It's about time it was said.

[antagon]

everyone went vulture over the booming property market from banks, to the feds to the local governments extorting property taxes. now is the season to write memoirs, point fingers, and say it wasn't so.

I agree that Sharks on both sides of the Aisle were predatory, buy not Everybody is that way. Not everyone took advantage.

There are alway's those waiting to pounce, when there is a misstep, muddy the waters, so most are not able to see the scheme, and grab everything that you can in the confusion. Time after time the Predators are long gone before Government even responds. That's when there is not collusion. Either they out smart or orchestrate hand in hand. Follow the money.

'all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.' -edmund burke

it is wise to take advantage of a good market. buyers, lenders, politicians, builders, many did. it wasn't all an evil conspiracy in that it does not require evil for there to be economic cycles with downturns epicentered on the leading trends in the boom.

i've just pointed out how disingenuous it is to roll around after the fact pointing your right finger with blood on your left. i'm not impressed by bush's or any partisan claim of futile resistance to any factors which could be implicated in the collapse particularly because it goes well beyond fred and fann inasmuch as the federal government's role. the signing statement style of bush's wont afford him a favorable legacy from me.

what i see is that the president's behest sent 300k troops to the other side of the world concurrent with his claim that powerful voices overshadowed his will. i call bullshit on this one.

 

[Samson]

This is no surprise to me. Bush was a lone voice over Fanny and Freddie... and much more. I don't credit Bush for much but, on this, he listened to the right people - Economists - who were warning about the state of the financial industry, ballooning personal debt through stupid lending policies and really stupid Americans borrowing more than they could afford. On Fanny and Freddie, both Republicans and Democrats fucked us over. A bipartisan effort. One of the very, very few who actually tried to do something BEFORE the shit hit the fan was George W Bush.

In fairness, we should also take note that Senator McCain (who has done plenty of stupid shit) was ALSO a kind of lonely voice on the topic.

I recall going to grad school during the early 2000's and a week never went by without the WSJ running an article about the EVILS of Fannie Mea or Freddie Mac.

 

[AVG-JOE]

everyone went vulture over the booming property market from banks, to the feds to the local governments extorting property taxes. now is the season to write memoirs, point fingers, and say it wasn't so.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to antagon again.

Bummer!

 

[AVG-JOE]

What astonishes me is that Enron implodes, and we see all sorts of top executives being chained together in court.

But, AIC, Fanny Mea, Freddy Mac, CitiBanc, et al., bring the ENTIRE COUNTRY to the brink of a fucking financial disaster, and there hasn't yet been EVEN THE MENTION of a congressional investigation.

Doesn't that strike anyone as more than a little odd?

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Samson again.

Bummer!

 

[AVG-JOE]

This is no surprise to me. Bush was a lone voice over Fanny and Freddie... and much more. I don't credit Bush for much but, on this, he listened to the right people - Economists - who were warning about the state of the financial industry, ballooning personal debt through stupid lending policies and really stupid Americans borrowing more than they could afford. On Fanny and Freddie, both Republicans and Democrats fucked us over. A bipartisan effort. One of the very, very few who actually tried to do something BEFORE the shit hit the fan was George W Bush.

In fairness, we should also take note that Senator McCain (who has done plenty of stupid shit) was ALSO a kind of lonely voice on the topic.

I recall going to grad school during the early 2000's and a week never went by without the WSJ running an article about the EVILS of Fannie Mea or Freddie Mac.

In all fairness though - if Fanny & Freddie weren't direct competition to the bankers with subscriptions, would the WSJ have cared?

 

[Samson]

In fairness, we should also take note that Senator McCain (who has done plenty of stupid shit) was ALSO a kind of lonely voice on the topic.

I recall going to grad school during the early 2000's and a week never went by without the WSJ running an article about the EVILS of Fannie Mea or Freddie Mac.

In all fairness though - if Fanny & Freddie weren't direct competition to the bankers with subscriptions, would the WSJ have cared?

It is a business journal.

I'm certain it didn't take the editorial board very long to weigh the pro's vs. the cons of running a story about the Evil Fannie Mae or whether green eyeshadow looked good on Madonna.

 

[The Rabbi]

I recall going to grad school during the early 2000's and a week never went by without the WSJ running an article about the EVILS of Fannie Mea or Freddie Mac.

In all fairness though - if Fanny & Freddie weren't direct competition to the bankers with subscriptions, would the WSJ have cared?

It is a business journal.

I'm certain it didn't take the editorial board very long to weigh the pro's vs. the cons of running a story about the Evil Fannie Mae or whether green eyeshadow looked good on Madonna.

