The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

[Faun]

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

First of all, the Dems did not take over until 2007.
And exactly what legislation did the Dems pass over the GOP filibuster and a Bush veto that suddenly caused a worldwide crash in a matter of months??????
Curious minds are dying to know!!!!

don't expect a lucid answer.

I couldn't dumb it down enough for a curious mind.

Actually, you can't answer that at all since Democrats didn't pass any legislation in 2007 or 2008 which caused the economy to collapse.

 

[Faun]

The misery index is not a good indicator of the economy. And unemployment went as high as 10.8% because of policies set forth by Reagan and Volker to fight inflation.

And even then, despite a 10.8% unemployment rate, only 1.2 million jobs were lost from Reagan's recession ... compared to Bush's recession, which lost 8.6 million jobs.

Real GDP during Reagan's recession fell only 1.4% ... compared to Bush's recession when it fell a whopping 4.2%.

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

They addressed the problem. Someone should tell the homeless about it, they'd be thrilled to know.

Why? Do you think the homeless are as stupid as TooTall and don't know that the Democrat-led House passed oversight of the GSE's as Bush had asked for 5 years earlier?

 

[Liminal]

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

They addressed the problem. Someone should tell the homeless about it, they'd be thrilled to know.

Why? Do you think the homeless are as stupid as TooTall and don't know that the Democrat-led House passed oversight of the GSE's as Bush had asked for 5 years earlier?

No, I think they'd all be happy to hear the good news, however many of them there may be.

 

[TooTall]

The misery index, combining unemployment and inflation was higher in Reagan's early term than it ever was under Obama. Unemployment early in Reagan's term reached 10.8%, higher than any month under Obama and inflation was in double digits. Obama never had to deal with high inflation. Reagan was forced to deal with BOTH high inflation and high unemployment at the same time.

The misery index is not a good indicator of the economy. And unemployment went as high as 10.8% because of policies set forth by Reagan and Volker to fight inflation.

And even then, despite a 10.8% unemployment rate, only 1.2 million jobs were lost from Reagan's recession ... compared to Bush's recession, which lost 8.6 million jobs.

Real GDP during Reagan's recession fell only 1.4% ... compared to Bush's recession when it fell a whopping 4.2%.

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

This is rather factual and you may even read it.

"Clinton, however, sowed the seeds of the Great Recession by helping to inflate the housing bubble, a key part of the financial debacle of 2007. But this wasn’t because he (not George W. Bush) signed two financial deregulation bills. Although Clinton legalized interstate banking in 1994 and commercial/investment banking combinations in 1999, that had nothing to do with the meltdown.

Then whyisClinton culpable? Because his secretary of housing and urban development, Andrew Cuomo, current governor of New York and a likely 2016 presidential aspirant, accelerated easy-housing policies and inflated the housing bubble, setting the stage for its collapse.

The meltdown was the consequence of a combination of the easy money and low interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve and the easy housing engineered by a variety of government agencies and policies. Those agencies include the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and two nominally private “government-sponsored enterprises” (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The agencies — along with laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act (passed in the 1970s, then fortified in the Clinton years), which required banks to make loans to people with poor and nonexistent credit histories — made widespread homeownership a national goal. This all led to a home-buying frenzy and an explosion of subprime and other non-prime mortgages, which banks and GSEs bundled into dubious securities and peddled to investors worldwide. Hovering in the background was the knowledge that the federal government would bail out troubled “too-big-to-fail” financial corporations, including Fannie and Freddie.

The housing boom could last for a while, but the bust was inevitable. When the Fed raised interest rates, things went kaboom. The Great Recession was on; we’re still suffering its effects. Without these government housing and monetary policies, the crisis would never have occurred.

Clinton’s contribution to the crisis lay in his appointment of Cuomo to HUD. Cuomo became HUD secretary in 1997 after becoming assistant secretary in 1993. In a heavily researched2008 articlein theVillage Voice, Wayne Barrett writes,

Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that — in combination with many other factors — helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded ‘kickbacks’ to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans. Three to four million families are now facing foreclosure, and Cuomo is one of the reasons why.

Perhaps the only domestic issue George Bush and Bill Clinton were in complete agreement about was maximizing home ownership, each trying to lay claim to a record percentage of homeowners, and both describing their efforts as a boon to blacks and Hispanics. HUD, Fannie, and Freddie were their instruments, and, as is now apparent, the more unsavory the means, the greater the growth.…

Cuomo …did more to set these forces of unregulated expansion in motion than any other secretary and then boasted about it, presenting his initiatives as crusades for racial and social justice. [Emphasis added.]

