10-27-2008, 11:32 AM
|
#1
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
|
ACORN discussion - can we move this into one thread?
ACORN discussions are wrapped up into several threads so I was hoping that we could try to spin this into one thread to help clean up the board.
Now it appears as though we have two main ACORN topics:
Old news = ACORN's involvement on the housing crisis. This may deserve a thread all to itself but it's pretty clear that we two trains of thought.
1) there is plenty of evidence of the mob tactics that ACORN used to force banks to handout loans to underqualified or unqualified applicants...thus pushing the financial crisis of today.
How has this effected Americans? First those who signed up for the loans are in worse shape today as they no longer can afford to pay the loan back, they now have worse credit and their income is worth less. You can get into the psychological aspect of things...but this may not be the forum for this topic. At the end of the day, these folks that were in bad shape to begin with, are now in worse shape and have a good chance of not getting out of this mess in this lifetime...perhaps future generations of their families will make better choices and not get caught up in this failed liberal system.
There are other Americans also paying the price with the strongly felt recession we are in and the uncertainty of the immidiate future.
2) they had nothing to do with it...I'll let those who support this view discuss on this topic.
Now the other main topic that is being discussed is the current Voter Registration Fraud that is squarely at the hands of ACORN.
I recently read one argument from Mavsdog that stated it was not ACORN but rather those who work for ACORN. Then I also read from Mavsdog "How can anyone ge against getting those who are qualified to vote registered?"
I agree that all who are qualified to vote should be registered to vote. From what I can tell this is not a problem. All one has to do is go up to a Drivers License office and register. Unless someone is truly handicapped and can't go...their is no problem.
Now, should we go out of our way to register every walking body? Here might be were we disagree. I do agree if someone is physically incapable of going to a registration office, then let's find a way to provide a registration to them at their location or of providing handicapped transportation.
All others, we can get the word out, hand out flyers, speak to communities and let them know the where and how...but how can anyone not want a qualified voter to take responsibility for getting themselves registered? Are we so Co-Dependant that we have to do it for them?
Now on the subject of ACORN and its employees. If only one or two employees were guilty of such Voter Registration fraud, then sure we could see a unique case of a few individuals who reflect poorly of the ACORN mission...but correct me if I'm wrong, are these tactics not being detected in several key ground swing states? This is not an isolated case, but rather a trend that are heavily pointing towards ACORN. Where is the line of responsibility on an organization such as ACORN?
It appears to my eyes that we have an organization and a group of citizens trying to do whatever it takes to get what they want in this election. They are throwing what they can at the wall to see what sticks and then when something is caught and found to be illegal they are playing naive.
This is not one or two isolated incidents, but rather Thousands of instances of Voter Registration Fraud. No it is NOT voter fraud until a fraudulant vote has been cast...but how can we not question the voting process with the sheer numbers of registration fraud?
Was it not ACORN that originally reported some 1.3 Million new registered voters, and now they have repealed that number to 400K?
Now what does this do...first it cast major doubt on the upcoming election and the voting in general. Second it plays mind games with those who have followed the system in a legit way. For some, they will be discouraged and perhaps even lose the courage to stand up and vote.
In essense we are witnessing history as we are watching ACORN as an organization manipulate the very foundation of the American Voting System.
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 12:20 PM
|
#2
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,673
|
I've got an even better idea for cleaning up the board.
STOP POSTING.
__________________
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 12:25 PM
|
#3
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux
I've got an even better idea for cleaning up the board.
STOP POSTING.
|
Nice to know that BigBoy support ACORN and believes that we have no problems to discuss regarding ACORN.
You are such a valued member that provides such great enlightenment to thread discussions.
We are all looking forward to your advanced wisdom...perhaps we can elect you to some political office???
Please tell us your platform and how this equates to the thread about ACORN.
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 12:31 PM
|
#4
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,673
|
You are such a beating, dude.
my honest opinion about ACORN and the "voter fraud"?
ACORN isn't committing the fraud, they are the ones being defrauded. They pay people to go out and register voters. These people open up phone books and register anybody, even Mickey Mouse, so they can get paid by ACORN.
Is Mickey Mouse actually going to vote? Are the dead people? Are the 2nd graders? Of course not.
This just boils down to this - The more people that VOTE (not just register), the better it is for the Democratic party. That's why Republicans don't stress regsitration as much as the Democratic party, and that's why false registrations are causing the Republicans to be up in arms.
but again i Stress, for the love of god. PLEASE STOP POSTING. You don't know politics. I'm not even sure why you're even on this board, as you don't really follow the mavs or know much about basketball.
__________________
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 02:46 PM
|
#5
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
|
BBL,
Dude, my issues with the Mavs is pure frustration. I'm a freakin die-hard, but I get pissed at the crap that has happened over the past few years. I've lived and died Mavs since I was a kid in the 80's.
Today, I happen to be a fan who believes there are some serious inconsistancies with the NBA...or perhaps more consistancies that support the conspiracies about the NBA than we would all like to admit.
But that is a topic for the Mavs part of this board. So I'll wait and post on the Mavs section for your pleasure :-)
So in regards to ACORN, you are saying that ACORN is NOT responsible for the employee's that ACORN hired.
You talk about ACORN wanting to get all the qualified voters registered...when is the last time we have seen ACORN enter into afluent, educated, business complex' to ensure that these people where all registered? Why does it appear that ACORN is only going after those who are of lower means within this society? Why does ACORN appear to be going after those to promote Class Wars rather than having integrity and promote voter registration to all?
