Who Causes US Recessions?

[pknopp]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

 

[Mac1958]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

It would be interesting to see what would have happened then, if this new version of capitalism had been in place.

The government may have stepped in and backstopped the mortgage companies or something.

The all-powerful federal government and the all-purchasing Federal Reserve. Capitalism 2.0, huh?

 

[pknopp]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

It would be interesting to see what would have happened then, if this new version of capitalism had been in place.

The government may have stepped in and backstopped the mortgage companies or something.

The all-powerful federal government and the all-purchasing Federal Reserve. Capitalism 2.0, huh?

It kinda was. We enacted HARP under Obama. No one actually paid for that. It was supposed to be used by the banks to help people upside down in their loans to refinance and keep their loans.

That's not what happened though. The banks foreclosed and used the HARP money to "pay back" TARP.

All as corrupt as can be.

Capitalism.

 

[Mac1958]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

It would be interesting to see what would have happened then, if this new version of capitalism had been in place.

The government may have stepped in and backstopped the mortgage companies or something.

The all-powerful federal government and the all-purchasing Federal Reserve. Capitalism 2.0, huh?

It kinda was. We enacted HARP under Obama. No one actually paid for that. It was supposed to be used by the banks to help people upside down in their loans to refinance and keep their loans.

That's not what happened though. The banks foreclosed and used the HARP money to "pay back" TARP.

All as corrupt as can be.

Capitalism.

Sure, and a shitload of crap mortgage-backed securities were snapped up and later unwound -- the beginning of Capitalism 2.0.

I just wonder if it would be more blatant today.

 

[there4eyeM]

All this shows that "capitalism" is merely an approach to exchange of human interests. The system has immense flaws and potential for harm. Hundreds of years ago, in its beginnings, it was certainly a step ahead for people and progress. We have learned that it must be mastered, fettered, controlled or it becomes worse than vicious.
Stating this does not infer any endorsement of any other proposed system, and definitely not "Marxism" as it has been known.
I have seen it said, "If socialists understood economics, they wouldn't be socialists."
It could well be put that if economists understood economics, they would be psychologists.

 

[pknopp]

All this shows that "capitalism" is merely an approach to exchange of human interests. The system has immense flaws and potential for harm. Hundreds of years ago, in its beginnings, it was certainly a step ahead for people and progress. We have learned that it must be mastered, fettered, controlled or it becomes worse than vicious.
Stating this does not infer any endorsement of any other proposed system, and definitely not "Marxism" as it has been known.
I have seen it said, "If socialists understood economics, they wouldn't be socialists."
It could well be put that if economists understood economics, they would be psychologists.

Right up until everything crashed Bernanke was telling us that everything was fine.

Then what happened. It all crashed and he kept his job.

Corruption defined.

People can argue that Capitalism is a great system but the problem is, it's not actually practiced anywhere.

 

[Dragonlady]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

There were a LOT of problems with the mortgage lending that all but assured the collapse of the housing market. One was actual sub-prime lending. Lending money to people who really couldn't afford it, and had no down payment - no skin in the game. They lost nothing in walking away when the shit hit the fan.

W had a firm belief in home ownership but the percentage of Americans who own their homes has been declining for decades. There are a lot of really good reasons why home ownership helps the economy, builds wealth for working people, and is good for the communities, the home owners and the country. It was a major policy of his administration.

Record of Achievement - Expanding Home Ownership

georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov

There were two major reasons for the depth of the housing collapse:

1. The mortgages offered a 2 year low/no interest mortgage, with the interest rate fixed after two years. On a $300,000 mortgage at 0.5% the monthly interest is $125. Two years later, that same $300,000 mortgage interest is now $1000 per month. An $875 per month difference. Many people who were marginal on the lower interest rates, were flattened by the new rate and couldn't afford the payments.

2. When the bubble burst, those who bought at the height of the market, found themselves owing tens of thousands of dollars more than the property was now worth. If you owe a $200,000 mortgage and your house is only worth $125,000, what's the point?

There were over one million foreclosures. The government bailed out the banks, and the lenders who profitted from the housing collapse. But the millions of Americans who were harmed by these practices, were left with nothing.

Every time the economy has collapsed under Republican governments, Republicans bail out the corporations and the wealthy - too big to fail. But the American workers aren't bailed out. Giving money to the workers is a "disincentive" to them finding work, according to Republicans. The result is that with every crash, more and more wealth is transferred from working Americans to the wealthy and big corporations.

