Who's to blame for the "Financial Collapse"?

[wdb]

Right wing radio wants you to think Obama is somehow to blame for the "Financial Collapse".

Well, here's a clip from George W. Bush's final press conference, as President Of The United States.... January 12th, 2009

You should take his word for it..

http://www.worlddatabase.com/mywatch.mov

Now sure, you can blame the congress, or bankers, or the Community Reinvestment Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act), but the buck stops at the top.... and for 8 years, GW was, I'd like to be nice and say, asleep at the wheel, but that would be too nice. The devil is in the details, and a president disinterested in the details is a National Security Threat!

Ignorance (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ignorance) and complacency (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/complacency) should be impeachable offenses!

[Clip]

Right wing radio wants you to think Obama is somehow to blame for the "Financial Collapse".

Well, here's a clip from George W. Bush's final press conference, as President Of The United States.... January 12th, 2009

You should take his word for it..

http://www.worlddatabase.com/mywatch.mov

Now sure, you can blame the congress, or bankers, or the Community Reinvestment Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act), but the buck stops at the top.... and for 8 years, GW was, I'd like to be nice and say, asleep at the wheel, but that would be too nice. The devil is in the details, and a president disinterested in the details is a National Security Threat!

Ignorance (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ignorance) and complacency (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/complacency) should be impeachable offenses!


:rolleyes:

[Reform2009]

Right wing radio wants you to think Obama is somehow to blame for the "Financial Collapse".

Well, here's a clip from George W. Bush's final press conference, as President Of The United States.... January 12th, 2009

You should take his word for it..

http://www.worlddatabase.com/mywatch.mov

Now sure, you can blame the congress, or bankers, or the Community Reinvestment Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act), but the buck stops at the top.... and for 8 years, GW was, I'd like to be nice and say, asleep at the wheel, but that would be too nice. The devil is in the details, and a president disinterested in the details is a National Security Threat!

Ignorance (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ignorance) and complacency (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/complacency) should be impeachable offenses!

Bush spread the fuel and Obama ignited it.

[mboncher]

Right wing radio wants you to think Obama is somehow to blame for the "Financial Collapse".

Well, here's a clip from George W. Bush's final press conference, as President Of The United States.... January 12th, 2009

You should take his word for it..

http://www.worlddatabase.com/mywatch.mov

Now sure, you can blame the congress, or bankers, or the Community Reinvestment Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act), but the buck stops at the top.... and for 8 years, GW was, I'd like to be nice and say, asleep at the wheel, but that would be too nice. The devil is in the details, and a president disinterested in the details is a National Security Threat!

Ignorance (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ignorance) and complacency (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/complacency) should be impeachable offenses!
And blaming it all on Bush isn't any less ignorant?

Hy-po-cri-sy. After all, it's Obama's mess now and the buck stops at the top. :rolleyes:

[Studebaker_Hawk]

Bush spread the fuel and Obama ignited it.

Ignited? It want an inferno when Obama was elected.

[mboncher]

No, it was a small fire when Obama found it with the potential to become big. Obama's Porkulus bill has made it a raging forest fire of bad news. 30% total loss on the market since taking office, and talking about the Porkulus bailouts? Yeah, the Dow shows signs of confidence or mistrust quick.

[Studebaker_Hawk]

No, it was a small fire when Obama found it with the potential to become big. Obama's Porkulus bill has made it a raging forest fire of bad news. 30% total loss on the market since taking office, and talking about the Porkulus bailouts? Yeah, the Dow shows signs of confidence or mistrust quick.

What are you talking about? The banks needed to be shored up before he was even elected.

[ChrisSpencer]

Right wing radio wants you to think Obama is somehow to blame for the "Financial Collapse".

Well, here's a clip from George W. Bush's final press conference, as President Of The United States.... January 12th, 2009

You should take his word for it..

http://www.worlddatabase.com/mywatch.mov

Now sure, you can blame the congress, or bankers, or the Community Reinvestment Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act), but the buck stops at the top.... and for 8 years, GW was, I'd like to be nice and say, asleep at the wheel, but that would be too nice. The devil is in the details, and a president disinterested in the details is a National Security Threat!

Ignorance (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ignorance) and complacency (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/complacency) should be impeachable offenses!

You should read a book called "Manias, Panics and Crashes" by the economist Charles Kindleberger.

it will change your perspective and stop your monday night quarterbacking.

[LoudAnimalAttack]

The Federal Reserve - 'nuff said.

[burt23]

its when stupid meets greedy.