Why did ACORN push banks to give out loans to unqualified individuals? Often times bringing on negative publicity and even the prospect of legal action to banks who wanted to maitain a FINANCIAL standard around issuing loans?
The concept of ACORN is a good thing...but the execution or tactics that ACORN has taken have flat out been wrong for this nation. They are serving a group of people with low financial means and they are facilitating these individuals to remain in a dependant state, thus providing power to ACORN and the people that ACORN selects to be in various political offices.
ACORN is using mob mentality to reshape the country. This is a very dangerous game and one candidate stands as the shining example of ACORN.
Perhaps your understanding of politics is simply different than mine, or perhaps you are a bit jaded or manipulated in your view.
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 03:10 PM
|
#6
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 92bDad
So in regards to ACORN, you are saying that ACORN is NOT responsible for the employee's that ACORN hired.
|
they were not employees, they were contract workers.
Quote:
You talk about ACORN wanting to get all the qualified voters registered...when is the last time we have seen ACORN enter into afluent, educated, business complex' to ensure that these people where all registered? Why does it appear that ACORN is only going after those who are of lower means within this society? Why does ACORN appear to be going after those to promote Class Wars rather than having integrity and promote voter registration to all?
|
the lower income are the ones who traditionally were denied the opportunity to register and to vote. those were the ones who had poll taxes thrust as barriers, etc. these are where the highest rates of non-regiatered people are at. it is only logical that these would be the groups who are targeted for registration.
as for "class wars", well, that is not the goal.
Quote:
Why did ACORN push banks to give out loans to unqualified individuals? Often times bringing on negative publicity and even the prospect of legal action to banks who wanted to maitain a FINANCIAL standard around issuing loans?
|
you are incorrect, acorn pushed banks to lend in areas of lower income people. as for if these were "unqualified", that was up to the bank to determine, and acorn NEVER forced banks to lend to people who were unqualified...unless you want to argue that all lower income people are unqualified. are you?
there was a long tradition of redlining by banks that suppressed economic development in those areas. acorn was aggressive in stopping the redlining. do you know what redlining is?
second, banks and other mortgage lenders wanted to give these loans to credit risk borrowers, they made more money in doing so. no one forced lenders to make these sub-prime loans, lenders did so because it was very, very profiable, and they could sell these loans.
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 03:25 PM
|
#7
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
they were not employees, they were contract workers.
Now we are talking semantics...employees or contract workers...who is cutting the check to pay these people? Who then is ultimately responsible for the decisions to hire these people and in turn the tactics that these people use.
the lower income are the ones who traditionally were denied the opportunity to register and to vote. those were the ones who had poll taxes thrust as barriers, etc. these are where the highest rates of non-regiatered people are at. it is only logical that these would be the groups who are targeted for registration.
First there is no one DENIED the opportunity to register... we all have an equal opportunity to go down to the local DMV and register to vote.
As for highest reates of non-registered voters...sure target them, but why would you NOT target other areas of non-registered voters? Are these business communities not worthy of ensuring that they are registered?
as for "class wars", well, that is not the goal. - Oh Okay...if you say so, but I'm not buyin...just an opinion so not worth the debate.
you are incorrect, acorn pushed banks to lend in areas of lower income people. as for if these were "unqualified", that was up to the bank to determine, and acorn NEVER forced banks to lend to people who were unqualified...unless you want to argue that all lower income people are unqualified. are you?
My apologies as I don't have the links at my side...but as the stories have indicated, banks had standards in which some people were not originally qualified for a loan, based on "Financial" reasons - they well within the law and yet ACORN threatened Legal/Civil actions under Equal Opportunity based on Ethnic reasons. - The banks fearful of the backlash, regardless of the merit of the threats behind ACORN didn't have the courage to stand up to this manipulation. As a result they changed their standards and starting dishing out riskier loans, basically to people who had originally NOT qualified.
there was a long tradition of redlining by banks that suppressed economic development in those areas. acorn was aggressive in stopping the redlining. do you know what redlining is?
For this I will plead ignorance...so please educate me on redlining.
second, banks and other mortgage lenders wanted to give these loans to credit risk borrowers, they made more money in doing so. no one forced lenders to make these sub-prime loans, lenders did so because it was very, very profiable, and they could sell these loans.
|
Wrong, the banks were intimidated by the threat of civil action from ACORN...they feared the loss of business due to negative publicity feeding negative perceptions.
In the end, people who would have otherwise NOT gotten a loan were granted loans. Today, many of these people are now in worse shape...not only can they no longer pay on this loan, they are being forced out of their homes with little to no hope of paying the bad debt, clearing up their credit or benefiting from this entrapment.
Is ACORN doing anything to educate the people within their community on how to live on a CASH plan and to stay off of credit? I'm simply asking, I'm curious to see if ACORN has adopted a plan of or like that of Dave Ramsey?
Do they want their communities to gain true wealth or to appear to have wealth...what's more important, reality or perception to ACORN?
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 03:43 PM
|
#8
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 92bDad
Wrong, the banks were intimidated by the threat of civil action from ACORN...they feared the loss of business due to negative publicity feeding negative perceptions.
|
again, you are mistaken. the work of acorn was for banks to give loans, not to give loans to anybody regardless of their ability to pay those loans.
show me where acorn forced any bank to make a loan to a borrower who should not have qualified....
Quote:
In the end, people who would have otherwise NOT gotten a loan were granted loans. Today, many of these people are now in worse shape...not only can they no longer pay on this loan, they are being forced out of their homes with little to no hope of paying the bad debt, clearing up their credit or benefiting from this entrapment.
