Trump blames Obama for doubling the debt

[Johann]

maybe the liberals should stop blowing all their money on Shaniqua and her 13 kids, then maybe we wouldn't have so much ******* debt.

Well ain;'t you the racist ****.

maybe the liberals should stop blowing all their money on Shaniqua and her 13 kids, then maybe we wouldn't have so much ******* debt.

Well ain;'t you the racist ****.

it's not racist just because i don't want to pay for shaniqua's kids.

Oh please, you purposefully chose a name most likely associated with a black person as if black people are the only ones on government assistance.

**** you you racist POS. If you don't know that was a racist post then your racism is so inbred to yourevery being that you don;t even know how racist you are.

it's not racist just because i don't want to pay for shaniqua's kids.

Oh please, you purposefully chose a name most likely associated with a black person as if black people are the only ones on government assistance.

**** you you racist POS. If you don't know that was a racist post then your racism is so inbred to yourevery being that you don;t even know how racist you are.

why you gotta be racist, just because her name is shaniqua doesn't mean she's black.

i see a lot of black ppl with white names, too.

Oh please, I love it when you racist ***** make a racist post &then try to run away when caught.

The only thing misleading in the OP's post is that he forgot to include Guadalupe's name with ShaQuita's.....Nothing defamatory, slanderous or racist in the ******* truth. Just because you sackless pussies are scared shitless to acknowledge the truth doesn't mean we all are. It's time to get your shit right...your filthy ass is about to be shamed into legitimacy...We know playing stupid and pretending you're not filth isn't working....haha
21.3% of US Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month
Who Participated in Welfare?
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.

One racist **** defending another.
So white people don;t get government help? Or is it you assfucks only complain when minorities get them?

You do realize that poor people are disproportionately poor? Did you ever think shit happens when you are held down by over a 150 years of racism?

You assholes should grab your buddies Jeff Sessions, Trump, & Steve Bannon & start your own white supremacist colony somewhere on an islands. Because that is not America.

Wrong.

You're not America.

Have fun in Liberia.

Asians seem to do pretty well, considering they're not white. I guess you never bothered to consider that perhaps it's not the racist GOP and white man holding the black man down, but perhaps they're responsible for their own situation.

I'm a cracker and both my parents were from very destitute rural communities. No one is stopping black people from being honest citizens, valuing education or developing strong work ethics.

Those Individuals who have those traits tend to do very well. Regardless of race.

 

[francoHFW]

Because you don't know shit about economics.

Liberals are the ones whining that they're too low.
I want to cut taxes, not raise them.

Unfortunately with the GOP you get lower taxes only on the rich, Dupe. Only the Democrats want to do but the country wants, raise taxes on the rich and giant corporations cut them on the non rich. Poor dupes poor America.

Unfortunately with the GOP you get lower taxes only on the rich

View attachment 154670

View attachment 154671

Unfortunately, you're a moron.

Of course because of cuts in the income tax, state and local taxes rise, which kill the non rich, Super Dupe.

Of course because of cuts in the income tax, state and local taxes rise

Why?

You're like a goddamn two year old... Because of Cuts in federal aid duh.

 

[RealDave]

Proof is in the pudding:

If CRA loans caused the problem their defaults rates would be expected to be higher than private market subprime loans, but exactly opposite is true.

If CRA loans caused the problem

Looks like a 15% default rate.....that's a problem.

what the **** is wrong with you? DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market subprime market lending defaults?

THAT is the real problem, if they were merely 15% we probably wouldn't even have a recession, never mind Great Recession.

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

So now we're down to one factor of many. You can't weasel your way out of your " OMG OMG OMG CRA CRA CRA" post.

So now we're down to one factor of many.

That's what I've always said.

You can't weasel your way out of your " OMG OMG OMG CRA CRA CRA" post.

Link?

When you said this:

"The seeds of the mortgage meltdown were planted during Bill Clinton's presidency.

