Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Bank of America to lay off thousands


RodandStaff
 Share

Recommended Posts

Bank of America to lay off thousands–and struck by lightning

Brian-Moynihan.jpgBrian Moynihan, President and CEO of Bank of America: AP Photo/Gerry Broome

Thousands more people are set to be thrown out of work by one of the banks that played a key role in the mortgage mess.

Bank of America is going to shed 3,500 jobs, the Wall Street Journal reports. And as part of a broader restructuring, it could cut another 10,000 or more--around 3.5 percent of the bank's total workforce.

The Charlotte, N.C., bank's profits have been hit by the weak economy, as well as a string of lawsuits and losses related to its investment in the sub-prime mortgages that triggered the financial crisis.

As if in response to the news, last night the Bank of America tower in New York City was hit by lightning.

The Lord works in mysterious ways.

Link: http://news.yahoo.co...-134651984.html

Edited by RodandStaff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Expect much more of this... the true national unemployment rate is about 19% and growing fast. Remember, the rate the media/government is giving is the rate of people on the unemployment rolls... well MOST of the unemployed are no longer or never were on the rolls.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One monkey goes the whole dang barrel of monkeys are sure to follow. The banks can kiss my butt for the crimes they have created upon our economy and most of our homes. What... no more free checking and you want to charge me when I put all this in your deposits that help you make more money anyway? Wait.... didn't we just bail your butts out? Now you are threatening to layoff 13000 employees that paid the taxes to bail your dumb non tax paying butts out? Insert the F word here please!

I am seriously thinking of pulling all of my accounts for business and personal from big banks and just go with small local ones or even credit unions. I am so sick and tired of being the dog being wagged by the tail. Vent over... beer opening... sipping initiated. :D

Edited by drox
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One monkey goes the whole dang barrel of monkeys are sure to follow. The banks can kiss my butt for the crimes they have created upon our economy and most of our homes. What... no more free checking and you want to charge me when I put all this in your deposits that help you make more money anyway? Wait.... didn't we just bail your butts out? Now you are threatening to layoff 13000 employees that paid the taxes to bail your dumb non tax paying butts out? Insert the F word here please!

I am seriously thinking of pulling all of my accounts for business and personal from big banks and just go with small local ones or even credit unions. I am so sick and tired of being the dog being wagged by the tail. Vent over... beer opening... sipping initiated. :D

Just remember-- the banks, as corrupt as we may think, were forced to alter their credit and risk structures to include those who should never have given a mortgage in the first place. Thank Congress for this on going mess. Instead of relying on the free market the do gooders 'made housing affordable' creating a glut of distressed properties. People still couldn't afford the homes the government was trying to make affordable.

No more bailouts for anyone--period! Let the banks fail because a better bank will rise from the ashes. The market place will punish poor management and inefficiency. I bank locally and get great service.

Just finished four of the 24--Adult beverage so cold there are ice crystals in the glass. Go RV!

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya'll must be slipping.... Eight responses so far and I thought surely somebody would make a crack about the BOA tower being hit by lightening! rolleyes.gif Apparently even the Lord is mad at em!laugh.gif

Edited by RodandStaff
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never the less, these greed infested executives, (what, the bail out money that you used to invest, instead of using it for its actual purpose isn't going to save you??) have no doubt lined their pockets, or secured their families, even if each individual eventually takes the fall. The little guy (the ones actually working ground level at the banks) will take the fall in loss of jobs. Why don't they fire the CEO and save thousands of jobs?? Then you only have to walk one person out to the exit doors of the building! Pretty bad when crooks are still coming out of the woodwork, and its been several years since the housing crisis and recession began. OH, hope you all aren't really buying that we are OUT of a recession....ppfftttttt.....can you tell these conversation tick me off??!!??!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say this is all a ploy. BOA knows that NObama has stated he has a plan, (that concerns me as well) to turn things around and will announce it immediately following his 10 day vacation he needed after creating more failure. He has already stated these business giants are too big to fail. This guy understood what he was really saying. All of a sudden after a horrific week on the markets, he states profits have been hit by the economy......."get a clue Guru"!! If BOA treatens a huge lay-off, Nobama will be shoveling more of our hard earned tax money to them to attempt to stave off more unemployment. This guy is no fool but I hope they all crash and burn. As BagDaddy stated "maybe something good will rise out of the ashes"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just remember-- the banks, as corrupt as we may think, were forced to alter their credit and risk structures to include those who should never have given a mortgage in the first place. Thank Congress for this on going mess. Instead of relying on the free market the do gooders 'made housing affordable' creating a glut of distressed properties. People still couldn't afford the homes the government was trying to make affordable.

