Unexpectedly: The New York Times discovers that many don’t have to work in the age of Obama

[francoHFW]

Bush regulators didn't change the rules, they just looked the other way while private lenders sold toxic mortgages to the unworthy. It took several years for them to blow up, so rule changes in 2008 were irrelevant. F+F share of bad loans were 25%- look at the bail out figures, and they got in late for the festivities, and many of their loans wouldn't have gone belly up without the SECOND corrupt world depression. Your US News article going after F+F without mentioning all that is ridiculous corporate twaddle, same bs as the networks. Fox, Rush etc is just lies, dupes...

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Bush regulators didn't change the rules, they just looked the other way while private lenders sold toxic mortgages to the unworthy. It took several years for them to blow up, so rule changes in 2008 were irrelevant. F+F share of bad loans were 25%- look at the bail out figures, and they got in late for the festivities, and many of their loans wouldn't have gone belly up without the SECOND corrupt world depression. Your US News article going after F+F without mentioning all that is ridiculous corporate twaddle, same bs as the networks. Fox, Rush etc is just lies, dupes...

Bush tried repeatedly to warn about the danger of so many risky loans being bundles and sold as financial instruments. So did John McCain. Let's not pretend like Republicans were in on this, because this was a Democrat project from start to blow up.

 

[francoHFW]

Were we heading in the right direction when we were losing 800,000 jobs a month under Bush?

An utterly stupid question, is that supposed to be some Bush vs Obama libtard talking point or something?

22.7 million jobs created under Clinton

1.1 million under Bush

However, at the end of Bush's term, we were losing close to 800,000 jobs per month. You do the math...

I bet you're silly enough to think that the financial meltdown caused by Fanny and Freddie, which was authored, operated, and defended exclusively by Democrats, had nothing to do with it. No, it has to be Bush's fault. You Leftists can lie to yourselves, but you can't lie to us. Did you see the last election?

Considering F+F's share of the market went from 75% to 25% in 2003 when when corrupt Booosh cronies like Countrywide and AIG took over, it's clear you're a brainwashed functional moron. Read something.

BTW, by 2003 it was already too late. As early as 2001 there were economists asking in fact begging the House and Senate Banking Chairs to look into the runaway lending.
Chris Dodd, Mel Watt, Maxine Watters and Barney Frank all pooh poohed the notion that anything was wrong and that it was more important to keep going down this road....Because of political expepdience

BS- Pubs have been whining about F+F forever duh. 75% of the bailouts were for companies that weren't it til 2003. Idiocy.

 

[francoHFW]

Bush regulators didn't change the rules, they just looked the other way while private lenders sold toxic mortgages to the unworthy. It took several years for them to blow up, so rule changes in 2008 were irrelevant. F+F share of bad loans were 25%- look at the bail out figures, and they got in late for the festivities, and many of their loans wouldn't have gone belly up without the SECOND corrupt world depression. Your US News article going after F+F without mentioning all that is ridiculous corporate twaddle, same bs as the networks. Fox, Rush etc is just lies, dupes...

Bush tried repeatedly to warn about the danger of so many risky loans being bundles and sold as financial instruments. So did John McCain. Let's not pretend like Republicans were in on this, because this was a Democrat project from start to blow up.

BS. He and Pubs were bragging about how many new homeowners there were. Back to SNL, Pub dupes.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Bush regulators didn't change the rules, they just looked the other way while private lenders sold toxic mortgages to the unworthy. It took several years for them to blow up, so rule changes in 2008 were irrelevant. F+F share of bad loans were 25%- look at the bail out figures, and they got in late for the festivities, and many of their loans wouldn't have gone belly up without the SECOND corrupt world depression. Your US News article going after F+F without mentioning all that is ridiculous corporate twaddle, same bs as the networks. Fox, Rush etc is just lies, dupes...

Bush tried repeatedly to warn about the danger of so many risky loans being bundles and sold as financial instruments. So did John McCain. Let's not pretend like Republicans were in on this, because this was a Democrat project from start to blow up.

BS. He and Pubs were bragging about how many new homeowners there were. Back to SNL, Pub dupes.

So you're denying that Bush and McCain tried repeatedly to warn about the dangers of financial instruments consisting of risky loans? I just want to make sure you're stupid enough to say that for the record.