Under Clinton's Housing and Urban Development (HUD) secretary, Andrew Cuomo, Community Reinvestment Act regulators gave banks higher ratings for home loans made in "credit-deprived" areas. Banks were effectively rewarded for throwing out sound underwriting standards and writing loans to those who were at high risk of defaulting. If banks didn't comply with these rules, regulators reined in their ability to expand lending and deposits. bah blah blah"

 

[RealDave]

maybe the liberals should stop blowing all their money on Shaniqua and her 13 kids, then maybe we wouldn't have so much ******* debt.

Well ain;'t you the racist ****.

Well ain;'t you the racist ****.

it's not racist just because i don't want to pay for shaniqua's kids.

Oh please, you purposefully chose a name most likely associated with a black person as if black people are the only ones on government assistance.

**** you you racist POS. If you don't know that was a racist post then your racism is so inbred to yourevery being that you don;t even know how racist you are.

Oh please, you purposefully chose a name most likely associated with a black person as if black people are the only ones on government assistance.

**** you you racist POS. If you don't know that was a racist post then your racism is so inbred to yourevery being that you don;t even know how racist you are.

why you gotta be racist, just because her name is shaniqua doesn't mean she's black.

i see a lot of black ppl with white names, too.

Oh please, I love it when you racist ***** make a racist post &then try to run away when caught.

The only thing misleading in the OP's post is that he forgot to include Guadalupe's name with ShaQuita's.....Nothing defamatory, slanderous or racist in the ******* truth. Just because you sackless pussies are scared shitless to acknowledge the truth doesn't mean we all are. It's time to get your shit right...your filthy ass is about to be shamed into legitimacy...We know playing stupid and pretending you're not filth isn't working....haha
21.3% of US Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month
Who Participated in Welfare?
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.

One racist **** defending another.
So white people don;t get government help? Or is it you assfucks only complain when minorities get them?

You do realize that poor people are disproportionately poor? Did you ever think shit happens when you are held down by over a 150 years of racism?

You assholes should grab your buddies Jeff Sessions, Trump, & Steve Bannon & start your own white supremacist colony somewhere on an islands. Because that is not America.

Wrong.

You're not America.

Have fun in Liberia.

Asians seem to do pretty well, considering they're not white. I guess you never bothered to consider that perhaps it's not the racist GOP and white man holding the black man down, but perhaps they're responsible for their own situation.

I'm a cracker and both my parents were from very destitute rural communities. No one is stopping black people from being honest citizens, valuing education or developing strong work ethics.

America is not for white supremacists. No one wants you here outside of Steve Bannon & Donald Trump.

Wow, now we have the argument that its the black man's fault for not being able to climb over the many hurdles you racist ***** erected.

You are a true example of the deplorables. Assholes who don't belong in this country.

 

[francoHFW]

If CRA loans caused the problem

Looks like a 15% default rate.....that's a problem.

what the **** is wrong with you? DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market subprime market lending defaults?

THAT is the real problem, if they were merely 15% we probably wouldn't even have a recession, never mind Great Recession.

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

So now we're down to one factor of many. You can't weasel your way out of your " OMG OMG OMG CRA CRA CRA" post.

So now we're down to one factor of many.

That's what I've always said.

You can't weasel your way out of your " OMG OMG OMG CRA CRA CRA" post.

Link?

When you said this:

"The seeds of the mortgage meltdown were planted during Bill Clinton's presidency.

Under Clinton's Housing and Urban Development (HUD) secretary, Andrew Cuomo, Community Reinvestment Act regulators gave banks higher ratings for home loans made in "credit-deprived" areas. Banks were effectively rewarded for throwing out sound underwriting standards and writing loans to those who were at high risk of defaulting. If banks didn't comply with these rules, regulators reined in their ability to expand lending and deposits. bah blah blah"

No they were rewarded for not redlining whole black areas and for helping worthy applicants. Then the GOP Regulators allowed toxic mortgages to anyone breathing for their Pals in the private Lending sector. Country-Wide ring a bell?

