Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Can our country afford to have investments in America disappear due to Obama's policies?Yeah.....we need to Allow The Marketplace To Regulate Itself.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2iHksmF7m4]YouTube - American Casino: Greenspan's "flaw in the model"[/ame]
The day Waxman goes after Barney Frankenstein is the day i'll believe Dems are really concerned about protecting the American public...
So how was this real estate bubble created in the first place?
In 1994, the Clinton Administration went directly to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and promoted an initiative called The National Homeownership Strategy, which pushed for looser and more creative lending guidelines from both the public (FHA & Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac) and private sector's lending institutions .
They released a document, called "The National Homeownership Strategy: Partners in the American Dream," and here's a telling excerpt:
"For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership."
And it worked: from 1994 to 2004, the percentage of U.S. homeowners rose from roughly 64% to roughly 69%. Loose lending guidelines, continued and exacerbated by the Bush Administration and its artificially low interest rates, made money cheap, easy, and available to everyone, which created a buying frenzy, which, of course, drove up real estate prices, creating the real estate bubble. Never mind the fact that many of these borrowers were simply not qualified for homeownership, and subsequently defaulted, leading to an avalanche of foreclosures, which burst that real estate bubble.
Incidentally the National Homeownership Strategy document was posted on HUD's website until 2007, when HUD removed it, presumably out of embarrassment and fear of denouncement.
The U.S. government specifically condoned and encouraged the subprime mortgage industry, despite its current cries of outrage. This is our government, that we created, out of complacency and foolishness. We wanted cheap money, they made it a reality, and now we want someone to blame, so we can sleep at night feeling like innocent victims. Look in the mirror, and look at your politicians."
Read more: The True Story Behind The Economic Meltdown: Hud, The Clinton & Bush Administrations, And The National Homeownership Strategy
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
The day Waxman goes after Barney Frankenstein is the day i'll believe Dems are really concerned about protecting the American public...
So how was this real estate bubble created in the first place?
In 1994, the Clinton Administration went directly to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and promoted an initiative called The National Homeownership Strategy, which pushed for looser and more creative lending guidelines from both the public (FHA & Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac) and private sector's lending institutions .
They released a document, called "The National Homeownership Strategy: Partners in the American Dream," and here's a telling excerpt:
"For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership."
And it worked: from 1994 to 2004, the percentage of U.S. homeowners rose from roughly 64% to roughly 69%. Loose lending guidelines, continued and exacerbated by the Bush Administration and its artificially low interest rates, made money cheap, easy, and available to everyone, which created a buying frenzy, which, of course, drove up real estate prices, creating the real estate bubble. Never mind the fact that many of these borrowers were simply not qualified for homeownership, and subsequently defaulted, leading to an avalanche of foreclosures, which burst that real estate bubble.
Incidentally the National Homeownership Strategy document was posted on HUD's website until 2007, when HUD removed it, presumably out of embarrassment and fear of denouncement.
The U.S. government specifically condoned and encouraged the subprime mortgage industry, despite its current cries of outrage. This is our government, that we created, out of complacency and foolishness. We wanted cheap money, they made it a reality, and now we want someone to blame, so we can sleep at night feeling like innocent victims. Look in the mirror, and look at your politicians."
Read more: The True Story Behind The Economic Meltdown: Hud, The Clinton & Bush Administrations, And The National Homeownership Strategy
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
How did a strategy started in 1994 geared toward regulated depository institutions cause a massive subprime explosion between 2003 and 2006, fueled almost exclusively by non-CRA, non-FDIC financial institutions ?
The roots of this crisis go back to the Carter administration. That was when government officials, egged on by left-wing activists, began accusing mortgage lenders of racism and "redlining" because urban blacks were being denied mortgages at a higher rate than suburban whites.
The pressure to make more loans to minorities (read: to borrowers with weak credit histories) became relentless. Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, empowering regulators to punish banks that failed to "meet the credit needs" of "low-income, minority, and distressed neighborhoods." Lenders responded by loosening their underwriting standards and making increasingly shoddy loans. The two government-chartered mortgage finance firms, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, encouraged this "subprime" lending by authorizing ever more "flexible" criteria by which high-risk borrowers could be qualified for home loans, and then buying up the questionable mortgages that ensued.
All this was justified as a means of increasing homeownership among minorities and the poor. Affirmative-action policies trumped sound business practices.
