Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Rating Agency

Posted 3 years ago on Oct. 17, 2011, 6:38 p.m. EST by JimBingham (15)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The rating agencies own a good part of the blame. They lied about the value of home loans. The lie led to home owners being fooled by home values. Home values fell, many home owners lost jobs and then lost their homes. The hardworking middle class suffered. All this resulting from rating agency lies.

Let them know how you feel:

Standard & Poor's (S&P) :Its head office is located on 55 Water Street in Lower Manhattan, Moody's Investors Service, Inc. 7 World Trade Center at 250 Greenwich Street New York, NY 10007 USA

6 Comments

6 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by JimBingham (15) 3 years ago

Benny, I believe you are exactly correct.

[-] 1 points by Benny14 (101) 3 years ago

The rating agencies are also wall street. They not neutral at all. The banks told them give us good rating and we will give you a great job in the financial sector and they did

[-] 1 points by JimBingham (15) 3 years ago

They knew or should have known. I suppose you can withhold a judgement because perfect information doesn't exist or you can conclude based the overwhelming circumstantial evidence. Your logic pattern prevents society from holding the powerful accountable.

[-] 1 points by PlasmaStorm (242) 3 years ago

Read "Too Big to Fail." The scene that stands out to me the most is the CEO and CFO of Lehman Brothers, watching CNBC and one talking head after another badmouthing Lehman on TV, as their stock plummets 40 percent in a day. There was literally nothing they could have done to stop it.

[-] 1 points by JimBingham (15) 3 years ago

Plasma, my view is the CEO and CFO knew the risk. They took the risk to make a bonus. They could care less about the employees, stock holders or economy. The vast majority of the powerful got jobs after the fall.

[-] 1 points by PlasmaStorm (242) 3 years ago

Jim,

There are two perspectives. You can suppose that the ratings agencies lied. Or you can suppose that the ratings agencies performed a best professional estimate considering facts available at the time.

My question is what kind of a person calls someone a liar when there is the benefit of the doubt.