 

[RealDave]

He was going to, until this collusion thing...

When Romney said Russia was our largest threat and Obama chuckled that "the 80s called and wanted their foreign policy back", what exactly was Obama going to be flexible about?

Spell it out.

Dealing with Medvedev, not Putin.. Duh

Putin, you idiot.

Obama said it to Medvedev.

Said what?

What the **** this was about. My God, you just blab without following the thread?

Flexible comment. That was not said to Putin ,like you said.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When Romney said Russia was our largest threat and Obama chuckled that "the 80s called and wanted their foreign policy back", what exactly was Obama going to be flexible about?

Spell it out.

Dealing with Medvedev, not Putin.. Duh

Putin, you idiot.

Obama was talking to Medvedev, you moron, the guy Democrats admired and wanted to deal with...

Obama was talking to Medvedev

What did Obama say to Medvedev? What did Medvedev say back? Stupid ****.

Do you want a diagram, idiot?

Or just their actual words, fucktard.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Liberals are the ones whining that they're too low.
I want to cut taxes, not raise them.

Unfortunately with the GOP you get lower taxes only on the rich, Dupe. Only the Democrats want to do but the country wants, raise taxes on the rich and giant corporations cut them on the non rich. Poor dupes poor America.

Unfortunately with the GOP you get lower taxes only on the rich

View attachment 154670

View attachment 154671

Unfortunately, you're a moron.

Of course because of cuts in the income tax, state and local taxes rise, which kill the non rich, Super Dupe.

Of course because of cuts in the income tax, state and local taxes rise

Why?

You're like a goddamn two year old... Because of Cuts in federal aid duh.

Why should the Federal government give aid to the states? Duh.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When Romney said Russia was our largest threat and Obama chuckled that "the 80s called and wanted their foreign policy back", what exactly was Obama going to be flexible about?

Spell it out.

Dealing with Medvedev, not Putin.. Duh

Putin, you idiot.

Obama said it to Medvedev.

Said what?

What the **** this was about. My God, you just blab without following the thread?

Flexible comment. That was not said to Putin ,like you said.

Obama said, tell Vlad I'll be more flexible after the election.

You think Medvedev was in charge? ROFLMFAO!

 

[francoHFW]

Dealing with Medvedev, not Putin.. Duh

Putin, you idiot.

Obama was talking to Medvedev, you moron, the guy Democrats admired and wanted to deal with...

Obama was talking to Medvedev

What did Obama say to Medvedev? What did Medvedev say back? Stupid ****.

Do you want a diagram, idiot?

Or just their actual words, fucktard.

Maybe people get tired of going around and around with your stupid f****** question dick head. LOL

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If CRA loans caused the problem

Looks like a 15% default rate.....that's a problem.

what the **** is wrong with you? DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market subprime market lending defaults?

THAT is the real problem, if they were merely 15% we probably wouldn't even have a recession, never mind Great Recession.

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

So now we're down to one factor of many. You can't weasel your way out of your " OMG OMG OMG CRA CRA CRA" post.

So now we're down to one factor of many.

That's what I've always said.

You can't weasel your way out of your " OMG OMG OMG CRA CRA CRA" post.

Link?

When you said this:

"The seeds of the mortgage meltdown were planted during Bill Clinton's presidency.

Under Clinton's Housing and Urban Development (HUD) secretary, Andrew Cuomo, Community Reinvestment Act regulators gave banks higher ratings for home loans made in "credit-deprived" areas. Banks were effectively rewarded for throwing out sound underwriting standards and writing loans to those who were at high risk of defaulting. If banks didn't comply with these rules, regulators reined in their ability to expand lending and deposits. bah blah blah"

So you lied when you claimed I said " OMG OMG OMG CRA CRA CRA"

Thanks for admitting you're a liar.

