Government's Failure at Business

[Wry Catcher]

1. "I see, my post above ^^^ has caused PC to cut and run."


What a fool you are.....as though anyone....any three year old.... shakes at your underwhelming intellect.

You seem like nothing so much as the kite that thought it ruled the wind.





2. "What would McCain and Palin have done if they had won the election and took office in Jan. 2009?"

Any candidate of my choosing would stand for individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.






3. "...wants others to believe she is all knowing and prescient..."

I understand why those adjectives would leap to the forefront in your feeble mind, based on the thorough thrashings you've received at my hands (posts).....

...but, I haven't claimed either.

Were I prescient, I would have considered that there might be folks as slow-witted as you, who could be convinced to vote for the candidate of proven failure.
I couldn't imagine there'd be so many as dumb as that......thank goodness so many have learned from their mistake.



And, as far as all-knowing, let's leave it at my being somewhere between you and all-knowing.

As expected ^^^, and thus my observation stands. A Passive, Aggressive, narcissistic charlatan she is and will always be. PC failed as usual to offer anything of substance; she is the queen of platitudes and always ready to attack the intellect of those who dare to criticize her.

Investopedia explains 'Free Market'

"In simple terms, a free market is a summary term for an array of exchanges that take place in society. Each exchange is a voluntary agreement between two parties who trade in the form of goods and services. In reality, this is the extent to which a free market exists since there will always be government intervention in the form of taxes, price controls and restrictions that prevent new competitors from entering a market. Just like supply-side economics, free market is a term used to describe a political or ideological viewpoint on policy and is not a field within economics.

Investopedia explains 'Limited Government'

A system of limited government, for example, generally does not concern itself with matters such as what wages employers are allowed to pay to employees (minimum wage), how individuals may invest funds for retirement (Social Security) or how many miles per gallon a vehicle must get (CAFÉ standards).

However, there are varying degrees of limited governments. The opposite of a limited government is an interventionist government.

Heimingway's final passage ring a bell?

"No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were. Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Fannie and Freddy are GSE's - Government Sponsored Enterprises. They only needed a $200 billion bailout from the taxpayers....Success!!

Created under the auspices of Democrat Franklin Roosevelt, who, like Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, felt that any allegiance to the Constitution, unnecessary.

Weird, worked for 70 years UNTIL Dubya

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

No it didn't.







"...warned in 2001..."



Clearly you've gotten your education via t-shirts and bumper stickers.

 

[Dad2three]

Created under the auspices of Democrat Franklin Roosevelt, who, like Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, felt that any allegiance to the Constitution, unnecessary.

Weird, worked for 70 years UNTIL Dubya

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

No it didn't.







"...warned in 2001..."



Clearly you've gotten your education via t-shirts and bumper stickers.

Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again.

"Clearly you've gotten your education via t-shirts and bumper stickers"

NOPE THAT'S YOU


YOU SAYING THE GOP IGNORED DUBYA?



Testimony from W’s Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS 2003 concerning the 'regulation’ of the GSE’s

Mr. BARNEY Frank: ...Are we in a crisis now with these entities?

Secretary Snow. No, that is a fair characterization, Congressman Frank, of our position. We are not putting this proposal before you because of some concern over some imminent danger to the financial system for housing; far from it.“

BARNEY? MINORITY MEMBER OF THE GOP HOUSE 1995-2007? PLEASE TELL ME THE SUPER POWERS HE HAD?

THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT'S VIEWS ON THE REGULATION OF GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTERPRISES

- THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT'S VIEWS ON THE REGULATION OF GOVERNMENT SPONSORED ENTERPRISES

Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”


One president controlled the regulators that not only let banks stop checking income but cheered them on. And as president Bush could enact the very policies that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble and he did. And his party controlled congress.

In April (2004), HUD (EXECUTIVE BRANCH BUSH) proposed new federal regulations that would raise the GSEs targeted lending requirements. HUD estimates that over the next four years an additional one million low- and moderate-income families would be served as a result of the new goals.

HUD Archives: HUD DATA SHOWS FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC HAVE TRAILED THE INDUSTRY IN PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN 44 STATES

HUD Archives: HUD DATA SHOWS FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC HAVE TRAILED THE INDUSTRY IN PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN 44 STATES


HOLY COW! Bush forced them to lower their standards. If only somebody had warned us that Bush's policies would hurt Freddie and Fannie. Wait, somebody did.




Fannie, Freddie to Suffer Under New Rule, Frank Says

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would suffer financially under a Bush administration requirement that they channel more mortgage financing to people with low incomes, said the senior Democrat on a congressional panel that sets regulations for the companies.