 

[Stephanie]

Democrats were WARNED of Financial crisis and did NOTHING

Uploaded on Sep 25, 2008

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Stephanie!

I wanted to wait until they actually said that Bush and McCain didn't try to warn what would happen.

 

[Stephanie]

Stephanie!

I wanted to wait until they actually said that Bush and McCain didn't try to warn what would happen.

oh darn. so sorry
but they won't care they'll still spread that lie around

 

[francoHFW]

It was way too late by then duh, and just the usual going after F+F, though they were only 25% of the market after dominating for years. LOOK AT THE BAILOUTS. Ay caramba!

 

[Stephanie]

The Democrats Responsible for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

 

[Spare_change]

Bush regulators didn't change the rules, they just looked the other way while private lenders sold toxic mortgages to the unworthy. It took several years for them to blow up, so rule changes in 2008 were irrelevant. F+F share of bad loans were 25%- look at the bail out figures, and they got in late for the festivities, and many of their loans wouldn't have gone belly up without the SECOND corrupt world depression. Your US News article going after F+F without mentioning all that is ridiculous corporate twaddle, same bs as the networks. Fox, Rush etc is just lies, dupes...

Read the text again ---- they proposed changes, and the Dem Congress shot them down. Maybe you remember .that, in 2008 alone, the Bush administration proposed changes to the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac charters SEVENTEEN times, and every time, the Democratic Congress refused.

Maybe you also remember:

"Congressman Frank, of course, blamed the financial crisis on the failure adequately to regulate the banks. In this, he is following the traditional Washington practice of blaming others for his own mistakes. For most of his career, Barney Frank was the principal advocate in Congress for using the government's authority to force lower underwriting standards in the business of housing finance. Although he claims to have tried to reverse course as early as 2003, that was the year he made the oft-quoted remark, "I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing." Rather than reversing course, he was pressing on when others were beginning to have doubts."

"His 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."

"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. When these mortgages failed in unprecedented numbers in 2008, driving down housing prices throughout the U.S., they weakened all financial institutions and caused the financial crisis."

"In an interview on Larry Kudlow's show in August 2010, he said "I hope by next year we'll have abolished Fannie and Freddie ... it was a great mistake to push lower-income people into housing they couldn't afford and couldn't really handle once they had it."

"Of the 19.2 million subprime and low quality loans that were on the books of government agencies in 2008, 12 million (about 62%) were held or guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie."

Hey Barney Frank The Government Did Cause the Housing Crisis - The Atlantic

-----------------------------

THIS is how you use facts to make your point ... you don't pout, you don't yell, you don't use obscenities, and you don't call people names. Let the facts speak for themselves.

 

[francoHFW]

F+F had little to do with it, brainwashed functional shytteheads. Look at the bailouts. DUH

 

[Spare_change]

F+F had little to do with it, brainwashed functional shytteheads. Look at the bailouts. DUH

Wow! What a succinct, fact-filled refutation of the supposition.

Oh yeah ... name calling? How immature.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

That's all he has left. He is not in possession of the facts.

 

[Billy000]

You know it's not that I don't consider this working participation problem a significant one, it's that I think it is completely stupid the rightwing thinks it's all that matters. You people think it alone serves as proof the economy is bad.

Hey guess what is apparent about the economy under Obama? Over 10 million private jobs have been created. The stock market is doing better now more than ever. Just admit it: if we had a republican president right now you would not even be talking about this issue. You would harp on the facts I just told you.

There are multiple reasons for the labor participation being low and food stamps is not the reason. It is because of more people retiring, going on disability, and yes, discouragement from working. However, people are discouraged from working because wages are too low. Obama tried to fix that by raising the minimum wage.

Oh and let's not forget that this stat has been declining since before Obama was president. Where was your outrage then?

 

[Listening]

F+F had little to do with it, brainwashed functional shytteheads. Look at the bailouts. DUH

STFU Frankie....

Meet me in the bullring....asswipe coward.

 

[Listening]

Tortured logic at its finest ....

I admire and respect your "opinion". It's called the real world, ignorant dupe. Any actual argument? Give us the talking point or a stupid insult...

Ok ... allow me to show you the many flaws in your logic. Just remember, you asked for this ...

