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

[bedowin62]

Democratic Donor Makes Fortune Off Subprime Mortgages ...
freebeacon.com/.../democratic-donor-make...

• Cached

The Washington Free Beacon
Loading...
Aug 11, 2015 - The man described on Monday by the Wall Street Journal as the new king of subprime lending is a major Democratic donor.

 

[Dad2three]

here is a Democrat insisting there was nothing wrong in the mortgage loan industry

You mean the CONservative Dem who became a GOPer? Weird, which guys had responsibility of F/F (GSE's) and FBI, HUD, SEC, etc 2004-2007 again?


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


Fannie & Freddie Mac & CRA didn’t cause the Mortgage Crisis

Fannie Freddie Mac CRA didn t cause the Mortgage Crisis Fact and Myth


BUT DUBYA SURE HOSED F/F

June 17, 2004


Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004

 

[bedowin62]

Dodd-Frank Regulators Admit That Clinton's Subprime ...
Dodd-Frank Regulators Admit That Clinton s Subprime Mortgage Scheme Caused the Economic and Housing Crisis Scotty Starnes s Blog

• Cached
• Similar

Jan 11, 2013 - Who pushed for these subprime mortgages? Democrats. Banks use to only lend to people who had good credit and real income to pay for ...

 

[bedowin62]

YAWN

so typical of left-wing crybabies to run away from facts and to spew propaganda

 

[Dad2three]

a community organizer from Chicago SUED BANKS TO EASE THEIR LENDING PRACTICES

HIS INITIALS ARE BHO

Liar. Try google it's your friend

Obama Sued To Stop Mortgage 'Red-Lining'. (you know something illegal!!!)

snopes.com Obama Required Banks to Lend Money to Poor People

two different things you dullard

try again

You REALLY need to grow a brain Bubba, THAT''S what Obama did when he worked the case!

exactly you stupid phuk; he wanted redlining stopped and for them to GET MORTGAGES AT SUB-PRIME RATES

HINT: Subprime rates AREN'T supposed to be low rates Bubs, the OPPOSITE...

 

[bedowin62]

Democrats DEMANDED sub-prime loans be made in the name of "fairness"

this is your mess leftard

 

[bedowin62]

the taxpayer covered the difference between the rates idiot
that is the whole point

 

[bedowin62]

and it's happening again under obama leftard:

Subprime mortgages are making a comeback - Mar. 21, 2014
money.cnn.com/2014/03/21/real.../subprime-mortgages/

• Cached
• Similar

CNNMoney
Loading...
Mar 21, 2014 - During the housing bubble, lenders were handing out subprime loans with cheap teaser rates and little or no down payments. Now, lenders are

 

[bedowin62]

Congressman Frank, of course, blamed the financial crisis on the failure adequately to regulate the banks. In this, he is following the traditional Washington practice of blaming others for his own mistakes. For most of his career, Barney Frank was the principal advocate in Congress for using the government's authority to force lower underwriting standards in the business of housing finance. Although he claims to have tried to reverse course as early as 2003, that was the year he made the oft-quoted remark, "I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing." Rather than reversing course, he was pressing on when others were beginning to have doubts.

 

[bedowin62]

His most successful effort was to impose what were called "affordable housing" requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 1992. Before that time, these two government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) had been required to buy only mortgages that institutional investors would buy--in other words, prime mortgages--but Frank and others thought these standards made it too difficult for low income borrowers to buy homes. The affordable housing law required Fannie and Freddie to meet government quotas when they bought loans from banks and other mortgage originators.

 

[bedowin62]

At first, this quota was 30%; that is, of all the loans they bought, 30% had to be made to people at or below the median income in their communities. HUD, however, was given authority to administer these quotas, and between 1992 and 2007, the quotas were raised from 30% to 50% under Clinton in 2000 and to 55% under Bush in 2007. Despite Frank's effort to make this seem like a partisan issue, it isn't. The Bush administration was just as guilty of this error as the Clinton administration. And Frank is right to say that he eventually saw his error and corrected it when he got the power to do so in 2007, but by then it was too late.

 

[bedowin62]

It is certainly possible to find prime mortgages among borrowers below the median income, but when half or more of the mortgages the GSEs bought had to be made to people below that income level, it was inevitable that underwriting standards had to decline. And they did. By 2000, Fannie was offering no-downpayment loans. By 2002, Fannie and Freddie had bought well over $1 trillion of subprime and other low quality loans. Fannie and Freddie were by far the largest part of this effort, but the FHA, Federal Home Loan Banks, Veterans Administration and other agencies--all under congressional and HUD pressure--followed suit. This continued through the 1990s and 2000s until the housing bubble--created by all this government-backed spending--collapsed in 2007.

 

[Dad2three]

Democrats and the media insist the Community Reinvestment Act, the anti-redlining law beefed up by President Clinton, had nothing to do with the subprime mortgage crisis and recession.
But a new study by the respected National Bureau of Economic Research finds, “Yes, it did. We find that adherence to that act led to riskier lending by banks.”
Added NBER: “There is a clear pattern of increased defaults for loans made by these banks in quarters around the (CRA) exam. Moreover, the effects are larger for loans made within CRA tracts,” or predominantly low-income and minority areas.
To satisfy CRA examiners, “flexible” lending by large banks rose an average 5% and those loans defaulted about 15% more often, the 43-page study found.
The strongest link between CRA lending and defaults took place in the runup to the crisis — 2004 to 2006 — when banks rapidly sold CRA mortgages for securitization by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Wall Street.
CRA regulations are at the core of Fannie’s and Freddie’s so-called affordable housing mission. In the early 1990s, a Democrat Congress gave HUD the authority to set and enforce (through fines) CRA-grade loan quotas at Fannie and Freddie.

