A reminder of how democrats led us to this mess

[Mac1958]

Another True Believer.


.

lets go one on one Bubs
'

You brought up Dems Supported F/F even late? AND?

WHICH PARTY CONTROLLED CONGRESS 2001-2007? Which bill passed the GOP majority House on GSE "reform" in that period where simple majority ruled?


PRETTY please?

The GOP. One of the many ways in which they have failed us.

Calm down. I'm not a righty, do your ape shit routine on one of them, willya?

Good gawd.
.

Tell you what Bubs, YOU just choose the points YOU wish to make on HOW it was the DEMOCRATIC LAWS that created OR hindered Dubya's subprime bubble? PRETTY PLEASE? Anything or are you going to do ANOTHER cut and run piece about both sides are to blame, then call me/us partisan AGAIN? LOL

You're claiming to not be partisan?

Holy crap. You people are amazing.

Third time: Believe that you will. Claim victory with your fellow zealot, bump your bellies together and cheer, and play with someone else. You guys are crazed.
.

 

[Dad2three]

Another True Believer.


.

lets go one on one Bubs
'

You brought up Dems Supported F/F even late? AND?

WHICH PARTY CONTROLLED CONGRESS 2001-2007? Which bill passed the GOP majority House on GSE "reform" in that period where simple majority ruled?


PRETTY please?

The GOP. One of the many ways in which they have failed us.

Calm down. I'm not a righty, do your ape shit routine on one of them, willya?

Good gawd.
.

Tell you what Bubs, YOU just choose the points YOU wish to make on HOW it was the DEMOCRATIC LAWS that created OR hindered Dubya's subprime bubble? PRETTY PLEASE? Anything or are you going to do ANOTHER cut and run piece about both sides are to blame, then call me/us partisan AGAIN? LOL

You're claiming to not be partisan?

Holy crap. You people are amazing.

Third time: Believe that you will. Claim victory with your fellow zealot, bump your bellies together and cheer, and play with someone else. You guys are crazed.
.

Got it, you can't show how it was "both sides",, instead you'll stick with the mantra of being a moderate,. but can't back up ANY position you hold in this matter. Weird

 

[Bfgrn]

CMO's were first created in 1987.

They kept growing right through Clinton's term. And Democrats pushed for eased standards and more "fairness" in the home buying process. We were told late in the game by Democrats that Fannie & Freddie were fine. And indeed, the Republicans failed us, too, largely by constantly pushing for fewer regulations.

I realize you're ideologically obligated to only "see" the other side's faults, but blame rests everywhere.
.

Herein lies your problem...Fannie and Freddie were not the cause of the financial crisis.

 

[Mac1958]

Herein lies your problem...Fannie and Freddie were not the cause of the financial crisis.

I love how you folks constantly argue with me over stuff I didn't say.

If you'd like to know what I actually think about this, read post 88.
.

 

[Dad2three]

CMO's were first created in 1987.

They kept growing right through Clinton's term. And Democrats pushed for eased standards and more "fairness" in the home buying process. We were told late in the game by Democrats that Fannie & Freddie were fine. And indeed, the Republicans failed us, too, largely by constantly pushing for fewer regulations.

I realize you're ideologically obligated to only "see" the other side's faults, but blame rests everywhere.
.

Herein lies your problem...Fannie and Freddie were not the cause of the financial crisis.

He will, I'm almost positive, CLAIM they set the underwriting standards, although THAT BS meme was debunked, over and over and over, except to AEI apologists like this Klown!

 

[Dad2three]

CMO's were first created in 1987.

They kept growing right through Clinton's term. And Democrats pushed for eased standards and more "fairness" in the home buying process. We were told late in the game by Democrats that Fannie & Freddie were fine. And indeed, the Republicans failed us, too, largely by constantly pushing for fewer regulations.

I realize you're ideologically obligated to only "see" the other side's faults, but blame rests everywhere.
.

Herein lies your problem...Fannie and Freddie were not the cause of the financial crisis.

I love how you folks constantly argue with me over stuff I didn't say.