"Lack of credit history should not be seen as a negative factor," the Fed's guidelines instructed. Lenders were directed to accept welfare payments and unemployment benefits as "valid income sources" to qualify for a mortgage. Failure to comply could mean a lawsuit.
But his fingerprints are all over this fiasco. Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.
Now that the bubble has burst and the "systemic risk" is apparent to all, Frank blithely declares: "The private sector got us into this mess." Well, give the congressman points for gall. Wall Street and private lenders have plenty to answer for, but it was Washington and the political class that derailed this train. If Frank is looking for a culprit to blame, he can find one suspect in the nearest mirror.
Granting loans to minorities. Pressuring banks to give loans to people without credit worthiness threatening lawsuits from Barak Obama's group called ACORN.
See the plot thickens now when you see the full picture, and the liberal media actually doing what it is paid to do. Investigate the truth without taking sides.
For too long the liberal media has blamed the Bush administration, meanwhile through the back door, Democratic leaders like Christopher Dood, and Barney Frank were sabotaging our financial stability and single handily crashed the housing market in the United States for years to come.
Democrats can blame the eight years of Bush's failed economic policies all they want.
Now, behold, the truth and the whole truth is coming out and it is the governments interfering with the banking system, and forcing banks to loan money to minority borrowers who did not qualify, threatening racial lawsuits and monetary judgments.
All in the name of the glorious Marxist, socialism plan of Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd and yes, Barak Obama and his ties to ACORN who were the very firm that threatened lawsuits and received monetary paypacks for putting pressure on the FED'S to loan the money to minorities.
Change...this is the change Barak Obama is calling for?
Barney Frank Cried Racism And Look What Happened
Wall St. is going to embrace whoever they think is going to give them the most cheese, no different than an inner city welfare recipient.
The day Waxman goes after Barney Frankenstein is the day i'll believe Dems are really concerned about protecting the American public...
How did a strategy started in 1994 geared toward regulated depository institutions cause a massive subprime explosion between 2003 and 2006, fueled almost exclusively by non-CRA, non-FDIC financial institutions ?
Definitely helped to pave the way...following it in 1995 the Community Reinvestment Act was passed...
The roots of this crisis go back to the Carter administration. That was when government officials, egged on by left-wing activists, began accusing mortgage lenders of racism and "redlining" because urban blacks were being denied mortgages at a higher rate than suburban whites.
The pressure to make more loans to minorities (read: to borrowers with weak credit histories) became relentless. Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, empowering regulators to punish banks that failed to "meet the credit needs" of "low-income, minority, and distressed neighborhoods." Lenders responded by loosening their underwriting standards and making increasingly shoddy loans. The two government-chartered mortgage finance firms, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, encouraged this "subprime" lending by authorizing ever more "flexible" criteria by which high-risk borrowers could be qualified for home loans, and then buying up the questionable mortgages that ensued.
All this was justified as a means of increasing homeownership among minorities and the poor. Affirmative-action policies trumped sound business practices.
"Lack of credit history should not be seen as a negative factor," the Fed's guidelines instructed. Lenders were directed to accept welfare payments and unemployment benefits as "valid income sources" to qualify for a mortgage. Failure to comply could mean a lawsuit.
But his fingerprints are all over this fiasco. Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.
Now that the bubble has burst and the "systemic risk" is apparent to all, Frank blithely declares: "The private sector got us into this mess." Well, give the congressman points for gall. Wall Street and private lenders have plenty to answer for, but it was Washington and the political class that derailed this train. If Frank is looking for a culprit to blame, he can find one suspect in the nearest mirror.
Granting loans to minorities. Pressuring banks to give loans to people without credit worthiness threatening lawsuits from Barak Obama's group called ACORN.
See the plot thickens now when you see the full picture, and the liberal media actually doing what it is paid to do. Investigate the truth without taking sides.
For too long the liberal media has blamed the Bush administration, meanwhile through the back door, Democratic leaders like Christopher Dood, and Barney Frank were sabotaging our financial stability and single handily crashed the housing market in the United States for years to come.
Democrats can blame the eight years of Bush's failed economic policies all they want.
Now, behold, the truth and the whole truth is coming out and it is the governments interfering with the banking system, and forcing banks to loan money to minority borrowers who did not qualify, threatening racial lawsuits and monetary judgments.