So if your narrative is "GSEs are to blame" then you have to blame bush


http://democrats.financialservices....s/112/06-17-04-new-Fannie-goals-Bloomberg.pdf



FACTS on Dubya's great recession

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

 

[Dad2three]

Created under the auspices of Democrat Franklin Roosevelt, who, like Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, felt that any allegiance to the Constitution, unnecessary.

Weird, worked for 70 years UNTIL Dubya

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

No it didn't.







"...warned in 2001..."



Clearly you've gotten your education via t-shirts and bumper stickers.

The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence

William K. Black: The Two Documents Everyone Should Read to Better Understand the Crisis


June 17, 2004


Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


"(In 2000, CLINTON) HUD restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay."

How DUBYA'S HUD Mortgage Policy Fed The Crisis

"In 2004 (BUSH), the 2000 rules were dropped and high‐risk loans were again counted toward affordable housing goals."

http://www.prmia.org/sites/default/files/references/Fannie_Mae_and_Freddie_Mac_090911_v2.pdf



Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

 

[PoliticalChic]

Weird, worked for 70 years UNTIL Dubya

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

No it didn't.







"...warned in 2001..."



Clearly you've gotten your education via t-shirts and bumper stickers.

The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence

William K. Black: The Two Documents Everyone Should Read to Better Understand the Crisis


June 17, 2004


Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


"(In 2000, CLINTON) HUD restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay."

How DUBYA'S HUD Mortgage Policy Fed The Crisis

"In 2004 (BUSH), the 2000 rules were dropped and high‐risk loans were again counted toward affordable housing goals."

http://www.prmia.org/sites/default/files/references/Fannie_Mae_and_Freddie_Mac_090911_v2.pdf



Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?



After you answer that, I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?

yes perhaps since all liberals including Bush wanted affordable housing and so invaded the private sector in 100 different ways to get folks into homes the private sector free market said they could afford. I do agree that FDR was a turning point toward massive liberal intervention.

 

[Dad2three]

No it didn't.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM



"...warned in 2001..."



Clearly you've gotten your education via t-shirts and bumper stickers.

The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence

William K. Black: The Two Documents Everyone Should Read to Better Understand the Crisis


June 17, 2004


Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


"(In 2000, CLINTON) HUD restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay."

How DUBYA'S HUD Mortgage Policy Fed The Crisis

"In 2004 (BUSH), the 2000 rules were dropped and high‐risk loans were again counted toward affordable housing goals."

http://www.prmia.org/sites/default/files/references/Fannie_Mae_and_Freddie_Mac_090911_v2.pdf



Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?



After you answer that, I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it.

GSE'S AROUND FOR 70 YEARS? Seriousl;y? lol

The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets OCT 2008

YEAH, THAT WAS GSE'S *SHAKING HEAD*

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

If W was a liberal why does Dumbto3 keep putting him down??

 

[Dad2three]

No it didn't.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM



"...warned in 2001..."



Clearly you've gotten your education via t-shirts and bumper stickers.

The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence

William K. Black: The Two Documents Everyone Should Read to Better Understand the Crisis


June 17, 2004


Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


"(In 2000, CLINTON) HUD restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay."

How DUBYA'S HUD Mortgage Policy Fed The Crisis

"In 2004 (BUSH), the 2000 rules were dropped and high‐risk loans were again counted toward affordable housing goals."

http://www.prmia.org/sites/default/files/references/Fannie_Mae_and_Freddie_Mac_090911_v2.pdf



Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?



After you answer that, I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it.

" I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it."

HERE LET ME HELP

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.




Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative




Agency’s ’04 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt

2004 Dubya allowed the leverage rules to go from 12-1 to 35-1+ which flooded the market with cheap money!


“We have a good deal of comfort about the capital cushions at these firms at the moment.” — Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, March 11, 2008.



Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble


He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down



The banks have known for 30 years the risks involved on the loan products they sold. This is why they lobbied so hard to allow them to sell the bad products to investors so they would not be holding the bad paper or the risks. The developed the products like stated income stated assets then bundled them to make it appear they were blended risks and then sold them to multiple investors. Who bought these high risk loans? Mostly pension funds and Insurances seeking higher returns who lost almost half of the pension funds value and the public that depended on those funds for retirement.




Nobody forced the big five investment banks to do what they did; they were not subject to CRA or other regulations common to depository banks. In fact, they mainly bought and sold loans rather than originate them. They did it because they thought they would make money.
Reply With Quote



MUCH MORE HERE (WITH LINKS FOR EVERYTHING) :

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

but dumbto3 was the one who pointed out how liberal Bush was with his ownership society and affordable housing goals!!

 

[Dad2three]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

but dumbto3 was the one who pointed out how liberal Bush was with his ownership society and affordable housing goals!!

