warrl wrote: You're arguing the primacy of theory over data. Sorry.Sorry, no.If disproportionately more CRA loans--which were full doc, fully vetted loans--defaulted over Alt-A loans--which came to be known as liar loans for good reason--there was something else operant in CRA loans.Here's what it was: CRA loans were given to people who live in so called underserved communities--the same communities that receive disproportionately more entitlements than other communities. It sure wasn't the underwriting guidelines of CRA loans that caused them to default. It was something more organic; something you can't quantify in a loan application due to red-lining laws. There, I said it.