[spinach]

blame:

liberals and liberal policy, beginning with FDR.

including Carter, Clinton
and the democraps in the congress.

in addition some blame to Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner.

[Reform2009]

blame:

Liberals and liberal policy, beginning with fdr.

Including carter, clinton
and the democraps in the congress.

In addition some blame to bernanke, paulson, geithner.

you forgot obama

[Tigerdrafted]

It all started with trying to do more good for all the people who wouldn't otherwise qualify for a home mortgage. It was out of control when it seemed too good to be true. Imagine that you can go from a slum house in Compton to a 550,000 home with a playboy mansion style swimming hole and you don't even have to make the payments because you can just keep refinancing as long as you don't spend more than the rate of appreciation.

Bush and McCain were on record to try and shut it down. Barny Frank was on video accusing them of being against poor people getting into homes. I watched that. He definitely gets the blame.

The people to blame are the holly-er than thou liberal crowed that the government should do anything to even things out for everyone.

[Studebaker_Hawk]

It all started with trying to do more good for all the people who wouldn't otherwise qualify for a home mortgage. It was out of control when it seemed too good to be true. Imagine that you can go from a slum house in Compton to a 550,000 home with a playboy mansion style swimming hole and you don't even have to make the payments because you can just keep refinancing as long as you don't spend more than the rate of appreciation.

Bush and McCain were on record to try and shut it down. Barny Frank was on video accusing them of being against poor people getting into homes. I watched that. He definitely gets the blame.

The people to blame are the holly-er than thou liberal crowed that the government should do anything to even things out for everyone.

And why was that? Because the banks wanted it that way. The banks wanted to loan money to people to buy homes they couldnt afford. Why? Because they thought when they forclosed on them they would be able to sell them for a profit. But their scam backfired on them.

[nygrany]

When the economy started to go bad in June '08, the democrats did nothing because they wanted a financial crisis to get Obama elected. Well they did nothing but tell the American people that Obama would fix everything in January, they didn't realized that their lack of action for 6 months would result in an almost total colapse of the country's financial system.

[spinach]

you forgot obama


well, his part of the blame so far is less than that of the congress.
his main failure is sorry ass speaking and idiotic policy.

everything he proposes has to be approved by congress--

I will agree that he has done absolutely nothing to make things better, and in addition has proposed a lot of idiocy that will make things worse.

his "don't stash money in mattresses" comment was a major gaffe.

wrong thing to say, totally.
he's a blithering idiot.
But the liberals in the congress carry most of the blame

[Spiked101]

Bush spread the fuel and Obama ignited it.

Amen.

[ChrisSpencer]

And why was that? Because the banks wanted it that way. The banks wanted to loan money to people to buy homes they couldnt afford. Why? Because they thought when they forclosed on them they would be able to sell them for a profit. But their scam backfired on them.

That's completely ridiculous.

Any banker with half a brain would know that your conspiracy theory, if it were true, contained major systemic risk and would thus be entirely impossible so I doubt that any banks intentionally went into risky lending under the assumption that they could sell the houses for a profit once their sub-prime borrowers foreclosed.

The profit scheme was in the repackaging and sale of debt backed securities, not the homes.

[Tigerdrafted]

And why was that? Because the banks wanted it that way. The banks wanted to loan money to people to buy homes they couldnt afford. Why? Because they thought when they forclosed on them they would be able to sell them for a profit. But their scam backfired on them.

Who was doing the bundleling and who was rating the CDO's?

[wdb]

And blaming it all on Bush isn't any less ignorant?

Hy-po-cri-sy. After all, it's Obama's mess now and the buck stops at the top. :rolleyes:

Well, I wouldn't just blame Bush, I'd blame a LOT of the mess on his CRONIES (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/bushco/cronyism.htm).

That's something you NEVER hear the right rant about.... CRONYISM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronyism). (because if they DID talk about it, they'd be pointing a negative finger at THEMSELVES)

... and to say the results of the Bush administration are somehow Obama's "fault" well, that's ridiculous... it's unfortunately, now Obama's responsibility, but CERTAINLY not his fault.

If the right ever wants to gain my respect and vote again, they will have to stop being so God Damned power hungry, and mean spirited, and be more subservient to WE the people!

The right could START this epic journey by allying themselves IN DEEDS with (not just borrowing the words of) the libertarian party.

A good start would be....

• ABOLISH the abdominal 600,000 page tax code. Go flat or national sales tax. (or progressive consumption)

• REDUCE the size of government.

