Bank of America. Anti gun
- Thread starter GameEarGabe
- Start date
mwells72774
New member
thy did the same thing to McMillan.
GameEarGabe
New member
Boycott em
BofA is a rotten bank. They're part of the cluster of banks that helped put this nation into the deep recession. We, the taxpayers bailed them out with huge billions and they reward us with some of the worst consumer interest rates among major banks. Pigs in suits. Nah, that's an insult to pigs, pigs are good for something, good eating, BofA isn't worth diddly. Don
Warboar_21
New member
I stopped banking with them years ago when I was in the Army. When I tried getting a loan through them I was told that they would not do it even though my credit score was perfect. I promptly opened a new account with a different bank and closed out my BOA account and told them to pound sand. They offered me really low interest rates a few years ago on my auto loan at the dealership. I told the dealer that I would not use them under any circumstance. I am all for letting them and others to fail.
CatShooter
New member
Originally Posted By: DonDBofA is a rotten bank. They're part of the cluster of banks that helped put this nation into the deep recession. We, the taxpayers bailed them out with huge billions and they reward us with some of the worst consumer interest rates among major banks. Pigs in suits. Nah, that's an insult to pigs, pigs are good for something, good eating, BofA isn't worth diddly. Don
I'm not defending Bank of America (I filed a suit against them).
But lets get the record straight.
Normally, banks lend money on business' and property. The interest on these mortgages is what keeps the bank open and pays the salaries of the employees.
Our economy crashed in 2007 because in 1975, Jimmy Carter passed the "Community re-investment act"
That act, by law, required banks to give 10% of its mortgage's to applicants in bad or failing neighborhoods.
These properties were falling in value, and so the banks, that were required by law to lend the money, needed to get out of these failing mortgages.
So they took all of their "Bad loans" and bundled them up in a "box", and sold them. they sold them to Fanny and Freddy - government entities that were created for just this purpose.
Fanny and Freddy were clearing houses (re-packagers) for this garbage, and they made larger "Boxes" of loans and sold them to investments companies like AIG, and over seas banks. Of course, none of these companies actually knew what was in these investment "boxes"... it was like, "Here's a box of $100,000,000 in mortgages that are paying 3% long term", and at this point, no one knew where these mortgages were located - it was just a ton of blind paperwork.
In the '90s, Bill Clinton smelled a rat, and asked congress to investigate Fanny and Freddy... but Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Barney Frank (D-MA) who controlled the House and Senate banking committees, shot it down.
In the early 2000's, George "Dubya" Bush asked for investigations of Fanny and Freddy, and Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Barney Frank (D-MA) "Lost the paper work" on the investigations.
It is interesting to note... Barney Frank (D-MA), who is an "outed homosexual", was having a sexual affair with the CEO of Fanny or Freddy (I forgot which)... and Chris Dodd got loans to buy property in Ireland at unbelievably low interest rates from from one of the companies that was involved in bundling mortgages.
The scam came tumbling down in the last days of the Bush administration, and Obama took over and sent (our) money to the investment houses that were in the middle of it - there were calls from the republicans for investigations of Fanny and Freddy, but Obama killed them.
Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Barney Frank (D-MA) violated numerous banking laws, but Obama blocked any investigations... Chris Dodd finished his term and did not run for re-election... Barney Frank announced that he will not run for re-election when his term runs out.
So that is actually how it happened.
.
I'm not defending Bank of America (I filed a suit against them).
But lets get the record straight.
Normally, banks lend money on business' and property. The interest on these mortgages is what keeps the bank open and pays the salaries of the employees.
Our economy crashed in 2007 because in 1975, Jimmy Carter passed the "Community re-investment act"
That act, by law, required banks to give 10% of its mortgage's to applicants in bad or failing neighborhoods.
These properties were falling in value, and so the banks, that were required by law to lend the money, needed to get out of these failing mortgages.
So they took all of their "Bad loans" and bundled them up in a "box", and sold them. they sold them to Fanny and Freddy - government entities that were created for just this purpose.
