Interesting Chart on US Debt history

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Weird how EVERY GOPer supported Dubya's dream down payment ($800 million 2003-2007) initiative, to 'help' people of little means to get in their homes? AND supported Dubya's allowing Gov't to guarantee much more 'zero down' loans too...

so Bush was liberal and you're putting him down for it? Why not take some time off and think about whether you're liberal or conservative!! See why we say dumbto3? Sad. Sorry

Weird how EVERY GOPer supported Dubya's dream down payment ($800 million 2003-2007) initiative, to 'help' people of little means to get in their homes? AND supported Dubya's allowing Gov't to guarantee much more 'zero down' loans too...


NONE of them were conservative either Bubba?

so you're saying they were liberal and they caused the crisis? Or, do you have no idea what you're saying.

 

[Dad2three]

so Bush was liberal and you're putting him down for it? Why not take some time off and think about whether you're liberal or conservative!! See why we say dumbto3? Sad. Sorry

Weird how EVERY GOPer supported Dubya's dream down payment ($800 million 2003-2007) initiative, to 'help' people of little means to get in their homes? AND supported Dubya's allowing Gov't to guarantee much more 'zero down' loans too...


NONE of them were conservative either Bubba?

so you're saying they were liberal and they caused the crisis? Or, do you have no idea what you're saying.

Was EVERY Repub in Congress in 2003-2004 NOT conservative since EVERY ONE voted for ADDI and guaranteeing first time home owners 100% financing. Simple question. This is like the 5th time I've asked you this

 

[Rshermr]

Weird how EVERY GOPer supported Dubya's dream down payment ($800 million 2003-2007) initiative, to 'help' people of little means to get in their homes? AND supported Dubya's allowing Gov't to guarantee much more 'zero down' loans too...


NONE of them were conservative either Bubba?

so you're saying they were liberal and they caused the crisis? Or, do you have no idea what you're saying.

Was EVERY Repub in Congress in 2003-2004 NOT conservative since EVERY ONE voted for ADDI and guaranteeing first time home owners 100% financing. Simple question. This is like the 5th time I've asked you this

poor stupid bastard just ignores questions that he does not like the answer to. Though he may change the wording, the meaning, and the subject and respond.

Look, poor bastard is stupid. I truly believe it is congenital. And therefor not his fault. Just bad luck.

The main thing with cons is that they feel no need for integrity. None at all.

 

[Politico]

It's not so much about Rep or Dem but more about settling claims about debt and GDP with regards to tax policy and spending.

I just find it fascinating and Political Chic is right, numbers can be deceiving but I felt the chart regarding Debt as a % of GDP to be telling so I would be interested to read other people's takes on this.

There is no take on it. At the end of the day congress passes bills. All you have to do is look who controlled it during the plus years.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Was EVERY Repub in Congress in 2003-2004 NOT conservative since EVERY ONE voted for ADDI and guaranteeing first time home owners 100% financing. Simple question. This is like the 5th time I've asked you this

dear if every person on the planet supported interference with the free market then every person on the planet was acting liberal. Is that really over your head?

Conservatives and libertarians support freedom and capitalism, not interference

Liberals support interference. This is why they elected Obama (Obamacare=massive interference) and spied for Stalin.

Do you have that straight now? This is 6th time I've answered you.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It's not so much about Rep or Dem but more about settling claims about debt and GDP with regards to tax policy and spending.

I just find it fascinating and Political Chic is right, numbers can be deceiving but I felt the chart regarding Debt as a % of GDP to be telling so I would be interested to read other people's takes on this.

There is no take on it. At the end of the day congress passes bills. All you have to do is look who controlled it during the plus years.

and what would you learn from looking?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

so you're saying they were liberal and they caused the crisis? Or, do you have no idea what you're saying.

Was EVERY Repub in Congress in 2003-2004 NOT conservative since EVERY ONE voted for ADDI and guaranteeing first time home owners 100% financing. Simple question. This is like the 5th time I've asked you this

poor stupid bastard just ignores questions that he does not like the answer to. Though he may change the wording, the meaning, and the subject and respond.

Look, poor bastard is stupid. I truly believe it is congenital. And therefor not his fault. Just bad luck.

The main thing with cons is that they feel no need for integrity. None at all.

violent ad hominem from typical lib without IQ for substance

 

[Uncensored2008]

Dubya ALLOWED and CHEER LEAD for household debt to double in his first 7 years

Then you should love him, since that is classical Keynesian theory in action.