MORE right wing junk? lol



Debunking the CRA Myth – Again


Abstract
Since its enactment in 1977, the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) has been the subject of extensive debate, which has intensified in the wake of the subprime crisis. One of the pernicious myths surrounding CRA is that it encouraged banks to make risky loans to low‐ and moderate‐income borrowers.

This argument has been made primarily by conservative think tanks, like American Enterprise Institute, who find it convenient to include CRA in their general position against governmental intervention in the private market.

But efforts to blame CRA for the most recent crisis reflect a deep misunderstanding of the scope and scale of CRA and its implementation. Indeed, the “blame the CRA” story has been refuted by industry leaders and researchers time and time again. Unfortunately, this narrative refuses to go away.

In this paper, center researchers review the research evidence on CRA and show that there is no credible research to support the assertion that CRA contributed to an increase in risky lending during the subprime boom. In particular, they present a detailed rebuttal of a recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, titled “Did the Community Reinvestment Act Lead to Risky Lending,” which purports to find evidence that “yes, it did.” The study is severely flawed, both in terms of the empirical analysis and in the authors’ interpretation of the results, and thus fails to contribute to the existing literature on both the strengths and weaknesses of CRA.


UNC Center for Community Capital








Low-income loans didn't cause the financial crisis



Manuel Adelino of the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University, Antoinette Schoar of the MIT Sloan School of Management and Felipe Severino of the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth undermines this story. In their paper, "Changes in Buyer Composition and theExpansion of Credit During the Boom," the researchers found:"While there was a rapid expansion in overall mortgage origination during this time period, the fraction of new mortgage dollars going to each income group was stable. In other words, the poor did not represent a higher fraction of the mortgage loans originated over the period. In addition, borrowers in the middle and top of the distribution are the ones that contributed most significantly to the increase in mortgages in default after 2007. Taken together, the evidence in the paper suggests that there was no decoupling of mortgage growth from income growth where unsustainable credit was flowing disproportionally to poor people."

Lots of previous evidence supports this conclusion. For example, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission established by Congress concluded:

"...the CRA was not a significant factor in subprime lending or the crisis. Many subprime lenders were not subject to the CRA. Research indicates only 6% of high-cost loans -- a proxy for subprime loans -- had any connection to the law. Loans made by CRA-regulated lenders in the neighborhoods in which they were required to lend were half as likely to default as similar loans made in the same neighborhoods by independent mortgage originators not subject to the law."

Low-income households didn t cause the financial crisis - CBS News

 

[bedowin62]

it's so embarrassing. you go away for a few minutes and it's clear you're just fetching some spoon-fed talking point to blow up in giant font here

it's AWKWARD watching y ou make a fool of yourself Dad

 

[Dad2three]

Democrats and the media insist the Community Reinvestment Act, the anti-redlining law beefed up by President Clinton, had nothing to do with the subprime mortgage crisis and recession.
But a new study by the respected National Bureau of Economic Research finds, “Yes, it did. We find that adherence to that act led to riskier lending by banks.”
Added NBER: “There is a clear pattern of increased defaults for loans made by these banks in quarters around the (CRA) exam. Moreover, the effects are larger for loans made within CRA tracts,” or predominantly low-income and minority areas.
To satisfy CRA examiners, “flexible” lending by large banks rose an average 5% and those loans defaulted about 15% more often, the 43-page study found.
The strongest link between CRA lending and defaults took place in the runup to the crisis — 2004 to 2006 — when banks rapidly sold CRA mortgages for securitization by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Wall Street.
CRA regulations are at the core of Fannie’s and Freddie’s so-called affordable housing mission. In the early 1990s, a Democrat Congress gave HUD the authority to set and enforce (through fines) CRA-grade loan quotas at Fannie and Freddie.

The busting of the housing bubble has been met with much finger-pointing. Advocates of smaller government and an unfettered free market have been quick to blame Fannie & Freddie and the Community Reinvestment Act, claiming that this is ‘another example’ of government incompetence. The argument of course, is that Fannie & Freddie (nationalized banks) made bad loans and the CRA pushed (if not forced) private lenders to make loans to borrowers who, under normal lending standards, would not qualify for loans.

The problem with this argument is that it was not GSE’s (Government-Sponsored Enterprise) like Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) that made the bulk of these loans, but rather private lenders in a less regulated sector (and therefore not subject to the CRA).

Fannie Freddie Mac CRA didn t cause the Mortgage Crisis Fact and Myth

 

[bedowin62]

You have no sense of shame; you're so transparent

i actually pity you

 

[bedowin62]

you go fetch 3 or 4 copy and paste articles at a time; desperately hoping to stay ahead while people dicipher through the propaganda you're spewing

 

[Dad2three]

Democrats made risky lending practices THE LAW

gosh ur stupid

REALLY? NAME THIS LAW:


"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.

NOW NAME THE LAW REQUIRING THIS BUBS? LOL




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

 

[Dad2three]

redlining is where poeple are prevented from getting loans and suc

obama sued to get them not only loans but sub-prime loans y ou idiot

you made my point for me

thanks!

Sure Bubba, sure. To slow to try reading the Snopes link? I get it Bubs

How about this "Snopes" Link???
Accuracy In Politics Snopes Got Snoped

An ad hom on Snopes? You mean they CAN'T refute it? Got it. LOL
'

 

[bedowin62]

all the left-wing talking points essentially say the same thing; a bunch of people the Left INSISTS they are superior to intellectually constantly got the best of them and their big Progressive brains


lol