Fanny and Freddy were clearing houses (re-packagers) for this garbage, and they made larger "Boxes" of loans and sold them to investments companies like AIG, and over seas banks. Of course, none of these companies actually knew what was in these investment "boxes"... it was like, "Here's a box of $100,000,000 in mortgages that are paying 3% long term", and at this point, no one knew where these mortgages were located - it was just a ton of blind paperwork.
In the '90s, Bill Clinton smelled a rat, and asked congress to investigate Fanny and Freddy... but Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Barney Frank (D-MA) who controlled the House and Senate banking committees, shot it down.
In the early 2000's, George "Dubya" Bush asked for investigations of Fanny and Freddy, and Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Barney Frank (D-MA) "Lost the paper work" on the investigations.
It is interesting to note... Barney Frank (D-MA), who is an "outed homosexual", was having a sexual affair with the CEO of Fanny or Freddy (I forgot which)... and Chris Dodd got loans to buy property in Ireland at unbelievably low interest rates from from one of the companies that was involved in bundling mortgages.
The scam came tumbling down in the last days of the Bush administration, and Obama took over and sent (our) money to the investment houses that were in the middle of it - there were calls from the republicans for investigations of Fanny and Freddy, but Obama killed them.
Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Barney Frank (D-MA) violated numerous banking laws, but Obama blocked any investigations... Chris Dodd finished his term and did not run for re-election... Barney Frank announced that he will not run for re-election when his term runs out.
So that is actually how it happened.
.
Death Dealer
New member
That sucks! I may have to ditch my Bass Pro Card since its issued by BOA.
The Famous Grouse
New member
Why anyone would still be banking with the MegaBanks like BOA is beyond me. Didn't you hear about the Ditch Your Bank campaign.
Catshooter, you really should stick to reloading. If the economy crashed in 2007 because national legislation Jimmy Carter signed in 1975, you might find it interesting to note that Carter didn't become President until January 20, 1977.
Your summary of what the Community Reinvestment Act does and requires is completely wrong. It does NOT "require" banks to lend to anyone. There's too many flaws in your post to address in more detail, basically it's all complete cobblers.
One thing that you might find interesting, though, is your Republican Hero George HW Bush signed into law the most sweeping increases in the scope of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1989. Funny, for such a terrible piece of legislation, you'd think a Republican would have shot it down. . . Unless, of course, the Act doesn't actually do what you're pretending to know that it does.
The cause of the financial crisis had nothing to do with the Federal government "forcing" banks to make bad loans. That's a bunch of Republican claptrap propaganda and yet another reason for their epic fail in the last election. See also, the old XX% of the population pays no tax.
The financial crisis had everything to do with banks not caring who they lent money to because they were simply grabbing their fees and dumping the bad debt off on the secondary market as mortgage-backed securities. The fact that institutional investors were allowed to short sell against their own securities and positions made a bad situation into a horrific situation.
There are many people to blame for the mess, but Jimmy ain't one of them. Do a little reading and educate yourself.
Grouse
Catshooter, you really should stick to reloading. If the economy crashed in 2007 because national legislation Jimmy Carter signed in 1975, you might find it interesting to note that Carter didn't become President until January 20, 1977.
Your summary of what the Community Reinvestment Act does and requires is completely wrong. It does NOT "require" banks to lend to anyone. There's too many flaws in your post to address in more detail, basically it's all complete cobblers.
One thing that you might find interesting, though, is your Republican Hero George HW Bush signed into law the most sweeping increases in the scope of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1989. Funny, for such a terrible piece of legislation, you'd think a Republican would have shot it down. . . Unless, of course, the Act doesn't actually do what you're pretending to know that it does.
The cause of the financial crisis had nothing to do with the Federal government "forcing" banks to make bad loans. That's a bunch of Republican claptrap propaganda and yet another reason for their epic fail in the last election. See also, the old XX% of the population pays no tax.
