Prof SOWELL on BWARNEY FWANK

[skookerasbil]

Which misread part of Sowell's excellent article do you find objectionable? The fact is that mortgage criteria were continuously watered down through that period because repackaging the loans into MBS's was immensely profitable. Once you run out of qualified buyers, however, you can only expand the market by loosening criteria. Which is what was done. Bad loans generally take 18 months before they go bad.

Frank continuously pushed for more "affordable loan" programs for his own political agenda. Where he should have been overseeing Fannie's regulator he was beating up on the regulator. He was joined in this by Chris Dodd. The fact that no politicians have gone to jail over the mortgage scandal is testament to the duplicity of the press with the Democratic party.

What do I find objectionable? That it is overwhelmingly false, and all the empirical evidence is against it. He doesn't back up his argument with a single piece of evidence. He just says "I believe this." Well, so what? Believing in fairies doesn't make them real.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/70006-cra-not-to-blame-for-housing-debacle.html

Like I said, if you can find a shred of empirical evidence to back up the claim, please post it. I'm more than happy to change my mind. But opinions and timelines aren't evidence.

ToroShit,

Read AquaAthena's excerpts (from Sowell's article, supplied by me):


"I believe there has been more alarm raised about potential unsafty and unsoundness [of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than, in fact, exists."--Barney Frank---September 25th, 2003

The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do NOT see.: --Barney Frank---September 10th, 2003

:"I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing."--Barney Frank---September 25th, 2003[/b]"

ToroSHIT, Now read your fucking puke:

"Sowell is a partisan hack. This has been refuted with data several times but the ideological shills keep repeating the same lies over and over.

If anyone can back up Sowell's argument with empirical data, please post it. But I haven't seen a single thing yet to back this up.

"

Do you understand how hollow your Obamarrhoidal LIERbturd LIEBERRHOID ToroSHIT sounds ????

What the fuck is their even any necessity for your phoney "empirical data" which is invariably covered up with obfuscating, and distorting Bwarney-Farney Fwanky-Wanky OUTRIGHT LIES "explaining" thisa and thata of the above away when the INCRIMINATING PUKE ISSUING FROM THE QUEER CLOWN'S VERY OWN ORIFICE CONDEMNS HIM/IT ??????

Is the venerable Prof Sowell of Stanford Univ with an established scholarly reputation a political hack ??????.......Or, is it you, you phoney Obamarrhoidal LIEBturd La Raza wetback pissant ?????[/QUOTE]

 

[gautama]

What do I find objectionable? That it is overwhelmingly false, and all the empirical evidence is against it. He doesn't back up his argument with a single piece of evidence. He just says "I believe this." Well, so what? Believing in fairies doesn't make them real.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/70006-cra-not-to-blame-for-housing-debacle.html

Like I said, if you can find a shred of empirical evidence to back up the claim, please post it. I'm more than happy to change my mind. But opinions and timelines aren't evidence.

ToroShit,

Read AquaAthena's excerpts (from Sowell's article, supplied by me):


"I believe there has been more alarm raised about potential unsafty and unsoundness [of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than, in fact, exists."--Barney Frank---September 25th, 2003

The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do NOT see.: --Barney Frank---September 10th, 2003

:"I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing."--Barney Frank---September 25th, 2003[/b]"

ToroSHIT, Now read your fucking puke:

"Sowell is a partisan hack. This has been refuted with data several times but the ideological shills keep repeating the same lies over and over.

If anyone can back up Sowell's argument with empirical data, please post it. But I haven't seen a single thing yet to back this up.

"

Do you understand how hollow your Obamarrhoidal LIERbturd LIEBERRHOID ToroSHIT sounds ????


What the fuck is their even any necessity for your phoney "empirical data" which is invariably SUBSEQUENTLY given as an ARSE-COVERING obfuscation, and distortion a la vintage Bwarney-Farney Fwanky-Wanky OUTRIGHT LIES "explaining" thisa and thata of the above away when the INCRIMINATING PUKE ISSUING FROM THE QUEER CLOWN'S VERY OWN ORIFICE CONDEMNS HIM/IT ??????

Is the venerable Prof Sowell of Stanford Univ with an established scholarly reputation a political hack ??????.......Or, is it you, you phoney Obamarrhoidal LIEBturd La Raza wetback pissant ?????

