Nothing but a re-distribution of wealth.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/28/d...ent-to-liberal-activist-groups/#ixzz3BtgvUkSB
http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/28/d...ent-to-liberal-activist-groups/#ixzz3BtgvUkSB
I wonder why CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS or Fox aren't calling this out?holder is such a criminal racist piece of crap.
The article linked in the original post actually does a bit of stretching with the truth regarding just how money is going to be "doled" out but I digress. Facts aren't always important when frothing at the mouth.nasdaq.com said:As part of the consumer aid portion of the accord, B of A will get credit for making loans to low to moderate income borrowers, as well as cleaning up neighborhoods where neglected properties mired in the foreclosure process have blighted the surrounding area. Donations to non-profits that assist in these activities will be credited toward the required amount of relief contained in the settlement.
Two groups in particular that are likely to reap a windfall are NeighborWorks America, an affordable housing advocacy group, and the Interest on Lawyers' Trust Account organization, a legal-aid group for low-income persons. While NeighborWorks may only receive funds if B of A doesn't satisfy its contractual obligations regarding consumer relief by August 2018, IOLTA, which has offices across the U.S., and other legal-aid organizations, are scheduled to receive at least $30 million from the bank, with each jurisdiction to get at least $200,000.
B of A has four years in which to implement the consumer relief portion of the pact. In many ways, the most expensive settlement in U.S. banking history just might turn out to be better than expected for Bank of America.
Fair enough. When you compile a list of Republican organizations that exist to help poor people sue banks I'll be glad to think this is purely partisan.The issue is not that there are penalties for misbehavior, it is that the beneficiaries are so clearly and exclusively the political bedfellows of the administration.
It is hiding behind the list of liberal organizations that support constitutional limitations.Fair enough. When you compile a list of Republican organizations that exist to help poor people sue banks I'll be glad to think this is purely partisan.
Well yeah, that is the original whole point....
I guess the moral of the story is that its only redistribution of wealth if its poor people who are getting the money.
...
I originally thought this had to be a mistake, but didn't see the blue font to indicate sarcasm.Well yeah, that is the original whole point.
Some quotes:
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic" - Benjamin Franklin
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."- Thomas Jefferson
"The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government." - James Madison
That said, IMO this particular episode has more to do with the problem of big government being inherently corrupt verses the historical problem of wealth redistribution.
It works for Obama's cronies.I originally thought this had to be a mistake, but didn't see the blue font to indicate sarcasm.
Did you really just equate the fraud and shady lending/misrepresentation of risk in the mortgage based securities industry with " the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it?" If so our conversation really has no possible basis upon which we can continue because you think that lying and stealing is a perfectly defensible means by which to make a living.
No, you missed my point. I guess it was poorly phrased on my part. I will try again.I originally thought this had to be a mistake, but didn't see the blue font to indicate sarcasm.
Did you really just equate the fraud and shady lending/misrepresentation of risk in the mortgage based securities industry with " the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it?" If so our conversation really has no possible basis upon which we can continue because you think that lying and stealing is a perfectly defensible means by which to make a living.
There is way too much false outrage based on questionable if not outright false info on the internet and things aren't always as they first seem.No comments from anyone on the other side? I guess they think it's ok.
How many churches would you like listed?Fair enough. When you compile a list of Republican organizations that exist to help poor people sue banks I'll be glad to think this is purely partisan.