Quote:President Trump signed an executive order Friday taking aim at the regulatory labyrinth created by Dodd-Frank, the massive 24,000-page law passed in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.

“We expect to be cutting a lot out of Dodd-Frank,” Trump said, after morning meetings with business leaders.

Link

The Dodd-Frank Act explained

Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

People make their own decisions. Anyone stupid enough not to learn from history and trade in subprime mortgages deserve what they get. Personally, Id love another bubble. I bought at the peak in 07 (big rookie mistake) and have paid my mortgage for 10 years, but still underwater. Luckily I got a conventional mortgage. Id love to get out of this hellhole. I am responsible and have top credit and make pretty good money, but being stuck suks.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The saddest part is that Obama told the justice department not to throw any of his wall st friends who were responsible for the illegal actions that took place in jail. If you give a damned about anything of what you just said, you would call Obama out here and now. In fact you shoul dhave called him out on it a year or so ago when he made up his mind to protect his wall st friends.

(02-04-2017 11:49 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The saddest part is that Obama told the justice department not to throw any of his wall st friends who were responsible for the illegal actions that took place in jail. If you give a damned about anything of what you just said, you would call Obama out here and now. In fact you shoul dhave called him out on it a year or so ago when he made up his mind to protect his wall st friends.

I didn't remove Obama from any responsibility in this. I just reacted to current news.

Dodd-Frank Act was also known as Goldman Sach's law. Guess who in charge will be coming up with new laws to replace it? People who were Goldman Sach's at the time they wrecked this economy.

(02-04-2017 11:58 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(02-04-2017 11:49 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The saddest part is that Obama told the justice department not to throw any of his wall st friends who were responsible for the illegal actions that took place in jail. If you give a damned about anything of what you just said, you would call Obama out here and now. In fact you shoul dhave called him out on it a year or so ago when he made up his mind to protect his wall st friends.

I didn't remove Obama from any responsibility in this. I just reacted to current news.

There's a difference between "not removing responsibility" and "speaking out". Right now you are speaking out. When your guy is in office, you sit silent. It means you really dont care about the subject matter, only who is dealing with the subject matter.

(02-04-2017 11:58 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(02-04-2017 11:49 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.
This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.
I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The saddest part is that Obama told the justice department not to throw any of his wall st friends who were responsible for the illegal actions that took place in jail. If you give a damned about anything of what you just said, you would call Obama out here and now. In fact you shoul dhave called him out on it a year or so ago when he made up his mind to protect his wall st friends.

I didn't remove Obama from any responsibility in this. I just reacted to current news.

Dodd-Frank has had two primary impacts on the banking industry:

1) Increased concentration, as small banks cannot afford the regulatory exercises, so they either fold or merge into larger banks, and
2) Substantially increased difficulty in lending/borrowing, placing a ceiling on upside growth potential.

I have a difficult time seeing either one of those as a positive. But what should we expect from a bill drafted by, and bearing the names of, two criminals who should be in prison for their roles in causing the bank crisis and recession?

(02-04-2017 12:25 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-04-2017 11:58 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(02-04-2017 11:49 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.
This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.
I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The saddest part is that Obama told the justice department not to throw any of his wall st friends who were responsible for the illegal actions that took place in jail. If you give a damned about anything of what you just said, you would call Obama out here and now. In fact you shoul dhave called him out on it a year or so ago when he made up his mind to protect his wall st friends.

I didn't remove Obama from any responsibility in this. I just reacted to current news.

There's a difference between "not removing responsibility" and "speaking out". Right now you are speaking out. When your guy is in office, you sit silent. It means you really dont care about the subject matter, only who is dealing with the subject matter.

I have spoken out against Shrub, I've spoken out against Zero, and I've spoken out against Trump. For those who missed it, I oppose the wall, I oppose the tariffs, and I would have done the "Muslim ban" (which isn't a ban and not really aimed at Muslims) a different way. The real issue is countries that either don't have or are unwilling to provide sufficient data to enable comprehensive and accurate background checks to be conducted.

O&B, Dodd-Frank is a disaster. It needs massive changes. Its regulatory requirements have driven small banks out, leading to a more concentrated industry. Its lending restrictions have essentially shut down bank lending. And don't worry, you're not going to get drowned in another round of sub-primes.

(02-04-2017 11:49 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The saddest part is that Obama told the justice department not to throw any of his wall st friends who were responsible for the illegal actions that took place in jail. If you give a damned about anything of what you just said, you would call Obama out here and now. In fact you shoul dhave called him out on it a year or so ago when he made up his mind to protect his wall st friends.

Repealing DF would be a colossal mistake that will spark a short boom (which we might already be seeing) and a crash shortly thereafter within ~1 year. DF has flaws, but it also has some extremely good safeguards. Banking regulations is markedly more complicated than I think anyone here realizes. There is no such thing as a perfect regulation. They will all always be works in process, so the existence of flaws is not grounds for a complete repeal.

Secondly, not pushing for jail time was a huge mistake in the last go-around. But I'm not sure if the DoJ even has the structural mechanisms (i.e. the right people w/ the right training, w/ the right experience) to successfully litigate these cases on a large scale against very good defense attorneys and consistently win in an efficient manner. That needs to change (but it won't).

Obama's drone program and his bailing out/not prosecuting anyone over the sub prime crisis was shameful.

The people who should have been prosecuted are Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Franklin Raines, and Jamie Gorelick.

