There is NO Institutional Racism. There are some institutions that are racist and we should fight against specific instances but one can't say that ALL banks are racist. Some are just as some people are. Bob, you ignored the remainder of my post so we are done debating. We will discuss only baseball from now on. You can't cherry pick what you like or don't like from my posts.

Thats BS!

I respect:

• Military
• Teachers
• Firemen
• Police Officers
• Doctors
• Vets
• Women

Period. Respect 100%

I don't respect obtuse people who throw BS comments without any logical back up. Like tangplay. They are dangerous and I will expose them.

Don't run Boris!!!!!! It wasn't just SOME banks. It was an entire industry (within certain neighborhoods) failure!! It's a REAL story. Just broken within the last week. You want some credibility?? Go read it before you try and argue with it. Tell your denial to the "couple" on the front page of Section II of my newspaper Sunday!! You're just flat WRONG....... or purposefully stupid and MUST have some other reason for your failure to accept FACT.
It is what it IS.
and
You ARE what you ARE!

How could you possibly disagree with me on anything, Bob? I'm always right. The quicker you and my wife realize that, the easier your lives will become.

Posted by laramiebob on 2/22/2018 3:20:00 PM (view original):
Don't run Boris!!!!!! It wasn't just SOME banks. It was an entire industry (within certain neighborhoods) failure!! It's a REAL story. Just broken within the last week. You want some credibility?? Go read it before you try and argue with it. Tell your denial to the "couple" on the front page of Section II of my newspaper Sunday!! You're just flat WRONG....... or purposefully stupid and MUST have some other reason for your failure to accept FACT.
It is what it IS.
and
You ARE what you ARE!

New Jersey-based TD Bank, which denied a higher proportion of black and Latino applicants than any other major lender, said it "makes credit decisions based on each Customer's credit profile, not on factors such as race or ethnicity."

I know credit and lending you don't. Our bank NEVER discriminates and I didn't see anything there about MA. BUT in general we lend on financial statistics period. It is against the law to discriminate. Keep in mind that Banks are also for profit companies. How many Nordstroms do you see in poorer neighborhoods?

If you want to discuss finance I will do it all day.

Last warning, you use one more f*cking pronoun with me and I will start doing the same with you. LAST WARNING. Heed it.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/22/2018 3:24:00 PM (view original):
How could you possibly disagree with me on anything, Bob? I'm always right. The quicker you and my wife realize that, the easier your lives will become.

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

Hilarious

The section for race needs to be removed from applications, especially college. This would eliminate a lot of potential institutional racism. It would create a more merit based society. A large % of mortgage loans are completed online or over the phone. If that section wasn't on the forms, the lender wouldn't know what race was applying. Now it would be solely based off of financial portfolio and credit history. It should also be removed from job applications.

I am all for it but the Government wants to keep stats and such.

Here's the deal.......... Banks are required to make home loans within the neighborhoods that they have a "branch" in. By the Feds.
But by definition, a bank building isn't a "branch" unless it takes deposits. So, you can go stand within the bank in some downtown neighborhood in places like Philly (and many others) and literally be told by a security officer that it isn't a "bank" at all, AND he will NOT allow you past him and onto the elevator UNLESS you can demonstrate that you are a "customer" which in this particular "kind" of "bank" is ONLY some sort of commercial borrower who the "bank" is willing to LOAN big dollars to, so that He/She developer can "gentrify" old traditionally black neighborhoods in downtown areas and turn them into playgrounds (restaurants, bars, etc) for rich white folk (and tourists!) at the VERY same time they use loopholes to get around lending to the "colored" homeowners.......so that the homeowners are FORCED out!!
There was a specific instance wherein a widowed black woman who had over a 100K equity in her home was denied a small "line of credit" from which she wanted to make improvements on her lifelong home, so that it would be worth even more and she was denied......... with a fine FICA score!!!
One large institution had made 3--------- THREE loans (out of 1,000's in the neighborhood) to people of color!
And yes Boris. I DO know something about the lending industry. In a past life I have been a loan officer, as well as a Banking Auditor.
I was one of those guys that come in yearly and VERIFY that your banking operation is what it purports to be.

In final.......... YOU can deny that institutionalized racism still exists in America all you want........... it doesn't make it so.......... it just makes you look ????????????? hell, I don't know.......... suspicious???? That's a fair assessment. You don't have to like it. But it is what it is. How the view looks from here!

So because some companies do it then it is "institutional"? You do realize that branches are loss leaders for Banks, right? Branches never make money. They are there as a pseudo marketing / convenience piece. I do commercial loans. And all banks get reviewed for CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) and those that are not compliant get destroyed --- see Santander.

