You are unemployed and want a new job, under a Democratic president you have a better chance of getting one!

[TruthNotBS]

Ok, let's discuss how bad loans came to fruition.

Never said that at all. Now you're melding the crisis into the root cause.

name the initial factor

what was reckless?

name the lending practice that lead to bad loans for people who couldn't pay them back?

Had nothing to do with bad loans, or what happened afterward.

How was giving bad loans to people who couldn't repay them profitable, yet highly profitable? Explain that program for the class.

nope obammy and acorn did that.

nope, untrue and disinformation.

banks who knew they weren't getting their money back worked the system available, to sell loans. All legal.

it was the first domino.

what greed? You keep slinging around the word.

the bad loans were government forced, we know how and why. for votes.

Global? explain?

First, you keep asking for the "initial factor" as if there was one single cause for the bad loans, but that’s not how complex systems work. The push for homeownership, supported by both government policies and private sector ambitions, was one factor. However, the deregulation of the financial industry, particularly the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, played a critical role. This deregulation allowed banks to mix commercial and investment banking activities, leading to a culture where risky lending practices were not only allowed but encouraged. The reckless behavior here was banks pushing loans they knew were risky, bundling them into mortgage-backed securities, and selling them off as safe investments, all while knowing they were anything but. That’s where the greed comes in—banks and financial institutions were chasing profits at the expense of long-term stability.

Your claim that the crisis had "nothing to do with Glass-Steagall" is just plain wrong. Without the repeal of Glass-Steagall, commercial banks wouldn’t have had the same opportunities to engage in the risky investment practices that amplified the crisis. The idea that giving bad loans to people who couldn’t repay them was somehow profitable isn’t hard to understand when you consider the short-term gains these banks made from selling those loans off as securities, making profits up front while offloading the risk onto others.

As for your dismissal of predatory practices like adjustable-rate mortgages, it shows a lack of understanding of how these financial products were designed to exploit borrowers. These loans were structured to seem affordable at first, only to become unmanageable when interest rates inevitably spiked, leading to massive defaults. The fact that banks legally worked the system doesn’t absolve them of blame—if anything, it highlights the failure of a deregulated system that allowed such reckless behavior.

Finally, your claim that the bad loans were "government-forced" for votes is nothing but conspiracy theory-level nonsense. The private sector aggressively pursued subprime lending because it was profitable in the short term, and they exploited every loophole and deregulation to maximize those profits. The global nature of the crisis is undeniable—it wasn’t just the U.S. economy that suffered, but economies around the world, as those toxic financial products were sold internationally. The crisis spread because of the interconnectedness of the global financial system, something that wouldn’t have happened if those bad loans had been contained within a regulated, responsible banking sector.

So, to sum it up: the 2008 crisis wasn’t just about bad loans—it was about a deregulated financial system that allowed greed and short-term profit motives to create a global catastrophe. That’s the full story, and it’s far more complex than just pointing fingers at government policies.

 

[TruthNotBS]

Let's break this down: you keep saying that the problem was simply bad loans, as if the crisis would have happened regardless of how those loans were handled. But that’s a fundamental misunderstanding of how financial systems work. Yes, bad loans were part of the problem,

What part of the problem was bad loans? 50%? 75%? 90%? 95%?

It's not about saying bad loans were "X% of the problem." It’s about understanding that without the predatory lending practices, the lack of regulatory oversight, the repeal of Glass-Steagall, and the financial engineering that turned bad loans into ticking time bombs, the crisis wouldn’t have escalated the way it did. It was the toxic combination of all these factors that created the perfect storm, not just the existence of bad loans themselves.

 

[jc456]

It's not about saying bad loans were "X% of the problem." It’s about understanding that without the predatory lending practices, the lack of regulatory oversight, the repeal of Glass-Steagall, and the financial engineering that turned bad loans into ticking time bombs, the crisis wouldn’t have escalated the way it did. It was the toxic combination of all these factors that created the perfect storm, not just the existence of bad loans themselves.