The WSJ was warning about Fannie for years before the crisis hit. They were very prescient. Too bad the Dems don't read the Journal.

 

[Jroc]

In thier own words..


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs[/ame]

An get this... Obama's new regulations STILL DIDN'T COVER fANNIE AND FREDDIE!!

 

[BlindBoo]

The powerful forces even though the republicans had a majority did not have enough to bust a threaten democratic fillabuster. Oh and 2003 wasn't the only time he said something he did it for all of his 8 years.

They didn't evey put up a fight. They damaged the brand, and Bush presided over that.

Agreed I am not saying the repuyblicans aren't at fault but afterall Freddy and Fanny are democrats pet projects and the CRA which is another democratic thing did most of the damage.

What evidence do you have to back that up with?


The right wing put that talking point out right after the meltdown occured. It has been completely disproved.

In a recent report to Congress, The Federal Reserve System investigated the CRA's alleged connection to the housing crisis; it found the CRA has in fact demonstrated success in its purpose over the years, and noted the following:

•Through partnerships with community organizations as well as adhering to sound lending practices, CRA-covered banks and thrifts created new ways to meet credit needs in underserved areas.
•Studies by the Federal Reserve System and Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, among others, have shown the CRA increased lending and home ownership in poorer communities without undermining banks’ profitability.
•Some financial institutions, not regulated by the CRA, were encouraged by its success and began to compete for business in lower-income areas by offering risky loan products or subprime loans.
•Non CRA-covered financial institutions were responsible for 60 percent of subprime loan originations made to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods -- borrower demographics not covered by the CRA. More than 20 percent of subprime loans were extended to lower-income borrowers or communities by independent non-bank institutions not covered by the CRA.
•CRA-covered banks and thrifts extended only 6 percent of all subprime loans to lower-income borrowers or neighborhoods.
Since the CRA did not urge financial institutions to take on unnecessary financial risk, using sound lending practices in lower income neighborhoods has proved to be just as profitable as lending in more affluent areas. Therefore, this piece of legislation is not to blame for our current woes. Instead, it appears we should look more closely at these “independent non-bank institutions” not covered by the CRA that extended risky and subprime loans to borrowers of all income levels.

New Hampshire Housing - Housing Myths

 

[Intense]

They didn't evey put up a fight. They damaged the brand, and Bush presided over that.

Agreed I am not saying the repuyblicans aren't at fault but afterall Freddy and Fanny are democrats pet projects and the CRA which is another democratic thing did most of the damage.

What evidence do you have to back that up with?


The right wing put that talking point out right after the meltdown occured. It has been completely disproved.

In a recent report to Congress, The Federal Reserve System investigated the CRA's alleged connection to the housing crisis; it found the CRA has in fact demonstrated success in its purpose over the years, and noted the following:

•Through partnerships with community organizations as well as adhering to sound lending practices, CRA-covered banks and thrifts created new ways to meet credit needs in underserved areas.
•Studies by the Federal Reserve System and Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, among others, have shown the CRA increased lending and home ownership in poorer communities without undermining banks’ profitability.
•Some financial institutions, not regulated by the CRA, were encouraged by its success and began to compete for business in lower-income areas by offering risky loan products or subprime loans.
•Non CRA-covered financial institutions were responsible for 60 percent of subprime loan originations made to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods -- borrower demographics not covered by the CRA. More than 20 percent of subprime loans were extended to lower-income borrowers or communities by independent non-bank institutions not covered by the CRA.
•CRA-covered banks and thrifts extended only 6 percent of all subprime loans to lower-income borrowers or neighborhoods.
Since the CRA did not urge financial institutions to take on unnecessary financial risk, using sound lending practices in lower income neighborhoods has proved to be just as profitable as lending in more affluent areas. Therefore, this piece of legislation is not to blame for our current woes. Instead, it appears we should look more closely at these “independent non-bank institutions” not covered by the CRA that extended risky and subprime loans to borrowers of all income levels.

New Hampshire Housing - Housing Myths

Did the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act cause the housing crisis? No.
It was revised in 1994.

 

[shintao]

During the limbaugh Bush interviewtoday Rush ask President Bush aboiut the car in the ditch
I will let President Bush speak for himself on this issue

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, on this issue, I don't steer clear because I remind the reader that on the issue of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, I saw a problem, and went to Congress and said, "Look, this is a group of... These are enterprises that have got an implicit government guarantee and they're taking risky stances, and therefore we ought to regulate them. If they've got an implicit government guarantee there ought to be some sense of regulation and make sure they don't misuse that guarantee, and I make it clear in the book what happened, and that is that powerful forces in Congress resisted that reform. Whether those reforms had taken place in 2003 it's hard to predict whether or not this crisis would have occurred, but I'm comfortable in telling the reader and comfortable that history will judge that we tried to do something about it. You know, and eventually the truth wins out, and this book is an attempt to set the record straight from my perspective.