[/QUOTE]

My exposure of Obamarrhoidal LIEbturd puke is nowhere close to your contributions Skookerasbil. But thanks, anyway.

 

[midcan5]

One knows right away from the title that the thread poster is a bigot. But that said I tried to read the piece. Anyone who can read that and think it contains even a morsel of reality has been asleep for a long long time. So much has been written on the 'whys' of the collapse only bigotry or sheer ignorance would excuse Sowell's OP.

An example from piece. "No one contributed more to the policies behind the housing boom and bust, which led to the economic disaster we are now in, than Congressman Barney Frank."

Sure and one representative did all this. I think life is simply too complex for conservatives and Townhall provides the simplicity of blaming individuals while ignoring the real cause. Below are a few links for readers interested in a bit of reality and not biased BS.

How We Were Ruined & What We Can Do by Jeff Madrick | The New York Review of Books
The End Of Wall Streets Boom - News Markets - Portfolio.com
Boston Review — Jeff Madrick: No New Tax Cuts
Boston Review — Dean Baker: Free Market Myth

Sowells works decimate liberal logic like no other.........he has been a beacon of truth for me for the last 30 years. He is most famous for his saying, "Liberals are concerned only with good intentions.........they have no care for 'results'". It is the most dead on assessment of liberal ideology that exists.

Allow me to ask for maybe the hundred time for a positive action for the average working person that is a conservative accomplishment comparable to SS, Medicare, Civil Rights, Labor laws, Minimum wage or even our liberal constitutional democracy - some call it a republic. And now Healthcare. We'd be a third world nation if conservatives did....actually in thinking about it, given that conservatism is only reactionary, we still be a cave howling at the moon.


"He argues that a triplet of 'rhetorical' criticisms--perversity, futility, and jeopardy--'has been unfailingly leveled' by 'reactionaries' at each major progressive reform of the past 300 years--those T. H. Marshall identified with the advancement of civil, political and social rights of citizenship...Charmingly written, this book can benefit a diverse readership." Harvard University Press



Conservative thought will be banned under the new Healthcare reform act as so much negativity. greed, and self centered narcissism only leads to depression and grouchy, lined faces, and furthermore is in opposition to the general welfare clause of the constitution.

Due to the widespread prevalence of Dunning–Kruger effect among conservatives and republicans, this healthcare proviso has been amended to the original bill. midcan5

 

[L.K.Eder]

hehehe at trying to prop this up by flaunting title and degree of sowell.

elitist?


hahahah

 

[gautama]

SHITcan's quote, summarizes the worth of the Obamarrhoidal LIEbturd position in a nutshell:

"Conservative thought will be banned under the new Healthcare reform act as so much negativity. greed, and self centered narcissism only leads to depression and grouchy, lined faces, and furthermore is in opposition to the general welfare clause of the constitution."

Due to the widespread prevalence of Dunning–Kruger effect among conservatives and republicans, this healthcare proviso has been amended to the original bill. midcan5 "

This ObamaCare's "HEALTHCARE REFORM ACT" conceived and executed behind the scenes by MARXIST stooges of the EXPOSED MONUMENTAL FRAUD OBAMBO and RAMMED DOWN THE THROATS of AMERICANS with ~70% DISAPPROVAL RATING smacks of the typical TYRANNICAL COMMIE/FASCISTIC Obambo/Pelosi/Reid REGIME that awaits, and will come to FULL FRUITION in America if this UNMASKED POLITICAL CHARLATAN OBAMBO and his stooges get re-elected in 2010 AND ESPECIALLY IN 2012.

America is NOT a MARXIST or an European/SOCIALISTIC type of a country envisaged by the EXPOSED MONUMENTAL FRAUD MARXIST OBAMBO and his stooges.

Our Founding Fathers made it clear, with the MOST BRILLIANTLY UNEQUALLED POLITICAL DOCUMENT ON THIS PLANET, THE CONSTITUTION of The UNITED STATES of AMERICA which produced the GREATEST COUNTRY IN THIS WORLD'S HISTORY for approx TWO HUNDRED YEARS: AMERICA .....the EMBODIMENT OF "ENLIGHTENED CAPITALISM".

NOT CAPITALISM......but "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM.