Oh, the hate sites didn't tell you that, did they?

There are a lot of things they don't tell you.

Cut & Paste, they'll give you a banana - and that is ALL you need to know.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How can you talk about the Subprime Crisis with people who don't understand that F/F were the biggest insurers on the planet and stamped AAA rating on No Income No Asset paper starting in 2004?

 

[Dad2three]

It's not so much about Rep or Dem but more about settling claims about debt and GDP with regards to tax policy and spending.

I just find it fascinating and Political Chic is right, numbers can be deceiving but I felt the chart regarding Debt as a % of GDP to be telling so I would be interested to read other people's takes on this.

There is no take on it. At the end of the day congress passes bills. All you have to do is look who controlled it during the plus years.

You mean the Dems? Thanks to their 93 bill that increase revenues and cut the deficit $400+ billion the next 5 years? AFTER Clinton's first surplus, the GOP passed a $700+ billion tax cut Clinton had to veto to get 3 more. THEN Dubya came in

 

[Dad2three]

Was EVERY Repub in Congress in 2003-2004 NOT conservative since EVERY ONE voted for ADDI and guaranteeing first time home owners 100% financing. Simple question. This is like the 5th time I've asked you this

dear if every person on the planet supported interference with the free market then every person on the planet was acting liberal. Is that really over your head?

Conservatives and libertarians support freedom and capitalism, not interference

Liberals support interference. This is why they elected Obama (Obamacare=massive interference) and spied for Stalin.

Do you have that straight now? This is 6th time I've answered you.

Got it, so YOU continually to support the 'liberal' GOPers...

 

[Dad2three]

Dubya ALLOWED and CHEER LEAD for household debt to double in his first 7 years

Then you should love him, since that is classical Keynesian theory in action.

Oh, the hate sites didn't tell you that, did they?

There are a lot of things they don't tell you.

Cut & Paste, they'll give you a banana - and that is ALL you need to know.

Yes, YOUR hate sites NEVER mention the paying back the debt part of Keynes huh lol

 

[Dad2three]

How can you talk about the Subprime Crisis with people who don't understand that F/F were the biggest insurers on the planet and stamped AAA rating on No Income No Asset paper starting in 2004?

' F/F were the biggest insurers on the planet and stamped AAA rating on No Income No Asset paper starting in 2004?'


DON'T KNOW WHAT INSURE MEANS HUH...


“The idea that they were leading this charge is just absurd,” said Guy Cecala, publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance, an authoritative trade publication. “Fannie and Freddie have always had the tightest underwriting on earth…They were opposite of subprime.”



Wall Street, Not Fannie and Freddie, Led Mortgage Meltdown - The Daily Beast

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

“Fannie and Freddie have always had the tightest underwriting on earth…They were opposite of subprime.”[/SIZE]

1) by the time of the crash they had about 30% of all sub prime mortgages


2) Fan Fred were hugely corrupt organizations

Warren Buffett: "There are significant limits to what regulation can accomplish. As a dramatic illustration, take two of the biggest accounting disasters in the past ten years: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We're talking billions and billions of dollars of misstatements at both places".

Now, these are two incredibly important institutions. I mean, they accounted for over 40% of the mortgage flow a few years back. Right now I think they're up to 70%. They're quasi-governmental in nature. So the government set up an organization called OFHEO. I'm not sure what all the letters stand for. [Note to Warren: They stand for Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.] But if you go to OFHEO's website, you'll find that its purpose was to just watch over these two companies. OFHEO had 200 employees. Their job was simply to look at two companies and say, "Are these guys behaving like they're supposed to?" And of course what happened were two of the greatest accounting misstatements in history while these 200 people had their jobs. It's incredible. I mean, two for two!

 

[Dad2three]

“Fannie and Freddie have always had the tightest underwriting on earth…They were opposite of subprime.”[/SIZE]

1) by the time of the crash they had about 30% of all sub prime mortgages


2) Fan Fred were hugely corrupt organizations

Warren Buffett: "There are significant limits to what regulation can accomplish. As a dramatic illustration, take two of the biggest accounting disasters in the past ten years: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We're talking billions and billions of dollars of misstatements at both places".

Now, these are two incredibly important institutions. I mean, they accounted for over 40% of the mortgage flow a few years back. Right now I think they're up to 70%. They're quasi-governmental in nature. So the government set up an organization called OFHEO. I'm not sure what all the letters stand for. [Note to Warren: They stand for Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.] But if you go to OFHEO's website, you'll find that its purpose was to just watch over these two companies. OFHEO had 200 employees. Their job was simply to look at two companies and say, "Are these guys behaving like they're supposed to?" And of course what happened were two of the greatest accounting misstatements in history while these 200 people had their jobs. It's incredible. I mean, two for two!