Time and time again I have said Freddy and fanny was the cause of the fanical crisis. Thank you George for telling it like it is.

"and this book is an attempt to set the record straight from my perspective." = Revisionist History Novelist Lessons, # 7626253937783762766338763761 in the Republican catalog.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

During the limbaugh Bush interviewtoday Rush ask President Bush aboiut the car in the ditch
I will let President Bush speak for himself on this issue

PRESIDENT BUSH: Well, on this issue, I don't steer clear because I remind the reader that on the issue of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, I saw a problem, and went to Congress and said, "Look, this is a group of... These are enterprises that have got an implicit government guarantee and they're taking risky stances, and therefore we ought to regulate them. If they've got an implicit government guarantee there ought to be some sense of regulation and make sure they don't misuse that guarantee, and I make it clear in the book what happened, and that is that powerful forces in Congress resisted that reform. Whether those reforms had taken place in 2003 it's hard to predict whether or not this crisis would have occurred, but I'm comfortable in telling the reader and comfortable that history will judge that we tried to do something about it. You know, and eventually the truth wins out, and this book is an attempt to set the record straight from my perspective.

Time and time again I have said Freddy and fanny was the cause of the fanical crisis. Thank you George for telling it like it is.

"and this book is an attempt to set the record straight from my perspective." = Revisionist History Novelist Lessons, # 7626253937783762766338763761 in the Republican catalog.

Actually the way he said it at least with freddy and fanny is the way it happened. The Revisionist comes from the left and that is a fact.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They didn't evey put up a fight. They damaged the brand, and Bush presided over that.

Agreed I am not saying the repuyblicans aren't at fault but afterall Freddy and Fanny are democrats pet projects and the CRA which is another democratic thing did most of the damage.

What evidence do you have to back that up with?


The right wing put that talking point out right after the meltdown occured. It has been completely disproved.

In a recent report to Congress, The Federal Reserve System investigated the CRA's alleged connection to the housing crisis; it found the CRA has in fact demonstrated success in its purpose over the years, and noted the following:

•Through partnerships with community organizations as well as adhering to sound lending practices, CRA-covered banks and thrifts created new ways to meet credit needs in underserved areas.
•Studies by the Federal Reserve System and Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, among others, have shown the CRA increased lending and home ownership in poorer communities without undermining banks’ profitability.
•Some financial institutions, not regulated by the CRA, were encouraged by its success and began to compete for business in lower-income areas by offering risky loan products or subprime loans.
•Non CRA-covered financial institutions were responsible for 60 percent of subprime loan originations made to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods -- borrower demographics not covered by the CRA. More than 20 percent of subprime loans were extended to lower-income borrowers or communities by independent non-bank institutions not covered by the CRA.
•CRA-covered banks and thrifts extended only 6 percent of all subprime loans to lower-income borrowers or neighborhoods.
Since the CRA did not urge financial institutions to take on unnecessary financial risk, using sound lending practices in lower income neighborhoods has proved to be just as profitable as lending in more affluent areas. Therefore, this piece of legislation is not to blame for our current woes. Instead, it appears we should look more closely at these “independent non-bank institutions” not covered by the CRA that extended risky and subprime loans to borrowers of all income levels.

New Hampshire Housing - Housing Myths

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCTxZa9kpSI&feature=related[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYz1rbB5V1s[/ame]

 

[jimbetty123]

now the things has cahnged and time also ,forget past and move in for Present and think about future...

 

[antagon]

During the limbaugh Bush interviewtoday Rush ask President Bush aboiut the car in the ditch
I will let President Bush speak for himself on this issue...


Time and time again I have said Freddy and fanny was the cause of the fanical crisis. Thank you George for telling it like it is.

"and this book is an attempt to set the record straight from my perspective." = Revisionist History Novelist Lessons, # 7626253937783762766338763761 in the Republican catalog.

Actually the way he said it at least with freddy and fanny is the way it happened. The Revisionist comes from the left and that is a fact.

to the contrary, bush is putting forward that he 'tried' to call for regulation of fred and fann, but he's bullshitting. he, his party, and the party across the aisle lapped up the prosperity that came along with easy money and easy guarantees. it funded his war agenda, it made his tax-cut agenda seem effective, it erased the recession that started when he took office. now that it is clear such was just postponed, bush wants to read his signing statements as if he's ever put his foot down. well, that's not the way it happened.