America has done well enough with all of its attributes BECAUSE it was free to follow the precepts of the CONSTITUTION PRIOR to MARXIST OBAMBO'S and his Pelosi/Reid stooges who OBVIOUSLY circumvented the CONSTITUTION by going behind the scenes with the infamous OBAMA "HEALTHCARE"......this abomination so admired by delusional LIEBERRHOID IDIOTS such as SHITcan.

SHITcan's listing of a shitload of Obamarrhoidal LIEbturd hacks extolls a system of government which is foreign to America. Their failed MARXISM and FAILING European/Socialistic models are, by now, HISTORICALLY DEFUNCT !!!

America has been SUCCESSFULLY FUNCTIONING FOR TWO HUNDRED YEARS. The MARXIST OBAMBO'S vertsion of America is something that the American people must RESOUNDINGLY REJECT......if the REAL AMERICA is to SUCCESSFULLY FUNCTION IN THE FUTURE.

"ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM'S FORMULA IS NOT STATIC.

THE VERY FOUNDATION of "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM'S SUCCESS IS PREDICATED ON ITS CONSTANT CHECKS and BALANCES CORRECTIONS TO THE ECONOMIC & SOCIOLOGICAL FORCES IN PLAY. THAT IS THE ESSENCE OF "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM'S VIABILITY !!!

And, YES !!!!!.......THERE WILL ALWAYS be minor to MAJOR imbalances.

That's LIFE in our IMPERFECT WORLD.

SEVERE DISLOCATIONS may occur every 50-100 years, due to CORRUPTION, SEVERE POLITICAL ERRORS, and/or a combination of both.

However, the solution is NOT to change our form of government of "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM to a STATICALLY FORMULAIC MARXISM or its facsimile: THE FAILED (COMMUNISTIC) and/or FAILING (Eurpean/Socialistic) systems of govt ........which is the OBVIOUS AGENDA of MARXIST OBAMBO and his STOOGES.

The POSITIVE aspects, or attributes of our "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM INCLUDE those MISTAKENLY ascribed to LIEBERRHOIDS by the delusional SHITcan. Some of the conservatives may not like Soc Sec, Medicre, etc.....BUT.....these have passed the CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS.....hence these are part and parcel of "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM.

OBAMACARE, CAP & TRADE, etc......IS UNAMERICAN and UNCONSTITUTIONAL......CONCOCTED BEHIND THE SCENES IN SECRECY AND SHOVED DOWN THE THROATS OF ~ 70% of AMERICA......the Elections of 2010, and, ESPECIALLY of 2012 will prove that !!!!

 

[L.K.Eder]

SHITcan's quote, summarizes the worth of the Obamarrhoidal LIEbturd position in a nutshell:

"Conservative thought will be banned under the new Healthcare reform act as so much negativity. greed, and self centered narcissism only leads to depression and grouchy, lined faces, and furthermore is in opposition to the general welfare clause of the constitution."

Due to the widespread prevalence of Dunning–Kruger effect among conservatives and republicans, this healthcare proviso has been amended to the original bill. midcan5 "

This ObamaCare's "HEALTHCARE REFORM ACT" conceived and executed behind the scenes by MARXIST stooges of the EXPOSED MONUMENTAL FRAUD OBAMBO and RAMMED DOWN THE THROATS of AMERICANS with ~70% DISAPPROVAL RATING smacks of the typical TYRANNICAL COMMIE/FASCISTIC Obambo/Pelosi/Reid REGIME that awaits, and will come to FULL FRUITION in America if this UNMASKED POLITICAL CHARALATAN OBAMBO and his stooges get re-elected in 2010 AND ESPECIALLY IN 2012.

America is NOT a MARXIST or an European/SOCIALISTIC type of a country envisaged by the EXPOSED MONUMENTAL FRAUD MARXIST OBAMBO and his stooges.

Our Founding Fathers made it clear, with the MOST BRILLIANTLY UNEQUALLED POLITICAL DOCUMENT ON THIS PLANET, THE CONSTITUTION of The UNITED STATES of AMERICA which produced the GREATEST COUNTRY IN THIS WORLD'S HISTORY for approx TWO HUNDRED YEARS:AMERICA.....the EMBODIMENT OF "ENLIGHTENED CAPITALISM".

NOT CAPITALISM......but "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM.

