Brian Pedaci wrote:.....fixing them in 2004 wouldn't necessarily have prevented the rest of the market implosion.
Fixing them in 2004 would have taken away 4 years and hundreds of billions off the bailout scam.
Moderator: Jim O'Bryan
Brian Pedaci wrote:Lest you lay the blame ENTIRELY at the feet of the CRA, Fannie/Freddie, or ACORN,
In other words, ACORN may have tried to coerce banks to change their policies, but nobody really forced them to. There was a potential profit to be made in that market (as long as home values continued to climb irrationally) and they seized it.
ryan costa wrote:ACORN turns applications in to election officials in three stacks: those we have verified, those we were unable to independently verify, and those we know are problematic. In most states we are required to turn in every signed application, including the ones we know have problems. In a few cases these applications have turned out to be phony, the result of part-time employees trying to get paid for doing work they didn’t do.
Isnt that the Barney Frank blogBrian Pedaci wrote:Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis
Did you actually read the article that you posted? "Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis."Brian Pedaci wrote:So you had no argument with what was actually said in the article? You can only make a lame non-sequitur joke? Good. Duly noted.
Clue number one that this article is a hack job...WASHINGTON — As the economy worsens and Election Day approaches, a conservative campaign that blames the global financial crisis on a government push to make housing more affordable to lower-class Americans has taken off on talk radio and e-mail.
Federal housing data reveal that the charges aren't true, and that the private sector, not the government or government-backed companies, was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis.
Brian Pedaci wrote:Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis
In a book on the sub-prime lending collapse published in June 2007, the late Federal Reserve Governor Ed Gramlich wrote that only one-third of all CRA loans had interest rates high enough to be considered sub-prime and that to the pleasant surprise of commercial banks there were low default rates. Banks that participated in CRA lending had found, he wrote, "that this new lending is good business."
Barack Obama actually sued Chicago banks to force them to loan money to people without jobs.
It is just a FACT that more black applicants have worse credit.
(Mark) Can someone explain something to me? Somebody registers twice, three times, ten times, 72 times; registers his dog; registers a cartoon character.
Because many times those ballots are cast and counted.
Fraudulent registration equals fraudulent voting in quite a few states that don’t require some form of identification to verify yourself prior to casting a ballot.
THE seeds of today's financial meltdown lie in the Community Reinvestment Act - a law passed in 1977 and made riskier by unwise amendments and regulatory rulings in later decades.
But, where is the data that proves these 15 listed companies losses had a greater impact on the economy than the Government bailout of Freddie and Fannie?
Commercial banks made a majority of the sub-prime loans that defaulted.
Why should I research a theory that I did not present? Did you miss the part where I asked for the data?Stephen Eisel, up to his old tricks:
Quote:
But, where is the data that proves these 15 listed companies losses had a greater impact on the economy than the Government bailout of Freddie and Fannie?
This is a good research question, Stephen. Go for it. Bring us some social science.