1st, 2nd, and 3rd.
Sowell wrote that the CRA was “far from being as
benign as it appeared.” Thus, the CRA “appeared” benign, or “innocuous,” at
least to some. The passage states that HUD exerted pressure on lenders,
which led to practices that later caused those same lenders to be assailed as
“predatory.” Thus, HUD had the ability to affect banking practices. Finally,
Sowell argued that the idea “that government officials were qualified to tell
banks how to lend” was a “flawed assumption.” If Sowell believed that the
government officials were not “qualified” to advise the banks, it follows that
some minimum level of expertise is necessary in order to be qualified to do
so.
20.
3rd only.
The passage states that discriminatory credit practices existed in
low-income neighborhoods. Do not assume that there is a linear relationship
wherein such practices occur most in low-income neighborhoods, less in
middle-income neighborhoods, and least in high-income neighborhoods.
Maybe such practices exist
only
in low-income neighborhoods. The first
choice is out of scope. The second choice is also out of scope—you have no
way to know what legislators were thinking or feeling when they voted for the
CRA. The passage does provide good proof for the third statement—since
some argue that “pressure on lenders from HUD led to practices that later
caused those same lenders to be assailed as ‘predatory,’” you can safely
conclude that some critics think that attempts to combat discriminatory credit
practices (passing the CRA and enforcing it through HUD) can have
unintended consequences—in this case, replacing a lack of lending with
predatory lending.
Chapter 2
Dostları ilə paylaş: |
