Christopher S. Penn – Marketing AI Keynote Speaker

Hillary Clinton is a financial George W. Bush

Written by

Christopher S Penn

in

Warning: this content is older than 365 days. It may be out of date and no longer relevant.

From HillaryClinton.com:

I will consider legislation that enables lenders to convert unworkable mortgages into stable, affordable loans without the permission of investors. Protection from lawsuits will remove the obstacle that keeps lenders, servicers and others from turning mortgages that were designed to fail into mortgages families can afford. Right now, servicers who process monthly loan payments and interface with homeowners have flexibility to modify loans. However, they are reluctant to fully exercise this discretion in part because they fear investor lawsuits. Investors who own the securities into which the mortgages have been packaged may assert that they are harmed when servicers help at-risk borrowers. Protection from lawsuits could enable the servicers to help homeowners avoid foreclosures, help investors avoid the losses they would otherwise suffer, and help the economy.

Servicers aren’t afraid of lawsuits. They’re BOUND by the law to honor the contracts signed as part of the securitization of loans.

Refresher. Securitization is what lets the majority of people get loans. Period. If I loan you 100, I can’t use that money until you pay it back. If 20 investors get together and invest5 in me plus a finder’s fee, they own the loan now, and I have $100 I can loan again.

Guess what, Hillary? The lenders and servicers DO NOT OWN THE LOANS that you’re referring to. It’s not a question of permission of the investors. They OWN the loans. Except as defined in the contracts, lenders and servicers cannot legally make changes to the mortgages they originated.

More importantly, reread:

I will consider legislation that enables lenders to convert unworkable mortgages into stable, affordable loans without the permission of investors.

Translation: I’m going to try to make it legal for a third party to monkey around with someone else’s property without their permission.

What you’re proposing is no different that George Bush’s foreign policy. Arbitrary decisions made without respect for the law – however flawed you think it might be – are what got us into a bunch of very sandy places. Now you’re publicly posting on your own web site that you’re willing and eager to ignore laws as it suits you politically? Sounds awfully familiar to me. Apparently your time at Yale taught you the same respect for the law as your classmate, Mr. Bush.

Whatever meager chance you might have had for my vote just evaporated.

Comments

6 responses to “Hillary Clinton is a financial George W. Bush”

  1. Richard Mondello Avatar
    Richard Mondello

    This comment won’t be highly intelligent or well thought out. All I have to say is:

    Ouch. That burns.

    Reply
  2. Richard Mondello Avatar
    Richard Mondello

    This comment won’t be highly intelligent or well thought out. All I have to say is:

    Ouch. That burns.

    Reply
  3. KeraC Avatar
    KeraC

    Thanks for posting this! I feel like I’ve been seeing a lot of little details about Clinton that don’t lead me to believe she’s the best bet for the presidency, and this falls right in there with the rest of them.

    Reply
  4. KeraC Avatar
    KeraC

    Thanks for posting this! I feel like I’ve been seeing a lot of little details about Clinton that don’t lead me to believe she’s the best bet for the presidency, and this falls right in there with the rest of them.

    Reply
  5. Rob Avatar
    Rob

    Whatever the case, Hillary is the smartest candidate in the field regardless of party. The reason most don’t want her in office is because of the added domestic and global scrutiny that will follow her as the first female President. She will be held to a higher standard than Bush or any other former President. The Republican’s will again try to villify her as they attempt to get back into office in 8 years. But there’s one thing that everyone forgets: she’ll have her CEO hat on and her thumb on the events of the last several years relating to corruption. She’ll have everyone’s number. I think historically that Hillary represents a significant coming of age for America. Most may disagree, but for that point alone she is worth voting for. Additionally, if we really want the planet as a whole to progress people are going to have to realize that political dynasties can be dangerous if unchecked. Again, refer back to the last 7 years of hell. The rich got richer. Everyone else poorer. Maybe a woman and a mother will be more compasionate than another old white guy.

    Reply
  6. Rob Avatar
    Rob

    Whatever the case, Hillary is the smartest candidate in the field regardless of party. The reason most don’t want her in office is because of the added domestic and global scrutiny that will follow her as the first female President. She will be held to a higher standard than Bush or any other former President. The Republican’s will again try to villify her as they attempt to get back into office in 8 years. But there’s one thing that everyone forgets: she’ll have her CEO hat on and her thumb on the events of the last several years relating to corruption. She’ll have everyone’s number. I think historically that Hillary represents a significant coming of age for America. Most may disagree, but for that point alone she is worth voting for. Additionally, if we really want the planet as a whole to progress people are going to have to realize that political dynasties can be dangerous if unchecked. Again, refer back to the last 7 years of hell. The rich got richer. Everyone else poorer. Maybe a woman and a mother will be more compasionate than another old white guy.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares
Share This