That the GOP unanimously supported, look at their 2000 and 2004 convention platforms, lol

OR THE UNANIMOUS SUPPORT OF DUBYA'S DREAM NONPAYMENT AND GUARANTEEING ZERO DOWNS, LOL

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

but dumbto3 was the one who pointed out how liberal Bush was with his ownership society and affordable housing goals!!

That the GOP unanimously supported, look at their 2000 and 2004 convention platforms, lol

OR THE UNANIMOUS SUPPORT OF DUBYA'S DREAM NONPAYMENT AND GUARANTEEING ZERO DOWNS, LOL

yes so Bush was liberal and it led to crisis? Do you have any idea what you're doing here?

 

[OnePercenter]

Government business = Oxymoron.

Any problems with your;

Roadways?
Police?
Fire Department?
Public Works?
Parks Department?
Are your street light working?
Traffic signals?

 

[Dad2three]

but dumbto3 was the one who pointed out how liberal Bush was with his ownership society and affordable housing goals!!

That the GOP unanimously supported, look at their 2000 and 2004 convention platforms, lol

OR THE UNANIMOUS SUPPORT OF DUBYA'S DREAM NONPAYMENT AND GUARANTEEING ZERO DOWNS, LOL

yes so Bush was liberal and it led to crisis? Do you have any idea what you're doing here?

Were EVERY GOPer in Congres, who supported Dubya's policies liberal or not?

"GOP unanimously supported, look at their 2000 and 2004 convention platforms, lol

OR THE UNANIMOUS SUPPORT OF DUBYA'S DREAM DOWNPAYMENT AND GUARANTEEING ZERO DOWNS"

SIMPLE QUESTION BUBBA, WHY DO KEEP EVADING IT?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence

William K. Black: The Two Documents Everyone Should Read to Better Understand the Crisis


June 17, 2004


Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


"(In 2000, CLINTON) HUD restricted Freddie and Fannie, saying it would not credit them for loans they purchased that had abusively high costs or that were granted without regard to the borrower's ability to repay."

How DUBYA'S HUD Mortgage Policy Fed The Crisis

"In 2004 (BUSH), the 2000 rules were dropped and high‐risk loans were again counted toward affordable housing goals."

http://www.prmia.org/sites/default/files/references/Fannie_Mae_and_Freddie_Mac_090911_v2.pdf



Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?



After you answer that, I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it.

" I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it."

HERE LET ME HELP

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.




Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative




Agency’s ’04 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt

2004 Dubya allowed the leverage rules to go from 12-1 to 35-1+ which flooded the market with cheap money!


“We have a good deal of comfort about the capital cushions at these firms at the moment.” — Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, March 11, 2008.



Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble


He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down



The banks have known for 30 years the risks involved on the loan products they sold. This is why they lobbied so hard to allow them to sell the bad products to investors so they would not be holding the bad paper or the risks. The developed the products like stated income stated assets then bundled them to make it appear they were blended risks and then sold them to multiple investors. Who bought these high risk loans? Mostly pension funds and Insurances seeking higher returns who lost almost half of the pension funds value and the public that depended on those funds for retirement.




Nobody forced the big five investment banks to do what they did; they were not subject to CRA or other regulations common to depository banks. In fact, they mainly bought and sold loans rather than originate them. They did it because they thought they would make money.
Reply With Quote



MUCH MORE HERE (WITH LINKS FOR EVERYTHING) :

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

Don't be afraid.....just answer the question:

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?


Then you can be afraid....very afraid.

 

[Rshermr]

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?



After you answer that, I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it.

" I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it."

HERE LET ME HELP

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.




Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative




Agency’s ’04 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt

2004 Dubya allowed the leverage rules to go from 12-1 to 35-1+ which flooded the market with cheap money!


“We have a good deal of comfort about the capital cushions at these firms at the moment.” — Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, March 11, 2008.



Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble


He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down



The banks have known for 30 years the risks involved on the loan products they sold. This is why they lobbied so hard to allow them to sell the bad products to investors so they would not be holding the bad paper or the risks. The developed the products like stated income stated assets then bundled them to make it appear they were blended risks and then sold them to multiple investors. Who bought these high risk loans? Mostly pension funds and Insurances seeking higher returns who lost almost half of the pension funds value and the public that depended on those funds for retirement.




Nobody forced the big five investment banks to do what they did; they were not subject to CRA or other regulations common to depository banks. In fact, they mainly bought and sold loans rather than originate them. They did it because they thought they would make money.
Reply With Quote



MUCH MORE HERE (WITH LINKS FOR EVERYTHING) :

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

Don't be afraid.....just answer the question:

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?


Then you can be afraid....very afraid.