 

[Johann]

maybe the liberals should stop blowing all their money on Shaniqua and her 13 kids, then maybe we wouldn't have so much ******* debt.

Well ain;'t you the racist ****.

it's not racist just because i don't want to pay for shaniqua's kids.

Oh please, you purposefully chose a name most likely associated with a black person as if black people are the only ones on government assistance.

**** you you racist POS. If you don't know that was a racist post then your racism is so inbred to yourevery being that you don;t even know how racist you are.

why you gotta be racist, just because her name is shaniqua doesn't mean she's black.

i see a lot of black ppl with white names, too.

Oh please, I love it when you racist ***** make a racist post &then try to run away when caught.

The only thing misleading in the OP's post is that he forgot to include Guadalupe's name with ShaQuita's.....Nothing defamatory, slanderous or racist in the ******* truth. Just because you sackless pussies are scared shitless to acknowledge the truth doesn't mean we all are. It's time to get your shit right...your filthy ass is about to be shamed into legitimacy...We know playing stupid and pretending you're not filth isn't working....haha
21.3% of US Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month
Who Participated in Welfare?
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
The black participation rate was followed by Hispanics at 36.4 percent, Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent, and non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.

One racist **** defending another.
So white people don;t get government help? Or is it you assfucks only complain when minorities get them?

You do realize that poor people are disproportionately poor? Did you ever think shit happens when you are held down by over a 150 years of racism?

You assholes should grab your buddies Jeff Sessions, Trump, & Steve Bannon & start your own white supremacist colony somewhere on an islands. Because that is not America.

Wrong.

You're not America.

Have fun in Liberia.

Asians seem to do pretty well, considering they're not white. I guess you never bothered to consider that perhaps it's not the racist GOP and white man holding the black man down, but perhaps they're responsible for their own situation.

I'm a cracker and both my parents were from very destitute rural communities. No one is stopping black people from being honest citizens, valuing education or developing strong work ethics.

America is not for white supremacists. No one wants you here outside of Steve Bannon & Donald Trump.

Wow, now we have the argument that its the black man's fault for not being able to climb over the many hurdles you racist ***** erected.

You are a true example of the deplorables. Assholes who don't belong in this country.

You realize Donald trump was elected, right?
No one might be a bit much.

Is it also the white man's fault that Asians earn more than whites?

Or does it only apply to blacks?


Also, white people pay for the education and benefits black people use in this country.

Whites are pretty bad at being racist, what with affirmative action and whatnot.

Kind of counter productive if our goal is to put barriers up for the black man. Since we do more to subsidize blacks than we do other races.

Unsuccessful blacks have nobody to blame but themselves. Unless otherwise disabled.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Putin, you idiot.

Obama was talking to Medvedev, you moron, the guy Democrats admired and wanted to deal with...

Obama was talking to Medvedev

What did Obama say to Medvedev? What did Medvedev say back? Stupid ****.

Do you want a diagram, idiot?

Or just their actual words, fucktard.

Maybe people get tired of going around and around with your stupid f****** question dick head. LOL

Of course, because if you answered it would expose your ignorance.

 

[AntonToo]

You are referring to the CRA from the days of Jimmie Carter & we are to believe that the program sat idled for 30 years & then jumped up & destroyed our economy on 2007.


The seeds of the mortgage meltdown were planted during Bill Clinton's presidency.

Under Clinton's Housing and Urban Development (HUD) secretary, Andrew Cuomo, Community Reinvestment Act regulators gave banks higher ratings for home loans made in "credit-deprived" areas. Banks were effectively rewarded for throwing out sound underwriting standards and writing loans to those who were at high risk of defaulting. If banks didn't comply with these rules, regulators reined in their ability to expand lending and deposits.

These new HUD rules lowered down payments from the traditional 20 percent to 3 percent by 1995 and zero down-payments by 2000. What's more, in the Clinton push to issue home loans to lower income borrowers, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made a common practice to virtually end credit documentation, low credit scores were disregarded, and income and job history was also thrown aside. The phrase "subprime" became commonplace. What an understatement.