Is ACORN doing anything to educate the people within their community on how to live on a CASH plan and to stay off of credit? I'm simply asking, I'm curious to see if ACORN has adopted a plan of or like that of Dave Ramsey?
Do they want their communities to gain true wealth or to appear to have wealth...what's more important, reality or perception to ACORN?
|
dave ramsey? for lowest income people? pretty funny.
you have a very limited understanding of economically depressed areas, and it appears that you do not understand what redlining is.
they didn't really have any debt because there was no no bank which would loan them anything. no new businesses, no new homes, no home ownership, no better education. that situation kept the lowest income households just that...lowest income.
that is the reality. that is what acorn was changing.
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 04:03 PM
|
#9
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
again, you are mistaken. the work of acorn was for banks to give loans, not to give loans to anybody regardless of their ability to pay those loans.
show me where acorn forced any bank to make a loan to a borrower who should not have qualified....
|
This is an easy blanket statement for you to make, because you know that it is difficult to do.
What we can do, however, is apply common sense. We know that ACORN threatened litigation against banks that wouldn't lend to lower income borrowers. Now, if these loans were so profitable and banks knew that they could make more money making them (as you assert), then why would ACORN need to threaten litigation? If what you suggest were entirely true, it doesn't seem that any coercion would have been required.
I'm not saying that greed by the banks can be taken entirely out of the equation, but it seems illogical that you'd have to coerce a bank into lending practices that were more profitable.
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 04:12 PM
|
#10
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
|
An article with more information about ACORN
The ACORN Obama Knows
Michelle Malkin
If you don’t know what ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) is all about, you better bone up. This left-wing group takes in 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers — you and me — and has leveraged nearly four decades of government subsidies to fund affiliates that promote the welfare state and undermine capitalism and self-reliance, some of which have been implicated in perpetuating illegal immigration and encouraging voter fraud. A new whistleblower report from the Consumer Rights League claims that Chicago-based ACORN has commingled public tax dollars with political projects.
Who in Washington will fight to ensure that your money isn’t being spent on these radical activities?
Don’t bother asking Barack Obama. He cut his ideological teeth working with ACORN as a “community organizer” and legal representative. Naturally, ACORN’s political action committee has warmly endorsed his presidential candidacy. ACORN head Maude Hurd gushes that Obama is the candidate who “best understands and can affect change on the issues ACORN cares about” — like ensuring their massive pipeline to your hard-earned money. Let’s take a closer look at the ACORN Obama knows.
Last July, ACORN settled the largest case of voter fraud in the history of Washington State. Seven ACORN workers had submitted nearly 2,000 bogus voter registration forms. According to case records, they flipped through phone books for names to use on the forms, including “Leon Spinks,” “Frekkie Magoal” and “Fruto Boy Crispila.” Three ACORN election hoaxers pleaded guilty in October. A King County prosecutor called ACORN’s criminal sabotage “an act of vandalism upon the voter rolls.”
The group’s vandalism on electoral integrity is systemic. ACORN has been implicated in similar voter fraud schemes in Missouri, Ohio and at least 12 other states. The Wall Street Journal noted: “In Ohio in 2004, a worker for one affiliate was given crack cocaine in exchange for fraudulent registrations that included underage voters, dead voters and pillars of the community named Mary Poppins, Dick Tracy and Jive Turkey. During a congressional hearing in Ohio in the aftermath of the 2004 election, officials from several counties in the state explained ACORN’s practice of dumping thousands of registration forms in their lap on the submission deadline, even though the forms had been collected months earlier.”
In March, Philadelphia elections officials accused the nonprofit advocacy group of filing fraudulent voter registrations in advance of the April 22nd Pennsylvania primary. The charges have been forwarded to the city district attorney’s office.
Under the guise of “consumer advocacy,” ACORN has received money from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. HUD funds hundreds, if not thousands, of left-wing “anti-poverty” groups across the country led by ACORN. Last October, HUD announced more than $44 million in new housing counseling grants to over 400 state and local efforts. The White House has increased funding for housing counseling by 150 percent since taking office in 2001, despite the role most of these recipients play as activist satellites of the Democratic Party. The AARP scored nearly $400,000 for training; the National Council of La Raza (”The Race”) scooped up more than $1.3 million; the National Urban League raked in nearly $1 million; and the ACORN Housing Corporation received more than $1.6 million.
As the Consumer Rights League points out in its new expose, the ACORN Housing Corporation has worked to obtain mortgages for illegal aliens in partnership with Citibank. It relies on undocumented income, “under the table” money, which may not be reported to the Internal Revenue Service. Moreover, the group’s “financial justice” operations attack lenders for “exotic” loans, while recommending 10-year interest-only loans (which deny equity to the buyer) and risky reverse mortgages. Whistleblower documents reveal internal discussions among the group that blur the lines between its tax-exempt housing work and its aggressive electioneering activities. The group appears to shake down corporate interests with relentless PR attacks, and then enters “no lobby” agreements with targeted corporations after receiving payment.
Republicans have largely looked the other way as ACORN has expanded its government-funded empire. But finally, a few conservative voices in Congress have called for investigation of the group’s apparent extortion schemes. This week, GOP Reps. Tom Feeney, Jeb Hensarling and Ed Royce called on Democrat Barney Frank, chair of the House Financial Services Committee, to convene a hearing to probe potential illegalities and abuse of taxpayer funds by ACORN’s management and minions alike.
Where does the candidate of Hope and Change — the candidate of Reform and New Politics — stand on the issue? Barack Obama, ACORN’s senator, is for more of the same old, same old subsidizing of far-left politics in the name of fighting for the poor while enriching ideological cronies. It’s the Chicago way.
