PaulC_80 said:

---

Banks still have to answer to the regulators. The city of Dallas can encourage things all they want but the banks can not loan if the numbers do not work or the applicant does not meet minimum qualifications. Otherwise the regulators get pretty pissy.

I will start to get really worried if the regulators start reducing requirements to stupid levels and then push the banks to loan. In the name of equity or inclusion or racism or whatever. With the FJB Admin I expect that will happen pretty soon.

---

It already has. Biden quietly signed an EO a few weeks ago removing/easing rules on loans for minorities and low income folks. Same deal that got us into the 2008 mess.

Had a thread on it here but it slipped by mostly unnoticed.

Showing the 404. Is the link dead or they remove the article?

Quote:

---

It already has. Biden quietly signed an EO a few weeks ago removing/easing rules on loans for minorities and low income folks. Same deal that got us into the 2008 mess.

---

Why am I not surprised. It was amazingly stupid 14 years ago and most thinking people that pay attention to such things knew it was. Apparently the Dems/Libs did not learn or do not remember. Or they want to do it all again because the banks were not hurt enough.

Sadly almost half the people in this country fully support lowering of lending standards because of equity or something. They are idiots that do not understand basic economics.

Whenever people who came into town and asked me what to do in Dallas, my answer for the last 25 years was "go to Fort Worth"

What authority over bank's lending standards does a city council have? I would say none. Why was this a story?

We all know how this ends…with a headline that contains the word "unexpectedly".

"Ordinance 3221.
It's better known as a responsible banking ordinance"

Why is it that liberals always misnam their laws. This ordinance encourages irresponsible banking.

ArmyAg97 said:

---

Greetings from 2008

---

Somebody call that freak Barney frank.

Clinton, Obama, Biden….anybody notice a pattern?

waitwhat? said:

---

https://www.wfaa.com/article/money/economy/dallas-becomes-first-city-texas-hold-banks-accountable-lending-low-income-minority-neighborhoods-following-wfaa-reports/

Quote:

---

The Dallas City Council accomplished lasting change when, based on WFAA's reporting, it recently approved Ordinance 3221.
It's better known as a responsible banking ordinance, which holds banks accountable for making loans in minority neighborhoods. It's something federal law already encourages banks to do, but in practice, as we've reported, many banks refuse to do.

---

Quote:

---

As we've reported, local governments are good bank customers. For example, the City of Dallas deposits more than $250 million in tax money at Bank of America. That kind of money gives local governments leverage to make demands about how a bank treats minority borrowers.
And that's exactly what the new ordinance does. It says: the city shall "...use socially responsible banking performance as a factor in determining..." who it banks with.

---

What could possibly go wrong?

---

Bill Clinton and his massive recession inducing policies are like one of the undead vampires/zombies you just cant kill. Redlining recession 2.0 on its way if the Marxist Morons due this on a national level !!

One of my (small) banker clients told me years ago that they stay away from municipal government business for reasons like this. I don't know if they were alone in that respect but he said in banks he worked for previously, his bosses had to attend various city board meetings that wasted their time. BoA does it because they think it makes them look good, but most smart business owners stay way away from BoA specifically and national banks in general, at least for the large portion of their business. Oh, they'll have accounts there and be on friendly terms with the staff, but what the national banks don't know is the majority of the business owner's banking needs are done through the local banks.

Unfortunately, that is getting harder and harder with fewer of those smaller, local banks in existence.

Again, I don't know if this is an anomaly or not.

Quote:

---

It's better known as a responsible banking ordinance, which holds banks accountable for making loans in minority neighborhoods.

---

If the media was actually honest they would tell the public that the city of Dallas is trying to push banks to loosen up borrower requirements in order to make loans to people who may not be able to repay the loans. And that the money being loaned is actually the money of the depositors.

Banks do not loan their money. They loan your money.

minority neighborhoods = high risk loans. Of course proponents will not say this, but they know it.

What could go wrong? See 2008.

This is what happens when government becomes too big.

As someone else mentioned, the article is gone so I'm curious if this was fake news?

YouBet said:

---

As someone else mentioned, the article is gone so I'm curious if this was fake news?

---

I didn't test the URL, so maybe I messed it up: https://www.wfaa.com/article/money/economy/dallas-becomes-first-city-texas-hold-banks-accountable-lending-low-income-minority-neighborhoods-following-wfaa-reports/287-88db74aa-a7f2-48a3-b450-c523f28daa51

ArmyAg97 said:

---

Greetings from 2008

---

2001, Bush warned Democrats that far back...they didnt listen

zoneag said:

---

Quote:

---

It's better known as a responsible banking ordinance, which holds banks accountable for making loans in minority neighborhoods. It's something federal law already encourages banks to do, but in practice, as we've reported, many banks refuse to do.