Next, the Clinton administration's rules ordered the taxpayer-backed Fannie and Freddie to expand their quotas of risky loans from 30 percent of portfolio to 50 percent as part of a big push to expand home ownership.

Fannie and Freddie were securitizing these home loans and offering 100 percent taxpayer guarantees of repayment. So now taxpayers were on the hook for these risky, low down-payment loans.

Kudlow: Are the Clintons the real housing crash villains?

Lowering rates had nothing to do with the concept with a buyer proving they could meet payments. That as a bank decision.

Housing values were climbing. Mortgage sellers were selling $450K mortgages to people making $70K. They used no interest / balloon payment mortgages (non traditional) as a gimmick. Some buyers knew they could afford these initial lower payments but were concerned about that balloon payment. The mortgage sellers told them to just refinance when the time came. Unfortunately, House values started to decline & when those buyers went to remortgage, they couldn't & ended up defaulting.

That mortgage seller did not give a rat's ass about the validity of that mortgage he sold because he sold to investment companies who wrapped them up into Mortgage Based Securities, bought AAA ratings, & sold them to unknowing buyers.

That is what caused the problems.

I thought a self proclaimed economics expert like you would have known this.

This went back to years of banking & wall street deregulation pushed by Republicans.

If you think you are right then you an find proof the these CRA traditional, long term mortgages were prevalent in the default mortgages at a rate higher than their percentage of all mortgages.

Don't bother to look, because they weren't

'This " OMG OMG OMG CRA CRA CRA" crap pedaled by the moronic right is yet another attempt to hide the fact that Republicans just plain can not govern.

Proof is in the pudding:

If CRA loans caused the problem their defaults rates would be expected to be higher than private market subprime loans, but exactly opposite is true.

If CRA loans caused the problem

Looks like a 15% default rate.....that's a problem.

what the **** is wrong with you? DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market subprime market lending defaults?

THAT is the real problem, if they were merely 15% we probably wouldn't even have a recession, never mind Great Recession.

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

Instead of accounting for the evidence you keep repeating same COUNTER-FACTUAL position that it was CRA mortgages and not clearly inferior quality private market subprime that took us under.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Lowering rates had nothing to do with the concept with a buyer proving they could meet payments. That as a bank decision.

Housing values were climbing. Mortgage sellers were selling $450K mortgages to people making $70K. They used no interest / balloon payment mortgages (non traditional) as a gimmick. Some buyers knew they could afford these initial lower payments but were concerned about that balloon payment. The mortgage sellers told them to just refinance when the time came. Unfortunately, House values started to decline & when those buyers went to remortgage, they couldn't & ended up defaulting.

That mortgage seller did not give a rat's ass about the validity of that mortgage he sold because he sold to investment companies who wrapped them up into Mortgage Based Securities, bought AAA ratings, & sold them to unknowing buyers.

That is what caused the problems.

I thought a self proclaimed economics expert like you would have known this.

This went back to years of banking & wall street deregulation pushed by Republicans.

If you think you are right then you an find proof the these CRA traditional, long term mortgages were prevalent in the default mortgages at a rate higher than their percentage of all mortgages.

Don't bother to look, because they weren't

'This " OMG OMG OMG CRA CRA CRA" crap pedaled by the moronic right is yet another attempt to hide the fact that Republicans just plain can not govern.

Proof is in the pudding:

If CRA loans caused the problem their defaults rates would be expected to be higher than private market subprime loans, but exactly opposite is true.

If CRA loans caused the problem

Looks like a 15% default rate.....that's a problem.

what the **** is wrong with you? DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market subprime market lending defaults?

THAT is the real problem, if they were merely 15% we probably wouldn't even have a recession, never mind Great Recession.