__________________________________________________ __________________
I didn't realize that ACORN was recieving Government money...so not only are they conducting Fraudulant Voter Registration and actually for quite some time, they are also defrauding the government and essentially stealing tax dollars from you and I!!!
This article points to the apparent extortion schemes.
Again the concept of ACORN to be an advocacy group for underdeveloped communities and to help those in Genuine need is admorable...but the actions show a very corrupt organization that is exploiting the peope they claim to help and essentially blackmailing the government and other entities for power and money.
The Republicans are guilty for looking away for so long...but now they have blown the whistle and it is time that the Democrats reach across the aisle and unite America against ACORN and those associated with ACORN.
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 09:07 PM
|
#11
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
too funny. michelle malkin using the faux "consumer rights league" to make her point.
birds of a feather....
|
|
|
10-27-2008, 10:11 PM
|
#12
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
This is an easy blanket statement for you to make, because you know that it is difficult to do.
What we can do, however, is apply common sense. We know that ACORN threatened litigation against banks that wouldn't lend to lower income borrowers. Now, if these loans were so profitable and banks knew that they could make more money making them (as you assert), then why would ACORN need to threaten litigation? If what you suggest were entirely true, it doesn't seem that any coercion would have been required.
I'm not saying that greed by the banks can be taken entirely out of the equation, but it seems illogical that you'd have to coerce a bank into lending practices that were more profitable.
|
*bump*
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 11:50 AM
|
#13
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
This is an easy blanket statement for you to make, because you know that it is difficult to do.
What we can do, however, is apply common sense. We know that ACORN threatened litigation against banks that wouldn't lend to lower income borrowers. Now, if these loans were so profitable and banks knew that they could make more money making them (as you assert), then why would ACORN need to threaten litigation? If what you suggest were entirely true, it doesn't seem that any coercion would have been required.
I'm not saying that greed by the banks can be taken entirely out of the equation, but it seems illogical that you'd have to coerce a bank into lending practices that were more profitable.
|
I'm sure that there is no need to explain to you what redlining is....
acorn threstened banks that would not lend in inner city areas, which were predominate minority areas. there is a connection that these areas had lower income residents. these instances of redlining were based on pure discrimination.
did acorn threaten lawsuits if the bank would not lend to unquaified borrowers? that is the argument that you appear to make, and it is not supported by any facts. if you could produce any backup to support your assertion, let's see it.
the point that I have made is the lenders became more aggressive in making sub-prime and alt-a mortgages, both to minority and non-minority borrowers, in low income areas and non-low income areas, as they saw the profit margins involved. that is why so many lenders made these loans, these lenders did not make these loans due to pressure from acorn. sub-prime and alt-a mortgages were made in a variety of areas and to a variety of borrowers, borrowers who were low, middle and upper incomes. these designations have to do with credit, not with income strata.
Last edited by Mavdog; 10-28-2008 at 11:51 AM.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 12:03 PM
|
#14
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
|
Here's a link:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/2105242/posts?page=5
How ACORN helps UNdocumented people get loans - this is a grey area, but again this puts ACORN involved in very risky and shady deals.
Would ACORN fight for the rights of legal citizens to protect their investments?
I'll keep digging up links...but a bit later, as I have to get out for a flight.
Mavsdog, nice back/forth feedback. Nothing personal, just some disagreements with how we view or interpret what is being reported.
I have my views, in that I believe ACORN is about as crooked as they come...again MY opinion. I will dig up articles and other references for you to read and analyze on your own.
Take care...my apologies, but I gotta run or miss my flight...
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 12:25 PM
|
#15
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 92bDad
Here's a link:
http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/2105242/posts?page=5
How ACORN helps UNdocumented people get loans - this is a grey area, but again this puts ACORN involved in very risky and shady deals.
Would ACORN fight for the rights of legal citizens to protect their investments?
I'll keep digging up links...but a bit later, as I have to get out for a flight.
Mavsdog, nice back/forth feedback. Nothing personal, just some disagreements with how we view or interpret what is being reported.
I have my views, in that I believe ACORN is about as crooked as they come...again MY opinion. I will dig up articles and other references for you to read and analyze on your own.
Take care...my apologies, but I gotta run or miss my flight...
|
it seems the question that should be asked is if illegal foreign nationals residing in the usa should be allowed to purchase real estate in the usa.
if the answer is yes, then acorn and the banks did nothing wrong.
if the answer is no, then the banks and acorn are doing something wrong.
btw, the foreigners purchasing real property in the usa must complete a form called FIRPTA (foreign investor in real property tax act) to take title to real estate.
second, the article you posted contains this: "this could be accomplished just with a Taxpayer Identification Number", so there was no attempt to circumvent the regulations.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 12:52 PM
|
#16
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
I'm sure that there is no need to explain to you what redlining is....
acorn threstened banks that would not lend in inner city areas, which were predominate minority areas. there is a connection that these areas had lower income residents. these instances of redlining were based on pure discrimination.
|
Actually, redlining was a term that was coined in the Chicago area and referred to banks that would lend to low income whites but not middle income minorities. In other words, there was clear racial discrimination involved because they would lend money to a less qualified white borrower.