America has done well enough with all of its attributes BECAUSE it was free to follow the precepts of the CONSTITUTION PRIOR to MARXIST OBAMBO'S and his Pelosi/Reid stooges in OBVIOUSLY circumventing the CONSTITUTION by going behind the scenes with the infamous OBAMA "HEALTHCARE"......this abomination so admired by delusional LIEBERRHOID IDIOTS such as SHITcan.

SHITcan's listing of a shitload of Obamarrhoidal LIEbturd hacks extolling a system of government foreign to America which has been SUCCESSFULLY FUNCTIONING FOR TWO HUNDRED YEARS is something that the American people must RESOUNDINGLY REJECT......if it is to SUCCESSFULLY FUNCTION IN THE FUTURE.

"ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM'S FORMULA IS NOT STATIC.

THE VERY FOUNDATION of "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM'S SUCCESS IS PREDICATED ON ITS CONSTANT CHECKS and BALANCES CORRECTIONS TO THE ECONOMIC & SOCIOLOGICAL FORCES IN PLAY.

And, YES !!!!!.......THERE WILL ALWAYS be minor to MAJOR imbalances.

That's LIFE in our IMPERFECT WORLD.

SEVERE DISLOCATIONS may occur every 50-100 years, due to CORRUPTION, SEVERE POLITICAL ERRORS, and/or a combination of both.

However, the solution is NOT to change our form of government of "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM to a STATICALLY FORMULAIC MARXISM or its facsimile: THE FAILED (COMMUNISTIC) and/or FAILING (Eurpean/Socialistic) systems of govt ........which is the OBVIOUS AGENDA of MARXIST OBAMBO and his STOOGES.

The POSITIVE aspects, or attributes of our "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM INCLUDE those MISTAKENLY ascribed to LIEBERRHOIDS by the delusional SHITcan. Some of the conservatives may not like Soc Sec, Medicre, etc.....BUT.....these have passed the CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS.....hence these are part and parcel of "ENLIGHTENED" CAPITALISM.

OBAMACARE, CAP & TRADE, etc......IS UNAMERICAN and UNCONSTITUTIONAL......CONCOCTED BEHIND THE SCENES IN SECRECY AND SHOVED DOWN THE THROATS OF ~ 70% of AMERICA......the Elections of 2010, and, ESPECIALLY of 2012 will prove that !!!!

guys and gals, if you look at gautama's post long enough, and let your eyes go out of focus in the correct way, you will see a 3d image of a crying loon.

 

[editec]

Another way to measure the relationship between the CRA and the subprime crisis is to examine foreclosure activity across neighborhoods that are classified by income. Data made available by RealtyTrac on foreclosure filings from January 2006 through August 2008 indicate that most foreclosure filings (e.g., about 70 percent in 2006) have taken place in middle- or higher-income neighborhoods. More important, foreclosure filings have increased at a faster pace in middle- or higher-income areas than in lower-income areas that are the focus of the CRA.9/ (See Table 7.)

Two basic points emerge from our analysis of the available data. First, only a small portion of subprime mortgage originations is related to the CRA. Second, CRA-related loans appear to perform comparably to other types of subprime loans. Taken together, the available evidence seems to run counter to the contention that the CRA contributed in any substantive way to the current mortgage crisis.

Did the CRA cause the mortgage market meltdown? - Community Dividend - Publications & Papers | The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

So in other words Thomas is again not backing up his conjecture with facts.

I've finally come to the conclusion that this issue will never, ever be won with facts. I'm worn out from trying. So I'm passing the baton to you at least with respect to this board.

There's very little point in arguming with FAITH BASED people, Mag.

All you can do is what BlindBoo did.

Present the facts for their consideration.

It's up to them to find their own way out of their prejudices that make them impervious to arguments based on facts and logic.

And most of them are so steeped in partisan propaganda that they cannot let go and just think things though.

The private banks screwed up because they knew it didn't much matter to them.

The FED screwed up because it wanted to keep the economy thriving.

MOST of the people who overpaid for property and who took out loans they could not afford were MIDDLE CLASS working people who counted on the continued (and highly inappropriate) rising prices of real estate to get them out of trouble.

They reckoned they could sell the property at a gain if they couldn't afford those vaiable rate mortgages when those rates changed.