 

[The T]

Powerful Forces in congress in 2003 were REPUBLICAN.

And the red flag was raised in 2005 by some Republicans on the Hill. Democrats said there wasn't anything wrong...the Net is filled with videos that attest to it.

Gee, the D's said there wasn't anything wrong, and the R's folded.

Not what I'd call a terribly effective party, these Republicans.

You're correct. As to your later comment regarding a leopard changing it's spots? You are correct there as well. We will see. The Blue-Bloods have been served notice and are on probation.

 

[edthecynic]

When the government says it will back any loans made by Freddy or fanny and Freddy and fanny makes loans to people who cannot or will not repay the loan and when you have enough of those types of loans. PLEASE PUT 2 AND 2 TOGETHER.

This is no surprise to me. Bush was a lone voice over Fanny and Freddie... and much more. I don't credit Bush for much but, on this, he listened to the right people - Economists - who were warning about the state of the financial industry, ballooning personal debt through stupid lending policies and really stupid Americans borrowing more than they could afford. On Fanny and Freddie, both Republicans and Democrats fucked us over. A bipartisan effort. One of the very, very few who actually tried to do something BEFORE the shit hit the fan was George W Bush.

BALONEY, it was Bush who threw the shit into the fan with his ADDI, American Dream Downpayment Initiative, as you well know.

Bush's Dec 2003 American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI) is what changed the rules to allow no down payment loans to people with bad credit who could not keep up with the payments for more than the house was worth and who were at least 20% below the standard for the neighborhood.

That's right, to get the assistance Bush's ADDI legally required people to buy into a neighborhood that was AT LEAST 20% beyond their means!!!

 

[edthecynic]

When the government says it will back any loans made by Freddy or fanny and Freddy and fanny makes loans to people who cannot or will not repay the loan and when you have enough of those types of loans. PLEASE PUT 2 AND 2 TOGETHER.

Fannie & Freddie stopped MAKING subprime loans in 2005.

Doesn't matter. The subprime market, whomever was running it, was artificially inflating values for ALL residential real estate, even though they only comprised a small percent of mortgages. If you have one more buyer in the market out of ten who doesn't care how much they pay for a house because they are putting nothing down, it starts a domino effect on the whole market. Every buyer must bid those prices to stay competitive.

When the subprime loans crashed, the whole market crashed with it.

Again that brings us directly to Bush's Dec 2003 American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI) which is what changed the rules to allow no down payment loans to people with bad credit who could not keep up with the payments for more than the house was worth and who were at least 20% below the standard for the neighborhood.

That's right, to get the assistance Bush's ADDI legally required people to buy into a neighborhood that was AT LEAST 20% beyond their means!!!

And this was strictly a POLITICAL ploy by the GOP to try to divert minority votes from the Dems to the GOP for the upcoming 2004 election.

 

[Intense]

When the government says it will back any loans made by Freddy or fanny and Freddy and fanny makes loans to people who cannot or will not repay the loan and when you have enough of those types of loans. PLEASE PUT 2 AND 2 TOGETHER.

This is no surprise to me. Bush was a lone voice over Fanny and Freddie... and much more. I don't credit Bush for much but, on this, he listened to the right people - Economists - who were warning about the state of the financial industry, ballooning personal debt through stupid lending policies and really stupid Americans borrowing more than they could afford. On Fanny and Freddie, both Republicans and Democrats fucked us over. A bipartisan effort. One of the very, very few who actually tried to do something BEFORE the shit hit the fan was George W Bush.

BALONEY, it was Bush who threw the shit into the fan with his ADDI, American Dream Downpayment Initiative, as you well know.

Bush's Dec 2003 American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI) is what changed the rules to allow no down payment loans to people with bad credit who could not keep up with the payments for more than the house was worth and who were at least 20% below the standard for the neighborhood.

That's right, to get the assistance Bush's ADDI legally required people to buy into a neighborhood that was AT LEAST 20% beyond their means!!!

I think Andrew Cuomo would dispute that. He doesn't like to share credit.

 

[Intense]

American Dream Downpayment Initiative


Summary
The American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI) was signed into law on December 16, 2003. The American Dream Downpayment Assistance Act authorizes up to $200 million annually for fiscal years 2004 - 2007. ADDI will provide funds to all fifty states and to local participating jurisdictions that have a population of at least 150,000 or will receive an allocation of at least $50,000 under the ADDI formula. ADDI will be administered as a part of the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, a formula grant program

American Dream Downpayment Initiative - Affordable Housing - CPD - HUD


Who ran HUD in 2003????? Who wrote the Law?????