---

The media is so damn dishonest. Banks don't refuse to make loans in minority neighborhoods. They refuse to make loans to buyers who are not credit worthy. I guess that's not as sensational though.

---

This is not a factual statement and I can say so because I actually do real estate projects in minority neighborhoods and am responsible for the financing piece as a very credit worthy borrower and guarantor. There are multiple banks that just flat out refused to lend in specific neighborhoods, regardless of the underlying quality of the asset or borrower. There's always someone else that will so as a matter of government policy I'm not sure there's an actual market that needs to be fixed, but I don't think that you should unequivocally say that banks are across-the-board happy to lend in any ZIP Code so long as the borrower is credit worthy and the asset produces good income.

So banks worry about their collateral? Who knew..

Malibu2 said:

---

zoneag said:

---

Quote:

---

It's better known as a responsible banking ordinance, which holds banks accountable for making loans in minority neighborhoods. It's something federal law already encourages banks to do, but in practice, as we've reported, many banks refuse to do.

---

The media is so damn dishonest. Banks don't refuse to make loans in minority neighborhoods. They refuse to make loans to buyers who are not credit worthy. I guess that's not as sensational though.

---

This is not a factual statement and I can say so because I actually do real estate projects in minority neighborhoods and am responsible for the financing piece as a very credit worthy borrower and guarantor. There are multiple banks that just flat out refused to lend in specific neighborhoods, regardless of the underlying quality of the asset or borrower. There's always someone else that will so as a matter of government policy I'm not sure there's an actual market that needs to be fixed, but I don't think that you should unequivocally say that banks are across-the-board happy to lend in any ZIP Code so long as the borrower is credit worthy and the asset produces good income.

---

Thanks for your personal insight. Wouldn't what these banks are doing be illegal? If so, how do they get around the law?

Yes, that's why they require insurance at replacement cost and make demands about required maintenance, such as seismic retrofitting for earthquakes or uneven pavement for slip-and-falls, to protect the collateral. I've never struggled to find several banks that are happy to underwrite. But there are banks that say things like "that is not our target market" or something similar, asset and borrower be dammed. Again, there's not a market failure so I don't think there's any need for the government to do anything, but it's not accurate to say that banks don't care about ZIP Codes, just borrower and asset.

I have no idea if what they're doing is illegal or not, I doubt it is illegal. If a bank wants to lend in Montrose but not 5th Ward I think that should be it's prerogative. If there is truly a lack of access to capital where the borrowers and assets are good, the government should probably do some thing about it. It is a market failure when the credit worth people who want to improve a neighborhood can't get loans to do so.

waitwhat? said:

---

What could possibly go wrong?

---

We've already seen what could go wrong. Natually the dems want a repeat of the 2008 crash.

At what point do we label the dems a domestic terrorist organization?

Per fair lending laws, backs and credit card companies cannot discriminate based on zipcode, at least for the borrower.

Now they might decide a project is untenable due to location, but they cannot deny a line of credit based on zipcode.

The regulations are incredible and lenders are very careful to meet regulatory compliance.

TexAgs91 said:

---

waitwhat? said:

---

What could possibly go wrong?

---

We've already seen what could go wrong. Natually the dems want a repeat of the 2008 crash.

At what point do we label the dems a domestic terrorist organization?

---

Well they're already trying to label republicans as a domestic terrorist organization so while we're destroying words we might as well label them back.

waitwhat? said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

waitwhat? said:

---

What could possibly go wrong?

---

We've already seen what could go wrong. Natually the dems want a repeat of the 2008 crash.

At what point do we label the dems a domestic terrorist organization?

---

Well they're already trying to label republicans as a domestic terrorist organization so while we're destroying words we might as well label them back.

---

It's not random name calling. Which party is purposefully destroying the US? Which party supports violence to achieve their political goals.

I find it hard to believe this is an issue in Dallas considering the level of gentrification underway here that has already been happening in traditional low income neighborhoods. But maybe some people are not getting loans over others? No idea what that looks like.

YouBet said:

---

I find it hard to believe this is an issue in Dallas considering the level of gentrification underway here that has already been happening in traditional low income neighborhoods. But maybe some people are not getting loans over others? No idea what that looks like.

---

I wouldn't find it surprising at all that Dallas is tackling a problem that barely exists in a way that will cause much greater damage.

Part and parcel for democrats in charge of a large city.