3 ms·
The problem was that everyone was in on it. I spoke to quite a few people in that time period, from mortgage brokers to borrowers to bankers. They all knew what
by pwned1 5y ago
The problem was that everyone was in on it. I spoke to quite a few people in that time period, from mortgage brokers to borrowers to bankers. They all knew what was happening. A friend tried to sell me on getting a NINJA loan (No Income, No Job, No Assets) where, I was told "just tell them any number for your income on the application." It was all done with a wink and nod and everyone in the pipeline knew what was happening.
When there's a collective acquiescence to large-scale fraud, who gets thrown in the clink? The bigger question should be how did the sytem evolve to the point where all of this was made possible?
- pengstrom 5y agoIt's almost as if there's a kernel of truth in the criticisms of capitalism. Incentives rule the world.
- AnimalMuppet 5y agoWho gets thrown in the clink? How about "as many as possible, and the higher up the better"? "We can't jail them all" does not imply "therefore jail none of them". Precedents matter. The precedent that was set is "widespread fraud is fine; if enough people are in on it, nobody can be jailed". Is that really the precedent we want?
- pwned1 5y agoThe underlying question I ask is who set the precedent? Why was the system designed to allow this to happen?