• wstrycker

    OK, they reasoned. We have caused a big stir in the reverse mortgage segment and other mortgage segments. Now, let’s see if we can keep going with some research on how much of a stir we made and how much it costs those we regulate. Then, let’s regulate the regulations to reduce cost to the lenders, if possible. Isn’t that what Dodd-Frank is about? Let’s not worry about prospect borrowers who we serve. They won’t be interested in getting any mortgage. It won’t be worth the trouble to them, so we won’t bother interviewing borrowers to see how many of them quit looking for a mortgage when we made it impossible to get. It is the regulators dream — stop the presses — there is no more mortgages to regulate. Now, we can create a new role for ourselves. But wait, what else can we regulate if not mortgages? With a stagnant economy, there’s not much going on to regulate. What is a regulator to do when the machine stops running? I know, we’ll do a study of the economy that drives mortgages. There’s bound to be more regulation to regulate.

  • wstrycker

    The CFPB says it will consider those costs along with the benefits consumers receive from the new regulations to become “better and smarter regulators.” (Could it be possible that the CFPB is now admitting they made a “dumber” and “worse” adjustment in the regulations???) But, that’s too easy. Let’s not start confessions now. Let’s keep it going while people are listening to us.

Back to top
mobile desktop