I agree that SOME Banks are not good banks.

To me institutional racism is when a certain group is targeted and discriminated against based upon race. I argue that it is based upon zip codes and $$ with banks and NOT race. LeBron James has a better shot at getting a loan than I do. He is wealthier. Nothing to do with race. I agree that we have institutional wealthism but NOT racism.

I heard on the radio the other day that 1,000s (??? Ican't remember what the number was) of bank branches closed last year due to the large increase in online banking. How will this affect the lending process?

Also, it was more proof that technology is destroying jobs. I'm starting to hate technology.

The reality I got from the housing lending radio story (and my newspaper) was that Banks play games with "lists" that they are required to be on by the Feds. They use differing kinds of operations to avoid their building appearing on a certain type of categorical "list" (for the fed regulations purposes) thereby allowing themselves to escape via loopholes needing to make home loans (in certain areas!) that have been "marked" for development.......... seems the Banks have learned they can make more $$$$ by loaning to gentrificating developers than by making HOME loans------------ so they slyly use loopholes and deception to AVOID having to follow the banking regulations imposed by the Feds. And thus, neighborhood by black (or latino) neighborhoods are being sold off to wealthy developers for a revitalization project in some large city. And in so doing, using these practices, NO HOME loans are made to people of colors in city after city. It may not be red-lining exactly, but it still stinks!!! And is EXACTLY institutionalized racism. Case closed.

Or you can call me a liar and act like I didn't read and hear these multiple news stories in the last week alone!

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/22/2018 4:11:00 PM (view original):
I heard on the radio the other day that 1,000s (??? Ican't remember what the number was) of bank branches closed last year due to the large increase in online banking. How will this affect the lending process?

Also, it was more proof that technology is destroying jobs. I'm starting to hate technology.

It doesn't. Branches serve almost no purpose. My clients never go to branches.

CCCP likes to make the argument that one needs to do three things to stay out of poverty:
1. Graduate
2. Get a job
3. Don't be a single parent

This is not true. The national poverty rate is 14%. Employment is at 96%, graduation is at 80%, and 71% of kids live in multiple parent families. There is a 54% chance that someone in America has done all 3 things, meaning that 40% of Americans (137 million people) have not done all of these things and yet are not in poverty. meanwhile, the chance that one has done none of these things is at 0.02% (60,000 people). So most people in poverty have done at least one of these things.

His main source is a 2013 report from Brookings.edu, which claims that "Our research shows that of American adults who followed these three simple rules, only about 2?percent are in poverty". So by my calculations, 130 million adults follow those three rules, and so according to Brookings's own numbers, around 2.5 million American adults follow these three rules, and STILL are in poverty. That's the entire population of Kansas! 432 of these people live in my town alone, it would actually be more unlikely that I DIDN'T know one of these people. 6% of the American poor follows these three rules, and are still in poverty.

In conclusion, the three rules are good rules to live by, and that is common sense. However, to make the argument that those three things will keep people out of poverty without fail is laughable. Brookings even says that other factors are at play. This claim simply does nothing to prove that institutional racism does not exist.

Posted by laramiebob on 2/22/2018 4:13:00 PM (view original):
The reality I got from the housing lending radio story (and my newspaper) was that Banks play games with "lists" that they are required to be on by the Feds. They use differing kinds of operations to avoid their building appearing on a certain type of categorical "list" (for the fed regulations purposes) thereby allowing themselves to escape via loopholes needing to make home loans (in certain areas!) that have been "marked" for development.......... seems the Banks have learned they can make more $$$$ by loaning to gentrificating developers than by making HOME loans------------ so they slyly use loopholes and deception to AVOID having to follow the banking regulations imposed by the Feds. And thus, neighborhood by black (or latino) neighborhoods are being sold off to wealthy developers for a revitalization project in some large city. And in so doing, using these practices, NO HOME loans are made to people of colors in city after city. It may not be red-lining exactly, but it still stinks!!! And is EXACTLY institutionalized racism. Case closed.

Or you can call me a liar and act like I didn't read and hear these multiple news stories in the last week alone!

Not case closed. Banks want to make money so they will lend to those who have the highest probability to repay them. They use 3rd party models that illustrate which borrowers are riskier than others. You keep playing the color card and I am telling you its $$ not race. You think Kyrie Irving has a hard time getting a loan in MA?

Banks see poorer neighborhoods as a greater risk so they don't as readily lend there. Banks also don't lend to golf courses because of seasonality. Does that make them golfcist? Banks are a terrible example because there is opportunity cost in using the capital they have to lend to "riskier" borrowers.