Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 10:59:15 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
Much as Bush-hating media members conveniently ignore historical events that led to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, their current finger-pointing at the White House, John McCain, and all Republican politicians for the collapse of the financial services industry lacks any honest assessment of decades-old legislation that laid the groundwork for today's problems.

In particular, 1977's Community Reinvestment Act which required banks and savings institutions to make loans to the lower-income areas in the communities they served.

Despite how integrally tied the current crisis is to this bill enacted by a Democrat-controlled Congress and signed into law by Jimmy Carter, no major media outlet other than Investor's Business Daily and National Review Online mentioned it during last week's market meltdown.

Going against the grain was a highly-informative editorial by IBD Thursday (emphasis added, h/t NBer Gary Hall, photo courtesy About.com):

To hear today's Democrats, you'd think all this started in the last couple years. But the crisis began much earlier. The Carter-era Community Reinvestment Act forced banks to lend to uncreditworthy borrowers, mostly in minority areas.

Age-old standards of banking prudence got thrown out the window. In their place came harsh new regulations requiring banks not only to lend to uncreditworthy borrowers, but to do so on the basis of race.

These well-intended rules were supercharged in the early 1990s by President Clinton. Despite warnings from GOP members of Congress in 1992, Clinton pushed extensive changes to the rules requiring lenders to make questionable loans. [...]

Failure to comply meant your bank might not be allowed to expand lending, add new branches or merge with other companies. Banks were given a so-called "CRA rating" that graded how diverse their lending portfolio was. [...]

In the name of diversity, banks began making huge numbers of loans that they previously would not have. They opened branches in poor areas to lift their CRA ratings.

Meanwhile, Congress gave Fannie and Freddie the go-ahead to finance it all by buying loans from banks, then repackaging and securitizing them for resale on the open market.

That's how the contagion began.

With those changes, the subprime market took off. From a mere $35 billion in loans in 1994, it soared to $1 trillion by 2008.

Readers are strongly encouraged to review this entire fact-filled piece to not only better understand the roots of today's financial crisis, but also to get a sense as to just how absurd media accusations of this all being Bush and McCain's fault are.

That said, from 1989 through 1995, I managed branches for two savings and loans: Imperial Savings, which got taken over by the Resolution Trust Corporation during the S&L bailout, and; Great Western Bank which eventually was purchased by Washington Mutual.

The pressure to comply with CRA was astounding, especially at Great Western as it was expanding throughout the country. Its ability to acquire other institutions was directly related to its CRA rating.

With this in mind, IBD's views concerning this matter are spot on raising a very important question: if the role of news media is to inform the public, why does a LexisNexis search indicate that as this crisis came to a head last week, its connection to CRA, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton was almost completely ignored?

Would such a revelation make it difficult for Obama-loving press outlets to point fingers at George W. Bush and, more importantly, John McCain?

originally from the newspaper IBD, hosted at:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/09/20/ibd-carter-more-blame-financial-crisis-bush-or-mccain
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 11:08:33 AM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
And the subsequent Republican administrations and Congresses did what to remedy the situation?

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 11:17:49 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
What the nutsuckers fail to mention is that the community reinvestment act has nothing to do with this.

Somewhere ensconced here, I pointed out in several authoritative documents from banks, and from the CBO, and Treasury that the average mortgage meltdown default ages were 2 years old. Thats all. But let us forego that for the other large nutsucker in the room:

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020617-2.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html?_r=0
http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/06/17/bush.minority.homes/
http://web.mit.edu/cjpalmer/www/CPalmer_JMP.pdf
http://www.mortgagecalculator.org/helpful-advice/mortgage-statistics.php

More reality for nutsuckers who don't read, nor are they aware of their surroundings.

It was a nutsucker opera of incompetence and malfeasance from the inception.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/9/2016 11:18:07 AM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 11:25:39 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

And the subsequent Republican administrations and Congresses did what to remedy the situation?


2003 they attempted to prevent fannie/freddie from accepting sub-prime loans; asked for hearings to change the CRA.
Held hearings on the threats and protests by democrat organizaitions which tried and succeeded in forcing banks to issue certain % of their loans as subprime.

A lot more as well.

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 11:36:26 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

What the nutsuckers fail to mention is that the community reinvestment act has nothing to do with this.

Somewhere ensconced here, I pointed out in several authoritative documents from banks, and from the CBO, and Treasury that the average mortgage meltdown default ages were 2 years old. Thats all. But let us forego that for the other large nutsucker in the room:




None of which is the least bit relevant. As usual.


quote:


https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020617-2.html


Nothing about the CRA.
quote:


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html?_r=0


Not a word about the CRA.
quote:


http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/06/17/bush.minority.homes/


Says nothing about the CRA. Or the housing crisis. Just says the republicans allocate 200 mil toward minority home ownership.

quote:


http://web.mit.edu/cjpalmer/www/CPalmer_JMP.pdf


Still nothing about the CRA

quote:


http://www.mortgagecalculator.org/helpful-advice/mortgage-statistics.php
Has nothing to do with the housing crisis. As usual.