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

Instead of accounting for the evidence you keep repeating same COUNTER-FACTUAL position that it was CRA mortgages and not clearly inferior quality private market subprime that took us under.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

It's true, the mandated demand for crappy mortgages by Fannie and Freddie was a much larger contributor than the mandated CRA crappy mortgages.

 

[francoHFW]

Proof is in the pudding:

If CRA loans caused the problem their defaults rates would be expected to be higher than private market subprime loans, but exactly opposite is true.

If CRA loans caused the problem

Looks like a 15% default rate.....that's a problem.

what the **** is wrong with you? DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market subprime market lending defaults?

THAT is the real problem, if they were merely 15% we probably wouldn't even have a recession, never mind Great Recession.

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

Instead of accounting for the evidence you keep repeating same COUNTER-FACTUAL position that it was CRA mortgages and not clearly inferior quality private market subprime that took us under.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

It's true, the mandated demand for crappy mortgages by Fannie and Freddie was a much larger contributor than the mandated CRA crappy mortgages.

funny how Fannie and Freddie's share of the market went down 60 70 per cent in 2003, eh dupe?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If CRA loans caused the problem

Looks like a 15% default rate.....that's a problem.

what the **** is wrong with you? DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market subprime market lending defaults?

THAT is the real problem, if they were merely 15% we probably wouldn't even have a recession, never mind Great Recession.

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

Instead of accounting for the evidence you keep repeating same COUNTER-FACTUAL position that it was CRA mortgages and not clearly inferior quality private market subprime that took us under.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

It's true, the mandated demand for crappy mortgages by Fannie and Freddie was a much larger contributor than the mandated CRA crappy mortgages.

funny how Fannie and Freddie's share of the market went down 60 70 per cent in 2003, eh dupe?

funny how Fannie and Freddie's share of the market went down 60 70 per cent in 2003

Anything to do with the Democrat accounting scandal at Fannie and Freddie? Moron.

Hey, lets buy a couple of hundred billion in crappy mortgages to get that share back up, eh?
What could go wrong?

 

[AntonToo]

what the **** is wrong with you? DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market subprime market lending defaults?

THAT is the real problem, if they were merely 15% we probably wouldn't even have a recession, never mind Great Recession.

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

Instead of accounting for the evidence you keep repeating same COUNTER-FACTUAL position that it was CRA mortgages and not clearly inferior quality private market subprime that took us under.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

It's true, the mandated demand for crappy mortgages by Fannie and Freddie was a much larger contributor than the mandated CRA crappy mortgages.

funny how Fannie and Freddie's share of the market went down 60 70 per cent in 2003, eh dupe?

funny how Fannie and Freddie's share of the market went down 60 70 per cent in 2003

Anything to do with the Democrat accounting scandal at Fannie and Freddie? Moron.

Hey, lets buy a couple of hundred billion in crappy mortgages to get that share back up, eh?
What could go wrong?

Amazing how you just MAKE BULLSHIT UP on the fly. Totally clueless tool.

In 2003 Bush admin was prodding GSEs to "keep up with the private market" in buying up Alt-A and subprime backed securities. and while they were market participators they ALWAYS made up a clear minority on the buy in:

 

[francoHFW]

what the **** is wrong with you? DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market subprime market lending defaults?

THAT is the real problem, if they were merely 15% we probably wouldn't even have a recession, never mind Great Recession.

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

Instead of accounting for the evidence you keep repeating same COUNTER-FACTUAL position that it was CRA mortgages and not clearly inferior quality private market subprime that took us under.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

It's true, the mandated demand for crappy mortgages by Fannie and Freddie was a much larger contributor than the mandated CRA crappy mortgages.

funny how Fannie and Freddie's share of the market went down 60 70 per cent in 2003, eh dupe?

funny how Fannie and Freddie's share of the market went down 60 70 per cent in 2003

Anything to do with the Democrat accounting scandal at Fannie and Freddie? Moron.

Hey, lets buy a couple of hundred billion in crappy mortgages to get that share back up, eh?
What could go wrong?

