This could have been done by not repealing Glass-Stegall and regulating the shadow banking system. It's a bit ironic that the President and his Administration were so worried about the systematic risk posed by GSEs---where the hell were they with shoddy private MBS, and insurers handing out OTC derivatives like they were candy?
I meant your copious cut and paste campaign from propaganda websites, of unreadable lengths, with huuuge sized videos that blow out the pages, have rendered you into joke status. I don't read them, I don't think many people read them, I don't watch your videos, I don't think many people watch your videos. You've posted yourself into irrelevancy, you never comment with personal insight or conviction, which is what an intimate scale political bulletin board is about; the why's and interaction of personality. I don't think I have actually ever learned anything from any of your posts like I do from Northside and Franchise ... of course now I won't. But if you will stop posting cut and pastes as a rule and just say I read this "...." and I think it means this "....." because "...." (put a little work and personality in it) I will at least give you the 30 seconds it takes to read it.
I agree their role was much smaller in causing the meltdown. Still, forgive me for being unable to muster up much support in their defense. I believe we've we've already paid out something like $150 billion keeping them alive. And you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Wall Street has at paid back the bailout money. It's unclear if Fannie or Freddie ever will.
Agreed with him on a lot of things. Disagreed with him on some major issues. I'm indifferent to this. He's probably one of the better representatives in Congress. I hold him in higher regard than most of the other ****heads on capital hill.
Spare me. For most of that timeline, Republicans controlled the WH, Senate, and House. And hey, I've got a timeline too! At the same time... And yes, let's set the record straight... In case you missed it, there was an entire political campaign ginned up by Rove and his minions that was based on the idea that if people had more property they would vote Republican. The push by the Bush Administration to get more people into homes was a policy directly influenced by these political thoughts, solid financial practices be damned. And who warned against it as soon as it happened? Why one Barney Frank.
its cool to be gay when you're a conservative its cool to be black when you're a conservative its cool to be hispanic when you're a conservative its cool to be a woman when you're a conservative the list goes on and on
His posts in GARM are almost always top notch. It's just when he comes into D&D he goes into troll mode.
Nah. A quarter of his GARM posts in the last year were in the "Glen Rice banged Sarah Palin" thread. He doesn't discriminate.
Wall Street caused the crisis. Sloppy private MBS underwriting and nice tricks with interest rates directly pressured GSEs to sloppier underwrting standards themselves. CRA-regulated loans were largely safer, and not the ones under default. At one point, something like 55% of commercial loans were underwater, and CRA isn't even implicated in that! Which is all to say, if you want to see why Freddie, and Fannie failed, look no further than the crappy private mortgages sold by Goldman et al. Insofar that you can say that the banks paid back TARP---well, they haven't come close to paying back for one of the largest destructions of wealth in history---and that includes the bailouts to Freddie and Fannie.
Nope. Bush absolutley did have an "ownership" initiative that was based on the wingnut idea that if people had more property they would vote Republican. Part of that was giving people zero-down home loans. W's Weekly Radio Address, June 15, 2002 W's remarks at signing of the American Dream Downpayment Act: <iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/kNqQx7sjoS8?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> From the Business Section: The whole article is worth reading and some of the parts I left out shed light on someof the other discussions in this thread.
rimrocker shutting basso down. It's questionable if ever comes back to this thread now. If he does he certainly won't address all the facts rimrocker posted. I wish there would be real debate and discussion instead of basso's paid little misinformation propaganda tour.
so, the argument is Bush's goals as articulated in 2002 caused the housing crisis, yet Bawney Frank's in 2003 could not have caused it, since it was too long before 2008? you're a very clever fellow. oh, and the bit about Bush adopting a rovian strategy via the housing market is pure NYTimes editorializing via their news pages, and it's sad to see you're unable of sorting actual news from partisan BS.
