Posted on 10/11/2008 6:12:24 PM PDT by listenhillary
WASHINGTON -- As the economy worsens and Election Day approaches, a conservative campaign that blames the global financial crisis on a government push to make housing more affordable to lower-class Americans has taken off on talk radio and e-mail.
Commentators say that's what triggered the stock market meltdown and the freeze on credit. They've specifically targeted the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which the federal government seized on Sept. 6, contending that lending to poor and minority Americans caused Fannie's and Freddie's financial problems.
Federal housing data reveal that the charges aren't true, and that the private sector, not the government or government-backed companies, was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis.
Subprime lending offered high-cost loans to the weakest borrowers during the housing boom that lasted from 2001 to 2007. Subprime lending was at its height from 2004 to 2006.
Federal Reserve Board data show that:
-More than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions.
-Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year.
(Excerpt) Read more at miamiherald.com ...
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&refer=home&sid=auCiw0BP4Fyk Currently, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac control about 90 percent of the nation's secondary mortgage market.
What BS. The private institutions did make most of the sub-prime loans, but that was because (a) they were intimidated into doing so by the CRA and the politicians, and (b) Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae were waiting anxious to buy them from the private businesses as soon as they were made.
You have to ask yourself one question: Why would any bank lend money to people with poor credit histories and low incomes? Greed? Hardly. There was the carrot of Fannie and Freddie buying up the mortgages and the stick of the Justice Department prosecuting the banks for redlining. No greedy person I know would lend his money to bad credit risks.
I’m sure we can count on the Miami Herald to set the record straight. They are probably an island of objectivity within the liberal MSM sea. (sarcasm)
I guess wise minds think alike.
If someone is registered there to post comments, suggest that they take a look at:
Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011 in Illinois
That’s the lawsuit that Obama helped bring against Citigroup to get them to lend to more people.
...and did so by ignoring sound loan underwriting practices because ACORN and others threatened to publicly brand the banks as racists if they actually denied loans to the unqualified borrowers. These loans were sold immediately to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
You aren't making loans voluntarily when someone has a gun to your head.
And who was arm twisting the private banks to make bad business decisions? Groups like Acorn, with people like Obama.
Total bull hockey
It must be my imagination that Fanny and Freddy were in dire straits and needed saving. Oh, I remember now, it was all those private lending institutions that failed. Fanny and Freddy just shook their heads and sad, “Naughty boys.”
Don’t these nincompoops realize that government policy incentivizes private entities to do things? Do they not realize that loans are more likely to be lent if the lenders know someone is there to back them? Let me tell you, private businesses acting on their own would never lend themselves into bankruptcy across an entire industry without government policy interfering. There just isn’t any way individual enterprisers would all make the same mistake at the same time on their own. If whoever is interpreting this data knew that, they’d be worthy of being called economists.
-Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year.
DUH!! Such loans were pushed, through legal action, by groups like ACORN. The CRA pushed this as well, and it's mandates didn't apply only to Freddie/Fannie - they applied to private mortgage entities as well, and perhaps to a greater extent. Does the Miami Herald have their collective heads in a dark, stinky place?
This is the biggest line of BS I've seen in several days from the left-wing media.
The following link does a really good job of explaining a lot of this world economic crisis, and predicting the next trouble areas. Well worth reading:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2103090/posts?page=4
Private lending institutions made the loans rather than having to answer to ACORN ‘auditors’ and paying fines for not doing making loans.
Big banks like Chase set aside the loan amount as an ante for when the house called the bet/the person making payments walked or balked.
Monies spent on said kitty went to cutting jobs—even on Dec. 24th—and sending work to India.
Whoa...are these people stuuuupid, or what?
It sounds like you have a good answer to this misleading article.
DATA PROVES: LSM carrying water for the National Democratic Party.
Golly. You said in a few sentences what McCain needs to say daily (and in response to almost every question).
“How’s the weather, Senator?”
“Not bad, but no bank would lend money to people with poor credit histories and low incomes out of greed.They did so because they knew they could sell the bad mortgages to Fannie and Freddie, and because they knew the Justice Department would prosecute them for racism if they did not.”
Must be lying, where's Countrywide, that lent to Dodd?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.