On Friday, Bear Stearns was on the verge of collapse (read about it here http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23638138/). Their competitor, JP Morgan, will be buying them out. Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost. It makes one wonder if the right people and businesses are paying the price for the scam, called sub-prime loans, that was foisted on the public. Oh, yes...the people that are currently in default got into homes that normally they wouldn't even be able to afford to even look at. But someone had to have told and assured them that they could afford them. Someone had to have told them that they would be able to come out ahead...be richer for it in the future, or at least not be damaged by this scam. Yes, people bought into it...but when dfo you stop blaming the victim of the con job? Yes, it was a con job. People were enticed and manipulated using the 3 key focus points that all con jobs and advertisements have in common:
1. Make offers appealing to people's greed.
2. Make offers appealing to people's ego.
3. Make offers appealing to people's fear of loss.
The sub-prime loan was a purely manipulative con job. Someone was going to get burned. After all, how long and far could home prices go up? But the people who came up with this con were not the ones that were going to be on the losing end. Con artists generally don't. Now who might these people be that were the sole winners in the sub-prime scam? Follow the money. Who gained the most from it? Don't stop at the actual business entity...a business entity does NOT make any decisions or take actions on its own. Someone there had to make the decision and put things into action. Look through the news archives and find out who was the BIGGEST proponent/champion for the sub-prime loans. Who gained the most and lost the least? I think that if you follow the money you may be surprised. None of the governemnt regulators are interested in getting to the bottom of the con. And the politicians are only interested in getting re-elected.