While working Americans are lining up at food banks, the top 10% have seen their wealth increase by more than a trillion dollars in this pandemic. Three economic crashes in the past 40 years, have left the American worker broke, sick, and increasingly desperate.

 

[pknopp]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

There were a LOT of problems with the mortgage lending that all but assured the collapse of the housing market. One was actual sub-prime lending. Lending money to people who really couldn't afford it, and had no down payment - no skin in the game. They lost nothing in walking away when the shit hit the fan.

W had a firm belief in home ownership but the percentage of Americans who own their homes has been declining for decades. There are a lot of really good reasons why home ownership helps the economy, builds wealth for working people, and is good for the communities, the home owners and the country. It was a major policy of his administration.

Record of Achievement - Expanding Home Ownership

georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov

There were two major reasons for the depth of the housing collapse:

1. The mortgages offered a 2 year low/no interest mortgage, with the interest rate fixed after two years. On a $300,000 mortgage at 0.5% the monthly interest is $125. Two years later, that same $300,000 mortgage interest is now $1000 per month. An $875 per month difference. Many people who were marginal on the lower interest rates, were flattened by the new rate and couldn't afford the payments.

2. When the bubble burst, those who bought at the height of the market, found themselves owing tens of thousands of dollars more than the property was now worth. If you owe a $200,000 mortgage and your house is only worth $125,000, what's the point?

There were over one million foreclosures. The government bailed out the banks, and the lenders who profitted from the housing collapse. But the millions of Americans who were harmed by these practices, were left with nothing.

Every time the economy has collapsed under Republican governments, Republicans bail out the corporations and the wealthy - too big to fail. But the American workers aren't bailed out. Giving money to the workers is a "disincentive" to them finding work, according to Republicans. The result is that with every crash, more and more wealth is transferred from working Americans to the wealthy and big corporations.

While working Americans are lining up at food banks, the top 10% have seen their wealth increase by more than a trillion dollars in this pandemic. Three economic crashes in the past 40 years, have left the American worker broke, sick, and increasingly desperate.

Obama did the same thing. Here is the disconnect with the vast majority of people.

When I condemn Obama for something, many jump thinking I am defending the Republicans. I am not.

Many who want to condemn the Republicans refuse to condemn Obama for the same thing (and yes it works the other way around)

Wrong is wrong is wrong no matter who did it. This mess is a creation of BOTH parties.

I hold Obama more at fault because I expected so much more out of him. I dont expect anything from Trump.

 

[edthecynic]

. You credit Reagan for a recession when it only took him two years to get out of the Peanut Man's recession.

Carter's recession was the shortest in history and ended long before the St Ronnie regime.
You revisionists are terrible liars!

 

[edthecynic]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

Before Bush all CRA loans required down payments and good credit. Bush gave no down payment loans to people with bad credit.

 

[pknopp]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

Before Bush all CRA loans required down payments and good credit. Bush gave no down payment loans to people with bad credit.

I got a FHA loan in 1985. Zero down. Working two minimum wage jobs.

 

[Aldo Raine]

1797
> 1857PIERCE DEMOCRAT
> 1873GRANT REPUBLICAN
> 1893HARRISON REPUBLICAN
> 1907 T ROOSEVELT REPUBLIC
> 1929–38 (The Great Depression) FDR DEMOCRAT
> 1945Truman DEM
> 1949 TrumanDEM
> 1953 Eisenhower REP
> 1957 EisenhowerREP
> 1960 Kennedy DEM
> 1970 Nixon REP
> 1973–75CarterDEM
> 1980–82 Reagan REP
> 1990–91 ClintonDEMOCRAT
> 2001GW Bush REPUB
> 2008–09 ObamaDEM
>
>
> 7 REPUBLICANS, 7 DEMOCRATS

17 Recessions in U.S. History

Democrats like to claim more recessions happen under Republican presidents than under Democrats. Above is the tally since 1857.

Looks like party does not make any difference.

Lies, all lies!
The great GOP depression was started by Hover REP, FDR was not president in 1929, 1929 was Hover's first year in office, FDR did not take office until 1933.

Eisenhower owns the 1960 recession, Kennedy did not take office until Jan 20 1961, the Eisenhower recession ended Feb 1961.

Carter didn't take office until 1977, so Ford and Nixon own the 1973-1975 recession.

Clinton didn't take office until 1993, so Bush I owns the 1990-1991 recession.

The Great BUSH Recession began Dec 2007, Obama didn't become president until 2009.

BTW, Buchanan was president in 1857.

Wait ...Viktor was lying?

Recessions that began before Dems took office were credited to those Dems by Viktor?