1) by the time of the crash they had about 30% of all sub prime mortgages


LIE. Only if you use right wing 'math' from Ed Pinto/AEI,



No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)


5. Expanding the subprime loan category to say GSEs had more exposure makes no sense: Some argue that the GSEs had huge subprime exposure if you create a new category that supposedly represents the risks of subprime more accurately. This new “high-risk” category is associated with a consultant to AEI named Ed Pinto, and his analysis deliberately blurs the wording on “high-risk” and subprime in much of his writings. David Min broke down the numbers, and I wrote about it here. Here’s a graphic from Min’s follow-up work, addressing criticism:

Even this “high risk” category isn’t risky compared to subprime and it looks like the national average. When you divide it by private label, the numbers are even worse. Private label loans “have defaulted at over 6x the rate of GSE loans, as well as the fact that private label securitization is responsible for 42% of all delinquencies despite accounting for only 13% of all outstanding loans (as compared to the GSEs being responsible for 22% of all delinquencies despite accounting for 57% of all outstanding loans).” The issue isn’t this fake “high risk” category, it is subprime and private label origination.

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) panel looked carefully at this argument and also ended up shredding it. So even those who blame the GSEs can’t get the numbers to work when they make up categories.


Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture




OFHEO

HUD (EXECUTIVE BRANCH CABINET POSITION. YOU MEAN DUBYA AND COMP FAILED? I'M SHOCKED, SHOCKED I TELL YOU

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

“Fannie and Freddie have always had the tightest underwriting on earth…They were opposite of subprime.”[/SIZE]

1) by the time of the crash they had about 30% of all sub prime mortgages


2) Fan Fred were hugely corrupt organizations

Warren Buffett: "There are significant limits to what regulation can accomplish. As a dramatic illustration, take two of the biggest accounting disasters in the past ten years: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We're talking billions and billions of dollars of misstatements at both places".

Now, these are two incredibly important institutions. I mean, they accounted for over 40% of the mortgage flow a few years back. Right now I think they're up to 70%. They're quasi-governmental in nature. So the government set up an organization called OFHEO. I'm not sure what all the letters stand for. [Note to Warren: They stand for Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.] But if you go to OFHEO's website, you'll find that its purpose was to just watch over these two companies. OFHEO had 200 employees. Their job was simply to look at two companies and say, "Are these guys behaving like they're supposed to?" And of course what happened were two of the greatest accounting misstatements in history while these 200 people had their jobs. It's incredible. I mean, two for two!

1) by the time of the crash they had about 30% of all sub prime mortgages


LIE. Only if you use right wing 'math' from Ed Pinto/AEI,



No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)


5. Expanding the subprime loan category to say GSEs had more exposure makes no sense: Some argue that the GSEs had huge subprime exposure if you create a new category that supposedly represents the risks of subprime more accurately. This new “high-risk” category is associated with a consultant to AEI named Ed Pinto, and his analysis deliberately blurs the wording on “high-risk” and subprime in much of his writings. David Min broke down the numbers, and I wrote about it here. Here’s a graphic from Min’s follow-up work, addressing criticism:

Even this “high risk” category isn’t risky compared to subprime and it looks like the national average. When you divide it by private label, the numbers are even worse. Private label loans “have defaulted at over 6x the rate of GSE loans, as well as the fact that private label securitization is responsible for 42% of all delinquencies despite accounting for only 13% of all outstanding loans (as compared to the GSEs being responsible for 22% of all delinquencies despite accounting for 57% of all outstanding loans).” The issue isn’t this fake “high risk” category, it is subprime and private label origination.

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) panel looked carefully at this argument and also ended up shredding it. So even those who blame the GSEs can’t get the numbers to work when they make up categories.


Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture




OFHEO

HUD (EXECUTIVE BRANCH CABINET POSITION. YOU MEAN DUBYA AND COMP FAILED? I'M SHOCKED, SHOCKED I TELL YOU

dear, all you do is cut and paste. We could all do that. PLease present an argument in your own words or admit you lack the IQ to be here

 

[Dad2three]

1) by the time of the crash they had about 30% of all sub prime mortgages


2) Fan Fred were hugely corrupt organizations

Warren Buffett: "There are significant limits to what regulation can accomplish. As a dramatic illustration, take two of the biggest accounting disasters in the past ten years: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We're talking billions and billions of dollars of misstatements at both places".