But then the market began waking up to the fact that housing was wildly overpriced, given how much money people actually made.

Trying to blame these multiple forces ALL on one party (as so many here try to do) demands that they IGNORE any evidence that might not suit their own partisan prejudices.

You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.

 

[Annie]

I really don't care the point a poster is trying to make. When 'shitcan' begins a post or other words like it, and I see it repeatedly used, I just skip.

Has nothing to do with political persuasion, more than a bit with civility.

 

[editec]

I really don't care the point a poster is trying to make. When 'shitcan' begins a post or other words like it, and I see it repeatedly used, I just skip.

Has nothing to do with political persuasion, more than a bit with civility.

It certainly is possible to be partisan without also being a jerk. There's plenty of reasoning people on both sides of our debates.

But people come to this party with their own standards of what is considered acceptable.

So your skipping over the posts of people who have proven to be uncivil and unwilling to at least try to be intellectually honest is a smart move.

There's a lot of sick individuals who get off on spewing personal insults for their own sake.

Most of them are just cowards who found a place where they can act out their fantasies of being tough guys and gals without fear of reprisal.

They're trolls unworthy of our consideration.

 

[Annie]

I really don't care the point a poster is trying to make. When 'shitcan' begins a post or other words like it, and I see it repeatedly used, I just skip.

Has nothing to do with political persuasion, more than a bit with civility.

It certainly is possible to be partisan without also being a jerk. There's plenty of reasoning people on both sides of our debates.

But people come to this party with their own standards of what is considered acceptable.

So your skipping over the posts of people who have proven to be uncivil and unwilling to at least try to be intellectually honest is a smart move.

There's a lot of sick individuals who get off on spewing personal insults for their own sake.

Most of them are just cowards who found a place where they can act out their fantasies of being tough guys and gals without fear of reprisal.

They're trolls unworthy of our consideration.

Indeed, I tend to see them more from the right, then look a bit and both sides have those that think vulgarities somehow make their points stronger. I disagree.

 

[Toro]

Gaytrauma

You are an idiot. But we all know that.

It's always amusing when conservatards like yourself rail against liberal "elite" college professors yet invoke the status of a professor when you can't offer anything. Well anything else other the insane rantings of a lunatic.

Dr Sowell is a professor. OK then he can publish an empirical study that backs him up. Or at least offer some data. Otherwise he is just a hack.

 

[LiberalNut]

Usually it's no use arguing with facts when dealing with right wingers. They have been sold alternative history in just about every area and this is no different. They want to blame CRA for the meltdown when the numbers undeniably (for anyone who will actully look at them) show that this is bunk. They want to hold up Barney Frank (a convenient gay male) as the boogieman responsible when in reality, Frank has been the only Congressperson, for decades, that has advocated for more money for renters rather than pushing for more home ownership. It's what the right wing noise machine feeds them however and there's nothing whatsoever you're gonna do about it. They will believe what they want to believe, regardless of the facts. All you can do is post the facts in the hope that others who are not so brainwashed by the right wing noise machine may be swayed. In all likelyhood, the wing-nut you are debating is beyond hope of reason.

 

[BlindBoo]

Another way to measure the relationship between the CRA and the subprime crisis is to examine foreclosure activity across neighborhoods that are classified by income. Data made available by RealtyTrac on foreclosure filings from January 2006 through August 2008 indicate that most foreclosure filings (e.g., about 70 percent in 2006) have taken place in middle- or higher-income neighborhoods. More important, foreclosure filings have increased at a faster pace in middle- or higher-income areas than in lower-income areas that are the focus of the CRA.9/ (See Table 7.)

Two basic points emerge from our analysis of the available data. First, only a small portion of subprime mortgage originations is related to the CRA. Second, CRA-related loans appear to perform comparably to other types of subprime loans. Taken together, the available evidence seems to run counter to the contention that the CRA contributed in any substantive way to the current mortgage crisis.

Did the CRA cause the mortgage market meltdown? - Community Dividend - Publications & Papers | The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

So in other words Thomas is again not backing up his conjecture with facts.

I've finally come to the conclusion that this issue will never, ever be won with facts. I'm worn out from trying. So I'm passing the baton to you at least with respect to this board.

The pseudo-conservative type will simply not be swayed by facts.