Now you’re just confused about your confusion

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's not about saying bad loans were "X% of the problem." It’s about understanding that without the predatory lending practices, the lack of regulatory oversight, the repeal of Glass-Steagall, and the financial engineering that turned bad loans into ticking time bombs, the crisis wouldn’t have escalated the way it did. It was the toxic combination of all these factors that created the perfect storm, not just the existence of bad loans themselves.

It's not about saying bad loans were "X% of the problem."

LOL!

It’s about understanding that without the predatory lending practices,


What predatory lending practices?


the lack of regulatory oversight


You're kidding, right?
Home mortgages are one of the most regulated products out there.


the repeal of Glass-Steagall,


That had nothing to do with bad mortgages.


and the financial engineering that turned bad loans into ticking time bombs


The bad loans were ticking timebombs, no financial engineering needed.


It was the toxic combination of all these factors


I can't help but notice that you ignored, again, the regulations that forced banks to write bad mortgages and the regulations that forced Fannie and Freddie to buy ever increasing numbers of bad mortgages.

You never said how much, dollar-wise, Fannie and Freddie bought in subprime paper.

 

[jc456]

First, you keep asking for the "initial factor"

I never asked for anything. I provided facts.

as if there was one single cause for the bad loans,

There was only one. Government forced loans to people who couldn’t repay them. Bad loan.

but that’s not how complex systems work.

Mortgages aren’t complex at all .

The push for homeownership, supported by both government policies

No policies, just forced participation

and private sector ambitions,

Government interference

However, the deregulation of the financial industry, particularly the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, played a critical role.

Has no bearing on creating mortgages

This deregulation allowed banks to mix commercial and investment banking activities, leading to a culture where risky lending practices were not only allowed but encouraged.

No bearing on loans

The reckless behavior here was banks pushing loans they knew were risky

Forced by government interference

, bundling them into mortgage-backed securities,

That’s not how one gets a loan

and selling them off as safe investments, all while knowing they were anything but. That’s where the greed comes in—banks and financial institutions were chasing profits at the expense of long-term stability.

Banks got out of bad loans

Your claim that the crisis had "nothing to do with Glass-Steagall" is just plain wrong.

I’m sorry you don’t understand mortgages

Without the repeal of Glass-Steagall, commercial banks

Give loans all the time and have no issues

wouldn’t have had the same opportunities to engage in the risky investment practices that amplified the crisis. The idea that giving bad loans to people who couldn’t repay them was somehow profitable isn’t hard to understand when you consider the short-term gains these banks made from selling those loans off as securities, making profits up front while offloading the risk onto others.

Loans are personal in this program acorn put through

As for your dismissal of predatory practices like adjustable-rate mortgages,

You should look up HSA loans

it shows a lack of understanding of how these financial products were designed to exploit borrowers. These loans were structured to seem affordable at first, only to become unmanageable when interest rates inevitably spiked, leading to massive defaults.

Again you obviously don’t know anything about HSA loans

The fact that banks legally worked the system doesn’t absolve them of blame—if anything, it highlights the failure of a deregulated system that allowed such reckless behavior.

Legal

Finally, your claim that the bad loans were "government-forced" for votes is nothing but conspiracy theory-level nonsense.

Prove me wrong.

The private sector aggressively pursued subprime lending because it was profitable in the short term, and they exploited every loophole and deregulation to maximize those profits. The global nature of the crisis is undeniable—it wasn’t just the U.S. economy that suffered, but economies around the world, as those toxic financial products were sold internationally. The crisis spread because of the interconnectedness of the global financial system, something that wouldn’t have happened if those bad loans had been contained within a regulated, responsible banking sector.

So, to sum it up: the 2008 crisis wasn’t just about bad loans—it was about a deregulated financial system that allowed greed and short-term profit motives to create a global catastrophe. That’s the full story, and it’s far more complex than just pointing fingers at government policies.