The financial crisis had everything to do with banks not caring who they lent money to because they were simply grabbing their fees and dumping the bad debt off on the secondary market as mortgage-backed securities. The fact that institutional investors were allowed to short sell against their own securities and positions made a bad situation into a horrific situation.
There are many people to blame for the mess, but Jimmy ain't one of them. Do a little reading and educate yourself.
Grouse
Last edited:
Cat, I think you've captured much of the sleaze associated with the crash of the "housing bubble." Barney the b-banger and C. Dodd now get praise from the liberal left for a "day late and a dime short" effort to clean up some of the mess they created.
Even with all the Congressional damage inflicted on the banks by asinine government rules and incentives, had the banks done a better job on the paperwork, less harm to the nation would have resulted. Some of those bank VIPs should be in jail had we had penalties appropriate for their crimes.
BofA still is anti consumer. Last I heard, they charged $1 simply to talk to a customer service rep, simply disgusting and cheap. Don
Even with all the Congressional damage inflicted on the banks by asinine government rules and incentives, had the banks done a better job on the paperwork, less harm to the nation would have resulted. Some of those bank VIPs should be in jail had we had penalties appropriate for their crimes.
BofA still is anti consumer. Last I heard, they charged $1 simply to talk to a customer service rep, simply disgusting and cheap. Don
CatShooter
New member
Originally Posted By: The Famous GrouseWhy anyone would still be banking with the MegaBanks like BOA is beyond me. Didn't you hear about the Ditch Your Bank campaign.
Catshooter, you really should stick to reloading. If the economy crashed in 2007 because national legislation Jimmy Carter signed in 1975, you might find it interesting to note that Carter didn't become President until January 20, 1977.
Your summary of what the Community Reinvestment Act does and requires is completely wrong. It does NOT "require" banks to lend to anyone. There's too many flaws in your post to address in more detail, basically it's all complete cobblers.
One thing that you might find interesting, though, is your Republican Hero George HW Bush signed into law the most sweeping increases in the scope of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1989. Funny, for such a terrible piece of legislation, you'd think a Republican would have shot it down. . . Unless, of course, the Act doesn't actually do what you're pretending to know that it does.
The cause of the financial crisis had nothing to do with the Federal government "forcing" banks to make bad loans. That's a bunch of Republican claptrap propaganda and yet another reason for their epic fail in the last election. See also, the old XX% of the population pays no tax.
The financial crisis had everything to do with banks not caring who they lent money to because they were simply grabbing their fees and dumping the bad debt off on the secondary market as mortgage-backed securities. The fact that institutional investors were allowed to short sell against their own securities and positions made a bad situation into a horrific situation.
There are many people to blame for the mess, but Jimmy ain't one of them. Do a little reading and educate yourself.
Grouse
OK... it was in 77 or 78 - sorry, it was a long time ago - Bush is no hero of mine!
As to the rest... sorry it is history, and your coments about the CRA are dead wrong.
Catshooter, you really should stick to reloading. If the economy crashed in 2007 because national legislation Jimmy Carter signed in 1975, you might find it interesting to note that Carter didn't become President until January 20, 1977.
Your summary of what the Community Reinvestment Act does and requires is completely wrong. It does NOT "require" banks to lend to anyone. There's too many flaws in your post to address in more detail, basically it's all complete cobblers.
One thing that you might find interesting, though, is your Republican Hero George HW Bush signed into law the most sweeping increases in the scope of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1989. Funny, for such a terrible piece of legislation, you'd think a Republican would have shot it down. . . Unless, of course, the Act doesn't actually do what you're pretending to know that it does.
The cause of the financial crisis had nothing to do with the Federal government "forcing" banks to make bad loans. That's a bunch of Republican claptrap propaganda and yet another reason for their epic fail in the last election. See also, the old XX% of the population pays no tax.