 

[The Rabbi]

Another way to measure the relationship between the CRA and the subprime crisis is to examine foreclosure activity across neighborhoods that are classified by income. Data made available by RealtyTrac on foreclosure filings from January 2006 through August 2008 indicate that most foreclosure filings (e.g., about 70 percent in 2006) have taken place in middle- or higher-income neighborhoods. More important, foreclosure filings have increased at a faster pace in middle- or higher-income areas than in lower-income areas that are the focus of the CRA.9/ (See Table 7.)

Two basic points emerge from our analysis of the available data. First, only a small portion of subprime mortgage originations is related to the CRA. Second, CRA-related loans appear to perform comparably to other types of subprime loans. Taken together, the available evidence seems to run counter to the contention that the CRA contributed in any substantive way to the current mortgage crisis.

Did the CRA cause the mortgage market meltdown? - Community Dividend - Publications & Papers | The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

So in other words Thomas is again not backing up his conjecture with facts.

I've finally come to the conclusion that this issue will never, ever be won with facts. I'm worn out from trying. So I'm passing the baton to you at least with respect to this board.

The pseudo-conservative type will simply not be swayed by facts.

True. They will end up voting for Obama's policies.
The real conservatives look at facts and make decisions and judgements. Liberals simply want to emote.

 

[BlindBoo]

Which misread part of Sowell's excellent article do you find objectionable? The fact is that mortgage criteria were continuously watered down through that period because repackaging the loans into MBS's was immensely profitable. Once you run out of qualified buyers, however, you can only expand the market by loosening criteria. Which is what was done. Bad loans generally take 18 months before they go bad.

Frank continuously pushed for more "affordable loan" programs for his own political agenda. Where he should have been overseeing Fannie's regulator he was beating up on the regulator. He was joined in this by Chris Dodd. The fact that no politicians have gone to jail over the mortgage scandal is testament to the duplicity of the press with the Democratic party.

What do I find objectionable? That it is overwhelmingly false, and all the empirical evidence is against it. He doesn't back up his argument with a single piece of evidence. He just says "I believe this." Well, so what? Believing in fairies doesn't make them real.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/70006-cra-not-to-blame-for-housing-debacle.html

Like I said, if you can find a shred of empirical evidence to back up the claim, please post it. I'm more than happy to change my mind. But opinions and timelines aren't evidence.

OK so it's objectionable because Sowell is black. Got it.

Hahahaha. Where did you read that in the prior post. Because he cannot back up his claims with facts and the facts he presents do not support his claim that mortgages to low-income folks is what caused the housing meltdown.

 

[BlindBoo]

I've finally come to the conclusion that this issue will never, ever be won with facts. I'm worn out from trying. So I'm passing the baton to you at least with respect to this board.

The pseudo-conservative type will simply not be swayed by facts.

True. They will end up voting for Obama's policies.
The real conservatives look at facts and make decisions and judgements. Liberals simply want to emote.

Or blindly Parrot 'No' with the herd without regards to the facts.

 

[midcan5]

"Adam Smith's position on the role of the state in a capitalist society was close to that of a modern twentieth century US liberal democrat." Spence J. Pack

SHITcan's quote, summarizes the worth of the Obamarrhoidal LIEbturd position in a nutshell:

"Conservative thought will be banned under the new Healthcare reform act as so much negativity. greed, and self centered narcissism only leads to depression and grouchy, lined faces, and furthermore is in opposition to the general welfare clause of the constitution."

Due to the widespread prevalence of Dunning–Kruger effect among conservatives and republicans, this healthcare proviso has been amended to the original bill. midcan5 "

Another reply that does not address the issue but goes off on a weird rant for an concept (capitalism) that can be a good thing, but is often not so good for real people. Why all the bold, did you think that added something to your empty praise of a concept you obviously know little about? You sound mad, in the medical sense.

Oh, and for homework find capitalism mentioned by the founding fathers. I'd love to see a pertinent reference.

I really don't care the point a poster is trying to make. When 'shitcan' begins a post or other words like it, and I see it repeatedly used, I just skip.

Has nothing to do with political persuasion, more than a bit with civility.