Why do you feel lithe need to write a book every post?

 

[TruthNotBS]

I never asked for anything. I provided facts.

There was only one. Government forced loans to people who couldn’t repay them. Bad loan.

Mortgages aren’t complex at all .

No policies, just forced participation

Government interference

Has no bearing on creating mortgages

No bearing on loans

Forced by government interference

That’s not how one gets a loan

Banks got out of bad loans

I’m sorry you don’t understand mortgages

Give loans all the time and have no issues

Loans are personal in this program acorn put through

You should look up HSA loans

Again you obviously don’t know anything about HSA loans

Legal

Prove me wrong.

Why do you feel lithe need to write a book every post?

1. Government Policies and Deregulation: Yes, there were government policies aimed at increasing homeownership, but these policies did not force banks to engage in predatory lending practices. The private sector took advantage of these policies, fueled by the deregulation of the financial industry, which removed critical safeguards like Glass-Steagall. This deregulation allowed commercial banks to dive into investment banking, leading to risky practices that amplified the crisis.
2. Predatory Lending and Subprime Mortgages: Banks and financial institutions aggressively pushed subprime loans onto people who clearly couldn’t afford them because these loans were highly profitable in the short term. They didn’t just issue these loans and sit on them—they bundled them into mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and sold them off as safe investments, spreading the risk across the global financial system. This wasn’t about the government forcing banks’ hands; it was about banks exploiting the system to maximize profits.
3. Adjustable-Rate Mortgages and Other Financial Products: These products were designed to lure in borrowers with low initial rates that would later spike, making the loans unmanageable for many. Dismissing this as a non-issue ignores how these predatory products contributed to the wave of foreclosures that followed.

The crisis was about much more than just bad loans. It was about how those loans were packaged, sold, and leveraged in a deregulated environment that prioritized short-term gains over long-term stability. Blaming it all on government policies is not only inaccurate but also a convenient way to ignore the greed and recklessness that were at the heart of the financial meltdown.

As for your comment on the length of my posts, discussing complex issues requires more than just a few one-liners. If you’re not interested in understanding the full scope of what happened, then perhaps you should reconsider engaging in debates on such serious topics.

 

[TruthNotBS]

It's not about saying bad loans were "X% of the problem."

LOL!

It’s about understanding that without the predatory lending practices,


What predatory lending practices?


the lack of regulatory oversight


You're kidding, right?
Home mortgages are one of the most regulated products out there.


the repeal of Glass-Steagall,


That had nothing to do with bad mortgages.


and the financial engineering that turned bad loans into ticking time bombs


The bad loans were ticking timebombs, no financial engineering needed.


It was the toxic combination of all these factors


I can't help but notice that you ignored, again, the regulations that forced banks to write bad mortgages and the regulations that forced Fannie and Freddie to buy ever increasing numbers of bad mortgages.

You never said how much, dollar-wise, Fannie and Freddie bought in subprime paper.

Todd, it’s clear that you’re doubling down on your misunderstanding of what led to the 2008 financial crisis. Let’s address your points one by one.

First, the predatory lending practices were very real. Banks and mortgage companies aggressively pushed subprime loans onto people who were not in a position to afford them. These loans often included adjustable-rate mortgages with low initial rates that would later spike, trapping borrowers in debt they couldn’t manage. This wasn’t just a case of offering mortgages—it was a deliberate strategy to exploit vulnerable borrowers for short-term profit. That’s what makes it predatory.

Second, you claim that home mortgages are highly regulated, but the issue wasn’t the regulation of the mortgages themselves—it was the lack of regulation around how those mortgages were bundled, rated, and sold as securities. The repeal of Glass-Steagall allowed commercial banks to engage in risky investment practices, which included the creation and sale of mortgage-backed securities (MBS) packed with subprime loans. This is where the lack of oversight became a critical issue. Glass-Steagall’s repeal didn’t cause the bad loans, but it allowed those bad loans to be bundled into financial products that spread risk throughout the global economy.