So once again, you post a more or less random series of websites, that has nothing to do with the CRA - and in fact doesn't even mention them. And somehow pretend that they are relevant to the conversation.

No one btw, is pretending there weren't other factors. CDO's contributed. Shadow book keeping where the banks created entites off the books and pumped them full of cdos - contributed. Repeal of Glass Siegal contributed.

But mandating that banks make subprime loans to minorities borrowers - the policy pushed by clinton, jackson and others - was the critical domino.

< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 5/9/2016 11:40:12 AM >

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 11:41:33 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
is this revisionist history part 2 after being taunted about bush in the other thread??????? or to get away from having to defend the teflon don., LMFAO


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 11:41:50 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

And the subsequent Republican administrations and Congresses did what to remedy the situation?


2003 they attempted to prevent fannie/freddie from accepting sub-prime loans; asked for hearings to change the CRA.
Held hearings on the threats and protests by democrat organizaitions which tried and succeeded in forcing banks to issue certain % of their loans as subprime.

A lot more as well.


And thats all, cockgargling to the nutsuckers, but no follow thru and absolute hindrance by the head nutsuckers. See hank paulson for details.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 11:48:26 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

What the nutsuckers fail to mention is that the community reinvestment act has nothing to do with this.

Somewhere ensconced here, I pointed out in several authoritative documents from banks, and from the CBO, and Treasury that the average mortgage meltdown default ages were 2 years old. Thats all. But let us forego that for the other large nutsucker in the room:




None of which is the least bit relevant. As usual.


quote:


https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020617-2.html


Nothing about the CRA.
quote:


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html?_r=0


Not a word about the CRA.
quote:


http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/06/17/bush.minority.homes/


Says nothing about the CRA. Or the housing crisis. Just says the republicans allocate 200 mil toward minority home ownership.

quote:


http://web.mit.edu/cjpalmer/www/CPalmer_JMP.pdf


Still nothing about the CRA

quote:


http://www.mortgagecalculator.org/helpful-advice/mortgage-statistics.php
Has nothing to do with the housing crisis. As usual.

So once again, you post a more or less random series of websites, that has nothing to do with the CRA - and in fact doesn't even mention them. And somehow pretend that they are relevant to the conversation.

No one btw, is pretending there weren't other factors. CDO's contributed. Shadow book keeping where the banks created entites off the books and pumped them full of cdos - contributed. Repeal of Glass Siegal contributed.

But mandating that banks make subprime loans to minorities borrowers - the policy pushed by clinton, jackson and others - was the critical domino.


And there is nothing to say about the CRA, it had nothing to do with it.
Your unsubstaniated, innumerate nutsuckerisms are what are not relevant and your random felching of nutsuckerisms are not on topic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_and_the_Financial_Crisis:_Anatomy_of_a_Financial_Collapse

the 'mandate' was not critical, it was not a domino, it is nutsuckerism. Deregulation, asleep at the wheel oversight, ruthless illegal deception and collusion allowed greed and capitalism their self-destructive head.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/9/2016 11:49:45 AM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 11:50:59 AM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
Some posts about the importance of the CRA (in direct contradiction to mnotter saying it was irrelevent)

http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/18/fannie-freddie-regulation-oped-cx_yb_0718brook.html

Says government caused the housing meltdown, primarily through the CRA.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/225898/planting-seeds-disaster-stanley-kurtz
Says Obama / Acorn militantly protested to achieve forcing CRA loans.

https://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/obama-sued-citibank-under-cra-to-force-it-to-make-bad-loans/
Says Obama sued citibank to force it to make loans under the CRA

Case Name
Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011
State/Territory Illinois

Case Summary
Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.

U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs’ suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank’s loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).

The parties voluntarily dismissed the case on May 12, 1998, pursuant to a settlement agreement.
Plaintiff’s Lawyers Alexis, Hilary I. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Childers, Michael Allen (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Clayton, Fay (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Cummings, Jeffrey Irvine (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Love, Sara Norris (Virginia)
FH-IL-0011-9000
Miner, Judson Hirsch (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Obama, Barack H. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000

Wickert, John Henry (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-9000

By the way - Obama got over $100K in legal fees forcing citibank to make subprime loans on this one case...


The National Bureau of Economic Research said the CRA was front and center in the housing crisis. I don't have access to the 45 page report any more but here's a blog to bits of it:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/12/new-study-finds-democrats-fully-to-blame-for-subprime-mortgage-crisis-that-caused-financial-collapse/

Here's the Atlantic magazine detailing the same:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/12/hey-barney-frank-the-government-did-cause-the-housing-crisis/249903/

So on the one hand you have Mnotter claiming the CRA was irrelevent. And on the other you have Forbes, the Atlantic, the NBER, and other, yanno, fact based organizations saying that the CRA caused the housing crisis.




< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 5/9/2016 11:52:29 AM >

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:00:08 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis

official findings or another 50-200 pages of nutsucker slobber blogs without any factual information?