That's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about, as Stanley Kurtz put it, "ACORN’s campaign to intimidate banks into making high-risk loans to low-credit customers." From Kurtz:
Quote:
Using provisions of a 1977 law called the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), Chicago ACORN was able to delay and halt the efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had agreed to lower their credit standards. link
|
Quote:
did acorn threaten lawsuits if the bank would not lend to unquaified borrowers? that is the argument that you appear to make, and it is not supported by any facts. if you could produce any backup to support your assertion, let's see it.
|
See above. Also, see the following quotes from City Journal:
Quote:
Then came the Community Reinvestment Act. Passed in 1977 to prompt banks to lend money in underserved communities, the CRA allowed community groups to file complaints that could hold up or even scuttle bank mergers. As one nonprofit umbrella group observed: "To avoid the possibility of a denied or delayed application, lending institutions have an incentive to make formal agreements with community organizations."
Acorn became among the most successful at exploiting the law, especially after the Clinton administration set up tough new CRA standards. In 1993 Acorn crafted a $55 million, 11-city lending program administered by it and financed by 14 major banks eager to avoid CRA woes. In 1998 Acorn activists disrupted Federal Reserve hearings on the proposed Citicorp merger with Travelers, waving red umbrellas, a corporate symbol of Travelers, and then later protested Citigroup's acquisition of Associates First Capital Corp. Eventually Citigroup signed an agreement to provide mortgages through Acorn counseling centers, including home loans to undocumented aliens in California. In 2000 a U.S. Senate subcommittee estimated that such CRA deals had directed at least $9.5 billion through nonprofits, making the CRA the second-most important funder of social advocacy groups next to the government itself. link
|
Quote:
But if the CRA is now unnecessary, ACORN has found a use for it beyond wielding it as a propaganda tool to suggest that “redlining” still exists. ACORN has developed a lucrative niche as an “advisor” to banks seeking regulatory approvals. Thus we have J. P. Morgan & Company, the legatee of the man who once symbolized for many all that was supposedly evil about American capitalism, suddenly donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to ACORN. This act of generosity and civic-mindedness came, interestingly, just as Morgan was asking bank regulators for approval of a merger with Chase Manhattan. Not to be outdone, Chase also decided to grant more than $200,000 to ACORN. link
|
So, yeah, I think the evidence shows that they extorted banks into both lowering their credit standards and paying them cash not to create legal problems for them related to proposed mergers.
Quote:
the point that I have made is the lenders became more aggressive in making sub-prime and alt-a mortgages, both to minority and non-minority borrowers, in low income areas and non-low income areas, as they saw the profit margins involved. that is why so many lenders made these loans, these lenders did not make these loans due to pressure from acorn. sub-prime and alt-a mortgages were made in a variety of areas and to a variety of borrowers, borrowers who were low, middle and upper incomes. these designations have to do with credit, not with income strata.
|
Respectfully, I disagree. As I noted above, you can't remove greed from it entirely, but there were legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons that the banks had their credit standards set at a certain level, and they were, in fact, pressured/blackmailed by ACORN into lowering those standards.
Banks are in the business of making money. If the "sub-prime and alt-a" mortgages were so profitable, I find it hard to believe that anyone would have had to pressure them at all.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 01:37 PM
|
#17
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
Actually, redlining was a term that was coined in the Chicago area and referred to banks that would lend to low income whites but not middle income minorities. In other words, there was clear racial discrimination involved because they would lend money to a less qualified white borrower.
|
yes, redlining is discriminatory.
Quote:
That's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about, as Stanley Kurtz put it, "ACORN’s campaign to intimidate banks into making high-risk loans to low-credit customers." From Kurtz:
Quote:
Using provisions of a 1977 law called the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), Chicago ACORN was able to delay and halt the efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had agreed to lower their credit standards. link
|
|
there is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the cra that mandates that banks lend to unqualified borrowers. the act establishes incentives for banks to set up branches and to make loans in areas that are determined to be underserved. it was a result of the prevalent redlining that existed prior to its enactment.
Quote:
See above. Also, see the following quotes from City Journal:
|
still no evidence that the cra mandated banks to make loans to unquaified borrowers.
unless, of course, your position is that all minority and all lower income borrowers are unqualified?
well, are you?
Quote:
So, yeah, I think the evidence shows that they extorted banks into both lowering their credit standards and paying them cash not to create legal problems for them related to proposed mergers.
|
no, the evidence you provide shows that acorn "intimidated banks" into making more loans to minority and lower income borrowers.
again, are all minority and lower income borrowers unqualified?
Quote:
Respectfully, I disagree. As I noted above, you can't remove greed from it entirely, but there were legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons that the banks had their credit standards set at a certain level, and they were, in fact, pressured/blackmailed by ACORN into lowering those standards.
Banks are in the business of making money. If the "sub-prime and alt-a" mortgages were so profitable, I find it hard to believe that anyone would have had to pressure them at all.
|
there was no readjustment of any lending standards which the banks themselves did not set. if a borrower could not qualify for a loan there is nothing in the cra that says the bank should make that loan.
acorn did not pressure the banks to lower the standards, they pressured the banks to make loans to borrowers who were previously denied the opportunity to borrow. it was up to the lender to determine if the borrower was qualified or not.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 03:59 PM
|
#18
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
there is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the cra that mandates that banks lend to unqualified borrowers.
|
I never said that, and you know it.
You said, "did acorn threaten lawsuits if the bank would not lend to unquaified borrowers? that is the argument that you appear to make, and it is not supported by any facts. if you could produce any backup to support your assertion, let's see it."
In response, I produced the various quotes and links above demonstrating that ACORN threatened to file regulatory complaints against banks that would have effectively delayed attempts by those banks to merge or expand unless those banks would comply with ACORN's demands to reduce their credit standards and/or pay them consulting fees.
Quote:
still no evidence that the cra mandated banks to make loans to unquaified borrowers.
|
Which, of course, is not what I said.
