! Some went to support her business. Some went to making the monthly strokes. Most of it went to vacations and other things.

Now - should the banks have been giving this money? No. And they deserve to face the money troubles they have. Don't go calling those people who had foreclosures (a VERY LARGE number of whom were greedy, irresponsible liars) "victims."

What do you say to the person with $50k in credit card debt who makes $35k per year? "Oh. You poor thing. You sad and sorry soul. You were victimized by the allure plastic." Yeah? How the hell did that person SPEND that money? By being greedy and irresponsible.

The VAST majority of good credit risks are still in their homes and making the strokes.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

You, then Piper17.

Where did I say anything like that in this thread? You must have misread my post or thought I was someone else.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

In the DOZENS of people I have met with I have YET to see a disclosure statement that did not precisely list EXACTLY what the payments would be.

Interesting. The interest rate on ARM's is typically tied to an index, the future performance of which is unknown at time of signing, thus it could not be known "EXACTLY" what the future payments would be.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[DougH 270]

Quote

Interesting. The interest rate on ARM's is typically tied to an index, the future performance of which is unknown at time of signing, thus it could not be known "EXACTLY" what the future payments would be.

You would have to be a absolute moron to lack the capacity to understand that interest rates do not decrease year after year.

You may not know exactly what your future payments will be, but you should understand that if you can barely afford your payments when the rates are good, that you have no chance when they reset to something less desirable.

Some victims... more like ignorant fools.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[jerryzflies 0]

Quote

True. The blue collar crooks who took $400k to buy a house and didn't repay it didn't do anythong wrong. They just didn't pay it back.

Not all defaulters were scumbags. Many, I'd suggest most, were caught by circumstances beyond their control.

And even then, $400k is peanuts compared with the thievery of people like Madoff, Lay, Skilling, Swartz, Kozlowski, etc.

If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

You may not know exactly what your future payments will be, but you should understand that if you can barely afford your payments when the rates are good, that you have no chance when they reset to something less desirable..

I was just pointing out that the reality of the typical situation does not match the claim made in the post.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jloirsdaan 0]

I'm with you, Amazon.

Jordan

Go Fast, Dock Soft.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

True. The blue collar crooks who took $400k to buy a house and didn't repay it didn't do anythong wrong. They just didn't pay it back.

Not all defaulters were scumbags. Many, I'd suggest most, were caught by circumstances beyond their control.

And even then, $400k is peanuts compared with the thievery of people like Madoff, Lay, Skilling, Swartz, Kozlowski, etc.

Well those guys are heroes to the apologists for them....

They are just waiting for their chance to get in there and get rich at other peoples expense... no matter how bereft of ethics they need to be. The only thing that matters is the accumulation of wealth.

Gee.....most crooks sound exactly the same.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

You may not know exactly what your future payments will be, but you should understand that if you can barely afford your payments when the rates are good, that you have no chance when they reset to something less desirable..

I was just pointing out that the reality of the typical situation does not match the claim made in the post.

Actually, the truth in lending provides est8imates. Most had interest that was tied to an index. Most also were fairly consistent considering the interests rate. Most were also capped at a maximum amount of interest increase - for which the statements reflected.

It is tied to the index with a margin but there was ALWAYS a cap - usually 6 month adjustment with maximum of 1% per adjustment. For a $400k house, with a 20% second (which is what the ARM would be) you'd get a second of $80k. Figuring an indexed 5.0% in 2004, the ARM would usually be capped at 7% in 05 and 9% in 06 and 11% in 07 - which exceeded the actual rate in increase of the Index.

So you could expect - at the most - to be paying an additional $133.00 per month AFTER the introductory rate wore off.

The increases in payments were there. They couldn't afford them. They started going negative amortization. Lots of these things just happened.

There were two problems - the banks had no business giving these loans. The second was that the borrowers had no business receiving them.

And really - the payments were nearly EXACTLY what was predicted. This is because the standard I was seeing was a 3-year initial fixed "teaser" rate. Then a big jump. KABOOM! Which was disclosed. It would adjust as predicted.

I believe the index rate doubled from 2004-2006 - which was less that the adjustment cap. These loans had lifetime caps of 6%. You'd see a disclosed interest rate jump of 3% in these things. Paying interest only at 5% left a $300 payment. Now the payment has gone up to $500 per month.

Add to that these foolish negative amortization loans, when the adjustment kicked in they were now at 600 per month. Foolishness on all sides.

But - these loans had mostly 3-year low-rate fixed. That's why we saw so much trouble starting in 07 - that's when these 3-year notes adjusted up.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

Quote

True. The blue collar crooks who took $400k to buy a house and didn't repay it didn't do anythong wrong. They just didn't pay it back.

Not all defaulters were scumbags. Many, I'd suggest most, were caught by circumstances beyond their control.

And even then, $400k is peanuts compared with the thievery of people like Madoff, Lay, Skilling, Swartz, Kozlowski, etc.

The circumstances may have been beyond their control, but better planning....even barely-reasonable planning....would've prevented them from being "caught."

A lot of people want some standard of living that they can't afford, so they see what they want to see. Instead of looking at their own situations realistically, they sugar-coat it for themselves. Well, they screwed up. Can't blame anybody but themselves.

Those who gave the loans were greedy. I think these folks could easily foresee what was likely to happen, but they, too, put blinders on and believed the lies they told themselves. They deserve what befell them.

Unfortunately when those folks got what was theirs, the rest of us got it too. There's gotta be a lesson in there...somewhere.

~linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

There were two problems - the banks had no business giving these loans. The second was that the borrowers had no business receiving them.

Agreed. I would suggest that the former was the greater mistake, if only slightly so.

Consumers are not accustomed to being offered loans that they will not be able to afford if everything goes as anticipated (i.e. no job loss, income reduction, etc.). Most of them knew nothing about CDO's, and that it wasn't in the bank's interest to even care, since their mortgage would be quickly resold.

That's doesn't mean the consumers were not at all to blame, just that traditionally there has been a safeguard in place to prevent over-borrowing, rejection of the loan application. Qualifying for a loan used to mean exactly that, the applicant was qualified and able to meet the obligations of the contract.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Lindsey 0]

umers are not accustomed to being offered loans that they will not be able to afford if everything goes as anticipated

Bullshit! 20 years ago when I was in college, any kid could get a credit card without any means to pay the loan. LOTS of kids got in credit card trouble. It's the same crew with the same mind-set buying homes on loans they couldn't afford. They didn't look past the ends of their noses. And they ARE to blame for their own mistakes. They're not victims. Victims are people whom hurricanes hit, not people who borrow money they can't pay back.

~linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Bullshit! 20 years ago when I was in college, any kid could get a credit card without any means to pay the loan.

Both the lenders and borrowers typically anticipated students graduating from college and obtaining employment that offered sufficient income.

Did kids that weren't enrolled in college receive credit offers at the same rate as those in college?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[lawrocket 3]

Fair enough and agreed. I have zero problem with your post.

What usually operated was sound business practices. (Note - the ARM wasn't authorized until the Garn-St.Germain Depository Institutions Act (of which I've developed some familiarityt of late) in 1982.). So they don't even have a long history.

My wife is hotter than your wife.