No more bailouts for anyone--period! Let the banks fail because a better bank will rise from the ashes. The market place will punish poor management and inefficiency. I bank locally and get great service.

Just finished four of the 24--Adult beverage so cold there are ice crystals in the glass. Go RV!

Amen! I remember when this CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) came about. Up to that point, if you wanted a home loan, your credit rating had to be pretty much pristine. I'm not saying banks are blameless but Congress creates the laws. Stated income anyone?

Edited by WorkerBee
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just remember-- the banks, as corrupt as we may think, were forced to alter their credit and risk structures to include those who should never have given a mortgage in the first place. Thank Congress for this on going mess. Instead of relying on the free market the do gooders 'made housing affordable' creating a glut of distressed properties. People still couldn't afford the homes the government was trying to make affordable.

No more bailouts for anyone--period! Let the banks fail because a better bank will rise from the ashes. The market place will punish poor management and inefficiency. I bank locally and get great service.

Just finished four of the 24--Adult beverage so cold there are ice crystals in the glass. Go RV!

Thank you for posting what I was thinking. While the banks weren't completely blameless, let's not forget that our current POTUS served on one of the legal teams that blackmailed the financial industry with lawsuits if they didn't issue these worthless loans. These guys pulled the perfect setup on the industry by having the press in their back pocket and keeping the real truth from being effectively exposed and making them the scapegoats.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Amen! I remember when this CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) came about. Up to that point, if you wanted a home loan, your credit rating had to be pretty much pristine. I'm not saying banks are blameless but Congress creates the laws. Stated income anyone?

Yes, the stated income was a joke, but if you look deeper it seems to be a well orchestrated plan by the big dogs to own more assets and enslave people by debt. Our govt knowingly took advantage of peoples want to own their own home and the "american dream".The govt and banks knew this would come crashing down before it even got started. Make money for a few years, get America owing a lifetime of debt, then take all the homes back, and get bailed out. Not saying that there aren't any good banks out there, but come on, Dangle meat in front of a hungry lion and he's gonna eat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for posting what I was thinking. While the banks weren't completely blameless, let's not forget that our current POTUS served on one of the legal teams that blackmailed the financial industry with lawsuits if they didn't issue these worthless loans. These guys pulled the perfect setup on the industry by having the press in their back pocket and keeping the real truth from being effectively exposed and making them the scapegoats.

Many of the loans that defaulted to start the crisis were written well before 2005 when Mr. Obama came into the Senate.

Also don't forget that in 2003 the President and Congress passed a huge bill to support down payments on loans for low and middle income families that couldn't get into a home. Google: American Dream Down Payment Innitiative(ADDPI). $200 Million a year from 2004 - 2008 to give people down payment assistance.

Then go and try to figure out that when 80-90% of American mortgages were still in sound shape, that there was a major meltdown of the mortgage market? Could it have anything to do with the deregulation that was passed in 1999 that allowed banks to also become investment banks. That law also laid the groundwork for the banks to set up Derivitives and Credit Default Swaps that allowed them to start selling these crap loans as investments (with AAA ratings from their buddies at the rating agencies) and also to buy insurance for those that did fail. That's what brought AIG (an insurance company that had nothing to do with writing loans) into the mess!

These bankers loved the push by the government to do these loans and encouraged the support from the government for the down payment assistance. Anything to write more loans, package them up, and then sell them as securities and gamble on them!

So for me, I say screw the big banks and I hope they all go out of business. 100% of my business, and any wealth I gain from my dinar, will all remain in local banks and credit unions.

Don't forget, Insurance companies are subject to the same "redlining" laws that were passed as part of the CRA. They've survived just fine without having a meltdown. How, by still enforcing sound underwriting rules and guidelines to price products correctly for the risk. All the zero down, liar loans, and ARMS are products of the banks and their drive to get as many loans as possible to bundle and sell!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These bankers loved the push by the government to do these loans and encouraged the support from the government for the down payment assistance. Anything to write more loans, package them up, and then sell them as securities and gamble on them!

Right. They loved it so much that they had to be threatened with law suits and demonstrations from the "community organizers" before they would do them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. They loved it so much that they had to be threatened with law suits and demonstrations from the "community organizers" before they would do them.

So the only loans that defaulted were the ones that were the result of them being forced to follow redlining laws???? No loans defaulted in middle class and upper middle class neighborhoods??

And it wasn't only the "community organizers" pushing them. Try this aritcle on for size and read the story of a loan default from a cop in Atlanta that shows exactly what I'm talking about:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html?pagewanted=all

from the article:

Darrin West could not believe it. The president of the United States was standing in his living room. It was June 17, 2002, a day West recalls as "the highlight of my life." Bush, in Atlanta to introduce a plan to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million, was touring Park Place South, a development of starter homes in a neighborhood once marked by blight and crime.