Quote:
unless, of course, your position is that all minority and all lower income borrowers are unqualified?
well, are you?
|
No, my position is that ACORN pressured banks into lower their credit standards by threatening to file regulatory complaints using provisions of the CRA, as demonstrated by the links and quotes I provided.
Quote:
no, the evidence you provide shows that acorn "intimidated banks" into making more loans to minority and lower income borrowers.
|
Actually, it shows that ACORN intimidated banks into reducing their credit standards, thereby making loans to borrowers who otherwise would have been unqualified.
Quote:
acorn did not pressure the banks to lower the standards
|
Yes they did. Read the links that I provided, or provide your own which refute them.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 05:06 PM
|
#19
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
I never said that, and you know it.
|
the quote from kurtz, that you posted, said "Using provisions of a 1977 law called the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), Chicago ACORN was able to delay and halt the efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had agreed to lower their credit standards".
Quote:
You said, "did acorn threaten lawsuits if the bank would not lend to unquaified borrowers? that is the argument that you appear to make, and it is not supported by any facts. if you could produce any backup to support your assertion, let's see it."
In response, I produced the various quotes and links above demonstrating that ACORN threatened to file regulatory complaints against banks that would have effectively delayed attempts by those banks to merge or expand unless those banks would comply with ACORN's demands to reduce their credit standards and/or pay them consulting fees.
No, my position is that ACORN pressured banks into lower their credit standards by threatening to file regulatory complaints using provisions of the CRA, as demonstrated by the links and quotes I provided.
Actually, it shows that ACORN intimidated banks into reducing their credit standards, thereby making loans to borrowers who otherwise would have been unqualified.
Yes they did. Read the links that I provided, or provide your own which refute them.
|
the links merely say that acorn did what they allege, and they offer no evidence that banks were forced to lend to unqualified borrowers.
the cra mandates that lenders keep records on loan applications, who was approved and who was denied. any bank that follows prudent lending guidelines for approving and denying loans is in compliance. there is no requirement to change any bank's standards to comply with cra.
acorn pushed to increase lending to lower income and minority borrowers, it was up to the lender to determine which loans were of the amount and quality of borrower to fund.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 05:48 PM
|
#20
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
the quote from kurtz, that you posted, said "Using provisions of a 1977 law called the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), Chicago ACORN was able to delay and halt the efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had agreed to lower their credit standards".
|
Right. How did you turn that into me saying that "the cra mandates that banks lend to unqualified borrowers"? Because I never said that.
Quote:
the links merely say that acorn did what they allege, and they offer no evidence that banks were forced to lend to unqualified borrowers.
the cra mandates that lenders keep records on loan applications, who was approved and who was denied. any bank that follows prudent lending guidelines for approving and denying loans is in compliance. there is no requirement to change any bank's standards to comply with cra.
acorn pushed to increase lending to lower income and minority borrowers, it was up to the lender to determine which loans were of the amount and quality of borrower to fund.
|
Do you acknowledge that there is a difference between a statute requiring/forcing/mandating something and ACORN pressuring/intimidating/coercing banks using the threat of regulatory complaints?
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 06:10 PM
|
#21
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
Right. How did you turn that into me saying that "the cra mandates that banks lend to unqualified borrowers"? Because I never said that.
Do you acknowledge that there is a difference between a statute requiring/forcing/mandating something and ACORN pressuring/intimidating/coercing banks using the threat of regulatory complaints?
|
sure, yet kurtz and others blame the cra for the mortgage crisis.
once again, there is no evidence that acorn, or anyone else for that matter, forced lenders to make loans to unqualified borrowers.
the lenders who made loans to unqualified borrowers did so on their own.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 07:25 PM
|
#22
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
sure, yet kurtz and others blame the cra for the mortgage crisis.
|
I haven't seen anybody blame the CRA itself. I've seen people blame ACORN for the way they used the provisions of the CRA to extort banks into lowering credit standards. I've seen people blame either the Clinton or Bush administrations (or both) for toughening CRA regulatory standards. But I haven't seen anybody blame the CRA itself.
Quote:
once again, there is no evidence that acorn, or anyone else for that matter, forced lenders to make loans to unqualified borrowers.
the lenders who made loans to unqualified borrowers did so on their own.
|
You acknowledge that ACORN pressured/blackmailed lenders into lowering credit standards on the one hand, and then on the other hand you say that lenders acted "on their own."
That doesn't make any sense.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 07:55 PM
|
#23
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
I haven't seen anybody blame the CRA itself. I've seen people blame ACORN for the way they used the provisions of the CRA to extort banks into lowering credit standards. I've seen people blame either the Clinton or Bush administrations (or both) for toughening CRA regulatory standards. But I haven't seen anybody blame the CRA itself.
|
yes, there has been, specifically malkin.
Quote:
You acknowledge that ACORN pressured/blackmailed lenders into lowering credit standards on the one hand, and then on the other hand you say that lenders acted "on their own."
That doesn't make any sense.
|
no, I never 'acknowledged" acorn did such. I acknowledge that acorn pressured lenders to make more loans to lower income and minority borrowers.
you and I both know that lower income borrowers are not credit risks merely due to their income levels.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 08:25 PM
|
#24
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
yes, there has been, specifically malkin.
|
Link please?
Quote:
no, I never 'acknowledged" acorn did such.
|
Then you're not willing to acknowledge reality.
There is a big difference between doing something solely because you think it will be a money-making venture and doing something because you want to avoid a costly legal fight. I know you can see the difference, so I don't know why you insist on pretending that lenders weren't extorted into acting.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 08:38 PM
|
#25
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
Link please?
|
ugh, I'll have to go read all those malkin columns....