Dems made it possible for poor and minorities, -

If you look at history, which you apparently didn't, you will see that, you're right. Dems made it possible for the poor and minorities to get mortgages they couldn't ever afford. They did this legislative pressure applied, primarily by Barney Franks and Chris Dodd. The Dems, 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 home ownership among minorities and the poor. Affirmative-action policies trumped sound business practices. A manual issued by the Federal Reserve Bank advised mortgage lenders to disregard financial common sense. "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.

corrupt Pub regulators made ANYONE including the UNEMPLOYED lol eligible for SCAM mortgages.

For this inanity, I'll just quote US News & World Report -

"Seventeen. That's how many times, according to this White House statement (hat tip Gateway Pundit), that the Bush administration has called for tighter regulation of the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congress has cooperated only once. In spring 2007, as House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank likes to point out, the House did pass a bill in response. The Senate did not act until 2008; Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd spent most of 2007 camped out in Iowa running for president. The legislation passed by Congress in 2008 enabled Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to put Fannie and Freddie into federal conservatorship this summer when they failed. But it didn't prevent them from spewing a huge amount of toxic waste, in the form of subprime and Alt-A mortgages, into our financial institutions from 2004 to 2007. As Stephen Spruiell points out in The Corner on National Review Online, Fannie and Freddie spewed out $1 trillion worth (face value) of subprime mortgages between 2005 and 2007. That's a whole lot of toxic waste. For more detail, consult the items referred to in my previous blogpost on this subject (most of the comments seem to have been disputes about the plot line of the movie It's a Wonderful Life, which I should think could be settled by consulting a reference work).

Much if not all of that could have been prevented by a bill cosponsored by John McCain and supported by all the Republicans and opposed by all the Democrats in the Senate Banking Committee in 2005. That bill, which the Democrats stopped from passing, would have prohibited the GSEs from speculating on the mortgage-based securities they packaged. The GSEs' mission allegedly justifying their quasi-governmental status was to package or securitize such mortgages, but the lion's share of their profits—which determined top executives' bonuses—came from speculation."

Democrats Were Wrong on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - US News

And, as for your last comment:

How's the weather on your planet, brainwashed dupes?

Yeah ---- how IS the weather on your planet? (Hint: This is where you start attacking me, calling me a racist and Republican shill because THESE are facts - indisputable facts - and you really have no other choice).

F+F's share of the market went from 75% to 25% in 2003, and they didn't get in on the action until late, under Pub pressure. Pubs always screw with them and try to end them, never went after their pals in private lending who changed the rules. US News is a bought off, cowardly corporate POS like the networks who've never reported who was at fault, dupe. Only 50%+ of dupes are racists. Maybe you're alright. It's not ALWAYS racism...

Can we keep racism out of this subject? I am sure 80% of blacks are just as racist.

You'll see I didn't bring it up. BTW, racism is defined as belief that another race is INFERIOR and discriminating against them.

Hey Frankie....

He answered your request for an argument.

He presented facts. Where are you : Nowhere.

Your stupid assed 50 word vocabulary and two line posts significantly increase the probability you are NOT a teacher and are instead some type of institutional moron.

 

[Listening]

F+F had little to do with it, brainwashed functional shytteheads. Look at the bailouts. DUH

Your family crest probably looks like the stain on used toilet paper.

You are worthless.

 

[Listening]

Bush regulators didn't change the rules, they just looked the other way while private lenders sold toxic mortgages to the unworthy. It took several years for them to blow up, so rule changes in 2008 were irrelevant. F+F share of bad loans were 25%- look at the bail out figures, and they got in late for the festivities, and many of their loans wouldn't have gone belly up without the SECOND corrupt world depression. Your US News article going after F+F without mentioning all that is ridiculous corporate twaddle, same bs as the networks. Fox, Rush etc is just lies, dupes...

Bush tried repeatedly to warn about the danger of so many risky loans being bundles and sold as financial instruments. So did John McCain. Let's not pretend like Republicans were in on this, because this was a Democrat project from start to blow up.

BS. He and Pubs were bragging about how many new homeowners there were. Back to SNL, Pub dupes.

Link ? Can you please stop with the horsecrap and back up your moron posts ?

PLEASE.

 

[Listening]

It was way too late by then duh, and just the usual going after F+F, though they were only 25% of the market after dominating for years. LOOK AT THE BAILOUTS. Ay caramba!

What about them ? What numbers have you provided ? None.

You are one sad sorry partisan stain on America.