TBD

TBD on Ning

Though I am not surprised at the ranking, I'd like to know what dominating factors contribute to our lower ranking on the global Human Development Index scale.


The 2009 report was released on October 5, 2009, and covers the period up to 2007. It was titled "Overcoming barriers: Human mobility and
development". The top countries by HDI were grouped in a new category
called "Very High Human Development". The report refers to these
countries as "developed countries".

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


The HDI combines three dimensions:


Tags: development, human

Views: 49

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Larry, Where in the world do you come up with information saying that the government told financial institutions to lend money to those who couldn't pay it back. If that was a true statement, no banking institution would have survived this crisis. There is a hugh difference in telling someone that they are free to do something, and telling them they have too.
I didn't come up with that info Robbie, I posed it as a question and forgot the question mark. I thank darroll for answering it. We did cover at least some of their losses though.
I think we have a deliberate confusion of terms occuring in this thread. When you use the term liberalisation of monetary policy, you are talking about something different than liberial politics.

Darroll, I read your comment as "the Government telling the banks how much to lend. This is the exact opposite of how the system works. The government regulates the banking industry by setting ratio of reserves to money lent out, it used to set a limit on the interest rate that lending institutions could charge. Anything over that was considered usuary which was against the law. These laws and regulations were done away with during, I believe, the Regan administration. The so called conservitives, who seem to be conservitive on everything except what big business wants, were estatic. No where, no time, did the government tell banks or other lending institutions that they had to fund interest only, no down payment, loans. That came about through the capitalistic competition. If you wouldn't fund my client to purchase the house I was peddleing I would take him/her to another institution. If I as an appraiser would not value a house at a high enough amount to meet the criteria for a loan, I would get no more business from that reality office. So you had the value of homes skyrocketing and the requirements for qualifying for the loans getting looser, right along with the bogus increase in housing values. The lending institutions made the loan, then sold the debt by colateralizing it and would then turn around and loan out the money transfered under that exchange to another loan. Sometimes that loan on the same piece of property to the second owner would be made by the same lending institution within a 6 month period. I was sent out to appraise the same peice of property two and three times over a two year period. I could justify the increase in value by comparing it to the selling price of other property around it. Often, no one ever moved into the property. As long as the contract met all the requirements of the loan appraisors they had no leg to stand on to deny the loan. This type of real estate deal is what brought the housing market down. Many local banking institutions survived by refusing to play the game to the hilt. It was the loosining of Government regulations that brought all this on, not the government telling institutions how they should conduct business. It was the governments caving in to the money grubbing capitalists that caused this mess, not the other way around. I saw it coming and got out of the business just before it went over the cliff. I go berserk when people try to blame the current recession on the government having to much regulation.
The first thing would do to resolve this issue is to study the "affordable housing" order that Barney Frank and his pals came up with.
Allot of the banks would not adapt affordable housing, and were fined for going against it.
The Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco (“Bank”) has established an Affordable Housing
Program (“AHP”), pursuant to Section 21 of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and
Enforcement Act of 1989, to assist in financing affordable housing for very low-, low-, and moderate income
individuals. This Implementation Plan has been adopted, and from time-to-time amended, by the
Bank in accordance with the requirements of Part 1291 of the Federal Housing Finance Agency
Regulations governing the AHP (12 C.F.R. Part 1291) (“Regulation”).


http://www.fhlbsf.com/ci/applications/ahp/imp_plan.pdf
I just read this document. I fail to see how this had any part of causing the housing bubble that brought on the current recession. This document is dated 2010 the Housing bubble burst in late 2006 early 2007. Secondly the FHLB is part of the fed not an independent bank. I still do not understand how this is the government forcing banks to make subpar loans.
The banking caucus started pushing this handout.
Bush went to congress and the American people with a warning.
He was quickly ignored by the biased press. They thought that a bubble that was about to pop meant to blow too big of a bubble with bubble-gum.
If I don’t like someone, I still listen to what the heck they have to say.
They are still pushing this bill. They did not learn a thing.
They don't have to, as they blamed someone else and got away with it.. Same o, same o.
I think our "development quotionent" is sub par because of right wing nuts like nancy. Sorry Maricel, I am just trying to bury her thread like a cat buries scat.
TWEET!!
SWEET
Wait a cotten picken minute. This isn't "word association" is it?
Gulls are what Immortal Porposes eat. And you better not get caught transporting them across state lines for that reason.

RSS

Badge

Loading…

© 2021   Created by Aggie.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service