If you'd like to know what I actually think about this, read post 88.
.

YOUR POST

A reminder of how democrats led us to this mess | Page 9 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

• ...Borrowers (yes kids, they were involved in this too) signing on the dotted line for loans they goddamn well knew they couldn't afford
• Borrowers (oops, there they are again) getting loans to pay off bills and then, as if they had no functioning brain matter whatsoever, immediately running up new bills

On and on, I know I missed a few. Both ends of the spectrum just love to point the finger at the other, as always."

WEIRD, IF ONLY WE HAD SOMEONE ON THE REGULATOR SIDE TO STOP THAT NONSENSE???


Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative


Eliot Spitzer - Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime




.


.

 

[Bfgrn]

Herein lies your problem...Fannie and Freddie were not the cause of the financial crisis.

I love how you folks constantly argue with me over stuff I didn't say.

If you'd like to know what I actually think about this, read post 88.
.

I read post 88...now what?

• Borrowers (yes kids, they were involved in this too) signing on the dotted line for loans they goddamn well knew they couldn't afford
• Borrowers (oops, there they are again) getting loans to pay off bills and then, as if they had no functioning brain matter whatsoever, immediately running up new bills
  

The vast majority of "borrowers" could afford to pay back the loans. The chose not to. Instead they chose to walk away. You see, they were not buying a "homestead"...they were investors who jettisoned a bad investment.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Weird how the great depression, S-L recession of the late 80's, George hw Bush slow down and the great recession were all caused by deregulations. This proves that small idiotic government is just dumb!

 

[ScienceRocks]

The binary thought processes of zealots, amazing to watch.
.

Would you admit that deregulation is bad and leads to problems?

 

[Mac1958]

Herein lies your problem...Fannie and Freddie were not the cause of the financial crisis.

I love how you folks constantly argue with me over stuff I didn't say.

If you'd like to know what I actually think about this, read post 88.
.

I read post 88...now what?

• Borrowers (yes kids, they were involved in this too) signing on the dotted line for loans they goddamn well knew they couldn't afford
• Borrowers (oops, there they are again) getting loans to pay off bills and then, as if they had no functioning brain matter whatsoever, immediately running up new bills

The vast majority of "borrowers" could afford to pay back the loans. The chose not to. Instead they chose to walk away. You see, they were not buying a "homestead"...they were investors who jettisoned a bad investment.

Funny how you folks somehow didn't "see" the other points I made.

Every day in here, my theory that adherence to hardcore partisan ideology distorts perception is proven correct.
.

 

[Mac1958]

The binary thought processes of zealots, amazing to watch..

Would you admit that deregulation is bad and leads to problems?

"Admit"?

Your turn, read post 88.

Good grief.
.

 

[Dad2three]

AMERICAN BANKERDOTCOM

GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance



...There is no data anywhere to cast doubt on the vastly superior loan performance of the GSEs. Year after year, decade after decade, before, during and after the housing crash, GSE loan performance has consistently been two-to-six times better than that of any other segment of the market. The numbers are irrefutable, and they show that the entire case against GSE underwriting standards, and their role in the financial crisis, is based on social stereotyping, smoke and mirrors, and little else.



...Or check out the FHFA study that compares, on an apples-to-apples basis, GSEs loan originations with those for private label securitizations. The study segments loans four ways, by ARMs-versus-fixed-rate, as well as by vintage, by FICO score and by loan-to-value ratio. In almost every one of 1800 different comparisons covering years 2001 through 2008, GSE loan performance was exponentially better. On average, GSE fixed-rate loans performed four times better, and GSE ARMs performed five times better.



Mortgage analyst Laurie Goodman estimated that private label securitizations issued during 2005-2007 incurred a loss rate of 24%, whereas the GSE loss rate for 2005-2007 vintage loans was closer to 4%.

And yet, large numbers of people remain convinced that Fannie and Freddie's underwriting standards caused the mortgage crisis. Why is that?


http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/gse-critics-ignore-loan-performance-1059187-1.html

 

[Dad2three]

Herein lies your problem...Fannie and Freddie were not the cause of the financial crisis.

I love how you folks constantly argue with me over stuff I didn't say.

If you'd like to know what I actually think about this, read post 88.
.

I read post 88...now what?

• Borrowers (yes kids, they were involved in this too) signing on the dotted line for loans they goddamn well knew they couldn't afford
• Borrowers (oops, there they are again) getting loans to pay off bills and then, as if they had no functioning brain matter whatsoever, immediately running up new bills

The vast majority of "borrowers" could afford to pay back the loans. The chose not to. Instead they chose to walk away. You see, they were not buying a "homestead"...they were investors who jettisoned a bad investment.

Funny how you folks somehow didn't "see" the other points I made.

Every day in here, my theory that adherence to hardcore partisan ideology distorts perception is proven correct.
.

You mean Banksters hosed US after they lobbied for 30 years to push bad products on US and Dubya turned a blind eye to their shenanigans?

 

[Misty]

Dispute it

Republicans run the house, senate, and Presidency from 2000 to 2006. But let's blame the Democrats!

The democrats are the ones who voted against regulating Freddie and Fannie. Nice try.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Dispute it

Republicans run the house, senate, and Presidency from 2000 to 2006. But let's blame the Democrats!

The democrats are the ones who voted against regulating Freddie and Fannie. Nice try.

Who was running things for 6 years of that administration again?

What is it you all liked to say during Obama's last election? Hmm.... was it... OWN IT!

 

[Misty]

AMERICAN BANKERDOTCOM

GSE Critics Ignore Loan Performance



...There is no data anywhere to cast doubt on the vastly superior loan performance of the GSEs. Year after year, decade after decade, before, during and after the housing crash, GSE loan performance has consistently been two-to-six times better than that of any other segment of the market. The numbers are irrefutable, and they show that the entire case against GSE underwriting standards, and their role in the financial crisis, is based on social stereotyping, smoke and mirrors, and little else.



...Or check out the FHFA study that compares, on an apples-to-apples basis, GSEs loan originations with those for private label securitizations. The study segments loans four ways, by ARMs-versus-fixed-rate, as well as by vintage, by FICO score and by loan-to-value ratio. In almost every one of 1800 different comparisons covering years 2001 through 2008, GSE loan performance was exponentially better. On average, GSE fixed-rate loans performed four times better, and GSE ARMs performed five times better.



Mortgage analyst Laurie Goodman estimated that private label securitizations issued during 2005-2007 incurred a loss rate of 24%, whereas the GSE loss rate for 2005-2007 vintage loans was closer to 4%.

And yet, large numbers of people remain convinced that Fannie and Freddie's underwriting standards caused the mortgage crisis. Why is that?


http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/gse-critics-ignore-loan-performance-1059187-1.html

Double talk bullshit.

"One thing was clear: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were given a government-sponsored monopoly on a large part of the U.S. secondary mortgage market. It is this monopoly, combined with the government's implicit guarantee to keep these firms afloat, that would later contribute to the mortgage market's collapse. (For more on the secondary mortgage market, see Behind the Scenes of Your Mortgage.)

In 2007, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac began to experience large losses on their retained portfolios, especially on their Alt-A and subprime investments. In 2008, the sheer size of their retained portfolios and mortgage guarantees led the FHFA to conclude that they would soon be insolvent. By September 6, 2008, it was clear that the market believed the firms were in financial trouble, and the FHFA put the companies into "conservatorship". American taxpayers were left on the hook for future losses beyond the companies' existing - and shrinking - capital cushions.

Read more: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac And The Credit Crisis Of 2008 Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac And The Credit Crisis Of 2008
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook

 

[Misty]

Dispute it

Republicans run the house, senate, and Presidency from 2000 to 2006. But let's blame the Democrats!

The democrats are the ones who voted against regulating Freddie and Fannie. Nice try.

Who was running things for 6 years of that administration again?

What is it you all liked to say during Obama's last election? Hmm.... was it... OWN IT!

Bush and republicans warned everyone but the lobbyists once again bought off the democrats. Spin it any way you want the democrats own this mess.

I can't wait to see how you spin Iran when that turns to shit.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Dispute it

Republicans run the house, senate, and Presidency from 2000 to 2006. But let's blame the Democrats!

The democrats are the ones who voted against regulating Freddie and Fannie. Nice try.

Who was running things for 6 years of that administration again?

What is it you all liked to say during Obama's last election? Hmm.... was it... OWN IT!

Bush and republicans warned everyone but the lobbyists once again bought off the democrats. Spin it any way you want the democrats own this mess.

I can't wait to see how you spin Iran when that turns to shit.

Yeah. 6 years of total republican dominance, and in the 7th year shit hits the fan. Democrats fault!!!

 

[Care4all]

Dispute it

Republicans run the house, senate, and Presidency from 2000 to 2006. But let's blame the Democrats!

The democrats are the ones who voted against regulating Freddie and Fannie. Nice try.

Actually you are wrong in that assumption...or partly wrong.

Hagel's bill to supposedly reign in Fannie and Freddie made it out of senate committee, (with or without the Democratic vote), and was going to be given a vote on the Senate floor, by the Republican leadership...

But underhandedly, Freddie Mac hired a lobby firm and paid millions of dollars to them, to Lobby the REPUBLICAN SENATORS that were supporting Hagel's bill in to changing their minds and in to voting against it....this happened behind Hagel's back...anyway, when the time came to put the Bill on to the Floor for a vote, the REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP decided NOT to do so....

The Hagel bill did NOT make it to the Senate floor for a vote because the Freddie Mac lobbyists, got enough of the Republican senators to change their vote in to not supporting these reforms, that the bill would no longer pass....so the Leadership passed on bringing it to a vote.

So when the rubber hits the road, the REASON there was no Fannie and Freddie reform done when Republicans had the majority, is simply because the Republican Senators lobbied by Freddie Mac, changed their position on the reform bill of Hagels...some would say, the Republican Senators were "bought off" by Freddie.
NOTE
I'll edit and add a link as soon as I find it.

here's one from FOX NEWS link

Freddie Mac Tried to Kill Republican Regulatory Bill in 2005
Published October 19, 2008
Associated Press
Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million to kill legislation that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae, three years before the government took control to prevent their collapse.

In the cross hairs of the campaign carried out by DCI of Washington were Republican senators and a regulatory overhaul bill sponsored by Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. DCI's chief executive is Doug Goodyear, whom John McCain's campaign later hired to manage the GOP convention in September.

Freddie Mac's payments to DCI began shortly after the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee sent Hagel's bill to the then GOP-run Senate on July 28, 2005. All GOP members of the committee supported it; all Democrats opposed it.

In the midst of DCI's yearlong effort, Hagel and 25 other Republican senators pleaded unsuccessfully with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., to allow a vote.

"If effective regulatory reform legislation ... is not enacted this year, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system and the economy as a whole," the senators wrote in a letter that proved prescient.

Unknown to the senators, DCI was undermining support for the bill in a campaign targeting 17 Republican senators in 13 states, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. The states and the senators targeted changed over time, but always stayed on the Republican side.

In the end, there was not enough Republican support for Hagel's bill to warrant bringing it up for a vote...
Freddie Mac Tried to Kill Republican Regulatory Bill in 2005 | Fox News

 

[Dad2three]

Dispute it

Republicans run the house, senate, and Presidency from 2000 to 2006. But let's blame the Democrats!

The democrats are the ones who voted against regulating Freddie and Fannie. Nice try.

You mean Dems didn't go along with the GOP goal to GUT F/F and despite Dubya's REPEATEDLY "warnings", he blocked F/F reform in the GOP Congress, TWICE?

ONE bill to ever make it out of the GOP majority House where it took simple GOP majority votes to pass ANYTHING (NO WAY TO FILIBUSTER!) on F/F reform 2001-Jan 2007?

Yep, once the Dems got in, they DID get a reform bill passed, though Dubya took MONTHS to sign onto it! lol