So you excuse bigotry because it is in line with your partisanship. Very big of you. And then to add schoolyard ignorance to your comment, you engage in the same childish name calling. Jeez, and we should take you serious! 45 thousand posts and this is the best you can do - I'd suggest a bit of reading and less empty reactionary BS. I'm sure you haven't read the links I posted as you reside in fantasyland. Give it try and maybe your next post will show a sign of life and maybe sense.

So your skipping over the posts of people who have proven to be uncivil and unwilling to at least try to be intellectually honest is a smart move.

There's a lot of sick individuals who get off on spewing personal insults for their own sake.

Most of them are just cowards who found a place where they can act out their fantasies of being tough guys and gals without fear of reprisal.

They're trolls unworthy of our consideration.

Editec, this reply makes no sense to me? Are you saying biased OPs from Sowell do not require comment, and then bigoted categorization in the thread is OK or what?

======================================================

And I am still still still waiting for an answer to my question.


"...In his classic study of mid 19th century American labor, Norman Ware observes that the imposition of industrial capitalism and its values 'was repugnant to an astonishingly large section of the earlier American community'. The primary reason was 'the decline of the industrial worker as a person', the 'degradation' and 'psychological change' that followed from the 'loss of dignity and independence' and of democratic rights and freedoms. These reactions were vividly expressed in the working class literature, often by women, who played a prominent role despite their subordination in the general society." Introduction 'Taking The Risk Out Of Democracy'

 

[Annie]

"Adam Smith's position on the role of the state in a capitalist society was close to that of a modern twentieth century US liberal democrat." Spence J. Pack

SHITcan's quote, summarizes the worth of the Obamarrhoidal LIEbturd position in a nutshell:

"Conservative thought will be banned under the new Healthcare reform act as so much negativity. greed, and self centered narcissism only leads to depression and grouchy, lined faces, and furthermore is in opposition to the general welfare clause of the constitution."

Due to the widespread prevalence of Dunning–Kruger effect among conservatives and republicans, this healthcare proviso has been amended to the original bill. midcan5 "

Another reply that does not address the issue but goes off on a weird rant for an concept (capitalism) that can be a good thing, but is often not so good for real people. Why all the bold, did you think that added something to your empty praise of a concept you obviously know little about? You sound mad, in the medical sense.

Oh, and for homework find capitalism mentioned by the founding fathers. I'd love to see a pertinent reference.

I really don't care the point a poster is trying to make. When 'shitcan' begins a post or other words like it, and I see it repeatedly used, I just skip.

Has nothing to do with political persuasion, more than a bit with civility.

So you excuse bigotry because it is in line with your partisanship. Very big of you. And then to add schoolyard ignorance to your comment, you engage in the same childish name calling. Jeez, and we should take you serious! 45 thousand posts and this is the best you can do - I'd suggest a bit of reading and less empty reactionary BS. I'm sure you haven't read the links I posted as you reside in fantasyland. Give it try and maybe your next post will show a sign of life and maybe sense.

So your skipping over the posts of people who have proven to be uncivil and unwilling to at least try to be intellectually honest is a smart move.

There's a lot of sick individuals who get off on spewing personal insults for their own sake.

Most of them are just cowards who found a place where they can act out their fantasies of being tough guys and gals without fear of reprisal.

They're trolls unworthy of our consideration.

Editec, this reply makes no sense to me? Are you saying biased OPs from Sowell do not require comment, and then bigoted categorization in the thread is OK or what?

======================================================

And I am still still still waiting for an answer to my question.


"...In his classic study of mid 19th century American labor, Norman Ware observes that the imposition of industrial capitalism and its values 'was repugnant to an astonishingly large section of the earlier American community'. The primary reason was 'the decline of the industrial worker as a person', the 'degradation' and 'psychological change' that followed from the 'loss of dignity and independence' and of democratic rights and freedoms. These reactions were vividly expressed in the working class literature, often by women, who played a prominent role despite their subordination in the general society." Introduction 'Taking The Risk Out Of Democracy'

I thank you for the positive rep, though from the above I guess I'll assume that was a mistake? I fail to find where I

...you engage in the same childish name calling...

Mind you, I'm certainly not saying I do not engage in some one-on-one nasty conversations, I do. However, in general you will not find that I write long posts railing against 'liberals,' especially in vile terms.

To defend or attack whatever that poster had to say, sorry, I missed his point. I didn't read it.