Now, these are two incredibly important institutions. I mean, they accounted for over 40% of the mortgage flow a few years back. Right now I think they're up to 70%. They're quasi-governmental in nature. So the government set up an organization called OFHEO. I'm not sure what all the letters stand for. [Note to Warren: They stand for Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.] But if you go to OFHEO's website, you'll find that its purpose was to just watch over these two companies. OFHEO had 200 employees. Their job was simply to look at two companies and say, "Are these guys behaving like they're supposed to?" And of course what happened were two of the greatest accounting misstatements in history while these 200 people had their jobs. It's incredible. I mean, two for two!

1) by the time of the crash they had about 30% of all sub prime mortgages


LIE. Only if you use right wing 'math' from Ed Pinto/AEI,



No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)


5. Expanding the subprime loan category to say GSEs had more exposure makes no sense: Some argue that the GSEs had huge subprime exposure if you create a new category that supposedly represents the risks of subprime more accurately. This new “high-risk” category is associated with a consultant to AEI named Ed Pinto, and his analysis deliberately blurs the wording on “high-risk” and subprime in much of his writings. David Min broke down the numbers, and I wrote about it here. Here’s a graphic from Min’s follow-up work, addressing criticism:

Even this “high risk” category isn’t risky compared to subprime and it looks like the national average. When you divide it by private label, the numbers are even worse. Private label loans “have defaulted at over 6x the rate of GSE loans, as well as the fact that private label securitization is responsible for 42% of all delinquencies despite accounting for only 13% of all outstanding loans (as compared to the GSEs being responsible for 22% of all delinquencies despite accounting for 57% of all outstanding loans).” The issue isn’t this fake “high risk” category, it is subprime and private label origination.

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) panel looked carefully at this argument and also ended up shredding it. So even those who blame the GSEs can’t get the numbers to work when they make up categories.


Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture




OFHEO

HUD (EXECUTIVE BRANCH CABINET POSITION. YOU MEAN DUBYA AND COMP FAILED? I'M SHOCKED, SHOCKED I TELL YOU

dear, all you do is cut and paste. We could all do that. PLease present an argument in your own words or admit you lack the IQ to be here

Why my own words? I keep showing how ignorant you are with FACTS not OPINIONS you keep giving me!!!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I keep showing how ignorant you are with FACTS not OPINIONS you keep giving me!!!!

please present best example then for whole world to see

 

[Rshermr]

1) by the time of the crash they had about 30% of all sub prime mortgages


LIE. Only if you use right wing 'math' from Ed Pinto/AEI,



No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)


5. Expanding the subprime loan category to say GSEs had more exposure makes no sense: Some argue that the GSEs had huge subprime exposure if you create a new category that supposedly represents the risks of subprime more accurately. This new “high-risk” category is associated with a consultant to AEI named Ed Pinto, and his analysis deliberately blurs the wording on “high-risk” and subprime in much of his writings. David Min broke down the numbers, and I wrote about it here. Here’s a graphic from Min’s follow-up work, addressing criticism:

Even this “high risk” category isn’t risky compared to subprime and it looks like the national average. When you divide it by private label, the numbers are even worse. Private label loans “have defaulted at over 6x the rate of GSE loans, as well as the fact that private label securitization is responsible for 42% of all delinquencies despite accounting for only 13% of all outstanding loans (as compared to the GSEs being responsible for 22% of all delinquencies despite accounting for 57% of all outstanding loans).” The issue isn’t this fake “high risk” category, it is subprime and private label origination.

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) panel looked carefully at this argument and also ended up shredding it. So even those who blame the GSEs can’t get the numbers to work when they make up categories.


Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture




OFHEO

HUD (EXECUTIVE BRANCH CABINET POSITION. YOU MEAN DUBYA AND COMP FAILED? I'M SHOCKED, SHOCKED I TELL YOU

dear, all you do is cut and paste. We could all do that. PLease present an argument in your own words or admit you lack the IQ to be here

Why my own words? I keep showing how ignorant you are with FACTS not OPINIONS you keep giving me!!!!

Poor dumb shit is simply trying to play games. He is way to stupid to understand that the rational world simply sees him as a waste.

 

[Dad2three]

I keep showing how ignorant you are with FACTS not OPINIONS you keep giving me!!!!

please present best example then for whole world to see

http://www.usmessageboard.com/search.php?searchid=8200116