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:00:56 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_and_the_Financial_Crisis:_Anatomy_of_a_Financial_Collapse


The democrats had total control of the Senate in 2011. Architects of the disaster, they wanted the report to absolve them of any role in the debacle. So it did.
Your contention that the CRA had nothing to do with it is laughable.

Unsustainable subprime lending jumped to $350 billion a year after doing so was FORCED by the CRA. Those mortgages had triple the default rate of conventional mortgages.


(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:06:19 PM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
quote:

2003 they attempted to prevent fannie/freddie from accepting sub-prime loans; asked for hearings to change the CRA.
Held hearings on the threats and protests by democrat organizaitions which tried and succeeded in forcing banks to issue certain % of their loans as subprime.

So nothing really. Thanks for admitting that.

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:11:43 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

2003 they attempted to prevent fannie/freddie from accepting sub-prime loans; asked for hearings to change the CRA.
Held hearings on the threats and protests by democrat organizaitions which tried and succeeded in forcing banks to issue certain % of their loans as subprime.

So nothing really. Thanks for admitting that.


A party that is out-of-power does not have the ability to force hearings, nor to pass legislation. What exactly would you have them do - vote to repeal the CRA 62 times like they do obamacare?

It seems that you lefties are hypocritical. That regardless of whether republicans act in a statemenlike fashion or confrontationally, you will criticize them.

But more to the point - the democrats passed the CRA, the democrats upped the percent of loans required to be subprime. What responsibility do you assign to the democrats for the debacle, hmm?

Where is your criticism to them?

(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:11:54 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
http://www.ffiec.gov/cra/history.htm

The CRA applies to depository institutions.

The vast majority of the mortgage failures are non-CRA loans.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to ThatDizzyChick)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:13:21 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
here's an excerpt

It is certainly possible to find prime mortgages among borrowers below the median income, but when half or more of the mortgages the GSEs bought had to be made to people below that income level, it was inevitable that underwriting standards had to decline. And they did. By 2000, Fannie was offering no-downpayment loans. By 2002, Fannie and Freddie had bought well over $1 trillion of subprime and other low quality loans. Fannie and Freddie were by far the largest part of this effort, but the FHA, Federal Home Loan Banks, Veterans Administration and other agencies--all under congressional and HUD pressure--followed suit. This continued through the 1990s and 2000s until the housing bubble--created by all this government-backed spending--collapsed in 2007. As a result, in 2008, before the mortgage meltdown that triggered the crisis, there were 27 million subprime and other low quality mortgages in the US financial system. That was half of all mortgages. Of these, over 70% (19.2 million) were on the books of government agencies like Fannie and Freddie, so there is no doubt that the government created the demand for these weak loans; less than 30% (7.8 million) were held or distributed by the banks, which profited from the opportunity created by the government. When these mortgages failed in unprecedented numbers in 2008, driving down housing prices throughout the U.S., they weakened all financial institutions and caused the financial crisis.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:15:10 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
And that is true, the nutsucker administration of GWB and the nutsucker policies, not the CRA allowed the melting down.

Thank you for finally admitting it.

And it shows why corporations should be heavily regulated, because they are responsible for nothing but their greed.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/9/2016 12:16:32 PM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:18:08 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

http://www.ffiec.gov/cra/history.htm

The CRA applies to depository institutions.

The vast majority of the mortgage failures are non-CRA loans.



Again your quote doesn't support your statement, and your statement is a lie.

While it is true that throughout history the fast majority of mortgage failures were non-cra loans, that doesn't change the fact that during the economic crash the CRA loans defaulted at 3x the rate of non CRA loans, and in fact caused the crash.

Regarding your FCIC report, Peter Wallison was a member of the commission. Here's what he said about it:
quote:

In any event, the FCIC acquitted the CRA from any responsibility for the crisis before it even began its study, and resisted all my efforts to find out more about the effect of the Act.



"

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:19:40 PM   
ThatDizzyChick


Posts: 5490
Status: offline
quote:

A party that is out-of-power does not have the ability to force hearings, nor to pass legislation.

I see, and the Republicans have never been in power since 1977?
They had plenty of opportunities to change things, yet they did not. Why do you suppose that was? Could it be because the banks were making money hand over fist and didn't actually want anything changed?
quote:

What responsibility do you assign to the democrats for the debacle, hmm?

Equal responsibility.
quote:

Where is your criticism to them?

You have, once again, entirely missed the point due to your inane Rep/Dem world view. The point is that both parties are to blame for pretty much all the shit that is wrong with your country, because in the end, both parties serve the interests of the same segment of the population, the donor class, the corporate class.

_____________________________

Not your average bimbo.

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:21:50 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
it does support it, and its been proven time and again, you are the liar. Felching nutsucker slobber blogs is all you got.

https://www.ncsha.org/blog/unc-center-study-debunks-role-cra-housing-crisis

I can do this all day, you can only originally felch about 4 nutsucker slobber blogs, the rest being re-felches.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 - 5/9/2016 12:23:09 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/loans-to-low-income-households-did-not-cause-the-financial-crisis/

do you want to answer with nutsucker slobberblog 1, 2, 3, or 4?

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> More reading for liberals - economic crash of 2009 Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094