Your argument that "bad loans were ticking time bombs, no financial engineering needed" completely ignores how those loans were weaponized through financial engineering. The problem wasn’t just the loans themselves—it was how they were packaged and sold off as low-risk investments, even though they were anything but. This practice turned what could have been a contained issue into a global financial disaster.

Finally, let’s talk about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Yes, they bought subprime mortgages, but they weren’t the only players in the game, nor were they the primary drivers of the crisis. Private financial institutions were deeply involved in the creation and sale of toxic mortgage-backed securities. The total dollar amount of subprime paper bought by Fannie and Freddie is part of the story, but it’s not the whole story. The crisis was the result of a systemic failure that included private sector greed, inadequate regulation, and the reckless behavior of financial institutions that prioritized short-term profits over long-term stability. Ignoring these factors doesn’t change the reality of what happened.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Todd, it’s clear that you’re doubling down on your misunderstanding of what led to the 2008 financial crisis. Let’s address your points one by one.

First, the predatory lending practices were very real. Banks and mortgage companies aggressively pushed subprime loans onto people who were not in a position to afford them. These loans often included adjustable-rate mortgages with low initial rates that would later spike, trapping borrowers in debt they couldn’t manage. This wasn’t just a case of offering mortgages—it was a deliberate strategy to exploit vulnerable borrowers for short-term profit. That’s what makes it predatory.

Second, you claim that home mortgages are highly regulated, but the issue wasn’t the regulation of the mortgages themselves—it was the lack of regulation around how those mortgages were bundled, rated, and sold as securities. The repeal of Glass-Steagall allowed commercial banks to engage in risky investment practices, which included the creation and sale of mortgage-backed securities (MBS) packed with subprime loans. This is where the lack of oversight became a critical issue. Glass-Steagall’s repeal didn’t cause the bad loans, but it allowed those bad loans to be bundled into financial products that spread risk throughout the global economy.

Your argument that "bad loans were ticking time bombs, no financial engineering needed" completely ignores how those loans were weaponized through financial engineering. The problem wasn’t just the loans themselves—it was how they were packaged and sold off as low-risk investments, even though they were anything but. This practice turned what could have been a contained issue into a global financial disaster.

Finally, let’s talk about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Yes, they bought subprime mortgages, but they weren’t the only players in the game, nor were they the primary drivers of the crisis. Private financial institutions were deeply involved in the creation and sale of toxic mortgage-backed securities. The total dollar amount of subprime paper bought by Fannie and Freddie is part of the story, but it’s not the whole story. The crisis was the result of a systemic failure that included private sector greed, inadequate regulation, and the reckless behavior of financial institutions that prioritized short-term profits over long-term stability. Ignoring these factors doesn’t change the reality of what happened.

These loans often included adjustable-rate mortgages with low initial rates that would later spike, trapping borrowers in debt they couldn’t manage.


Are adjustable-rate mortgages predatory?


Second, you claim that home mortgages are highly regulated


Only because they are.


but the issue wasn’t the regulation of the mortgages themselves—it was the lack of regulation around how those mortgages were bundled, rated, and sold as securities.


Issuing securities isn't highly regulated? Are you kidding me?


The repeal of Glass-Steagall allowed commercial banks to engage in risky investment practices


Stop lying. Glass-Steagall wouldn't have prevented these mortgages from being written, sold or securitized.


Glass-Steagall’s repeal didn’t cause the bad loans, but it allowed those bad loans to be bundled into financial products that spread risk throughout the global economy.


Glass-Steagall wouldn't have prevented Fannie, Freddie, Countrywide or Goldman Sachs from buying a single one of these mortgages and securitizing the hell out of it.


The problem wasn’t just the loans themselves—it was how they were packaged and sold off as low-risk investments,


You're so clueless. If the mortgages were all AAA with 20% down, they wouldn't have failed, there would have been no crisis. But they were shitty loans.


This practice turned what could have been a contained issue into a global financial disaster.