Bill Clinton gave Cuomo that power and backed his aggressive policies to the hilt. Bill Clinton, then, shares responsibility for the Great Recession. When will he be held accountable?"

 

[Faun]

The misery index is not a good indicator of the economy. And unemployment went as high as 10.8% because of policies set forth by Reagan and Volker to fight inflation.

And even then, despite a 10.8% unemployment rate, only 1.2 million jobs were lost from Reagan's recession ... compared to Bush's recession, which lost 8.6 million jobs.

Real GDP during Reagan's recession fell only 1.4% ... compared to Bush's recession when it fell a whopping 4.2%.

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

This is rather factual and you may even read it.

"Clinton, however, sowed the seeds of the Great Recession by helping to inflate the housing bubble, a key part of the financial debacle of 2007. But this wasn’t because he (not George W. Bush) signed two financial deregulation bills. Although Clinton legalized interstate banking in 1994 and commercial/investment banking combinations in 1999, that had nothing to do with the meltdown.

Then whyisClinton culpable? Because his secretary of housing and urban development, Andrew Cuomo, current governor of New York and a likely 2016 presidential aspirant, accelerated easy-housing policies and inflated the housing bubble, setting the stage for its collapse.

The meltdown was the consequence of a combination of the easy money and low interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve and the easy housing engineered by a variety of government agencies and policies. Those agencies include the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and two nominally private “government-sponsored enterprises” (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The agencies — along with laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act (passed in the 1970s, then fortified in the Clinton years), which required banks to make loans to people with poor and nonexistent credit histories — made widespread homeownership a national goal. This all led to a home-buying frenzy and an explosion of subprime and other non-prime mortgages, which banks and GSEs bundled into dubious securities and peddled to investors worldwide. Hovering in the background was the knowledge that the federal government would bail out troubled “too-big-to-fail” financial corporations, including Fannie and Freddie.

The housing boom could last for a while, but the bust was inevitable. When the Fed raised interest rates, things went kaboom. The Great Recession was on; we’re still suffering its effects. Without these government housing and monetary policies, the crisis would never have occurred.

Clinton’s contribution to the crisis lay in his appointment of Cuomo to HUD. Cuomo became HUD secretary in 1997 after becoming assistant secretary in 1993. In a heavily researched2008 articlein theVillage Voice, Wayne Barrett writes,

Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that — in combination with many other factors — helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded ‘kickbacks’ to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans. Three to four million families are now facing foreclosure, and Cuomo is one of the reasons why.

Perhaps the only domestic issue George Bush and Bill Clinton were in complete agreement about was maximizing home ownership, each trying to lay claim to a record percentage of homeowners, and both describing their efforts as a boon to blacks and Hispanics. HUD, Fannie, and Freddie were their instruments, and, as is now apparent, the more unsavory the means, the greater the growth.…

Cuomo …did more to set these forces of unregulated expansion in motion than any other secretary and then boasted about it, presenting his initiatives as crusades for racial and social justice. [Emphasis added.]

Bill Clinton gave Cuomo that power and backed his aggressive policies to the hilt. Bill Clinton, then, shares responsibility for the Great Recession. When will he be held accountable?"

Seriously, are you drunk?

You were blaming the Democrat-led 110th Congress for the meltdown? WTF does that have to do with Clinton?

Then you posted how the Democrat-led House ignored Bush's attempts to "persuade" them into fixing lending problems. I correct you by showing 2 bills that Democrat-led House passed, one of which made it to Bush's desk -- and you respond with that long-winded diatribe which has nothing to do with your idiotic inference that the Democrat-led 110th Congress was responsible for the financial meltdown.

 

[Dad2three]

Hmmm.... after 71 months in office, Obama's average unemployment rate is just one tenth of one percent higher than Reagan's was after 71 months in office. 8.2% versus 8.1%. Yet to hear righties tell the story, Obama is one of the worst presidents we've ever had while Reagan was one of the best.

Go figger

Reagan faced a larger economic hurdle with the twin problems of high unemployment and high inflation. Reagan did very well which is why he was re-elected in a landslide victory in 1984 winning every state in the Union except Minnesota. Obama can't get anywhere near that.

More importantly, there are things like National Security, Foreign Policy, and Defense Policy where Reagan was a lot more successful in than Obama in several ways.

The economy Reagan took over was nowhere near as bad as the economy Obama inherited. First and foremost, the economy was not even in recession in January, 1981. The unemployment rate was higher when Obama became president and increasing rapidly. Over a million jobs disappeared in one month.

And at this same point in both presidencies ... Obama has averaged 8.2% unemployment, Reagan averaged 8.1%. The unemployment rate is currently 5.6%, under Reagan it was 6.6%. Gallup currently scores Obama's JAR at 46%, Reagan was at 49%.