 

[edthecynic]

Sowell is a partisan hack. This has been refuted with data several times but the ideological shills keep repeating the same lies over and over.

If anyone can back up Sowell's argument with empirical data, please post it. But I haven't seen a single thing yet to back this up.

Which misread part of Sowell's excellent article do you find objectionable? The fact is that mortgage criteria were continuously watered down through that period because repackaging the loans into MBS's was immensely profitable. Once you run out of qualified buyers, however, you can only expand the market by loosening criteria. Which is what was done. Bad loans generally take 18 months before they go bad.

Frank continuously pushed for more "affordable loan" programs for his own political agenda. Where he should have been overseeing Fannie's regulator he was beating up on the regulator. He was joined in this by Chris Dodd. The fact that no politicians have gone to jail over the mortgage scandal is testament to the duplicity of the press with the Democratic party.

Done by BUSH, not Frank!!!!!

Bush's Dec 2003 American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI) is what changed the rules to allow no downpayment 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.

American Dream Downpayment Initiative - Affordable Housing - CPD - HUD
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.

Purpose

ADDI aims to increase the homeownership rate, especially among lower income and minority households, and to revitalize and stabilize communities. ADDI will help first-time homebuyers with the biggest hurdle to homeownership: downpayment and closing costs. The program was created to assist low-income first-time homebuyers in purchasing single-family homes by providing funds for downpayment, closing costs, and rehabilitation carried out in conjunction with the assisted home purchase.

Type of Assistance

ADDI will provide downpayment, closing costs, and rehabilitation assistance to eligible individuals. The amount of ADDI assistance provided may not exceed $10,000 or six percent of the purchase price of the home, whichever is greater. The rehabilitation must be completed within one year of the home purchase. Rehabilitation may include, but is not limited to, the reduction of lead paint hazards and the remediation of other home health hazards.

Eligible Customers

To be eligible for ADDI assistance, individuals must be first-time homebuyers interested in purchasing single family housing. A first-time homebuyer is defined as an individual and his or her spouse who have not owned a home during the three-year period prior to the purchase of a home with ADDI assistance. ADDI funds may be used to purchase one- to four- family housing, condominium unit, cooperative unit, or manufactured housing. Additionally, individuals who qualify for ADDI assistance must have incomes not exceeding 80% of area median income.

Eligible Activities

ADDI funds may be used for downpayment, closing costs and, if necessary, rehabilitation in conjunction with home purchase. ADDI funds used for rehabilitation may not exceed twenty percent of the participating jurisdiction's total ADDI allocation. The rehabilitation assisted with ADDI funds must be completed within one year of the home purchase.

Funding Status

In FY 2007, Congress appropriated $24,750,000 for ADDI. Previously, Congress appropriated $74,513,000 in FY2003 and $86,984 in FY2004, $49,600,000 in FY2005 and $24,750,000 in FY2006. HUD has issued formula allocations for FY 2007 to assist participating jurisdictions in preparing their consolidated plans.

Obtaining Assistance

First, check the formula allocation page to determine whether your local HOME administering agency received ADDI funding. If they did not receive ADDI funding, ADDI funds may be available through your state. Every state received ADDI funds. The contacts for state are available in the HOME administering agency list.


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8&feature=player_embedded[/ame]


USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership

Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.

In announcing the plan Monday at a home builders show in Las Vegas, Federal Housing Commissioner John Weicher called the proposal the "most significant FHA initiative in more than a decade." It would lead to 150,000 first-time owners annually, he said.

Nothing-down options are available on the private mortgage market, but, in general, they require the borrower to have pristine credit. Bush's proposed change would extend the nothing-down option to borrowers with blemished credit.

The FHA isn't a direct lender, but guarantees loan payments for mortgages on moderately priced owner-occupied property. The FHA guarantee now permits private lenders to finance as much as 97% of the purchase price of a home for millions of low- and middle-income borrowers.

In the proposal soon to be delivered to Congress, Bush would allow the FHA to guarantee loans for the full purchase price of the home, plus down-payment costs. As a practical matter, the FHA would guarantee mortgages as high as 103% of the value of the underlying property.

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

 

[Toro]

Sowell is correct when he says that Frank is revising history. Yes, Bush pushed homeownershp, but it was primarily the Democrats' baby.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/115616-barney-franks-revisionist-history.html