Quote:
Then you're not willing to acknowledge reality.
There is a big difference between doing something solely because you think it will be a money-making venture and doing something because you want to avoid a costly legal fight. I know you can see the difference, so I don't know why you insist on pretending that lenders weren't extorted into acting.
|
it comes back to the question: are you asserting that making loans to lower income and minority borrowers equals lowered credit standards.
it appears that you are.
acorn's goal was to increase the availability of loans to these borrowers, not the loosening of standards by the lenders.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 08:49 PM
|
#26
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
ugh, I'll have to go read all those malkin columns....
|
Yeah, especially if you're going to attribute something to her that I don't think she said.
Quote:
it comes back to the question: are you asserting that making loans to lower income and minority borrowers equals lowered credit standards.
|
No, I'm asserting that ACORN pressured lenders into lowering credit standards. And I've backed it up with proof. You've yet to produce anything to refute what I've said.
Quote:
acorn's goal was to increase the availability of loans to these borrowers, not the loosening of standards by the lenders.
|
Actually, I've demonstrated that their goal in threatening regulatory complaints was exactly that -- to have the lenders lower their credit standards.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 08:54 PM
|
#27
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
Yeah, especially if you're going to attribute something to her that I don't think she said.
No, I'm asserting that ACORN pressured lenders into lowering credit standards. And I've backed it up with proof. You've yet to produce anything to refute what I've said.
Actually, I've demonstrated that their goal in threatening regulatory complaints was exactly that -- to have the lenders lower their credit standards.
|
no kg, you have provided links to pieces by the likes of kurtz where they say their opinions about acorn. you and these writers have not shown any "proof" whatsoever that the goal of acorn was for lenders to lower their credit standards.
the only "proof" is that acorn pushed lenders to make more loans to minorities and lower income borrowers.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 08:59 PM
|
#28
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
no kg, you have provided links to pieces by the likes of kurtz where they say their opinions about acorn. you and these writers have not shown any "proof" whatsoever that the goal of acorn was for lenders to lower their credit standards.
the only "proof" is that acorn pushed lenders to make more loans to minorities and lower income borrowers.
|
Where is the proof of that? Mavdog's word for it?
The pieces I cited aren't just op-ed columns; they're investigative pieces. Cite to some that support your position, if you can. So far, you haven't cited to anything other than your own opinion.
You're trying to draw a rhetorical distinction for some unknown reason, but it's not working.
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 09:14 PM
|
#29
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
Where is the proof of that? Mavdog's word for it?
The pieces I cited aren't just op-ed columns; they're investigative pieces. Cite to some that support your position, if you can. So far, you haven't cited to anything other than your own opinion.
You're trying to draw a rhetorical distinction for some unknown reason, but it's not working.
|
what? kurtz's is an "investigative piece"?
no, it's not. it's his attempt to slam acorn, and it is not factual.
here is what acorn themselves say on their site:"ACORN Housing and CitiMortgage, Bank of America, First American Title Insurance Company, and Fannie Mae announced today the launching of a new non-profit mortgage brokerage called Acorn Housing Affordable Loans, LLC, to help qualified borrowers enjoy the benefits of homeownership throughout Florida. Additional offices will be launched in other states in the coming months. The new mortgage brokerage will also help homeowners faced with resetting adjustable rates that may make their current home mortgage payments unaffordable
http://www.acornhousing.org/index.php
uh, "qualified".
acorn works on affordable housing. that's a euphemism for "cheap"....
|
|
|
10-28-2008, 10:13 PM
|
#30
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
what? kurtz's is an "investigative piece"?
no, it's not. it's his attempt to slam acorn, and it is not factual.
here is what acorn themselves say on their site:"ACORN Housing and CitiMortgage, Bank of America, First American Title Insurance Company, and Fannie Mae announced today the launching of a new non-profit mortgage brokerage called Acorn Housing Affordable Loans, LLC, to help qualified borrowers enjoy the benefits of homeownership throughout Florida. Additional offices will be launched in other states in the coming months. The new mortgage brokerage will also help homeowners faced with resetting adjustable rates that may make their current home mortgage payments unaffordable
http://www.acornhousing.org/index.php
uh, "qualified".
acorn works on affordable housing. that's a euphemism for "cheap"....
|
Two things:
1. What do you expect ACORN to say? That they blackmailed lenders? You should know better than to cite ACORN as a source...about ACORN!
2. You do realize that by lowering or relaxing lending standards, borrowers who were previously "unqualified" can suddenly become "qualified", don't you?
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 10:04 AM
|
#31
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
yeah kg, going to the acorn website and looking at what they are actually doing and promoting, rather than relying on opinon hit pieces by people such a kurtz, is just...well, just too direct and logical isn't it?
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 10:13 AM
|
#32
|
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,885
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
yeah kg, going to the acorn website and looking at what they are actually doing and promoting, rather than relying on opinon hit pieces by people such a kurtz, is just...well, just too direct and logical isn't it?
|
That makes too much sense... ![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif) ![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif) ![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 10:15 AM
|
#33
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
yeah kg, going to the acorn website and looking at what they are actually doing and promoting, rather than relying on opinon hit pieces by people such a kurtz, is just...well, just too direct and logical isn't it?
|
The reason we can't seem to agree is that you attribute no wrongdoing to ACORN in this whole matter.
You probably don't attribute any wrongdoing to ACORN in all of the voter fraud scams, either.
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 10:47 AM
|
#34
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
|
I love this...nothing like going to the place in question to form an opinion.