Regardless how you recall Reagan, they were pretty much evenly ranked at this point.

The misery index, combining unemployment and inflation was higher in Reagan's early term than it ever was under Obama. Unemployment early in Reagan's term reached 10.8%, higher than any month under Obama and inflation was in double digits. Obama never had to deal with high inflation. Reagan was forced to deal with BOTH high inflation and high unemployment at the same time.

"Unemployment early in Reagan's term reached 10.8%, higher than any month under Obama and inflation was in double digits."

01/1981 - Unemployment rate 7.5% …. Reagan sworn in.
02/1981 - 7.4%
03/1981 - 7.4%
04/1981 - 7.2%
05/1981 - 7.5%
06/1981 - 7.5%
07/1981 - 7.2%
08/1981 - 7.4% * Reagan CUTS taxes for top 1% and says unemployment will DROP to 6.9%.
09/1981 - 7.6%
10/1981 - 7.9%
11/1981 - 8.3%
12/1981 - 8.5%

01/1982 - 8.6%
02/1982 - 8.9%
03/1982 - 9.0%
04/1982 - 9.3%
05/1982 - 9.4%
06/1982 - 9.6%
07/1982 - 9.8%
08/1982 - 9.8%
09/1982 - 10.1%
10/1982 - 10.4%
11/1982 - 10.8% * Unemployment HITS a post WW2 RECORD of 10.8%.
12/1982 - 10.8%

01/1983 - 10.4%
02/1983 - 10.4%
03/1983 - 10.3%
04/1983 - 10.3%
05/1983 - 10.1%
06/1983 - 10.1%
07/1983 - 9.4%
06/1983 - 9.5%
07/1983 - 9.4%
08/1983 - 9.5%
09/1983 - 9.2%
10/1983 - 8.8%
11/1983 - 8.5%
12/1983 - 8.3%

01/1984 - 8.0%
02/1984 - 7.8%


It took Reagan 28 MONTHS to get unemployment rate back down below 8 percent.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data


AGAIN, CARTER HAD 9+ MILLION PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS GROWTH IN 4 YEARS VERSUS 14 MILLION FOR REAGAN'S 8 years, lol

 

[Dad2three]

I'm shocked that the President with the worst average unemployment rate since WW2 is the President who took office during the worst economic meltdown since WW2! ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED!

I am shocked that the President in office when the attack on 911 and Hurricane Katrina happened was able to have an average of 5.7% UE FOR 8 years, ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED!

Those 2 events, as bad as they were, paled in comparison in terms of the damage done to the economy. The only reason Duhbya averaged 5.7% was a) he started at 4.2%; and b) the housing boom, which pumped up GDP and created millions of jobs.

Fact remains, while Bush was in office the average unemployment rate was 5.27% which was great for main street American far better than it has been while Obama has been sitting in the White House. That's a hard indisputable FACT! People can have great reasons and arguments to try and explain those facts, but those are opinions which are debatable.

And yet. Duhbya will be remembered as the president who nearly doubled unemployment on his watch as well as being only other president along with Herbert Hoover since the Great Depression to leave office with fewer private sector jobs than when he started.

For people who only look at the first month and the last month of an administration and absurdly believe they can form a summary of that administration just based on that, that may be true. But for those who really dig into the details and look at all 96 months, they will find Bush was a far better President than his biased liberal critics would like to claim.

Even the Wall Street Journal says:

Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record

Bush On Jobs The Worst Track Record On Record - Real Time Economics - WSJ


Aughts were a lost decade for U.S. economy, workers

Aughts were a lost decade for U.S. economy workers

 

[TooTall]

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

This is rather factual and you may even read it.

"Clinton, however, sowed the seeds of the Great Recession by helping to inflate the housing bubble, a key part of the financial debacle of 2007. But this wasn’t because he (not George W. Bush) signed two financial deregulation bills. Although Clinton legalized interstate banking in 1994 and commercial/investment banking combinations in 1999, that had nothing to do with the meltdown.

Then whyisClinton culpable? Because his secretary of housing and urban development, Andrew Cuomo, current governor of New York and a likely 2016 presidential aspirant, accelerated easy-housing policies and inflated the housing bubble, setting the stage for its collapse.

The meltdown was the consequence of a combination of the easy money and low interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve and the easy housing engineered by a variety of government agencies and policies. Those agencies include the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and two nominally private “government-sponsored enterprises” (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The agencies — along with laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act (passed in the 1970s, then fortified in the Clinton years), which required banks to make loans to people with poor and nonexistent credit histories — made widespread homeownership a national goal. This all led to a home-buying frenzy and an explosion of subprime and other non-prime mortgages, which banks and GSEs bundled into dubious securities and peddled to investors worldwide. Hovering in the background was the knowledge that the federal government would bail out troubled “too-big-to-fail” financial corporations, including Fannie and Freddie.

