wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 04:30:54 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Wednesday, March 17, 2021 at 10:04:25 AM UTC-4, wrote:

Clueless again.
The housing failure alone would have simply meant a lot of people got
evicted. The thing that made it a global crisis was that the banks and
mortgage companies leveraged these mortgages with derivatives that
were worth many times more than the underlying mortgages.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, there was no leveraging that caused the
problems.
The "derivatives" were simply pooling mortgages together into securities
and
selling shares in them to investors. It was fundamentally sound, not
leveraged
and it increased funding for mortgages. The only problem was in the
lending
practices where banks and institutions made progressively riskier loans to
people with marginal ability to be able to keep up with the payments on
real
estate that had already appreciated sharply and was over valued. And then
when the problems started, it was further complicated by the fact that
investors
only knew they had an investment in mortgages, without any way of knowing
how many of those mortgages were in trouble, what the properties were
really
worth at the moment, etc.

And absent the MBSs, it most certainly would not have simply meant a lot
of
people got evicted. There were huge losses there, because the values of
the
properties declined, the real estate market turned poor, millions of
properties
were under water, not worth the mortgage value. THAT is what lead to the
huge
losses, those were real and would have been widespread whether the
mortgages
were part of MBSs, held by Fannie or Freddie (which went bankrupt), held
by banks,
or held by the seller.

You really need to read more about what derivatives are.

You really need to read more about what mortgage
backed securitys are and why 2008 happened.

One mortgage ended up being many times as
much in "bets" for and against that mortgage.

The mortgages were bundled and securitized, stupid.

Maybe you could just watch the "Big Short"
movie if you don't like to read.

Its irrelevant to what produced 2008 but certainly explains
why you don't have a ****ing clue about what produced that.

Commercial banks like BoA were heavily
invested in them with depositor money.

That's wrong too. AFAIK, BOA and similar didn't invest in MBS. They
originated
the mortgage loans, packaged them into MBS and sold them to investors.
And banks have always had exposure to mortgage loan risk, that's their
business.
Prior to MBSs banks passed mortgages on to Fannie and Freddie, this was
similar.

They were exposed because of vehicles like AIG that sold insurance
on the mortgage or insurance on the insurance on the mortgage. .

Wrong, as always.

Much of that bail out money also went to bail out foreign investors.
That is why it was claimed to be a global crisis.

Show us your proof for that claim, because I suspect it's also BS.
I never heard of *any* of the 2009 bail out money going to foreign
investors. It was a worldwide crisis, because when the core of the
US financial system is in crisis, it will always be a worldwide crisis.
I can't help again notice that you're just like Trump, just make it
up on the fly.

Again look at who was invested just in AIG.

**** all were foreigners.

(there were other similar operations, just not as big).

Still **** all foreigners.