Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Todd, if you were as informed as you claim, you'd know that condescension doesn't make you more persuasive—it just exposes insecurity. Your argument ignores the broader context in which the government purchased subprime mortgages. From whom did the government buy these toxic assets? The private sector created, bundled, and sold these risky investments, largely due to deregulation and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, which they lobbied for extensively. The government, in turn, bailed them out when their reckless profiteering led to the financial collapse.
The private sector's drive for profits at the expense of economic stability is the real issue here. Without Glass-Steagall's repeal, the scale of the crisis would have been far smaller. Your attempt to deflect blame away from deregulation and corporate greed onto government purchases of these bad loans misses the mark entirely. Also, the link you provided is broken, which makes your reference invalid. If you’re going to cite evidence, ensure it’s accessible and reliable.
Your argument ignores the broader context in which the government purchased subprime mortgages. From whom did the government buy these toxic assets?
There is only one source of mortgages. The private sector.
Where did Fannie and Freddie buy high quality mortgages before the HUD mandate? You're right, the private sector.
How many low-quality mortgages, issued to people with low credit scores and small down-payments were created before the CRA? Some, but not as many. When the government forced banks to lower their standards in order to expand, banks lowered their standards. When the government forced banks to lower their standards in order to merge with other banks, banks lowered their standards.
When HUD forced Fannie and Freddie to make 30% of their mortgage purchases subprime mortgages, what did Fannie and Freddie do? They called up mortgage providers in the private sector and said, "We want to buy billions of dollars of subprime mortgages".
What does the private sector do when a government backed buyer demands billions of dollars of a product? LOL!
The private sector created, bundled, and sold these risky investments,
It sounds like, by 2008, the private sector only handled 30% of those risky investments. The government agencies plus Fannie and Freddie handled 70% of them. WOW!
The private sector's drive for profits at the expense of economic stability is the real issue here.
The public sector's multi-trillion-dollar demand for crap looks like it was a very large part of the real issue here.
Also, the link you provided is broken, which makes your reference invalid. If you’re going to cite evidence, ensure it’s accessible and reliable.
It's not broken. It's here......post #1248
![www.usmessageboard.com](https://www.usmessageboard.com/img/usmb-opengraph.jpg)
You are unemployed and want a new job, under a Democratic president you have a better chance of getting one!
Yeah, and spending it on illegal aliens. Now who could be behind that ? 🤔 You mean to tell me that Trump's plan to deport 11 million+ immigrants is not going to cause additional spending? You mean to say that Trump's wall, was going to be free? Mexico certainly was not going to pay for it...
![www.usmessageboard.com](https://www.usmessageboard.com/data/assets/logo/usmb-192x192.png)
It's you.
Last edited: