Do you know left wingers still blame the 2008 housing bubble on just Booooosh?

[edthecynic]

Bush did encourage increased lending by the banks and the relaxation of regulations, though. He provided financial incentives, too.

He also made no downpayment loans available to people with bad credit for more than the property was worth with Bush's ADDI.

 

[edthecynic]

Bush Called For Reform 17 Times In 2008

Proof that talk is cheap!!!
Bush may have "called" for reform, but he and the rest of the GOP fought reform tooth and nail.

 

[Markle]

Regulations have consequences

But, but, but repealing Glass-Steagall REDUCED regulation and the Right blames its repeal for the Bush Housing Crash!!!!!
How can it be that reduced regulation caused a bubble???

But, but, but repealing Glass-Steagall REDUCED regulation and the Right blames its repeal for the Bush Housing Crash!!!!!

Elizabeth Warren blames its repeal, is she on the right?
So does Bernie. He a righty?

Do you blame the repeal?

But, but, but she doesn't make the moronic claim that reduced regulation is good for the economy, now does she!!!!!!!! geeezzzz you fools are dense!!!

ONE of the issues leading to the 2007/2008 housing/mortgage/financial meltdown was MORE REGULATIONS.

Chris Dodd and Barney Frank's committees who FORCED Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase the percentage of SUB-PRIME, HIGH RISK loans in their portfolio. This reduction in their qualifications forced all other lenders and secondary mortgage markets to lower their standards.

Yes, the repeal of Glass-Steagall was a small part of the problem, but certainly not the biggest.

Democrats actions leading to Mortgage Collapse B.B.

From New York Times
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending


From Bloomberg News
How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&refer=columnist_hassett&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0


The Administration’s Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs, ie Fannie, Freddie etc.)
Just the Facts: The Administration's Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs


Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Democrats of Financial Crisis; Meltdown



The Wall Street Journal Barney’s Rubble
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB122161010874845645


Mashup of Maxine Waters & Barney Frank - Then Vs. Now

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

 

[Markle]

Of course we know that. Aren't they pathetic?

Lets play a keep-em-honest experiment:

Mentally switch the name of the person who was in White House 2001-2009 from Bush to Obama.

Ready? Ok who's fault was 2008 Great Recession...GO!

Barney Frank & his ilk

A testament to the total incompetence of Bush if a MINORITY congressman Frank was more powerful than a president named Bush!!!!

Your intentional ignorance of how our government is NOT surprising.

 

[edthecynic]

Chris Dodd and Barney Frank's committees who FORCED Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase the percentage of SUB-PRIME, HIGH RISK loans in their portfolio. This reduction in their qualifications forced all other lenders and secondary mortgage markets to lower their standards.

That is pure hogwash! Dodd and Frank were MINORITY members of their committees, the GOP had two more votes in each committee, so nothing could be forced on the committees by either Dodd or Frank!!!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Regulations have consequences

But, but, but repealing Glass-Steagall REDUCED regulation and the Right blames its repeal for the Bush Housing Crash!!!!!
How can it be that reduced regulation caused a bubble???

But, but, but repealing Glass-Steagall REDUCED regulation and the Right blames its repeal for the Bush Housing Crash!!!!!

Elizabeth Warren blames its repeal, is she on the right?
So does Bernie. He a righty?

Do you blame the repeal?

But, but, but she doesn't make the moronic claim that reduced regulation is good for the economy, now does she!!!!!!!! geeezzzz you fools are dense!!!

But, but, but she doesn't make the moronic claim that reduced regulation is good for the economy

She makes the moronic claim that increased regulation is good for the economy.
How many more regulations does Obama need to add to improve his weak economic growth?

 

[Fueri]

Clinton was just as responsible, for the regulatory framework that lead to the housing boom and dotcom crash.

With a GOP majority in both houses?

Try again.

Clinton has admitted some culpability

“I think that the responsibility that the Democrats had may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress, or by me when I was President, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” – Former President Bill Clinton (D-AR), September 25, 2008

F+F lost 50-70% of the market when Booosh pals Countrywide etc started selling crap in 2002. The F+F BS is pure crap propaganda.

Take it up with Clinton then.

Or Greenspan, who said this in '05

"”We at the Federal Reserve remain concerned about the growth and magnitude of the mortgage portfolios of the government-sponsored enterprises, which concentrate interest rate risk and prepayment risk at these two institutions and makes our financial system dependent on their ability to manage these risks” … “To fend off possible future systemic difficulties, which we assess as likely if G.S.E. expansion continues unabated, preventive actions are required sooner rather than later.”



People saw this shit coming. They were ignored.

Still going on about Clinton and F+F that had near nothing to do with it, dupe? Change the channel...

Did you see clinton in that second Post?
Tell your doctor the meds aren't working.

I could post numerous quotes going back to as early as 2002 of people of all stripes warning that this was coming, but dupity dupes like you choose to ignore that mountain of easily documentable evidence because blubbering bbbbbbbBush! is easier than actually bothering to look..

And of course it fits the hyper partisan agenda to continue to spew the nonsense that one guy is to blame. and it''s the other guy. always is isn't it, eh?

 

[WaitingFor2020]

Who cares?

Bush-43 was one of the most honorable men ever to reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and anyone with sufficient interest in reality knows it.

And yet, Google the expression, "Bush lied..." and watch your computer explode with all the hits. Not "Hillary lied," not "Bill lied," but "Bush lied." And the "lie" to which they refer was the acceptance by Bush-43 of the intelligence information provided by our own military and civilian intelligence services. It was not a lie at all.

Lefties are not often burdened with such trivialities as facts.

Since you don't list any we can surmise that you don't burden yourself with them either.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

They blame everything on Bush.....their battle cry for the last 7 1/2 years has been Bbbbuuuuuutt BOOOOOOOOSH!!!!

No, actually the last 1.25 years we've been warning the blank-eyed brain dead about Mr. Trump.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

maybe, just maybe, there is a huge machine in place, and it doesn't matter one damn bit which party owns the title of POTUS.

I think you're right. It's called the fix and it's in. But I think the Clintons are less volatile and compulsive than Mr. Trump and his alliances with Breitbart and Roger Ailes.

 

[francoHFW]

With a GOP majority in both houses?

Try again.

Clinton has admitted some culpability

“I think that the responsibility that the Democrats had may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress, or by me when I was President, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” – Former President Bill Clinton (D-AR), September 25, 2008

F+F lost 50-70% of the market when Booosh pals Countrywide etc started selling crap in 2002. The F+F BS is pure crap propaganda.

Take it up with Clinton then.

Or Greenspan, who said this in '05

"”We at the Federal Reserve remain concerned about the growth and magnitude of the mortgage portfolios of the government-sponsored enterprises, which concentrate interest rate risk and prepayment risk at these two institutions and makes our financial system dependent on their ability to manage these risks” … “To fend off possible future systemic difficulties, which we assess as likely if G.S.E. expansion continues unabated, preventive actions are required sooner rather than later.”



People saw this shit coming. They were ignored.

Still going on about Clinton and F+F that had near nothing to do with it, dupe? Change the channel...

Did you see clinton in that second Post?
Tell your doctor the meds aren't working.

I could post numerous quotes going back to as early as 2002 of people of all stripes warning that this was coming, but dupity dupes like you choose to ignore that mountain of easily documentable evidence because blubbering bbbbbbbBush! is easier than actually bothering to look..

And of course it fits the hyper partisan agenda to continue to spew the nonsense that one guy is to blame. and it''s the other guy. always is isn't it, eh?

Your quote is bs about F+F, not the driver behind the meltdown. Yup, it always is the GOP with REAL corrupt scandals that actually hurt tens of millions, dupe. See 1929, S+L,and 2008.

Post some of those quotes then, dupe, and not the usual GOP tripe about F+F they've been going on and on about for decades.

 

[Markle]

The accounting scandals in the GSEs opened the door to Wall Street storming into the secondary market.

How?

Investors lost trust in the GSEs and turned to Wall Street instead.

Well sub-prime derivative market was very profitable...until it wasn't. Besides, if GSE's actually went down from internal problems they would drag down the rest of the market.

Sub-primes were less than three percent of the secondary market, until Wall Street went hog wild with CDOs.

The newly invented CDOs were a hot commodity, and there weren't enough good risks to pack into them, and so Wall Street threw the underwriting laws of the Universe out the window, and began searching for more paper to cram into their CDOs. And this mean they needed more and more borrowers.

When you run out of good risk borrowers, and still want to lend more money out, then you inevitably lower your standards. THIS is what caused the crash. Wall Street was selling CDOs like heroin. As was every Western financial institution on the planet.

The idea the banks were FORCED to lend, as the retards claim, is outright laughable. Every time I hear a tard say that, I immediately know they are a parroting rube who is completely clueless.

Lehman Brothers bought their own mortgage broker pipeline to keep the paper flowing in. And Fuld thought he had his risks covered by credit default swaps and CDO-squareds and all kinds of other bizarre shit. He also thought that if all else failed, the US government would not allow him to collapse.

He was wrong on every count.

And when some ignorant parroting rube in Congress asked him during the hearings how much the CRA had to do with Lehman failing, Fuld responded, "De minimus."

Not true.

SPECIFICALLY CRA made fewer than 3 percent of the loans. That does not include the millions of SUB-PRIME loans which were NOT CRS loans.

The reduction in the qualifications caused by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac flowed over to all borrowers making more and more bad loans.

These forced changes also led to the "no doc" loans where you simply had to state your income in order to obtain a mortgage. It was INSANE!

 

[Markle]

maybe, just maybe, there is a huge machine in place, and it doesn't matter one damn bit which party owns the title of POTUS.

I think you're right. It's called the fix and it's in. But I think the Clintons are less volatile and compulsive than Mr. Trump and his alliances with Breitbart and Roger Ailes.

As you know, and obviously know well, the Clinton's and their alliances with George Soros and your favorite, Elizabeth Warren.

The Clinton's also owe huge favors to:

 

[Markle]

Investors lost trust in the GSEs and turned to Wall Street instead.

Well sub-prime derivative market was very profitable...until it wasn't. Besides, if GSE's actually went down from internal problems they would drag down the rest of the market.

Sub-primes were less than three percent of the secondary market, until Wall Street went hog wild with CDOs.

The newly invented CDOs were a hot commodity, and there weren't enough good risks to pack into them, and so Wall Street threw the underwriting laws of the Universe out the window, and began searching for more paper to cram into their CDOs. And this mean they needed more and more borrowers.

When you run out of good risk borrowers, and still want to lend more money out, then you inevitably lower your standards. THIS is what caused the crash.

The idea the banks were FORCED to lend, as the retards claim, is ourtight laughable. Every time I hear a tard say that, I immediately know they are a parroting rube who is completely clueless.

Lehman Brothers bought their own mortgage broker pipeline to keep the paper flowing in. And Fuld thought he had his risks covered by credit default swaps and CDO-squareds and all kinds of other bizarre shit. He also thought that if all else failed, the US government would not allow him to collapse.

He was wrong on every count.

And when some ignorant parroting rube in Congress asked him during the hearing how much the CRA had to do with Lehman failing, Fuld responded, "De minimus."

Ok, but CDOs are still here today and we aren't crashing, right?

CDS are still here today, too, and they shouldn't be.

CDOs were working just fine before the bubble. They had a very specific purpose and carried no risk whatsoever. They were a righteous tool in the hands of people with integrity.

But then the dumb and greedy took over.

Credit Default Swaps should definitely be banned, though.

CDOs should be sold on an open exchange with transparent chains of collateral.

CDOs were working just fine before the bubble. They had a very specific purpose and carried no risk whatsoever.

That's not true.

Credit Default Swaps should definitely be banned, though.

Why?

Here

The Bet That Blew Up Wall Street
Steve Kroft On Credit Default Swaps And Their Central Role In The Unfolding Economic Crisis
The Bet That Blew Up Wall Street

 

[Markle]

Bush was the guy who lowered the interest rates to practically zero so that anybody and everybody could qualify for a mortgage on the basis of income. The result was that the market was flooded with new buyers who couldn't previously qualify for a mortgage, and this resulted in bidding wars, and properties selling at way over asking. IOW's, the housing bubble.