(02-04-2017 12:57 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-04-2017 11:58 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(02-04-2017 11:49 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.
This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.
I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The saddest part is that Obama told the justice department not to throw any of his wall st friends who were responsible for the illegal actions that took place in jail. If you give a damned about anything of what you just said, you would call Obama out here and now. In fact you shoul dhave called him out on it a year or so ago when he made up his mind to protect his wall st friends.

I didn't remove Obama from any responsibility in this. I just reacted to current news.

Dodd-Frank has had two primary impacts on the banking industry:

1) Increased concentration, as small banks cannot afford the regulatory exercises, so they either fold or merge into larger banks, and
2) Substantially increased difficulty in lending/borrowing, placing a ceiling on upside growth potential.

I have a difficult time seeing either one of those as a positive. But what should we expect from a bill drafted by, and bearing the names of, two criminals who should be in prison for their roles in causing the bank crisis and recession?

Both Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have been up to point said that the big banks got away with murder while the little banks struggle. That is what the Goldman Sach's do. They gobbled up the smaller banks. One of the biggest small bank that went under for making bad loans were banks in Arizona and Nevada that was run by John McCain's son. Why do you think John McCain lured Obama to vote for the bailout? John McCain was the big guy who wanted the bail out for the banks.

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The next financial blowup will probably start in car loans, student loans, or commercial real estate loans. I'd really watch out for commercial real estate loans. There's a lot of loans out there in that sector and the impact of the move to online retailing will cause that industry to start to falter. It is a time for MORE oversight of the banks, not less.

Of course, adding a bunch of incentives for 'too big to fail' banks to start gambling big again on financial derivatives isn't a good idea either way.

The impact of these regulations will be a temporary rise in financial services stocks, and ultra high end NYC real estate. For the top 0.01 percent

(02-03-2017 10:35 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

People make their own decisions. Anyone stupid enough not to learn from history and trade in subprime mortgages deserve what they get. Personally, Id love another bubble. I bought at the peak in 07 (big rookie mistake) and have paid my mortgage for 10 years, but still underwater. Luckily I got a conventional mortgage. Id love to get out of this hellhole. I am responsible and have top credit and make pretty good money, but being stuck suks.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

And if banks fail all the executives' stock options become worthless. Saying they don't care if they fail is just demonstrating you have no understanding of corporations and business.

(02-04-2017 06:28 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The next financial blowup will probably start in car loans, student loans, or commercial real estate loans. I'd really watch out for commercial real estate loans. There's a lot of loans out there in that sector and the impact of the move to online retailing will cause that industry to start to falter. It is a time for MORE oversight of the banks, not less.

Of course, adding a bunch of incentives for 'too big to fail' banks to start gambling big again on financial derivatives isn't a good idea either way.

The impact of these regulations will be a temporary rise in financial services stocks, and ultra high end NYC real estate. For the top 0.01 percent

Banks are still ultra-cautious. Its hard to get real estate financing. Its going to take a few years before they forget what happened.

Kind of like the oil business. Huge boom in Texas in mid 50s and then the industry stagnated until late 70s. Collapse started in 1982 and it fell through the floor in 1986. There was a bumper stick you would see, "Lord please give me another oil boom and I promise not to p___ this one away." By 1980 most of the people who learned to be cautious in the late 50s had retired.

Texas didn't have nearly the real estate collapse like the rest of the country in 2008, because the collapse of 1986-1987 was still within memory for the local bankers. They were cautious while the rest of the country was going nuts.

(02-04-2017 06:37 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(02-04-2017 06:28 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

The next financial blowup will probably start in car loans, student loans, or commercial real estate loans. I'd really watch out for commercial real estate loans. There's a lot of loans out there in that sector and the impact of the move to online retailing will cause that industry to start to falter. It is a time for MORE oversight of the banks, not less.

Of course, adding a bunch of incentives for 'too big to fail' banks to start gambling big again on financial derivatives isn't a good idea either way.

The impact of these regulations will be a temporary rise in financial services stocks, and ultra high end NYC real estate. For the top 0.01 percent

Banks are still ultra-cautious. Its hard to get real estate financing. Its going to take a few years before they forget what happened.

Kind of like the oil business. Huge boom in Texas in mid 50s and then the industry stagnated until late 70s. Collapse started in 1982 and it fell through the floor in 1986. There was a bumper stick you would see, "Lord please give me another oil boom and I promise not to p___ this one away." By 1980 most of the people who learned to be cautious in the late 50s had retired.

Texas didn't have nearly the real estate collapse like the rest of the country in 2008, because the collapse of 1986-1987 was still within memory for the local bankers. They were cautious while the rest of the country was going nuts.

Also, Texas banned home equity loans until 1997. And even then, they couldn't be for more than 80% of the home's value.

(02-03-2017 10:24 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Mistake.

This is going to end in more people losing everything trading sub-prime mortgages. The banks don't care if they fail since they'll be getting bailed out anyway. The saddest part about it is that we're all so stupid that we'll buy what we can't afford anyway - just 10 years after the last collapse.

I'm in architecture. I hope that I don't have to move after this next bubble bursts just to find work. I don't want to leave.

imho, the saddest part is people who are too dumb to understand they can't afford a house. more of an indictment on our public education system than anything else.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Dodd-Frank increases the concentration of our banking system, greatly increases the difficulty of loaning and borrowing funds, and addresses none of the root causes of the 2008 crash. And it was drafted by two men who should be in prison for their roles in creating the crisis. Other than that, it's fine piece of legislation.

Trump is on a roll and Im down with this. Im pretty much against anything that the corrupt POS Barney Frank had anything to do with.