Wall Street Did It? ( Not! Govt. Housing Bubble )

http://www.investors.com/ ^ | October 20 2011 | IBD

[ronnie raygun]

The GOP remains SILENT! SILENT! Notice not to much talk about repealing zerocare either.

[Meet the New Boss]

the person who poisons the well or the one who distributes the water?

My own preferred metaphor is not a water well, but bags of crap.

The government (at the behest of ACORN and people who think like Obama) demanded that the bags be filled with crap.

Wall Street handed out the bags of crap to investors.

The institutional investors who took the bags of crap could have looked in the bags, but because the market was dominated by Fannie and Freddie and had the imprimatur of the US government, they assumed that no matter what the US government would make sure they didn't have to eat the crap.

The derivatives market is like people playing musical bags of crap. All a derivative does is to simply identify which institutions are actually holding bags of crap when the music stops.

[org.whodat]

You had no original point.

[Para-Ord.45]

Now you`ve simply devolved into being obtuse and petulant after your humiliation at being intellectually eviscerated .

Lesson: Realize you attempted to peddle the neo-marxist narrative and got your ass handed to you and move on.

[Hoplite]

Strange how someone digging themselves a hole can imagine they’ve just won a round of “King of the Mountain”.

[org.whodat]

You are delusional, you have made no point, the historical time line of event is the time line. Things happened in that order, banks were making loans to anyone that could breath, because the could sell them, get their money back and make 5 to 10000, a pop. No one was holding a damn gun on them.

[Para-Ord.45]

Keep insisting your last domino is the first won`t make it a reality:

In 1995 the Clinton administration’s Treasury Department issued regulations tracking loans by neighborhoods, income groups and races to rate the performance of banks. 
.
The ratings were used by regulators to determine whether the government would approve bank mergers, acquisitions and new branches.
.
.

By the way, does it sound like an unfettered mortgage market to you so far?  No, the government’s all over this business;  and for all the wrong reasons!
.
.

The regulations also encouraged statist-aligned groups such as ACORN and the Neighborhood Assistance Cooperation of America to file petitions with regulators (or threaten to) to slow or even prevent banks from conducting their business by challenging the extent to which banks were issuing these loans.
.
.

.

With such powerful leverage over banks some groups were able, in effect, to legally extort banks to make huge pools of money available to the groups;  money they in turn used to make loans.  The banks and community groups issued loans to low income individuals who often had bad credit or insufficient income. 
.
These loans, which become known as ‘sub-prime loans’, made available 100% financing, did not always require the use of credit scores and were even made without documenting income;  by government regulation and litigation from the left. 
.
.
Therefore the government insisted that banks, particularly those who wanted to expand, abandon traditional underwriting standards.  One estimate puts the figure of CRA-eligible loans at 4.5 trillion dollars in sub-prime toxic loans based on government policy.
.

Oh, that unfettered free market!
.

LESSON : You`re still crazy and at this point I suspect just a DNC stooge paid to stir the pot since no one is that stupid.

[woofie]

That one musta hurt

[Rashputin]

I think by then he didn't give a crap. Everyone in Congress no matter what party they were in was on the bandwagon raking in money from the scam and his own party laughed their ass off at him when he tried to do something, so, he just said to hell with it.

Now, I didn't watch the clip yet, but there was some "ownership society" crap around that was almost as bad but not quite. The scan that slaugtered the industry was in the works ever since Carter and expanded greatly under Clinton, so I'll watch the clip. In a way, so what? He tried multiple times, no one was going to lift a finger, yeah, why not act like it's nice for unqualified poor folks to have a house?? They're going to get one anyway.

We can trade clips all night, there are plenty around with his folks getting all but spit on by Baaaknee Fwank and Chris Dodd as well as a few of Bush saying this was going to end badly. So what? I know people who will ignore whatever you show them because they bought into the anti-Bush propaganda, helped Barry get in office either actively or by sitting it out, and now need to justify their sitting out the last Presidential election, and all that sort of stuff.

I'd rather have had another ten years of Bush than just the first year of this bastard Barry and painting Bush as just as bad is plain silly IMHO.

Regards

[org.whodat]

http://www.collinstreet.com/pages/online_bakery_gift/deluxe_fruitcake

[woofie]

You will also find Bush trying to slow down the craziness with Dems in Congress stopping him

[Para-Ord.45]

Timeline !?