The housing boom could last for a while, but the bust was inevitable. When the Fed raised interest rates, things went kaboom. The Great Recession was on; we’re still suffering its effects. Without these government housing and monetary policies, the crisis would never have occurred.

Clinton’s contribution to the crisis lay in his appointment of Cuomo to HUD. Cuomo became HUD secretary in 1997 after becoming assistant secretary in 1993. In a heavily researched2008 articlein theVillage Voice, Wayne Barrett writes,

Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that — in combination with many other factors — helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded ‘kickbacks’ to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans. Three to four million families are now facing foreclosure, and Cuomo is one of the reasons why.

Perhaps the only domestic issue George Bush and Bill Clinton were in complete agreement about was maximizing home ownership, each trying to lay claim to a record percentage of homeowners, and both describing their efforts as a boon to blacks and Hispanics. HUD, Fannie, and Freddie were their instruments, and, as is now apparent, the more unsavory the means, the greater the growth.…

Cuomo …did more to set these forces of unregulated expansion in motion than any other secretary and then boasted about it, presenting his initiatives as crusades for racial and social justice. [Emphasis added.]

Bill Clinton gave Cuomo that power and backed his aggressive policies to the hilt. Bill Clinton, then, shares responsibility for the Great Recession. When will he be held accountable?"

Seriously, are you drunk?

You were blaming the Democrat-led 110th Congress for the meltdown? WTF does that have to do with Clinton?

Then you posted how the Democrat-led House ignored Bush's attempts to "persuade" them into fixing lending problems. I correct you by showing 2 bills that Democrat-led House passed, one of which made it to Bush's desk -- and you respond with that long-winded diatribe which has nothing to do with your idiotic inference that the Democrat-led 110th Congress was responsible for the financial meltdown.

Apparently you are too fucking stupid to read what the laws that caused the eventual meltdown were and when and why they were signed into law. At last, a bill just before I leave office and after the crash. I am sure Bush was pleased.

 

[Dad2three]

The misery index is not a good indicator of the economy. And unemployment went as high as 10.8% because of policies set forth by Reagan and Volker to fight inflation.

And even then, despite a 10.8% unemployment rate, only 1.2 million jobs were lost from Reagan's recession ... compared to Bush's recession, which lost 8.6 million jobs.

Real GDP during Reagan's recession fell only 1.4% ... compared to Bush's recession when it fell a whopping 4.2%.

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

This is rather factual and you may even read it.

"Clinton, however, sowed the seeds of the Great Recession by helping to inflate the housing bubble, a key part of the financial debacle of 2007. But this wasn’t because he (not George W. Bush) signed two financial deregulation bills. Although Clinton legalized interstate banking in 1994 and commercial/investment banking combinations in 1999, that had nothing to do with the meltdown.

Then whyisClinton culpable? Because his secretary of housing and urban development, Andrew Cuomo, current governor of New York and a likely 2016 presidential aspirant, accelerated easy-housing policies and inflated the housing bubble, setting the stage for its collapse.

The meltdown was the consequence of a combination of the easy money and low interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve and the easy housing engineered by a variety of government agencies and policies. Those agencies include the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and two nominally private “government-sponsored enterprises” (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The agencies — along with laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act (passed in the 1970s, then fortified in the Clinton years), which required banks to make loans to people with poor and nonexistent credit histories — made widespread homeownership a national goal. This all led to a home-buying frenzy and an explosion of subprime and other non-prime mortgages, which banks and GSEs bundled into dubious securities and peddled to investors worldwide. Hovering in the background was the knowledge that the federal government would bail out troubled “too-big-to-fail” financial corporations, including Fannie and Freddie.

The housing boom could last for a while, but the bust was inevitable. When the Fed raised interest rates, things went kaboom. The Great Recession was on; we’re still suffering its effects. Without these government housing and monetary policies, the crisis would never have occurred.

Clinton’s contribution to the crisis lay in his appointment of Cuomo to HUD. Cuomo became HUD secretary in 1997 after becoming assistant secretary in 1993. In a heavily researched2008 articlein theVillage Voice, Wayne Barrett writes,

Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that — in combination with many other factors — helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded ‘kickbacks’ to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans. Three to four million families are now facing foreclosure, and Cuomo is one of the reasons why.

