A couple of years ago, as Joe Biden was trying desperately to save his failed presidency, he sent his sleazy attorney general to Jacksonville in search of votes.
To persuade voters with dark skin that Democrats cared about them, the government filed a case against a local bank alleging “redlining.”
This is a crime based on the preposterous notion that banks would not lend money to people because of their skin color.
This is the same socialist party that claims capitalists – especially bankers – are so greedy they would stop at nothing to make a profit.
If that were true, why would bankers refuse to make loans to people and reap the profits?
The idea that greedy people would forego profits because of the debtor’s skin color makes no sense whatsoever – like many Democrat claims.
Bankers protect their customers’ money by denying loans to people who can’t or won’t pay back the money.
As it happens, more people with dark skin are low-income, (largely as a result of Democrat policies).
Ameris bank denied that they had redlined anyone but eventually consented to make a few more risky loans and – Biden having been kicked out of office – the government declared them in compliance and dropped the case.
It all appears to be a classic demonstration of the government’s willingness to trample rights for political purposes.
In reality, it was the government that promoted redlining during FDR’s New Deal. The Federal Housing Administration and Veterans Administration backed loans — but only in “safe” (i.e., white) areas.
Banks followed these government guidelines to make certain their loans would be insured. Lending in redlined areas meant no federal backing, which increased risk and reduced incentive.
Redlining has been illegal since 1968.
Eye on Jacksonville could not find a single example cited in the government’s complaint in which a credit-worthy loan applicant who was black or Hispanic was denied a loan.
The government didn’t even allege that anyone complained about the bank’s practices. It appears the government just selected the bank for a lawsuit.
The government’s case was that Ameris did not have enough branch banks located in census tracts where the majority of the residents were black or Hispanic, and other banks made more loans to people with dark skin than Ameris did.
“Ameris does not have, and has never had, a branch located in a majority-Black and Hispanic census tract in its Jacksonville assessment area,” the complaint said.
Ameris agreed to invest a minimum of$7.5 million in a loan subsidy fund with the goal of “increasing credit for home mortgage loans, home improvement loans, and home refinance loans extended in majority-Black and Hispanic census tracts.”
In other words, it must discriminate against people with light skin by subsidizing loans made to people with dark skin or Spanish ancestry.
That’s how a government obsessed with skin color perceives “justice.”