LOL

You point to the END of the timline and regurgitate the false narrative from the extreme radical left.

Take a look, the timeline is damning. You lose, again:

Subprime crisis impact timeline

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_crisis_impact_timeline

If you wish to persist in making a fool of yourself over and over I`ll oblige in doing so.

[Rashputin]

Oh, I agree. I can think of only two reasons why with the House in Republican hands there aren't all sorts of investigations, trials, and bills that they know the Senate will halt, flying around DC. Those reasons are cowardice and complicity.

Now, for sure, many a Republicans is so tied to the way things have always been they can't even imagine ever staying in the majority and so act like cowards. They even point to the brief Republican majorities of the last few elections as proof. The problem is, if you give up when you have an alternative to giving up, of course you can't handle being in the majority, you can only frustrate the Hell out of people.

I talk to some friends who seem to keep up with Republicans in the House and there's a lot of new folks who are really pissed off over there being no repeal of Obamacare already out of the House and dying in the Senate. The more Conservative House folks who aren't new feel the same way but there's enough others people who are against doing anything until after the election in hopes of having control of the Senate by then that those who want to do it admit they might not get it out of the House without them onboard. So, leadership thinks trying and not even getting something out of the House would be worse than not trying. That's what I hear at least.

Personally, I think they owe us at least trying to send a repeal out of the House so the azzholes who won't go along with that can be voted out right along with the democrats but how likely is that to happen the way things run in any organization not just the political ones? Republicans better wake up because people in this country are just dumb enough to go for a third party again because they're ticked off which would give the democrats a majority again and I'm not sure they'd ever have another election. They were absolutely shocked to find out that their own propaganda was wrong and that everyone isn't tickled to death with them. Knowing that, I doubt they care about ever having elections if they're the majority across the board again. The elder fascists have worked to get one party rule for their entire lives and they're seeing it slip away while they don't have many years left in this world. So, wounded animals are dangerous.

Just sort thinking out loud, I guess, but you're exactly right they're as quiet as little Church Mice and we know they're up to something, for the most part probably up to no good. I trust Jim DeMint, and Marines, everyone else can pay cash, even family, is the way I see it.

Regards

[org.whodat]

Have some fruit cake, you have already convince me you are a loon.

[Para-Ord.45]

Timeline !?

Seems your timeline is assbackwards.

You really expected to point to the END of the timeline and claim it was the beginning !?

I busted your balls because NO ONE can be that stupid so the only logical conclusion is your a DNC agitator .

[Para-Ord.45]

you`re *

[org.whodat]

You did not bust a thing, you have no point, if you remove the credit modernizing act, the housing bubble never happens.

[Para-Ord.45]

Hey , i can do this all night and tomorrow.

HERE`S THE TIMELINE OF A GOVT CREATED BUBBLE:

LOL

You point to the END of the timline and regurgitate the false narrative from the extreme radical left.

Take a look, the timeline is damning. You lose, again:

Subprime crisis impact timeline

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_crisis_impact_timeline

[raybbr]

Go to "Ol Dan Tucker's" page for all the info on what Bush and his administration did to foment the housing crisis as well as what the dems did. Failure to include Bush, who convinced Congress to give tax dollars to the "poor" so they could use it for down payments on home, is simply ignoring the truth.

Both parties have used the housing industry to prop up their numbers in the economy. The banks fueled it with cheap money from Greenspan. Bush and his cronies in HUD (Jackson and Martinez) played the game too.

[Intolerant in NJ]

Mortgage-backed securities were nothing new, and we've always had speculation in the market...but what was new was the conditions under which the MBS's were created - risky loans which the government forced banks and lending institutions to approve and then protected from collapse which otherwise would have happened with taxpayer money - this so dislocated the market and confused speculators - "Wall Street" - who hadn't seen this sort of nonsense before that literally for years they could not and did not expect the market to fail, because they could not believe the initial lenders had acted in such a heedless manner - the real problem on Wall Street was not greed but ignorance about the real nature of what they were dealing with - ignorance which the federal government hatched by interfering with the normal rules of lending and credit so they could provide free houses to voters at taxpayer expense......