Perhaps the only domestic issue George Bush and Bill Clinton were in complete agreement about was maximizing home ownership, each trying to lay claim to a record percentage of homeowners, and both describing their efforts as a boon to blacks and Hispanics. HUD, Fannie, and Freddie were their instruments, and, as is now apparent, the more unsavory the means, the greater the growth.…

Cuomo …did more to set these forces of unregulated expansion in motion than any other secretary and then boasted about it, presenting his initiatives as crusades for racial and social justice. [Emphasis added.]

Bill Clinton gave Cuomo that power and backed his aggressive policies to the hilt. Bill Clinton, then, shares responsibility for the Great Recession. When will he be held accountable?"

LIAR


Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”



Q Did the Community Reinvestment Act under Carter/Clinton caused it?


A "Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/20081203_analysis.pdf

"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them.


Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum




Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up


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

 

[Dad2three]

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

This is rather factual and you may even read it.

"Clinton, however, sowed the seeds of the Great Recession by helping to inflate the housing bubble, a key part of the financial debacle of 2007. But this wasn’t because he (not George W. Bush) signed two financial deregulation bills. Although Clinton legalized interstate banking in 1994 and commercial/investment banking combinations in 1999, that had nothing to do with the meltdown.

Then whyisClinton culpable? Because his secretary of housing and urban development, Andrew Cuomo, current governor of New York and a likely 2016 presidential aspirant, accelerated easy-housing policies and inflated the housing bubble, setting the stage for its collapse.

The meltdown was the consequence of a combination of the easy money and low interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve and the easy housing engineered by a variety of government agencies and policies. Those agencies include the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and two nominally private “government-sponsored enterprises” (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The agencies — along with laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act (passed in the 1970s, then fortified in the Clinton years), which required banks to make loans to people with poor and nonexistent credit histories — made widespread homeownership a national goal. This all led to a home-buying frenzy and an explosion of subprime and other non-prime mortgages, which banks and GSEs bundled into dubious securities and peddled to investors worldwide. Hovering in the background was the knowledge that the federal government would bail out troubled “too-big-to-fail” financial corporations, including Fannie and Freddie.

The housing boom could last for a while, but the bust was inevitable. When the Fed raised interest rates, things went kaboom. The Great Recession was on; we’re still suffering its effects. Without these government housing and monetary policies, the crisis would never have occurred.

Clinton’s contribution to the crisis lay in his appointment of Cuomo to HUD. Cuomo became HUD secretary in 1997 after becoming assistant secretary in 1993. In a heavily researched2008 articlein theVillage Voice, Wayne Barrett writes,

Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that — in combination with many other factors — helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded ‘kickbacks’ to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans. Three to four million families are now facing foreclosure, and Cuomo is one of the reasons why.

Perhaps the only domestic issue George Bush and Bill Clinton were in complete agreement about was maximizing home ownership, each trying to lay claim to a record percentage of homeowners, and both describing their efforts as a boon to blacks and Hispanics. HUD, Fannie, and Freddie were their instruments, and, as is now apparent, the more unsavory the means, the greater the growth.…

Cuomo …did more to set these forces of unregulated expansion in motion than any other secretary and then boasted about it, presenting his initiatives as crusades for racial and social justice. [Emphasis added.]

Bill Clinton gave Cuomo that power and backed his aggressive policies to the hilt. Bill Clinton, then, shares responsibility for the Great Recession. When will he be held accountable?"

Seriously, are you drunk?

You were blaming the Democrat-led 110th Congress for the meltdown? WTF does that have to do with Clinton?

Then you posted how the Democrat-led House ignored Bush's attempts to "persuade" them into fixing lending problems. I correct you by showing 2 bills that Democrat-led House passed, one of which made it to Bush's desk -- and you respond with that long-winded diatribe which has nothing to do with your idiotic inference that the Democrat-led 110th Congress was responsible for the financial meltdown.

Apparently you are too fucking stupid to read what the laws that caused the eventual meltdown were and when and why they were signed into law. At last, a bill just before I leave office and after the crash. I am sure Bush was pleased.

Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up


When an economy booms or busts, money gets misspent, assets rise in prices, fortunes are made. Out of all that comes a set of easy-to-discern facts.

Here are key things we know based on data. Together, they present a series of tough hurdles for the big lie proponents.

•The boom and bust was global. Proponents of the Big Lie ignore the worldwide nature of the housing boom and bust.

Nonbank mortgage underwriting exploded from 2001 to 2007, along with the private label securitization market, which eclipsed Fannie and Freddie during the boom.

•Private lenders not subject to congressional regulations collapsed lending standards.

 

[Dad2three]

The economy Reagan took over was nowhere near as bad as the economy Obama inherited. First and foremost, the economy was not even in recession in January, 1981. The unemployment rate was higher when Obama became president and increasing rapidly. Over a million jobs disappeared in one month.

