« Financial Crisis: The Foxes Guarded the Henhouse | Main | Now You've Made Me and My NC Small Town Plumbing Kin MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD!, SP »

Friday, October 17, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e5514f834d88340105358890ac970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Mortgage Crisis: History and Hypocrisy:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Let me see if I got this{for a novice}.You had CEOs whith golden parachuts which they get regardless of the businesss sucess{man would we all like that}.And they get bonuses when the profits go up.So they all had no incentive to care about the long term health of their business just get as much cash coming in as possible.Which everyone did.And every one disreguarded rules and regulations{if there were any}in the housing market.More money was pumped in by people betting on the market{derivitives ect.}all making everyone happy for awhile{homeowners got their loans,sellers got their money,agents got their fees up the chain}especially the execs who didnt care if their company collapsed because they were gonna make out big time anyway.What have i got wrong?

Hearing this less than accurate and wholly partisan rant from a presumably intelligent person is just garbage. Anyone who has "read' their history understands this all started with the S&L's followed by Carter's ineptitude and Volcker. You might want to ask why lloyd Bensen owned a few S&L's and still ran for president. That adn Clinton and the Democratic Senate passing laws to force banks to lend money to those who could not afford a home. Finally, it was regulation not de-regulation that created this fiasco., check your history and you might want to start wth FDR.

I find it intersting that many put the Democrats in the hot seat for the current economic situation. It seems the Republicans maintained a majority in congress for the better part of the last decade, and half of the Clinton administraion. There was also a republican president for the last 8 years. I guess the Republicans can't do anything for themselves except let the Democrats ruin everything, right? People need to get off thier partisanship band wagons and do some real research. Fox news and CNN dont count.

Also, just a thought Nancy, but what kind of a bank would see profit in a losing investment? What kind of a bank would be predatory enough to chew off their own leg in profit by lending to people who were given hardly any requirements for mortgage loans? It makes no sense. They didn't have a choice but to offer these high risk bail outs.

Also, just a thought Nancy, but what kind of a bank would see profit in a losing investment? What kind of a bank would be predatory enough to chew off their own leg in profit by lending to people who were given hardly any requirements for mortgage loans? It makes no sense. They didn't have a choice but to offer these high risk bail outs.

Google it, you'll find plenty.

Please be specific. What bills did the Dems support that were in favor of predatory lending? (after the CRA) Thanks.

What the h.... are you talking about? This Bush bashing rhetoric is like your brain locked in the dumb position. Get off it! Study your histopry and read what occured in the late 1980's, the early Clinton years, the warnings in the early 2000's and the attempts to rein in Freddie Mac and Sallie Mae by both parties, which the vast majority of Democrats opposed. It was the Dem resistence to regulation that put the lobbying efforts squarely on the Republicans. Had the Dems not been so myopic and power greedy, they would have done what was best for the country and not what was best for themselves. The finger pointing by the Dems is the worse grammer school playground trick ever played on the American public and you bought it..hook, line and sinker!

50 percent of sub-prime lending was completely outside the CRA, and another 25-30 percent was only partially involved with CRA regulation. Clearly, it was the banks, themselves, who enthusiastically sub-primed their way well-past any legitimate incentives of the CRA (Community Reinvestment Act).

It is a lesson about government interference. Yet you seem to "glaze over" th federal government's ultimate protection of the predatory banks. Also isn't the Bailout government interference??

"In 1994, President Clinton had the good intention of raising home ownership."

We all know what they say about "good intentions". Anyway, as much as I hate to say it, the fact is President Clinton also had a lot to do with this current financial fiasco and he's admitted as much on national television. Personally I'm not nearly as upset with him (or President Bush) as I am those that benefitted financially from letting this happen.

I don't really agree with the claims you make in your post since as early as 2001 Bush was warning us about this. If I fault him for anything (at least in this matter) it's that he didn't make enough ruckus about it. Though I guess this is what we should expect when the government interferes too much with the free market and forces banks to make affirmative action loans.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.