All in the name of the glorious Marxist, socialism plan of Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd and yes, Barak Obama and his ties to ACORN who were the very firm that threatened lawsuits and received monetary paypacks for putting pressure on the FED'S to loan the money to minorities.
Change...this is the change Barak Obama is calling for?
Barney Frank Cried Racism And Look What Happened
Wall St. is going to embrace whoever they think is going to give them the most cheese, no different than an inner city welfare recipient.
BIG DIFFERENCE.
The inner city welfare recipient is not among the greatest means of innovation and job creation.
It is comments such as this that make one both laugh and then sit stunned at the implication of such vast ignorance...
Wall St. is going to embrace whoever they think is going to give them the most cheese, no different than an inner city welfare recipient.
BIG DIFFERENCE.
The inner city welfare recipient is not among the greatest means of innovation and job creation.
It is comments such as this that make one both laugh and then sit stunned at the implication of such vast ignorance...
Wall St. is going to embrace whoever they think is going to give them the most cheese, no different than an inner city welfare recipient.
BIG DIFFERENCE.
The inner city welfare recipient is not among the greatest means of innovation and job creation.
It is comments such as this that make one both laugh and then sit stunned at the implication of such vast ignorance...
So you think corporate subsidies are needed? I thought you supported less government, I guess I truly was ignorant as to how you felt.
He tries to placate his fanatical Left Wing base too much. He tries to have his cake and eat it too. He gives these Corporations $Billions in Tax Payer Bailouts while at the same time calling them "Evil Corporations." Most Leftists i observe try to have it both ways on Wall Street issues. He just needs to stop sending Wall Street these mixed signals.
.How did a strategy started in 1994 geared toward regulated depository institutions cause a massive subprime explosion between 2003 and 2006, fueled almost exclusively by non-CRA, non-FDIC financial institutions ?
Definitely helped to pave the way...following it in 1995 the Community Reinvestment Act was passed...
The roots of this crisis go back to the Carter administration. That was when government officials, egged on by left-wing activists, began accusing mortgage lenders of racism and "redlining" because urban blacks were being denied mortgages at a higher rate than suburban whites.
The pressure to make more loans to minorities (read: to borrowers with weak credit histories) became relentless. Congress passed the Community Reinvestment Act, empowering regulators to punish banks that failed to "meet the credit needs" of "low-income, minority, and distressed neighborhoods." Lenders responded by loosening their underwriting standards and making increasingly shoddy loans. The two government-chartered mortgage finance firms, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, encouraged this "subprime" lending by authorizing ever more "flexible" criteria by which high-risk borrowers could be qualified for home loans, and then buying up the questionable mortgages that ensued.
All this was justified as a means of increasing homeownership among minorities and the poor. Affirmative-action policies trumped sound business practices.
"Lack of credit history should not be seen as a negative factor," the Fed's guidelines instructed. Lenders were directed to accept welfare payments and unemployment benefits as "valid income sources" to qualify for a mortgage. Failure to comply could mean a lawsuit.
But his fingerprints are all over this fiasco. Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.
Now that the bubble has burst and the "systemic risk" is apparent to all, Frank blithely declares: "The private sector got us into this mess." Well, give the congressman points for gall. Wall Street and private lenders have plenty to answer for, but it was Washington and the political class that derailed this train. If Frank is looking for a culprit to blame, he can find one suspect in the nearest mirror.
Granting loans to minorities. Pressuring banks to give loans to people without credit worthiness threatening lawsuits from Barak Obama's group called ACORN.
See the plot thickens now when you see the full picture, and the liberal media actually doing what it is paid to do. Investigate the truth without taking sides.
For too long the liberal media has blamed the Bush administration, meanwhile through the back door, Democratic leaders like Christopher Dood, and Barney Frank were sabotaging our financial stability and single handily crashed the housing market in the United States for years to come.
Democrats can blame the eight years of Bush's failed economic policies all they want.
Now, behold, the truth and the whole truth is coming out and it is the governments interfering with the banking system, and forcing banks to loan money to minority borrowers who did not qualify, threatening racial lawsuits and monetary judgments.
All in the name of the glorious Marxist, socialism plan of Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd and yes, Barak Obama and his ties to ACORN who were the very firm that threatened lawsuits and received monetary paypacks for putting pressure on the FED'S to loan the money to minorities.
Change...this is the change Barak Obama is calling for?
