That's utter horseshit. Bush didn't create the sub-prime mortgage debacle. I realize leftwing toadies will keep pushing this bogus theiry until doomsday, but people like me will always be here to debunk it.
Who did create the sub-prime mortgage debacle?
Bush warned Congress years before it happened.
Folks like Barney Frwank and Chris Dodd ignored him.
When the Dems took over Jan of 07 they tightened lending regulations. Up until that point anyone could get a loan with no qualifications under the Sub-prime program using "Stated Income" as a qualification. I was a loan officer during in the period leading up to the housing debacle so I know what was going on.
I remember seeing families that couldn't afford to pay their rent moving into mansions and trashing the place, living rent free, then just leaving the place a mess. This was going on all over the country. Somebody told them they could get away with it, so they did it.
Some people that obtained ARM loans during the period before 07 needed to refinance to avoid massive increases in their payments and found they no-longer qualified for the home they lived in. So many of them defaulted and just walked away from their mortgages. People that need these types of programs even to qualify for a loan in the first place due to bad credit did what they always do, they shirked their responsibility.
A lack of accountability is the primary cause of the sub-prime crisis.
THIS George Bush?????????????????????????????
Zero-down mortgage initiative by Bush is hit
Budget office says plan likely to spur more loan defaults
By Chris Reidy, Globe Staff | October 5, 2004
President Bush's weekend campaign promise that he will push legislation allowing for no money down on some federally insured mortgages could cost taxpayers as much as $500 million over four years because of a higher rate of defaults, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The election-year idea may appeal to those who can't save as fast as home prices are rising. But some financial planners warn that increasingly common no- and low-down-payment programs can be ruinous for some consumers -- especially if home values decline.
If housing prices fall, consumers with little or no money of their own invested in the home are more vulnerable to ending up with mortgages larger than the value of the house.
And those who can't afford large down payments usually don't have enough savings to serve as a cushion if someone in the household gets sick or is laid off.
"If you're really stretching, maybe you should back off and look at a less expensive house," said Joan Gray Anderson, a professor of family financial counseling at the University of Rhode Island.
Bush proposed zero-down-payment legislation earlier this year. The Congressional Budget Office has contended for months that the proposal would generate huge losses, an assessment that could be a stumbling block for the bill's passage. But the Department of Housing and Urban Development thinks the program could be run on a break-even basis.
Bush contends that reducing the required 3 percent down in the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program to zero down would help 150,000 first-time buyers in the first year. Homeownership rates are now about 69 percent nationwide, compared to about 64 percent 10 years ago. The FHA insures many private-lender home loans.
"To build an ownership society, we'll help even more Americans to buy homes," Bush said in an Ohio speech to home builders. "Some families are more than able to pay a mortgage but just don't have the savings to put money down."