Wow. A person living in the rational world would be concerned about the fact that they are about to be thumped. But then, you do not live in the rational world.

 

[Dad2three]

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?



After you answer that, I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it.

" I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it."

HERE LET ME HELP

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.




Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative




Agency’s ’04 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt

2004 Dubya allowed the leverage rules to go from 12-1 to 35-1+ which flooded the market with cheap money!


“We have a good deal of comfort about the capital cushions at these firms at the moment.” — Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, March 11, 2008.



Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble


He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down



The banks have known for 30 years the risks involved on the loan products they sold. This is why they lobbied so hard to allow them to sell the bad products to investors so they would not be holding the bad paper or the risks. The developed the products like stated income stated assets then bundled them to make it appear they were blended risks and then sold them to multiple investors. Who bought these high risk loans? Mostly pension funds and Insurances seeking higher returns who lost almost half of the pension funds value and the public that depended on those funds for retirement.




Nobody forced the big five investment banks to do what they did; they were not subject to CRA or other regulations common to depository banks. In fact, they mainly bought and sold loans rather than originate them. They did it because they thought they would make money.
Reply With Quote



MUCH MORE HERE (WITH LINKS FOR EVERYTHING) :

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

Don't be afraid.....just answer the question:

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?


Then you can be afraid....very afraid.

Don't be afraid.....just answer the question:

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?


What did the GSE's that worked for 70 years, have to do with Dubyas regulator failure as the Bankters created a WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST?


Wall Street, Not Fannie and Freddie, Led Mortgage Meltdown

Mortgages financed by Wall Street from 2001 to 2008 were 4½ times more likely to be seriously delinquent than mortgages backed by Fannie and Freddie.


“The idea that they were leading this charge is just absurd,” said Guy Cecala, publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance, an authoritative trade publication. “Fannie and Freddie have always had the tightest underwriting on earth…They were opposite of subprime.”

Wall Street, Not Fannie and Freddie, Led Mortgage Meltdown - The Daily Beast


MORE ON DUBYA'S REGULATOR FAILURE


http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

 

[PoliticalChic]

" I'll provide the timeline with the Democrat fingerprints all over it."

HERE LET ME HELP

Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."


June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.




Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative




Agency’s ’04 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt

2004 Dubya allowed the leverage rules to go from 12-1 to 35-1+ which flooded the market with cheap money!


“We have a good deal of comfort about the capital cushions at these firms at the moment.” — Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, March 11, 2008.



Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble


He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meet ambitious new goals for low-income lending.

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down



The banks have known for 30 years the risks involved on the loan products they sold. This is why they lobbied so hard to allow them to sell the bad products to investors so they would not be holding the bad paper or the risks. The developed the products like stated income stated assets then bundled them to make it appear they were blended risks and then sold them to multiple investors. Who bought these high risk loans? Mostly pension funds and Insurances seeking higher returns who lost almost half of the pension funds value and the public that depended on those funds for retirement.




Nobody forced the big five investment banks to do what they did; they were not subject to CRA or other regulations common to depository banks. In fact, they mainly bought and sold loans rather than originate them. They did it because they thought they would make money.
Reply With Quote



MUCH MORE HERE (WITH LINKS FOR EVERYTHING) :

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

Don't be afraid.....just answer the question:

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?


Then you can be afraid....very afraid.

Don't be afraid.....just answer the question:

If FDR had not abused the US Constitution, and decided to invade the private sector with the GSE's......

......would there have been a mortgage meltdown?


What did the GSE's that worked for 70 years, have to do with Dubyas regulator failure as the Bankters created a WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST?


Wall Street, Not Fannie and Freddie, Led Mortgage Meltdown

Mortgages financed by Wall Street from 2001 to 2008 were 4½ times more likely to be seriously delinquent than mortgages backed by Fannie and Freddie.


“The idea that they were leading this charge is just absurd,” said Guy Cecala, publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance, an authoritative trade publication. “Fannie and Freddie have always had the tightest underwriting on earth…They were opposite of subprime.”

Wall Street, Not Fannie and Freddie, Led Mortgage Meltdown - The Daily Beast


MORE ON DUBYA'S REGULATOR FAILURE


http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

Let me answer for you, you coward: no.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down

yes yes Bush was a liberal who interfered with the free market to get people into homes the free market said they could not afford.

So now dumbto3 is a conservative?

 

[OnePercenter]

Concerned that down payments were a barrier, Bush persuaded Congress to spend as much as $200 million a year to help first-time buyers with down payments and closing costs.

And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for government insured mortgages with no money down

yes yes Bush was a liberal who interfered with the free market to get people into homes the free market said they could not afford.

So now dumbto3 is a conservative?

There is no free market.