• STOP spending like drunken soldiers - even on military projects.

Anyway, I guess I could keep ranting. But that's my point. The right should STOP RANTING and start DOING.

wdb

p.s., wasn't it Ann Coulter who said, she's excited about the future, because the right now has someone they can standup against because it would have been political suicide to stand up to Bush? I think that says a LOT. This is the highest form of Power and Politics over Progress and Common Sense.

p.p.s., To think the Republicans wear the mantle of smaller government, and lower taxes, I would argue THAT (the Republican Party itself) is the height of "hypocrisy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrite)".

[mboncher]

Well, I wouldn't just blame Bush, I'd blame a LOT of the mess on his CRONIES (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/bushco/cronyism.htm).

That's something you NEVER hear the right rant about.... CRONYISM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronyism). (because if they DID talk about it, they'd be pointing a negative finger at THEMSELVES)

... and to say the results of the Bush administration are somehow Obama's "fault" well, that's ridiculous... it's unfortunately, now Obama's responsibility, but CERTAINLY not his fault.

If the right ever wants to gain my respect and vote again, they will have to stop being so God Damned power hungry, and mean spirited, and be more subservient to WE the people!

The right could START this epic journey by allying themselves IN DEEDS with (not just borrowing the words of) the libertarian party.

A good start would be....

• ABOLISH the abdominal 600,000 page tax code. Go flat or national sales tax. (or progressive consumption)

• REDUCE the size of government.

• STOP spending like drunken soldiers - even on military projects.

Anyway, I guess I could keep ranting. But that's my point. The right should STOP RANTING and start DOING.

wdb

p.s., wasn't it Ann Coulter who said, she's excited about the future, because the right now has someone they can standup against because it would have been political suicide to stand up to Bush? I think that says a LOT. This is the highest form of Power and Politics over Progress and Common Sense.

p.p.s., To think the Republicans wear the mantle of smaller government, and lower taxes, I would argue THAT (the Republican Party itself) is the height of "hypocrisy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrite)".
Okay. If you're such a wizard of smart, start naming Bush apointees and bureaucrats DIRECTLY responsible for this fiasco. We all know about the drunken sailor spree, but those aren't "Bush Cronies". Those are run-of-the-mill jackass self-centered politicians.

Second, Cronyism... and the left isn't just RIDDLED with cronies, political appointees based on corruption? Come on now... you can't be THAT blind can you?

How far has the stockmarket fallen since P-BO's taken office because he's out there shooting off his mouth and scaring investors to death with radical redistributionist blather? I'd be investing in commodities too if I thought the president was going to end up nationalizing the interests in which I have put my life savings, effectively wiping out what I'd saved. Not to mention bailing out companies who are going insolvent from bad financial decisions, thereby making it harder to tell who's gonna go down in a few months. No... P-BO is responsible for making a bad situation much much worse with his rhetorcal war on the rich.

Right now, you ARE right in that neither party is to be trusted yet except either to try and tear the capitalist system apart, or gain personal power and wealth off it's destruction. Michael Steele has a chance to make at least ONE party represent the American people, but it would involve a purge over a massive part of the big tent and creating a dogma/litmus test that must be adhered to the majority of the time. You can't stand on principles when they're for sale.

I can't disagree much with the 3 points you raise. Rather have a flat RATE tax for everyone, gut the government back to say 1950's departmental level and force government out of the insurance, medical and charity business. That there would help massively.

PS.... huh? Please insert clarity.

pps... hence my statement about Michael Steele needing to purge the GOP of all RINOism. Let em be democrats or independents. It'd make Steele a legendary statesman in the party if he did so, and probably save it from Whig-ing.

[Reform2009]

Bush and his cronies did screw up in pretty much all areas but Obama really fertilized and multiplied every area Bush tainted. Bush has been around the block and has business experience but is not too intelligent. Not his fault. He was not asked to be born and it is not his fault that his mental capacity is limited. He tried to the best of his IQ can take and trying any harder would have caused him a stroke.