No. They got in late on the stupid GOP corruption...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

DO YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEE 40-50% default rates in private market

I see them right there in your chart.
A 15% default rate is no big deal?

Every market participator lost money on real estate collapse, but by far the biggest loss was stemming from private market origination, not lending under CRA.

Absolutely. CRA was only one factor of many that contributed.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

Instead of accounting for the evidence you keep repeating same COUNTER-FACTUAL position that it was CRA mortgages and not clearly inferior quality private market subprime that took us under.

Well if you SEE THEM, and are not intellectually impaired, then I don't understand what is keeping you from concluding that they were clearly the main contributors, with considerably poorer standards of underwriting and much bigger losses than mortgages issued under CRA program.

It's true, the mandated demand for crappy mortgages by Fannie and Freddie was a much larger contributor than the mandated CRA crappy mortgages.

funny how Fannie and Freddie's share of the market went down 60 70 per cent in 2003, eh dupe?

funny how Fannie and Freddie's share of the market went down 60 70 per cent in 2003

Anything to do with the Democrat accounting scandal at Fannie and Freddie? Moron.

Hey, lets buy a couple of hundred billion in crappy mortgages to get that share back up, eh?
What could go wrong?

Amazing how you just MAKE BULLSHIT UP on the fly. Totally clueless tool.

In 2003 Bush admin was prodding GSEs to "keep up with the private market" in buying up Alt-A and subprime backed securities. and while they were market participators they ALWAYS made up a clear minority on the buy in:

Amazing how you just MAKE BULLSHIT UP on the fly.

Really? What did I make up?

In 2003 Bush admin was prodding GSEs to "keep up with the private market" in buying up Alt-A and subprime backed securities.

Yup. Clinton and Bush pushed them to load up on crap.

His (Barney Frank) most successful effort was to impose what were called "affordable housing" requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 1992. Before that time, these two government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) had been required to buy only mortgages that institutional investors would buy--in other words, prime mortgages--but Frank and others thought these standards made it too difficult for low income borrowers to buy homes. The affordable housing law required Fannie and Freddie to meet government quotas when they bought loans from banks and other mortgage originators.

At first, this quota was 30%; that is, of all the loans they bought, 30% had to be made to people at or below the median income in their communities. HUD, however, was given authority to administer these quotas, and between 1992 and 2007, the quotas were raised from 30% to 50% under Clinton in 2000 and to 55% under Bush in 2007. Despite Frank's effort to make this seem like a partisan issue, it isn't. The Bush administration was just as guilty of this error as the Clinton administration. And Frank is right to say that he eventually saw his error and corrected it when he got the power to do so in 2007, but by then it was too late.


and while they were market participators they ALWAYS made up a clear minority on the buy in:

A minority that totaled over $1 trillion by 2002.

It is certainly possible to find prime mortgages among borrowers below the median income, but when half or more of the mortgages the GSEs bought had to be made to people below that income level, it was inevitable that underwriting standards had to decline. And they did. By 2000, Fannie was offering no-downpayment loans. By 2002, Fannie and Freddie had bought well over $1 trillion of subprime and other low quality loans. Fannie and Freddie were by far the largest part of this effort, but the FHA, Federal Home Loan Banks, Veterans Administration and other agencies--all under congressional and HUD pressure--followed suit. This continued through the 1990s and 2000s until the housing bubble--created by all this government-backed spending--collapsed in 2007. As a result, in 2008, before the mortgage meltdown that triggered the crisis, there were 27 million subprime and other low quality mortgages in the US financial system. That was half of all mortgages. Of these, over 70% (19.2 million) were on the books of government agencies like Fannie and Freddie, so there is no doubt that the government created the demand for these weak loans; less than 30% (7.8 million) were held or distributed by the banks, which profited from the opportunity created by the government.

Hey, Barney Frank: The Government Did Cause the Housing Crisis