And at this same point in both presidencies ... Obama has averaged 8.2% unemployment, Reagan averaged 8.1%. The unemployment rate is currently 5.6%, under Reagan it was 6.6%. Gallup currently scores Obama's JAR at 46%, Reagan was at 49%.

Regardless how you recall Reagan, they were pretty much evenly ranked at this point.

The misery index, combining unemployment and inflation was higher in Reagan's early term than it ever was under Obama. Unemployment early in Reagan's term reached 10.8%, higher than any month under Obama and inflation was in double digits. Obama never had to deal with high inflation. Reagan was forced to deal with BOTH high inflation and high unemployment at the same time.

The misery index is not a good indicator of the economy. And unemployment went as high as 10.8% because of policies set forth by Reagan and Volker to fight inflation.

And even then, despite a 10.8% unemployment rate, only 1.2 million jobs were lost from Reagan's recession ... compared to Bush's recession, which lost 8.6 million jobs.

Real GDP during Reagan's recession fell only 1.4% ... compared to Bush's recession when it fell a whopping 4.2%.

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

"The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay."


Loans that were under government regulation did better than private loans, especially if they were regulated by the "Community Reinvestment Act."


Center for Public Integrity reported in 2011, mortgages financed by Wall Street from 2001 to 2008 were 4½ times more likely to be seriously delinquent than mortgages backed by Fannie and Freddie.

It is clear to anyone who has studied the financial crisis of 2008 that the private sector’s drive for short-term profit was behind it. More than 84 percent of the sub-prime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending. These private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year. Out of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006, only one was subject to the usual mortgage laws and regulations. The nonbank underwriters made more than 12 million subprime mortgages with a value of nearly $2 trillion. The lenders who made these were exempt from federal regulations.

Lest We Forget Why We Had A Financial Crisis - Forbes

LYING POS

 

[Dad2three]

The misery index is not a good indicator of the economy. And unemployment went as high as 10.8% because of policies set forth by Reagan and Volker to fight inflation.

And even then, despite a 10.8% unemployment rate, only 1.2 million jobs were lost from Reagan's recession ... compared to Bush's recession, which lost 8.6 million jobs.

Real GDP during Reagan's recession fell only 1.4% ... compared to Bush's recession when it fell a whopping 4.2%.

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

They addressed the problem. Someone should tell the homeless about it, they'd be thrilled to know.

Don't understand what Frannie/Freddie do huh? lol

 

[Dad2three]

I am shocked that the President in office when the attack on 911 and Hurricane Katrina happened was able to have an average of 5.7% UE FOR 8 years, ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED!

It was 5.27%

Right ... 1.1 point higher than what he inherited.

Again, the single ending month or beginning month of administration is not what is important. Its the average of what you did over the entire 96 months in office that is important. Crow all you want to about one or two months, most reasonable people would prefer to look at how someone did over 96 months rather than just two.

Really? Then you can show where economists have averaged out the unemployment rate under presidents before Obama became president?

But I understand why it's so important to you since it hides how presidents like Bush drastically increased unemployment.

In the history of the BLS keeping unemployment stats, only ONE Republican left office with a lower unemployment rate; by comparison NO Democrat left office with a higher unemployment rate. Not one. Not even Carter.

So how can the right respond to that abysmal record on employment? Kraft a new measurement they find more palatable.

The numbers don't reveal the depth of the problem. Our economy has essentially recovered, but it's not the same economy it was before the crash. Ask anyone currently attending any college or university what they think their chances are of landing a good job when they graduate. Ask anyone who works at McDonald's when they think they'll be moving on to a higher paying service or manufacturing job. Do that and you may get some indication of the actual state of the economy.

Lowest SUSTAINED tax 'burden' on the 'job creators' since Harding/Coolidge's great depression and the 'free market' isn't creating good paying jobs? WHY THE FUK ARE THEY STILL PAYING LOW TAXES???

 

[Faun]

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

This is rather factual and you may even read it.

"Clinton, however, sowed the seeds of the Great Recession by helping to inflate the housing bubble, a key part of the financial debacle of 2007. But this wasn’t because he (not George W. Bush) signed two financial deregulation bills. Although Clinton legalized interstate banking in 1994 and commercial/investment banking combinations in 1999, that had nothing to do with the meltdown.

Then whyisClinton culpable? Because his secretary of housing and urban development, Andrew Cuomo, current governor of New York and a likely 2016 presidential aspirant, accelerated easy-housing policies and inflated the housing bubble, setting the stage for its collapse.