West had patrolled there as a police officer, and now he was the proud owner of a $130,000 town house, bought with an adjustable-rate mortgage and a $20,000 government loan as his down payment - just the sort of creative public-private financing Bush was promoting.

"Part of economic security," Bush declared that day, "is owning your own home."

A lot has changed since then. West, beset by personal problems, has left Atlanta. Unable to sell his home for what he owed, he said, he gave it back to the bank last year.

Also from the article:

But for much of Bush's tenure, government statistics show, incomes for most families remained relatively stagnant while housing prices skyrocketed. That put home ownership increasingly out of reach for first-time buyers like West.

So Bush had to, in his words, "use the mighty muscle of the federal government" to meet his goal. He proposed affordable housing tax incentives. He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down. Republican congressional leaders and some housing advocates balked, arguing that homeowners with no stake in their investments would be more prone to walk away, as West did. Many economic experts, including some in the White House, now share that view.

Farther down in the article:

The president also leaned on mortgage brokers and lenders to devise their own innovations. "Corporate America," he said, "has a responsibility to work to make America a compassionate place."

And corporate America, eyeing a lucrative market, delivered in ways Bush might not have expected, with a proliferation of too-good-to-be-true teaser rates and interest-only loans that were sold to investors in a loosely regulated environment. But Bush populated the financial system's alphabet soup of oversight agencies with people who, like him, wanted fewer rules, not more.

And even more:

As for Bush's banking regulators, they once brandished a chain saw over a 9,000-page pile of regulations as they promised to ease burdens on the industry. When states tried to use consumer protection laws to crack down on predatory lending, the comptroller of the currency blocked the effort, asserting that states had no authority over national banks.

The administration won that fight at the Supreme Court. But Roy Cooper, North Carolina's attorney general, said, "They took 50 sheriffs off the beat at a time when lending was becoming the Wild West."

So, the banks got pushed by President Bush to lend more, told to create new products, and then when they became predatory, the President called off the dogs! Sure sounds like the banks had a lot of free reign to decide who to lend to and how much. But you can keep carrying the water for the Big Banks if you want. Me, I think they should all go pound sand!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screw Bof A sorry if anyone works there but you know damn well they are evil.

with a capitol "E"

So the only loans that defaulted were the ones that were the result of them being forced to follow redlining laws???? No loans defaulted in middle class and upper middle class neighborhoods??

And it wasn't only the "community organizers" pushing them. Try this aritcle on for size and read the story of a loan default from a cop in Atlanta that shows exactly what I'm talking about:

http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all

from the article:

Darrin West could not believe it. The president of the United States was standing in his living room. It was June 17, 2002, a day West recalls as "the highlight of my life." Bush, in Atlanta to introduce a plan to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million, was touring Park Place South, a development of starter homes in a neighborhood once marked by blight and crime.

West had patrolled there as a police officer, and now he was the proud owner of a $130,000 town house, bought with an adjustable-rate mortgage and a $20,000 government loan as his down payment - just the sort of creative public-private financing Bush was promoting.

"Part of economic security," Bush declared that day, "is owning your own home."

A lot has changed since then. West, beset by personal problems, has left Atlanta. Unable to sell his home for what he owed, he said, he gave it back to the bank last year.

Also from the article:

But for much of Bush's tenure, government statistics show, incomes for most families remained relatively stagnant while housing prices skyrocketed. That put home ownership increasingly out of reach for first-time buyers like West.

So Bush had to, in his words, "use the mighty muscle of the federal government" to meet his goal. He proposed affordable housing tax incentives. He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down. Republican congressional leaders and some housing advocates balked, arguing that homeowners with no stake in their investments would be more prone to walk away, as West did. Many economic experts, including some in the White House, now share that view.

Farther down in the article:

The president also leaned on mortgage brokers and lenders to devise their own innovations. "Corporate America," he said, "has a responsibility to work to make America a compassionate place."

And corporate America, eyeing a lucrative market, delivered in ways Bush might not have expected, with a proliferation of too-good-to-be-true teaser rates and interest-only loans that were sold to investors in a loosely regulated environment. But Bush populated the financial system's alphabet soup of oversight agencies with people who, like him, wanted fewer rules, not more.

And even more:

As for Bush's banking regulators, they once brandished a chain saw over a 9,000-page pile of regulations as they promised to ease burdens on the industry. When states tried to use consumer protection laws to crack down on predatory lending, the comptroller of the currency blocked the effort, asserting that states had no authority over national banks.