Obama, on the other hand, is a very intelligent cat. Maybe too smart. But he is absolutely clueless and never had any real business experience. After Harvard Law School, he worked as an activist and the most money he ever made was by writing his own autobiography. He is actually more like the White House press secretary to Pelosi and Biden`s puppet. I think Obama read too many books for his own good and severely lacks real life experience. It is a shame that the prestigious office of the presidency is turning into an international laughing stock. Both the Democratic and Republican Parties need to unite and put their arrogances aside and come together for the benefit of the American people and the future of this country. This tax hike on the achievers of society will definitely not work. Already, there are doctors, dentists, lawyers, business people talking about declaring below the $250K per year income and rolling it over to the following year. This program will backfire for sure. Business people will be losing motivation to work harder and will be laying workers off, compounding the problem. Investment dollars will be leaving this country so the achievers in this country will avoid being in the higher tax bracket. I always pay my taxes and do not have a problem. But I do have a problem if I need to pay 10% or more than my fellow citizen and it will definitely make me to look for other loopholes in the tax code to be treated equally. This is such a great country and has always been. Hope we can keep the tradition but am really skeptical with the current group of clowns running this country.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[wildcat87]

Just setting the record straight.

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/speeches/archives/2008/chairman/spdec0408_2.html



Remarks by FDIC Chairman Sheila C. Bair Before the Consumer Federation of America
December 4, 2008

Good morning and thank you for inviting me to speak.

The main reason I'm here is to have a vigorous discussion with you about the consumer issues we now face as a result of the financial crisis.

But first I want to clear up some myths that have been circulating lately ... in particular, that the Community Reinvestment Act caused the financial crisis.

And then I want to share a few thoughts on how we can improve and modernize consumer protections for financial services.

I'd also like to share a few thoughts on our continuing partnership to fight unnecessary foreclosures.

I think we can agree that a complex interplay of risky behaviors by lenders, borrowers, and investors led to the current financial storm. To be sure, there's plenty of blame to go around.

However, I want to give you my verdict on CRA: NOT guilty.

Point of fact: Only about one in four higher-priced first mortgage loans were made by CRA-covered banks during the hey-day years of subprime mortgage lending (2004-2006). The rest were made by private independent mortgage companies and large bank affiliates not covered by CRA rules.

You've heard the line of attack: The government told banks they had to make loans to people who were bad credit risks, and who could not afford to repay, just to prove that they were making loans to low- and moderate-income people.

Let me ask you: Where in the CRA does it say to make loans to people who can't afford to repay? Nowhere!

And the fact is, the lending practices that are causing problems today were driven by a desire for market share and revenue growth ... pure and simple.

CRA isn't perfect. But it has stayed around more than 30 years because it encourages FDIC-insured banks to lend in low- and moderate-income (or LMI) areas and, I quote, "consistent with the safe and sound operation of such institutions."

Another question: Is lending to borrowers who can not afford to repay "consistent with the safe and sound operations"? No, of course not.

CRA always recognized there are limitations on the potential volume of lending in lower-income areas due to safety and soundness considerations, and that a bank's capacity and opportunity for safe and sound lending in the LMI community may be limited.

That is why the CRA never set out lending "target" or "goal" amounts.





http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/b/sheila_bair/index.html



Sheila C. Bair was appointed by President Bush to head the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in mid-2006, just as the housing market was peaking.

She brought one of the most varied backgrounds of anyone to lead the agency, cultivating fans in financial circles from Wall Street to Washington and on both sides of the aisle. She is probably the only head of the F.D.I.C. to have written risk-capital policy briefs for bankers and short stories for Highlights for Children magazine.

A native of Independence, Kan., Ms. Bair got a taste of policy-making and pragmatic politics while working for former Senator Robert Dole, the Kansas Republican. After losing a close race for Congress in Kansas in 1990, she worked as a commissioner at the Commodities Trading Commission and later joined the New York Stock Exchange as its top government relations officer.

In 2001, President Bush appointed her assistant secretary for financial institutions at the Treasury. She soon left for the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, where, as a professor of public policy, she became known for her work on consumer protection issues.

[wildcat87]

That's completely ridiculous.

Any banker with half a brain would know that your conspiracy theory, if it were true, contained major systemic risk and would thus be entirely impossible so I doubt that any banks intentionally went into risky lending under the assumption that they could sell the houses for a profit once their sub-prime borrowers foreclosed.

The profit scheme was in the repackaging and sale of debt backed securities, not the homes.


http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7BD224460E-3C4F-49A2-8CE4-F11EAA4697BE%7D&siteid=mktw

The exotic loans have mushroomed in the past three years, going from less than 2% of loans in 2000 to more than a third in 2006, industry data show. In 2005, about half of the exotic loans sold nationally were originated in California.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. found that exotic loans were more prevalent in the housing markets with the biggest price increases, and suggested that the loans were both a cause of and a reaction to the housing boom.