The financial crisis had everything to do with banks not caring who they lent money to because they were simply grabbing their fees and dumping the bad debt off on the secondary market as mortgage-backed securities. The fact that institutional investors were allowed to short sell against their own securities and positions made a bad situation into a horrific situation.
There are many people to blame for the mess, but Jimmy ain't one of them. Do a little reading and educate yourself.
Grouse
OK... it was in 77 or 78 - sorry, it was a long time ago - Bush is no hero of mine!
As to the rest... sorry it is history, and your coments about the CRA are dead wrong.
The Famous Grouse
New member
Originally Posted By: CatShooter
OK... it was in 77 or 78 - sorry, it was a long time ago - Bush is no hero of mine!
As to the rest... sorry it is history, and your comments about the CRA are dead wrong.
It is not history. It is your attempt to invent history or to simply repeat on the Tea Bagger propaganda / tinfoil-lined-hat explanations that don't add up when placed under even the most minor level of scrutiny.
It was a long time ago. Which begs the question why did this piece of legislation that began in the Carter era and that you are blaming the entire Great Recession on, survive 20 years of Republican administrations and numerous instances where the Republicans controlled one or even both houses?
Being able to pass on bad risk was the crux of the past financial crisis. Added to that was that regulators never foresaw, nor did they react to, reports that institutional investors had started shorting their own positions in mortgage-backed securities. The makings of the crisis were fully exposed by 2007, but the Bush administration refused to risk alienation of key political donors in an election year by pushing forward with rule changes.
In defense of the Bush administration, I'll also say that the scenario whereby institutional investors were taking up short positions against their own portfolios was so fantastically unlikely that it took almost a year for it to become apparent WHY they were doing so. Essentially, they had set up situation where they would profit if the bad mortgages did not go bust or they would profit more if they DID go bust. It's like being able to bet on a horse to both win and not win on the same bet--you win either way.
If you're going to say I'm dead wrong, please explain exactly how, and in your own words. Also, please explain how the situation was caused by the CRA even though the largest sub-prime lenders were NOT subject to regulation by the CRA.
Grouse
OK... it was in 77 or 78 - sorry, it was a long time ago - Bush is no hero of mine!
As to the rest... sorry it is history, and your comments about the CRA are dead wrong.
It is not history. It is your attempt to invent history or to simply repeat on the Tea Bagger propaganda / tinfoil-lined-hat explanations that don't add up when placed under even the most minor level of scrutiny.
It was a long time ago. Which begs the question why did this piece of legislation that began in the Carter era and that you are blaming the entire Great Recession on, survive 20 years of Republican administrations and numerous instances where the Republicans controlled one or even both houses?
Being able to pass on bad risk was the crux of the past financial crisis. Added to that was that regulators never foresaw, nor did they react to, reports that institutional investors had started shorting their own positions in mortgage-backed securities. The makings of the crisis were fully exposed by 2007, but the Bush administration refused to risk alienation of key political donors in an election year by pushing forward with rule changes.
In defense of the Bush administration, I'll also say that the scenario whereby institutional investors were taking up short positions against their own portfolios was so fantastically unlikely that it took almost a year for it to become apparent WHY they were doing so. Essentially, they had set up situation where they would profit if the bad mortgages did not go bust or they would profit more if they DID go bust. It's like being able to bet on a horse to both win and not win on the same bet--you win either way.
If you're going to say I'm dead wrong, please explain exactly how, and in your own words. Also, please explain how the situation was caused by the CRA even though the largest sub-prime lenders were NOT subject to regulation by the CRA.
Grouse
yotehunter57
New member
I think the real issue with BOA (Bank of A-holes) is their not wanting the bussiness of any gun related company.
I believe it was close to a year ago that they started telling their clients in gun related bussinesses to go elsewhere. They were not welcome at BOA anymore.
I agree; Boycot them seriously.
Shayne
I believe it was close to a year ago that they started telling their clients in gun related bussinesses to go elsewhere. They were not welcome at BOA anymore.
I agree; Boycot them seriously.
Shayne