Flat out lie. You really need to do your research BEFORE posting. I know, how unique.

The average annual mortgage interest rate from 2001 through 2008 ran between a low of 5.83% to a high of 6.97% the year he took office 2001.

July 2016, the mortgage rate was 3.44%.

 

[Fueri]

Clinton has admitted some culpability

“I think that the responsibility that the Democrats had may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress, or by me when I was President, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” – Former President Bill Clinton (D-AR), September 25, 2008

F+F lost 50-70% of the market when Booosh pals Countrywide etc started selling crap in 2002. The F+F BS is pure crap propaganda.

Take it up with Clinton then.

Or Greenspan, who said this in '05

"”We at the Federal Reserve remain concerned about the growth and magnitude of the mortgage portfolios of the government-sponsored enterprises, which concentrate interest rate risk and prepayment risk at these two institutions and makes our financial system dependent on their ability to manage these risks” … “To fend off possible future systemic difficulties, which we assess as likely if G.S.E. expansion continues unabated, preventive actions are required sooner rather than later.”



People saw this shit coming. They were ignored.

Still going on about Clinton and F+F that had near nothing to do with it, dupe? Change the channel...

Did you see clinton in that second Post?
Tell your doctor the meds aren't working.

I could post numerous quotes going back to as early as 2002 of people of all stripes warning that this was coming, but dupity dupes like you choose to ignore that mountain of easily documentable evidence because blubbering bbbbbbbBush! is easier than actually bothering to look..

And of course it fits the hyper partisan agenda to continue to spew the nonsense that one guy is to blame. and it''s the other guy. always is isn't it, eh?

Your quote is bs about F+F, not the driver behind the meltdown. Yup, it always is the GOP with REAL corrupt scandals that actually hurt tens of millions, dupe. See 1929, S+L,and 2008.

Post some of those quotes then, dupe, and not the usual GOP tripe about F+F they've been going on and on about for decades.

I already posted a quote from Clinton. Is that gop tripe?

How about this one then


"Like a lot of my Democratic colleagues I was too slow to appreciate the recklessness of Fannie and Freddie. I defended their efforts to encourage affordable homeownership when in retrospect I should have heeded the concerns raised by their regulator in 2004. Frankly, I wish my Democratic colleagues would admit when it comes to Fannie and Freddie, we were wrong.” – Congressman Artur Davis (D-AL) , September 30, 2008"

 

[AntonToo]

FFS- I never said it did. What I said the fraudulent accounting at fannie did was misrepresent fannies position.

WELL IT NO IT FUCKING DIDN'T YOU IDIOT.

THERE WAS EXACTLY ONE AND ONLY ONE THING ONLY THAT AFFECTED GSE'S POSITION - DETERIORATION OF THEIR HOLDINGS DUE TO REAL ESTATE COLLAPSE, ESPECIALLY SUBPRIME BACKED SECURITIES THAT WERE ORIGINALLY RATED AS AAA.

How many times does that need to be repeated for it to sink into your little narrow one track mind?

 

[edthecynic]

Regulations have consequences

But, but, but repealing Glass-Steagall REDUCED regulation and the Right blames its repeal for the Bush Housing Crash!!!!!
How can it be that reduced regulation caused a bubble???

But, but, but repealing Glass-Steagall REDUCED regulation and the Right blames its repeal for the Bush Housing Crash!!!!!

Elizabeth Warren blames its repeal, is she on the right?
So does Bernie. He a righty?

Do you blame the repeal?

But, but, but she doesn't make the moronic claim that reduced regulation is good for the economy, now does she!!!!!!!! geeezzzz you fools are dense!!!

But, but, but she doesn't make the moronic claim that reduced regulation is good for the economy

She makes the moronic claim that increased regulation is good for the economy.
How many more regulations does Obama need to add to improve his weak economic growth?

Well, Bush's housing crash proves her right!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well sub-prime derivative market was very profitable...until it wasn't. Besides, if GSE's actually went down from internal problems they would drag down the rest of the market.

Sub-primes were less than three percent of the secondary market, until Wall Street went hog wild with CDOs.