After all, if you go into the Dallas Cowboys press conferences, websites, etc...I'm certain that they would tell you all is well with the Cowboys. There are no issues and the team and organization are doing great and will continue to do well with the season.
Meanwhile, when you jump to outside opinion pieces...you find problems with Starting CB's being suspended or injured, you find a starting QB injured and a back-up who can't play.
You have outsiders questioning the decisions of Jerry Jones and stating that he is ultimately responsible for the actions of the team.
But you go back to Jerry and he believes he's doing a fine job.
Hmmmm...I wonder if you take this analogy to ACORN, what would it say.
ACORN - website and so forth talk about the great things ACORN does. You don't see one mention of any controversy within ACORN tactics...it's all good.
Outside sources who share data and funnel opinion - Questions about tactics used to influence or even force bad lending practices. Questions regarding voter registration fraud and the tactics from ACORN people, which brings into question ACORN itself.
Let me go one step further...ask me about me....I love me some me, I don't have any issues...no go ask Silk about me, I'm certain silk would have some negative things to say about me.
Point is, we can all find the data to support our view and as it stands, we are not going to change the minds of most posters on this site...but rather, we will have a serious case of "I told you so" a few years down the road when we can show our point as being correct...trust me both sides will be doing this...thus the debate will rage on and on.
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 11:05 AM
|
#35
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,249
|
We like our team.
__________________
Is this ghost ball??
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 12:05 PM
|
#36
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
The reason we can't seem to agree is that you attribute no wrongdoing to ACORN in this whole matter.
You probably don't attribute any wrongdoing to ACORN in all of the voter fraud scams, either.
|
"wrongdoing"? no, I can't see that acorn was guilty of "wrongdoing" in pursuing their goals of better accessibility to housing, and an even chance by minorities and lower income people at getting a lender to make a loan rather than the lender determining that they wouldn't make loans to "those people".
do you see that as "wrongdoing"?
do I see the idea that everyone should own a home illconceived? absolutely, some people have no business owning a home if they are not responsible enough.
as for the voter registration frauds, the "wrongdoing" was committed by the contract workers who cheated.
should acorn have improved systems to catch these worker's cheating? absolutely.
is the system where acorn pays the worker for each voter registration card full of potential problems such as the fraud we've heard about? absolutely.
is acorn committing "wrongdoing" by attempting to register as many eligible voters as can be registered? no.
do you believe that there should not be any private based efforts made to register eligible voters?
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 12:20 PM
|
#37
|
Old School Balla
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 13,097
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mavdog
"wrongdoing"? no, I can't see that acorn was guilty of "wrongdoing" in pursuing their goals of better accessibility to housing, and an even chance by minorities and lower income people at getting a lender to make a loan rather than the lender determining that they wouldn't make loans to "those people".
do you see that as "wrongdoing"?
|
What I see as wrongdoing is the effective blackmail of lenders into lowering credit standards so that people who shouldn't have been getting mortgages were. What I also see as wrongdoing is ACORN getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by these banks (in addition to the relaxation of credit standards) so that they wouldn't create a fuss.
Quote:
do I see the idea that everyone should own a home illconceived? absolutely, some people have no business owning a home if they are not responsible enough.
|
Or, if they simply don't have enough income to afford it. Providing a mortgage to a person that can't afford it does them no favors.
Quote:
as for the voter registration frauds, the "wrongdoing" was committed by the contract workers who cheated.
should acorn have improved systems to catch these worker's cheating? absolutely.
is the system where acorn pays the worker for each voter registration card full of potential problems such as the fraud we've heard about? absolutely.
|
It seems like we're on the same page here.
Quote:
is acorn committing "wrongdoing" by attempting to register as many eligible voters as can be registered? no.
do you believe that there should not be any private based efforts made to register eligible voters?
|
I don't have any problem with private efforts to register voters. I do have a problem with trying to register unqualified voters to vote.
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 12:24 PM
|
#38
|
Troll Hunter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sports Heaven!
Posts: 9,898
|
I read somewhere that ACORN doesn't have the authority to NOT send in registration applications.
They are required by law to send in their applications....alll of them.
Is that true?
__________________
"I don't know what went wrong," said guard Thabo Sefolosha. "It's hard to talk about it."
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 12:38 PM
|
#39
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,012
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mary
I read somewhere that ACORN doesn't have the authority to NOT send in registration applications.
They are required by law to send in their applications....alll of them.
Is that true?
|
Yes. They flag the ones that look suspicious, but they are legally obligated to send in every application they get.
__________________
|
|
|
10-29-2008, 12:41 PM
|
#40
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,014
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kg_veteran
What I see as wrongdoing is the effective blackmail of lenders into lowering credit standards so that people who shouldn't have been getting mortgages were. What I also see as wrongdoing is ACORN getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by these banks (in addition to the relaxation of credit standards) so that they wouldn't create a fuss.
|
your vision may be, say, clouded in it's accuracy.
acorn was paid by banks for counseling services, as well as for the ventures the banks and acorn formed to facilitate first time home buyers getting into their homes. banks do that with a variety of public and private groups.
again, do you see better accesibility to housing and lending by minorities and lower income households wrong? that is the mission of acorn.
Quote:
Or, if they simply don't have enough income to afford it. Providing a mortgage to a person that can't afford it does them no favors.
|
that is true for all income strata, low income, middle income or high income, and the lenders should be doing the qualifying to determine if the borrower can perform.
Quote:
I don't have any problem with private efforts to register voters. I do have a problem with trying to register unqualified voters to vote.
|
It seems like we're on the same page here.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:35 PM.
|