"The greater availability of flexible mortgage structures probably allowed price increases to outstrip growth in incomes to a greater extent than would otherwise have been the case," said Sandra Thompson, acting director of supervision and consumer protection at the FDIC. But the popularity of the loans is also a response to the higher prices, she said.

The regulators testified that defaults and foreclosures on nontraditional loans remain very low, but they emphasized that it's too soon to tell what might happen if the economy slows, interest rates rise and housing prices stagnate.

Mortgage-industry representatives at the hearing insisted that they are merely responding to consumer demand. It's not up to the mortgage broker or banker to determine what's a "suitable" loan, said Robert Broeksmit of the Mortgage Bankers Association.

"I strongly believe that the market's success in making these nontraditional products available is a positive development, not a cause for alarm," Broeksmit said.

Looks like mortgage brokers were all in on the "conspiracy." Ridiculous, huh?

[Drive Business]

Almost every bad loan was sold to a Europen or Asian bank.

If that were the case, our financial system would not be in disarray. Bad loans are littered across american balance sheets.

[JeffR]

Bush Administration
The Fed
Dems in Congress
Repubs in Congress
Banks making bad loans
people buying houses they can't afford


The Obama Administration is not responsible for the collapse. It is responsible, however, for making things much worse.

[spinpolitico]

Carter instituted the Community Reinvestment Act in 1977. This ultimately led to a national average of 7% subprime loans.

In 1997 Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, de-regulating bank loan and investment practices. As a result of this, subprime loans escalated to become over 30% of all outstanding loans. It also led to unethical loan and investment practices.

Barney Frank (Twiddely DeeDee) and his cohort Dodds (Twiddely Dumb****) were in charge of the oversight committies that continually reported that all was fine, despite doubts and Bills expressed by Bush and tendered by McCain.

These events were the primary precursors to all that followed. From this point on, everyone screwed up.

[coolhead]

That's completely ridiculous.

Any banker with half a brain would know that your conspiracy theory, if it were true, contained major systemic risk and would thus be entirely impossible so I doubt that any banks intentionally went into risky lending under the assumption that they could sell the houses for a profit once their sub-prime borrowers foreclosed.

The profit scheme was in the repackaging and sale of debt backed securities, not the homes.

True I don't think it was the banks plan to profit from foreclosures but It is clear that the data used in the foreclosure risk modeling was way off and I do believe the banks felt that the "risk" of these stupid loans was far less than actual because they could always sell the underlying asset and not loose much.

Additionally I am not sure all banks are in a great hurry to unload all of the "toxic assets" that these mortgages make up....I believe the issue of the "toxic assets" is more of an accounting issue with how they must be valued and the affect on the balance sheet and then what that leads to for capital ratios as opposed to just a issue with the asset itself. As I understand it many of these bad assets are actually performing but have very little "value" and therefore create an issue for write downs.

[mboncher]

Carter instituted the Community Reinvestment Act in 1977. This ultimately led to a national average of 7% subprime loans.

In 1997 Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, de-regulating bank loan and investment practices. As a result of this, subprime loans escalated to become over 30% of all outstanding loans. It also led to unethical loan and investment practices.

Barney Frank (Twiddely DeeDee) and his cohort Dodds (Twiddely Dumb****) were in charge of the oversight committies that continually reported that all was fine, despite doubts and Bills expressed by Bush and tendered by McCain.

These events were the primary precursors to all that followed. From this point on, everyone screwed up.
Nicely laid out.

[wildcat87]

Carter instituted the Community Reinvestment Act in 1977. This ultimately led to a national average of 7% subprime loans.



http://www.occ.treas.gov/ftp/release/2008-136.htm
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
November 19, 2008 Contact: Robert M. Garsson
(202) 874-5770

Comptroller Dugan Says CRA not Responsible for Subprime Lending Abuses

BALTIMORE — Comptroller of the Currency John C. Dugan said he categorically disagrees with suggestions that the Community Reinvestment Act is partly responsible for the ongoing credit crisis.

“CRA is not the culprit behind the subprime mortgage lending abuses, or the broader credit quality issues in the marketplace,” Mr. Dugan said in a speech to the Enterprise Annual Network Conference.

“Indeed, the lenders most prominently associated with subprime mortgage lending abuses and high rates of foreclosure are lenders not subject to CRA,” he added. “A recent study of 2006 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data showed that banks subject to CRA and their affiliates originated or purchased only six percent of the reported high cost loans made to lower-income borrowers within their CRA assessment areas.”