The meltdown was the consequence of a combination of the easy money and low interest rates engineered by the Federal Reserve and the easy housing engineered by a variety of government agencies and policies. Those agencies include the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and two nominally private “government-sponsored enterprises” (GSEs), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The agencies — along with laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act (passed in the 1970s, then fortified in the Clinton years), which required banks to make loans to people with poor and nonexistent credit histories — made widespread homeownership a national goal. This all led to a home-buying frenzy and an explosion of subprime and other non-prime mortgages, which banks and GSEs bundled into dubious securities and peddled to investors worldwide. Hovering in the background was the knowledge that the federal government would bail out troubled “too-big-to-fail” financial corporations, including Fannie and Freddie.

The housing boom could last for a while, but the bust was inevitable. When the Fed raised interest rates, things went kaboom. The Great Recession was on; we’re still suffering its effects. Without these government housing and monetary policies, the crisis would never have occurred.

Clinton’s contribution to the crisis lay in his appointment of Cuomo to HUD. Cuomo became HUD secretary in 1997 after becoming assistant secretary in 1993. In a heavily researched2008 articlein theVillage Voice, Wayne Barrett writes,

Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that — in combination with many other factors — helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded ‘kickbacks’ to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans. Three to four million families are now facing foreclosure, and Cuomo is one of the reasons why.

Perhaps the only domestic issue George Bush and Bill Clinton were in complete agreement about was maximizing home ownership, each trying to lay claim to a record percentage of homeowners, and both describing their efforts as a boon to blacks and Hispanics. HUD, Fannie, and Freddie were their instruments, and, as is now apparent, the more unsavory the means, the greater the growth.…

Cuomo …did more to set these forces of unregulated expansion in motion than any other secretary and then boasted about it, presenting his initiatives as crusades for racial and social justice. [Emphasis added.]

Bill Clinton gave Cuomo that power and backed his aggressive policies to the hilt. Bill Clinton, then, shares responsibility for the Great Recession. When will he be held accountable?"

Seriously, are you drunk?

You were blaming the Democrat-led 110th Congress for the meltdown? WTF does that have to do with Clinton?

Then you posted how the Democrat-led House ignored Bush's attempts to "persuade" them into fixing lending problems. I correct you by showing 2 bills that Democrat-led House passed, one of which made it to Bush's desk -- and you respond with that long-winded diatribe which has nothing to do with your idiotic inference that the Democrat-led 110th Congress was responsible for the financial meltdown.

Apparently you are too fucking stupid to read what the laws that caused the eventual meltdown were and when and why they were signed into law. At last, a bill just before I leave office and after the crash. I am sure Bush was pleased.

So how did the Democrat-led House cause the crash??

I'm still waiting for you to explain how they did that?

And if I'm the one who's "too fucking stupid," why was I the one who had to educate you about the Democrat-led House passing two bills shortly after taking control, which you didn't know about?

You're welcome, by the way.

 

[Dad2three]

I am shocked that the President in office when the attack on 911 and Hurricane Katrina happened was able to have an average of 5.7% UE FOR 8 years, ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED!

It was 5.27%

Right ... 1.1 point higher than what he inherited.

Again, the single ending month or beginning month of administration is not what is important. Its the average of what you did over the entire 96 months in office that is important. Crow all you want to about one or two months, most reasonable people would prefer to look at how someone did over 96 months rather than just two.

Really? Then you can show where economists have averaged out the unemployment rate under presidents before Obama became president?

But I understand why it's so important to you since it hides how presidents like Bush drastically increased unemployment.

In the history of the BLS keeping unemployment stats, only ONE Republican left office with a lower unemployment rate; by comparison NO Democrat left office with a higher unemployment rate. Not one. Not even Carter.

So how can the right respond to that abysmal record on employment? Kraft a new measurement they find more palatable.

The numbers don't reveal the depth of the problem. Our economy has essentially recovered, but it's not the same economy it was before the crash. Ask anyone currently attending any college or university what they think their chances are of landing a good job when they graduate. Ask anyone who works at McDonald's when they think they'll be moving on to a higher paying service or manufacturing job. Do that and you may get some indication of the actual state of the economy.

Dec 2007

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush
The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup.

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush Vanity Fair

 

[Dad2three]

I am shocked that the President in office when the attack on 911 and Hurricane Katrina happened was able to have an average of 5.7% UE FOR 8 years, ABSOLUTELY SHOCKED!

It was 5.27%

Right ... 1.1 point higher than what he inherited.

Again, the single ending month or beginning month of administration is not what is important. Its the average of what you did over the entire 96 months in office that is important. Crow all you want to about one or two months, most reasonable people would prefer to look at how someone did over 96 months rather than just two.