A trillion dollars of losses on the banks' balance sheets is better than a trillion in losses spread around the world? Why?


Finally, let’s talk about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Yes, they bought subprime mortgages, but they weren’t the only players in the game


They weren't the only players. How much did they buy?


The total dollar amount of subprime paper bought by Fannie and Freddie is part of the story,


Let's hear that part. How much?


The crisis was the result of a systemic failure that included private sector greed, inadequate regulation,


Don't forget damaging regulation that helped start and inflate the bubble. A lot.

 

[beagle9]

The government did have a role in the 2008 financial crisis, but it’s important to understand that it was a combination of government actions and private sector greed that led to the meltdown. The government, through policies like the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) and other initiatives, did encourage homeownership, which led to an increase in subprime lending. However, it’s a gross oversimplification to blame the government alone.

A key aspect was the deregulation that occurred in the years leading up to the crisis. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 allowed commercial banks to engage in risky investment banking activities. This deregulation enabled the creation of complex financial products like mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), which were instrumental in spreading risk across the financial system.

Additionally, government-sponsored enterprises like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did play a role by purchasing subprime mortgages, but they were not the only entities involved. Private lenders and Wall Street firms aggressively pushed subprime loans and created the financial instruments that ultimately destabilized the economy. The ratings agencies, which were supposed to provide objective assessments of risk, also failed by giving high ratings to toxic assets, further exacerbating the problem.

So, while the government’s actions were certainly a factor, the crisis was largely driven by a combination of deregulation, private sector greed, and a lack of proper oversight. It wasn’t a simple case of government manipulation; it was a systemic failure involving multiple actors across both the public and private sectors.

The government was the root cause, and Democrat government at that. JMO.

Hell Democrat government and leftist are actually at it again.

1st it was to tear down that wall or not finish it. Then it was to allow millions of illegals in here for an political agenda that is now backfiring bigly on the leberallies.

Sadly it's not a melt down (yet), but rather it is responsible for the innocent American lives that have fallen due to the illegals that came here under the guise of asylum seeker. Yes, these so called asylum but deadly seekers by their predatory actions have since killed our innocent, and we as a nation under Democrat philosophy have sat back on our hands watching the carnage unfold in many vulnerable cities and/or state's.

 

[jc456]

1. Government Policies and Deregulation: Yes, there were government policies aimed at increasing homeownership, but these policies did not force banks to engage in predatory lending practices. The private sector took advantage of these policies, fueled by the deregulation of the financial industry, which removed critical safeguards like Glass-Steagall. This deregulation allowed commercial banks to dive into investment banking, leading to risky practices that amplified the crisis.
2. Predatory Lending and Subprime Mortgages: Banks and financial institutions aggressively pushed subprime loans onto people who clearly couldn’t afford them because these loans were highly profitable in the short term. They didn’t just issue these loans and sit on them—they bundled them into mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and sold them off as safe investments, spreading the risk across the global financial system. This wasn’t about the government forcing banks’ hands; it was about banks exploiting the system to maximize profits.
3. Adjustable-Rate Mortgages and Other Financial Products: These products were designed to lure in borrowers with low initial rates that would later spike, making the loans unmanageable for many. Dismissing this as a non-issue ignores how these predatory products contributed to the wave of foreclosures that followed.

The crisis was about much more than just bad loans. It was about how those loans were packaged, sold, and leveraged in a deregulated environment that prioritized short-term gains over long-term stability. Blaming it all on government policies is not only inaccurate but also a convenient way to ignore the greed and recklessness that were at the heart of the financial meltdown.

As for your comment on the length of my posts, discussing complex issues requires more than just a few one-liners. If you’re not interested in understanding the full scope of what happened, then perhaps you should reconsider engaging in debates on such serious topics.

What Was the Subprime Meltdown? What Happened and Consequences

The subprime meltdown includes the economic and market fallout following the housing boom and bust from 2007 to 2009.

www.investopedia.com