Mr. Dugan said that CRA lending has generally been safe and sound. For example, he said, single family CRA-related mortgages offered in conjunction with NeighborWorks organizations have performed on par with standard conventional mortgages.

“Foreclosure rates within the NeighborWorks network were just 0.21 percent in the second quarter of this year, compared to 4.26 percent of subprime loans and 0.61 percent for conventional conforming mortgages,” he added.



http://www.allbusiness.com/finance/913660-1.html

White House Nominates John Dugan for Comptroller
Publication: CBA Reports
Date: Tuesday, March 1 2005
The White House has nominated John Dugan, a partner in the D.C. office of law firm Covington and Burling who specializes in banking regulation, for a fiveyear term as Comptroller of the Currency.

He was formerly Assistant secretary of the Treasury for Domestic Finance during the Administration of President George H.W. Bush, and before that was Republican General Counsel to U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

Dugan is a partner and coordinator of the firm's Financial Institutions Group, specializing in financial institution regulation. According to the firm's web site, he advises banking and financial institutions with respect to regulatory and legislative issues, including expanded securities and financial activities for banks, bank holding companies, thrifts, and other financial companies; privacy issues; fair lending issues; swaps and other capital markets activities; bank antitying regulation; and issues affecting Government-sponsored enterprises.

Dugan has represented the American Bankers Association, Bank One, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., Freddie Mac, and PNC Bank Corp., among others. As outside counsel to the ABA securities Association, he has advised on a broad range of bank securities issues, including securities underwriting and dealing, merchant banking, and securities "push out" regulation.

He received his A.B. in English Literature from the University of Michigan in 1977, and his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1981.


In 1997 Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, de-regulating bank loan and investment practices. As a result of this, subprime loans escalated to become over 30% of all outstanding loans. It also led to unethical loan and investment practices.
Clinton was a doofus and should have never signed that bill. You seemed to have left out the name of said bill and it helps illuminate the whole story.


Barney Frank (Twiddely DeeDee) and his cohort Dodds (Twiddely Dumb****) were in charge of the oversight committies that continually reported that all was fine, despite doubts and Bills expressed by Bush and tendered by McCain.

Fwanks is a dumd***, but let's not fool ourselves. At the same time as demanding oversight Bush was increasing the FM/FM budget by $440 billion and pushing HUD, the GSE's and private mortgage providers to increase homeownership by 5.5 million owners.
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020617-2.html


These events were the primary precursors to all that followed. From this point on, everyone screwed up.

I agree that everyone screwed up. I mean EVERYONE.

[spinpolitico]

True enough. EVERYONE screwed up. Dugan defending the CRA just makes me go "hmmm, he doth protest too much". Carter was the biggest baffoon that ever held office, his list of screw-ups can fill a book.

Bottom line though, ALL of these people (Left or Right), are so corrupted by greed and power that they cannot turn a wise of discernment upon anything. They only see things thru the paradigm of how well it self-serve.

Neither Party has done a single thing to make politics accountable and honest. Some of the ******** they throw at the American people is absolutely laughable if it were not so damn sad....things such as "I am signing a Bill to Blanace the Budget". Oh, that fooled me!! As if passing a Bill saying you are going to do something is somehow related to actually doing it! lol

(i'm writing myself a note to reconcile my checkbook). Tah Dah!!

[ChrisSpencer]

True I don't think it was the banks plan to profit from foreclosures but It is clear that the data used in the foreclosure risk modeling was way off and I do believe the banks felt that the "risk" of these stupid loans was far less than actual because they could always sell the underlying asset and not loose much.

Additionally I am not sure all banks are in a great hurry to unload all of the "toxic assets" that these mortgages make up....I believe the issue of the "toxic assets" is more of an accounting issue with how they must be valued and the affect on the balance sheet and then what that leads to for capital ratios as opposed to just a issue with the asset itself. As I understand it many of these bad assets are actually performing but have very little "value" and therefore create an issue for write downs.

I promise you that their allowance for doubtful accounts is no where near large enough for these under performing assets. Their income statement is screwed since by accounting standards these losses are recorded as expenses, despite the fact that they have yet to be actually sold.

[FREE DON]

So why are FRANKS, DODDS still their? Jst like the ceo of GM they should be FIRED TOO !

[mboncher]

So why are FRANKS, DODDS still their? Jst like the ceo of GM they should be FIRED TOO !
They're probably protected under the endangered species act or some such lunacy.