Really? Then you can show where economists have averaged out the unemployment rate under presidents before Obama became president?

But I understand why it's so important to you since it hides how presidents like Bush drastically increased unemployment.

In the history of the BLS keeping unemployment stats, only ONE Republican left office with a lower unemployment rate; by comparison NO Democrat left office with a higher unemployment rate. Not one. Not even Carter.

So how can the right respond to that abysmal record on employment? Kraft a new measurement they find more palatable.

Look, its common sense that we would not base your record in school on the grades from your first month of classes and the last month. GPA takes into consideration all the grades you posted and averages them.

If you are going to accurately assess any President you need to look at each individual month and not just where things happened start in January 2001 and ended in December 2008. January 2001 and December 2008 don't tell you what happened during the Bush administration. You can't make an assessment of any President simply based on two months out of 96. It does not matter if you are talking about the economy, foreign policy, national security, education etc. In order to look at the entire record, your going to have to look beyond January 2001 and December 2008.

Part of you agrees, even if you won't admit it, since you continue to participate in this thread.

"January 2001 and December 2008 don't tell you what happened during the Bush administration"


Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Liminal]

Bush was doing just fine until the Democrats took the House in 2006, or did you forget that.

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

They addressed the problem. Someone should tell the homeless about it, they'd be thrilled to know.

Don't understand what Frannie/Freddie do huh? lol

They must be celebrating at homeless camps and parked cars right now. The problem has been solved, their salvation has come because Congress addressed the issue, homeless folks all across America can go home now. Genius, why didn't anyone think of it before?

 

[Dad2three]

So the liberal drool still talks about Bush, primarily the financial melt down that both Republicans and Democrats are responsible for. Come on, get over it, the past seven years has been a joke. Time to look forward and stop living in the revisionist past to deflect from the fact that under the current administration leadership has been focused on class warfare.

"So the liberal drool still talks about Bush, primarily the financial melt down that both Republicans and Democrats are responsible for."




Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse


"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDN'T REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Liminal]

It was 5.27%

Right ... 1.1 point higher than what he inherited.

Again, the single ending month or beginning month of administration is not what is important. Its the average of what you did over the entire 96 months in office that is important. Crow all you want to about one or two months, most reasonable people would prefer to look at how someone did over 96 months rather than just two.

Really? Then you can show where economists have averaged out the unemployment rate under presidents before Obama became president?

But I understand why it's so important to you since it hides how presidents like Bush drastically increased unemployment.

In the history of the BLS keeping unemployment stats, only ONE Republican left office with a lower unemployment rate; by comparison NO Democrat left office with a higher unemployment rate. Not one. Not even Carter.

So how can the right respond to that abysmal record on employment? Kraft a new measurement they find more palatable.

The numbers don't reveal the depth of the problem. Our economy has essentially recovered, but it's not the same economy it was before the crash. Ask anyone currently attending any college or university what they think their chances are of landing a good job when they graduate. Ask anyone who works at McDonald's when they think they'll be moving on to a higher paying service or manufacturing job. Do that and you may get some indication of the actual state of the economy.

Dec 2007

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush
The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup.

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush Vanity Fair

I wasn't arguing the causes of the disaster, merely disputing the accuracy of the unemployed numbers.

 

[Dad2three]

So? Let's see you explain how that caused the collapse of the economy......

The Housing bubble that was started under Clinton when he coerced lending institutions under penalty of law to loan money to those that would be unable to repay. That policy continued under Bush and the bundling of good and bad mortgages by the lending institutions that became worthless when the inflationary housing market price slowed, and people bailed out of their houses, caused the collapse of the economy. Bush realized the danger, but was unable to persuade the Democrats that controlled the House that the problem had to be resolved by the Congress.

Plenty of blame to go around unless you are a partisan hack.

You're either demented or lying (or both). In reality, when Democrats were in control of the House, they passed 2 bills to address the problem. One was introduced by Barney Frank (H.R.1427 in March, 2007), passed in the House but died in the Senate. The other, after Frank's bill died, was introduced by Nancy Pelosi (H.R.3221 in July, 2007) was ultimately signed by Bush in July, 2008.

They addressed the problem. Someone should tell the homeless about it, they'd be thrilled to know.

Don't understand what Frannie/Freddie do huh? lol

They must be celebrating at homeless camps and parked cars right now. The problem has been solved, their salvation has come because Congress addressed the issue, homeless folks all across America can go home now. Genius, why didn't anyone think of it before?

False premises, distortions and lies, without them what would right wingers do??? lol

I KNOW ANOTHER TAX CUT WILL HELP THE HOMELESS RIGHT/ Especially one going towards the 'job creators'??? LOL