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

[bedowin62]

Snopes is biased; and that's been proven leftard

ok go cry now

 

[edthecynic]

once again you idiot; Bush retained clinton's top Intel guy. was he wrong in doing that?

Not for that, but for then IGNORING him!!!!

 

[bedowin62]

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


THE ANSWER IS "C" LEFTARD; FOR "FAIRNESS". LEFTARD, THE ANSWER IS ALWAYS "C"

LOL

 

[bedowin62]

once again you idiot; Bush retained clinton's top Intel guy. was he wrong in doing that?

Not for that, but for then IGNORING him!!!!

YAWN
i asked that idiot i'll ask you the same question

where were they?
did tenet know?

yes or no leftard?

 

[bedowin62]

who let ALL of them in, Bush or Clinton?

easy question leftard; waiting...............

 

[bedowin62]

i see two losers addicted to lying to themselves; wallowing BDS and living in the past

 

[bedowin62]

the loser is off getting more propaganda to spew

 

[Dad2three]

No source from your CRA "graph". I'm shocked. No really I am, lol

Predatory origination practices were especially prevalent within the HEL segment. Alt-A and subprime mortgages (sometimes called “B/C” mortgages to denote their lower credit quality) were sold to people with impaired credit history, or people who lacked the ability to make a large down payment, or people who did not have verification of their income. Alt-A is not strictly defined but is generally viewed as an intermediate category that encompasses borrowers with FICO scores to qualify for prime but who lack some other qualification.

The term subprime actually has a set of formal definitions. To qualify for a prime or conventional mortgage, a person needed 20% down and a credit FICO score of 660 or above (the average score is 710 on a scale from 450-900). Mortgagees who did not have these qualifications were not eligible for prime or conventional mortgages





In 2004, for the first time, these four categories of loans exceeded the prime market or conventional market. In 2001, the largest conventional (prime, government-insured) originator did 91% of its origination business in the conventional market, and only 9% in the non-prime market.


By 2005 the largest conventional originator was doing less than half of its origination business within the conventional sector (Inside Mortgage Finance 2009). In the peak of the mortgage craze in 2006, fully 70% of all loans that were made were unconventional mortgages.

This meant in a very short period of time, banks reoriented housing finance–one of the largest industries in the economy–around securitizations of highly risky loans. This astounding change in the character of the mortgage market was noticed by regulators and Congress. But, the Federal Reserve chose to ignore what was going on

• Allan Greenspan has famously testified before Congress that the reason he did nothing to stop this rapid growth in unconventional mortgages is that he believed banks would not have made these loans if they thought they were too risky.
  
  
  There were two main reasons banks pursued these risky subprime loans so aggressively. The first, which we discuss at greater length below, is that there were fewer and fewer loans left to sell in the saturated prime market. The other reason is that subprime origination and securitization turned out to be enormously profitable
  
  
  

• 
  According to a study by the consulting firm Mercer Oliver Wyman, nonconventional lending accounted for approximately half of originations in 2005, but over 85% of profits

http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf



NEXT

 

[bedowin62]

YAWN

so predictable

 

[bedowin62]

the more a leftard posts, the less the leftard actually says

 

[bedowin62]

B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-B-BUT I HAVE A GRAPH!!!!


LOL!

 

[Dad2three]

It passed a law requiring the government-backed agencies to “assist insured depository institutions to meet their obligations under the (CRA).” The goal was to help banks meet lending quotas by buying their CRA loans.

Weird, less than 6% of loans 2004-2007 were even DONE by CRA qualified banks, much less FOR the purposes

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST (THANKS "FREE MARKET"), ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US!

you're simply making a fool of yourself; Democrats DEMANDED THOSE LOANS BE MADE

Sure Bubba, sure. The WORLD WIDE creedit bubble and bust brought to US by Banksters and cheered on by Dubya, was the Dems fault *shaking head*



Jun 16, 2005 - The worldwide rise in house prices is the biggest bubble in history. .
Prepare for the economic pain when it pops


NEVER before have real house prices risen so fast, for so long, in so many countries. Property markets have been frothing from America, Britain and Australia to France, Spain and China. Rising property prices helped to prop up the world economy after the stockmarket bubble burst in 2000

According to estimates by The Economist, the total value of residential property in developed economies rose by more than $30 trillion over the past five years, to over $70 trillion, an increase equivalent to 100% of those countries' combined GDPs. Not only does this dwarf any previous house-price boom, it is larger than the global stockmarket bubble in the late 1990s (an increase over five years of 80% of GDP) or America's stockmarket bubble in the late 1920s (55% of GDP). In other words, it looks like the biggest bubble in history.

http://www.economist.com/node/4079027

 

[Dad2three]

It passed a law requiring the government-backed agencies to “assist insured depository institutions to meet their obligations under the (CRA).” The goal was to help banks meet lending quotas by buying their CRA loans.

Weird, less than 6% of loans 2004-2007 were even DONE by CRA qualified banks, much less FOR the purposes

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST (THANKS "FREE MARKET"), ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US!

THE CHART SHOWS $6 TRILLION WORTH LEFTARD?

is that your idea of 6%?

THE chart? Oh must be a Ed Pinto/AEI "math" chart right? lol

 

[edthecynic]

Snopes is biased; and that's been proven leftard

ok go cry now

A hell of a lot less biased than the extreme Right-tard Free Bacon site you posted.