Barney Frank Cried Racism And Look What Happened
the Community Reinvestment Act was passed in 1977.
Yes, it was passed then but also revised and passed again in 1995.
By the way, since when was it bad policy to give loans to minorities?
Since when they didn't financially qualify to pay back the loan
And how did the CRA cause a massive run-up in subprime loan origination at non-depository institutions?
I suppose after looking at the lucrative returns they could get...many pension fund and insurance company investment managers got greedy and joined in the feeding frenzy
I'm sure the fear of complaints from political race hustlers and poverty pimps, over lack of ability of some to come up with decent downstrokes and "red lining" of high risk neighborhoods, played into the mix.And how did the CRA cause a massive run-up in subprime loan origination at non-depository institutions?
Wall Street donated $700 million to Democrats in 2008, but the Dems did not come through, and they feel demonized. Wall Street has donated nearly $700 million to the Republicans for the 2010 year elections and now the republicans are reaping the benefits....because Wall Street thinks they will help them.
the Ferris wheel keeps turning, just like the money meant to influence keeps flowing.
Can our country afford to have investments in America disappear due to Obama's policies?Yeah.....we need to Allow The Marketplace To Regulate Itself.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2iHksmF7m4]YouTube - American Casino: Greenspan's "flaw in the model"[/ame]
The day Waxman goes after Barney Frankenstein is the day i'll believe Dems are really concerned about protecting the American public...
So how was this real estate bubble created in the first place?
In 1994, the Clinton Administration went directly to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and promoted an initiative called The National Homeownership Strategy, which pushed for looser and more creative lending guidelines from both the public (FHA & Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac) and private sector's lending institutions .
They released a document, called "The National Homeownership Strategy: Partners in the American Dream," and here's a telling excerpt:
"For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership."
And it worked: from 1994 to 2004, the percentage of U.S. homeowners rose from roughly 64% to roughly 69%. Loose lending guidelines, continued and exacerbated by the Bush Administration and its artificially low interest rates, made money cheap, easy, and available to everyone, which created a buying frenzy, which, of course, drove up real estate prices, creating the real estate bubble. Never mind the fact that many of these borrowers were simply not qualified for homeownership, and subsequently defaulted, leading to an avalanche of foreclosures, which burst that real estate bubble.
Incidentally the National Homeownership Strategy document was posted on HUD's website until 2007, when HUD removed it, presumably out of embarrassment and fear of denouncement.
The U.S. government specifically condoned and encouraged the subprime mortgage industry, despite its current cries of outrage. This is our government, that we created, out of complacency and foolishness. We wanted cheap money, they made it a reality, and now we want someone to blame, so we can sleep at night feeling like innocent victims. Look in the mirror, and look at your politicians."
Read more: The True Story Behind The Economic Meltdown: Hud, The Clinton & Bush Administrations, And The National Homeownership Strategy
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Yeah...Unfortunately, that greedy epithet is being shouted by the likes of UAW, AFACME, NEA and AFT union goons, demanding that the feds bail out their poorly invested and administered pension funds.Wall Street donated $700 million to Democrats in 2008, but the Dems did not come through, and they feel demonized. Wall Street has donated nearly $700 million to the Republicans for the 2010 year elections and now the republicans are reaping the benefits....because Wall Street thinks they will help them.
the Ferris wheel keeps turning, just like the money meant to influence keeps flowing.
Meanwhile, the unemployed continue to be unemployed because of greed. The greed which translates: "Until I'm assured I'm gonna get more, fuck you."
8537 said:How did a strategy started in 1994 geared toward regulated depository institutions cause a massive subprime explosion between 2003 and 2006, fueled almost exclusively by non-CRA, non-FDIC financial institutions ?
It's all the Democrats' fault. It's all Fannie & Freddie's fault. It's all Obama's fault. Goldman-Sachs was the only investment bank playing games with home mortgages/securities for trade.
Can our country afford to have investments in America disappear due to Obama's policies?
Wall St. is going to embrace whoever they think is going to give them the most cheese, no different than an inner city welfare recipient.
BIG DIFFERENCE.
The inner city welfare recipient is not among the greatest means of innovation and job creation.
It is comments such as this that make one both laugh and then sit stunned at the implication of such vast ignorance...
Issues like the carry-interest tax on private equity or the Volcker Rule have become personal.