Oh noooooes.

A lying Republican!

Imagine that

JFC, is there any other kind?

 

[lennypartiv]

People like Dr. Fauci cause recessions.

 

[edthecynic]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

Before Bush all CRA loans required down payments and good credit. Bush gave no down payment loans to people with bad credit.

I got a FHA loan in 1985. Zero down. Working two minimum wage jobs.

Are you black and did you have bad credit?

 

[pknopp]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

Before Bush all CRA loans required down payments and good credit. Bush gave no down payment loans to people with bad credit.

I got a FHA loan in 1985. Zero down. Working two minimum wage jobs.

Are you black and did you have bad credit?

.


I mostly had no credit and your stereotyping of loans is a huge part of the problem.

People of all races and income classes defaulted on loans. Spec builders built expensive neighborhoods and walked away from them.

 

[Lesh]

FDR wasn't sworn in until '32 with a promise to end the recession that evolved into the "Great Depression" in three terms. Democrats still love the big jerk though. You credit Reagan for a recession when it only took him two years to get out of the Peanut Man's recession.

It had BEEN a Depression for three years by that point

 

[AntonToo]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

Before Bush all CRA loans required down payments and good credit. Bush gave no down payment loans to people with bad credit.

??? CRA loans with no downpayment?

Got link? I'm pretty sure CRA has always had higher loan requirements.

 

[edthecynic]

For example, the 2008 sub-prime crash, can be traced straight to 1997, when the government forced banks to make bad loans, and at the same time, guaranteed bad loans through Freddie Mac.

Pure BULLSHIT!

They did not force bad loans. They did guarantee bad loans. The banks were happy to oblige. It was a part of a quid pro quo. The banks got restrictions removed and in return they made loans that the government backed.

They were NOT bad loans, as the data proves, they were loans to QUALIFIED buyers. It was BUSH who made the bad no downpayment loans to to unqualified buyers with bad credit for more than the property was worth.
but you knew that already.

I noted that many of the loans that went bad were not actually bad loans. Many people could have kept their houses if not for the corrupt banks and system.

Before Bush all CRA loans required down payments and good credit. Bush gave no down payment loans to people with bad credit.

??? CRA loans with no downpayment?

Got link? I'm pretty sure CRA has always had higher loan requirements.

Read again!

 

[Meister]

1797
> 1857PIERCE DEMOCRAT
> 1873GRANT REPUBLICAN
> 1893HARRISON REPUBLICAN
> 1907 T ROOSEVELT REPUBLIC
> 1929–38 (The Great Depression) FDR DEMOCRAT
> 1945Truman DEM
> 1949 TrumanDEM
> 1953 Eisenhower REP
> 1957 EisenhowerREP
> 1960 Kennedy DEM
> 1970 Nixon REP
> 1973–75CarterDEM
> 1980–82 Reagan REP
> 1990–91 ClintonDEMOCRAT
> 2001GW Bush REPUB
> 2008–09 ObamaDEM
>
>
> 7 REPUBLICANS, 7 DEMOCRATS

17 Recessions in U.S. History

Democrats like to claim more recessions happen under Republican presidents than under Democrats. Above is the tally since 1857.

Looks like party does not make any difference.

WHO caused US the recession. Seems it's going to be a very short-lived one.

You have to also look to the House and the Senate. Bush jr. had a rise in jobs and the economy for 6 and one half years. It wasn't till pelosi and her criminals took over the House and started messing with minimum wages is when the jobs and economy went in the toilet. When Frank, Dobbs, and obama could no longer cover for the criminals of Fanny May the top 3 criminals took $250 million in bonuses. The court made them give half of it back and they say crime doesn't pay. There is also the stock market. When a Republican is elected the market always goes up. A democrat it always goes down. When obama was elected for the first time in my life I and every construction worker in this state didn't have a job. It lasted one and a half years and his whole term saw work part time at best.

I'll go by what I have lived through. democrats couldn't create a job to save their live. With in two weeks Trump turned it around Houses are going up everywhere. A VA hospital has gone up down the street. These builders have even bought up lots left over from old housing tracks. With all the tilt ups going up it's been back to over time. for a few years now. This virus hasn't effected my work at all.

Pure BULLSHIT!

Democrats do in fact create jobs - government jobs. The problem is they don;t create wealth.

At Tramp's peak employment before the Trump-45 virus Tramp employed ~1.5 million more government workers than when Obama left office

I don't know how anyone can take you serious with throwing out facts, and making up other ones, Ed. just an observation

 

[sartre play]

Best thing heard today. Both party's suck.