 

[Dad2three]

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.

Weird, perhaps READ YOUR OWN LINK/ lol


"The average interest rate of Springleaf’s loans is 26 percent."


Democratic Donor Makes Fortune Off Subprime Mortgages Washington Free Beacon

HMM, WAS THAT WHAT DUBYA CHEERED ON WHEN HE IGNORED REGULATOR WARNINGS BUBBA?

 

[Dad2three]

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 ...

LOL, You mean laws the GOP/Conservatives fight since it WASN'T a requirement under Dems to give anyone with a pulse a loan, but BANKSTERS who fought for deregulation for 30 years so they could profit under ANOTHER GOP Prez

Headlines from your blog DON'T prove anything, nor does the blog, opinions based on BS


PLEASE give me the law that required ALL 5 INVESTMENT BANKS TO JUMP INTO THE SUBPRIME MESS (all 5 gone as investment banks today, 3 totally gone!!!)

 

[Dad2three]

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

Gawd YOU are stupid

 

[Dad2three]

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.

A Timeline of Republicans’ Failure to Stop Reckless Mortgage Lending



2004: Reps. Brad Miller (D ‐ NC), Mel Watt (D ‐ NC), and Frank worked to restrict predatory lending, but Republicans blocked their efforts. States across the country sought to beef up their own protections against predatory lending, but under the Bush administration regulators preempted state consumer protection regulation of federally ‐ chartered banks. This prevented any state laws or rules regarding predatory lending at federally ‐ chartered institutions from having any effect.


2004 ‐ 2007: While the Republican Congress and the Bush administration looked on – and even provided encouragement – Wall Street came to dominate the market for securitized mortgage products, including securities backed by mortgages (MBS) held by homebuyers who were never required to document any income, employment, or assets. A report from the Brookings Institution points out that, “while the GSEs dominated the securitization market during the 1980s and 1990s, by 2000 they began losing market share to private financial institutions as more and more subprime mortgages began to be securitized.”


http://democrats.financialservices....e_mortgage_lending/gses_subprime_timeline.pdf

 

[Dad2three]

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.

READING COMPREHENSION ISSUES HUH?


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


Q Why is it commonly called the “subprime bubble” ?

A Because the Bush Mortgage Bubble coincided with the explosive growth of Subprime mortgage and politics


THAT WAS BARNEY? F/F? CRA? lol

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

 

[Faun]

And of course YOU totally Bush bashing ignoratii.... YOU never mention the hurricanes that happened during 2001 through 2008.
NOTHING in the history of the USA has ever occurred as they did during his terms.

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters Weather Underground

Because ignorati like you don't see the connection between businesses being destroyed and TAX revenue PLUS disaster recovery funds being spent here let me help you!
What tax incentives were created in response to Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma?
Congress passed two major pieces of legislation providing tax relief to victims of the hurricanes that struck the Gulf Coast in the fall of 2005. The Katrina Emergency Tax Relief Act of 2005 (KETRA) established tax incentives to provide relief to Hurricane Katrina victims and stimulate donations to relief efforts. The Gulf Opportunity Zone Act of 2005 extended KETRA incentives to areas affected by Hurricanes Rita and Wilma and created additional tax incentives to support the economic recovery of the region, dubbed the Gulf Opportunity Zone (GO Zone). The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that, from 2006 to 2010, KETRA and the Gulf Opportunity Zone Act will cost $6.1 billion and $7.8 billion, respectively.
What tax incentives were created in response to Hurricanes Katrina Rita and Wilma
THESE cost TAX revenue PLUS !

Hurricane Katrina ALONE!!!
The economic effects of Hurricane Katrina, which hit Louisiana, Florida, Texas and Mississippi in late August 2005, were far-reaching. 2006, the Bush Administration had sought $105 billion for repairs and reconstruction in the region, making it the costliest natural disaster in US history.[1] And this does not account for damage to the economy caused by potential interruption of the oil supply and exports of commodities such as cotton. Also, before Hurricane Katrina, the region supported approximately one million non-farm jobs, with 600,000 of them in New Orleans. One study, by Mark Burton and Michael J. Hicks estimated the total economic impact to Louisiana and Mississippi may exceed $150 billion. Economic effects of Hurricane Katrina - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


But of course you idiots don't seem to take these events into consideration!
YET in spite of the recession starting in 2000, in spite of the $5 trillion in dot.com bust LOST tax revenue, in spite of hurricanes, this is the FACT of TAX REVENUE
under BUSH!!!
Tax revenues were increasing after the Recession/Dot.com bust/911 and worst hurricanes !
Historical Tables The White House
View attachment 47704

WAIT, NOW you want to argue tax revenues DIDN'T increase after BOTH OF DUBYA'S TAX CUTS (one while we were at war and expected to blow up the budgets!)?

HINT THE IMPACT OF DUBYA'S SUBPRIME BUBBLE HE CHEERED ON IN THE US ALONE WAS $45+ TRILLION!

"dubya's subprime bubble.."
and this is why you cant be taken seriously. Democrats not only supported those policies; they were neck-deep in the banks that offered sub-prime mortgages. democrats WANT TO RETURN TO THOSE POLICIES

You keep making this unsubstantiated claim....

You keep avoiding posting proof.