The administration won that fight at the Supreme Court. But Roy Cooper, North Carolina's attorney general, said, "They took 50 sheriffs off the beat at a time when lending was becoming the Wild West."

So, the banks got pushed by President Bush to lend more, told to create new products, and then when they became predatory, the President called off the dogs! Sure sounds like the banks had a lot of free reign to decide who to lend to and how much. But you can keep carrying the water for the Big Banks if you want. Me, I think they should all go pound sand!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a good idea, Crush the big Banks so all these big wig Morons lose there jobs, Lower there rating down here with the real working class folks. Oh ya take all OUR MONEY FROM THEM. Fire the hole Fricking white house staff, including BIG O, and plant all there asses down in TEXAS ON THE BORDER so these non working spoon Fed MFers no what its like to live in fear and work for there bucks. Sorry Folks there all PRICKS in my book. :angry:

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the only loans that defaulted were the ones that were the result of them being forced to follow redlining laws???? No loans defaulted in middle class and upper middle class neighborhoods??

And it wasn't only the "community organizers" pushing them. Try this aritcle on for size and read the story of a loan default from a cop in Atlanta that shows exactly what I'm talking about:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html?pagewanted=all

from the article:

Darrin West could not believe it. The president of the United States was standing in his living room. It was June 17, 2002, a day West recalls as "the highlight of my life." Bush, in Atlanta to introduce a plan to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million, was touring Park Place South, a development of starter homes in a neighborhood once marked by blight and crime.

West had patrolled there as a police officer, and now he was the proud owner of a $130,000 town house, bought with an adjustable-rate mortgage and a $20,000 government loan as his down payment - just the sort of creative public-private financing Bush was promoting.

"Part of economic security," Bush declared that day, "is owning your own home."

A lot has changed since then. West, beset by personal problems, has left Atlanta. Unable to sell his home for what he owed, he said, he gave it back to the bank last year.

Also from the article:

But for much of Bush's tenure, government statistics show, incomes for most families remained relatively stagnant while housing prices skyrocketed. That put home ownership increasingly out of reach for first-time buyers like West.

So Bush had to, in his words, "use the mighty muscle of the federal government" to meet his goal. He proposed affordable housing tax incentives. He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down. Republican congressional leaders and some housing advocates balked, arguing that homeowners with no stake in their investments would be more prone to walk away, as West did. Many economic experts, including some in the White House, now share that view.

Farther down in the article:

The president also leaned on mortgage brokers and lenders to devise their own innovations. "Corporate America," he said, "has a responsibility to work to make America a compassionate place."

And corporate America, eyeing a lucrative market, delivered in ways Bush might not have expected, with a proliferation of too-good-to-be-true teaser rates and interest-only loans that were sold to investors in a loosely regulated environment. But Bush populated the financial system's alphabet soup of oversight agencies with people who, like him, wanted fewer rules, not more.

And even more:

As for Bush's banking regulators, they once brandished a chain saw over a 9,000-page pile of regulations as they promised to ease burdens on the industry. When states tried to use consumer protection laws to crack down on predatory lending, the comptroller of the currency blocked the effort, asserting that states had no authority over national banks.

The administration won that fight at the Supreme Court. But Roy Cooper, North Carolina's attorney general, said, "They took 50 sheriffs off the beat at a time when lending was becoming the Wild West."

So, the banks got pushed by President Bush to lend more, told to create new products, and then when they became predatory, the President called off the dogs! Sure sounds like the banks had a lot of free reign to decide who to lend to and how much. But you can keep carrying the water for the Big Banks if you want. Me, I think they should all go pound sand!

Look, no love for BOA from here. But, your responses only prove my point that it was government (on BOTH sides starting back in "77) that screwed this up in the first place. Just be careful what you wish for. If you think that's all that will happen if BOA fails, think again. That bank is in 1 of every 2 households in th U.S. one way or another. That said, no bailouts! If they fail, they fail. That's the way it should be. Right now, the major factor holding their heads above water is the Merrill Lynch side of the business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Screw Bof A sorry if anyone works there but you know damn well they are evil.

PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELF BEFORE CASTING UNINFORMED JUDGEMENT. I work there, My Son works there and my wife works there. If you knew the real reasons for layoffs you would not be so quick to judge. I applaud your wanting to protest and lash out. The problem is you need to learn who to lash out at.. i still like your enthusiasm as Miguided as it is.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a post somebody put out about a week ago that said that all the big bank CEO's were now making 3 to 5 times their already huge saleries since 2008. If thats true then all those people are loosing their jobs and the big boss man is pocketing all their income. A good example of the shrinking middle class people and the elite just keep getting richer at the price of thousands being unemployed. Thats what the protesters should be protesting about.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.