The newly invented CDOs were a hot commodity, and there weren't enough good risks to pack into them, and so Wall Street threw the underwriting laws of the Universe out the window, and began searching for more paper to cram into their CDOs. And this mean they needed more and more borrowers.

When you run out of good risk borrowers, and still want to lend more money out, then you inevitably lower your standards. THIS is what caused the crash.

The idea the banks were FORCED to lend, as the retards claim, is ourtight laughable. Every time I hear a tard say that, I immediately know they are a parroting rube who is completely clueless.

Lehman Brothers bought their own mortgage broker pipeline to keep the paper flowing in. And Fuld thought he had his risks covered by credit default swaps and CDO-squareds and all kinds of other bizarre shit. He also thought that if all else failed, the US government would not allow him to collapse.

He was wrong on every count.

And when some ignorant parroting rube in Congress asked him during the hearing how much the CRA had to do with Lehman failing, Fuld responded, "De minimus."

Ok, but CDOs are still here today and we aren't crashing, right?

CDS are still here today, too, and they shouldn't be.

CDOs were working just fine before the bubble. They had a very specific purpose and carried no risk whatsoever. They were a righteous tool in the hands of people with integrity.

But then the dumb and greedy took over.

Credit Default Swaps should definitely be banned, though.

CDOs should be sold on an open exchange with transparent chains of collateral.

CDOs were working just fine before the bubble. They had a very specific purpose and carried no risk whatsoever.

That's not true.

Credit Default Swaps should definitely be banned, though.

Why?

Here

The Bet That Blew Up Wall Street
Steve Kroft On Credit Default Swaps And Their Central Role In The Unfolding Economic Crisis
The Bet That Blew Up Wall Street

Thanks.

"And the new bet that arose over the last several years is a bet based on whether people will default on their mortgages."

And that was the bet that blew up Wall Street.

And here's where he's wrong.
The mortgages blew up. Banks lost trillions.
Even banks that never saw a derivative in their lifetime were taken down by bad mortgages.
Even banks with conservative lending standards.
I've never heard of a single bank that failed, or nearly failed, due to derivatives.
Have you?

"As the market began to seize up and as the market for the underlying obligations began to perform poorly, everybody wanted to get paid, had a right to get paid on those credit default swaps. And there was no 'there' there. There was no money behind the commitments. And people came up short. And so that's to a large extent what happened to Bear Sterns, Lehman Brothers, and the holding company of AIG," he explains.

Nope. Bear Stearns didn't go under because they couldn't make payments on their credit default swaps.
If anything, Bear Stearns was owed money on swaps they bought to protect their huge bond portfolio.
That's was Bear was, a giant bond portfolio financed by overnight loans.
They'd buy a mortgage yielding 6% and borrow from a bank, overnight at 2.5%, to finance it.

When defaults started rising, as the Fed started hiking short term rates, they started losing money on their bond portfolio. When other firms started to fear for Bear's survival, no one wanted to loan them any money on their sinking bonds. That was March 2008. It had nothing to do with credit default swaps.

Almost exactly the same thing happened to Lehman in September 2008.
Again, nothing to do with CDS that Lehman owed money on.

Only AIG was blown up by swaps.
They owed everybody on the street.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Regulations have consequences

But, but, but repealing Glass-Steagall REDUCED regulation and the Right blames its repeal for the Bush Housing Crash!!!!!
How can it be that reduced regulation caused a bubble???

But, but, but repealing Glass-Steagall REDUCED regulation and the Right blames its repeal for the Bush Housing Crash!!!!!

Elizabeth Warren blames its repeal, is she on the right?
So does Bernie. He a righty?

Do you blame the repeal?

But, but, but she doesn't make the moronic claim that reduced regulation is good for the economy, now does she!!!!!!!! geeezzzz you fools are dense!!!

But, but, but she doesn't make the moronic claim that reduced regulation is good for the economy

She makes the moronic claim that increased regulation is good for the economy.
How many more regulations does Obama need to add to improve his weak economic growth?

Well, Bush's housing crash proves her right!

Which regulation would have prevented the housing crash? Be specific.