quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I didnt say it years ago, I said it on this thread and in response to you a couple times.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I didnt say it years ago, I said it on this thread and in response to you a couple times. You shouldn't rely on things said years ago, you are not good at it, becuase you now confuse decades based on nutsuckerism.

I have done that timeline several times, and still want an explanation of how that timeline worked. It doesnt work with what established numbers are from the same sources, that is, MrRogers, Yours, Phydeauxs, and my established facts. Some new facts will have to be made up by nutsuckers to make it work, CRA won't get it.


read
post 3
post 8
post 10 (hilarious, since the meltown was in 2007-2009 but democrats had control in 2011)
post 14
https://www.ncsha.org/blog/unc-center-study-debunks-role-cra-housing-crisis
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/loans-to-low-income-households-did-not-cause-the-financial-crisis/
http://www.frbsf.org/community-development/files/cra_lending_during_subprime_meltdown11.pdf
http://fortune.com/2015/06/17/subprime-mortgage-recession/
http://www.federalreservehistory.org/Events/DetailView/55
https://business.cch.com/images/banner/subprime.pdf
https://fcic.law.stanford.edu/
https://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications/community-dividend/did-the-cra-cause-the-mortgage-market-meltdown
You chime in post 53.

I posted the timeline in post 56,61,64,73 which you ignored and deflected in post 74.

You agreed in post 80 with the characterization of what really happened.
timeline again, 112, 113.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I didnt say it years ago, I said it on this thread and in response to you a couple times. You shouldn't rely on things said years ago, you are not good at it, becuase you now confuse decades based on nutsuckerism.

I have done that timeline several times, and still want an explanation of how that timeline worked. It doesnt work with what established numbers are from the same sources, that is, MrRogers, Yours, Phydeauxs, and my established facts. Some new facts will have to be made up by nutsuckers to make it work, CRA won't get it.


read
post 3
post 8
post 10 (hilarious, since the meltown was in 2007-2009 but democrats had control in 2011)
post 14
https://www.ncsha.org/blog/unc-center-study-debunks-role-cra-housing-crisis
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/loans-to-low-income-households-did-not-cause-the-financial-crisis/
http://www.frbsf.org/community-development/files/cra_lending_during_subprime_meltdown11.pdf
http://fortune.com/2015/06/17/subprime-mortgage-recession/
http://www.federalreservehistory.org/Events/DetailView/55
https://business.cch.com/images/banner/subprime.pdf
https://fcic.law.stanford.edu/
https://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications/community-dividend/did-the-cra-cause-the-mortgage-market-meltdown
You chime in post 53.

I posted the timeline in post 56,61,64,73 which you ignored and deflected in post 74.

You agreed in post 80 with the characterization of what really happened.
timeline again, 112, 113.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I didnt say it years ago, I said it on this thread and in response to you a couple times.

You saying there is a time line problem is a repetition of talking points. I've given you citations of published authors who disputes your characterization of the timeline problem.

While bush was an idiot for jumping the CRA percentage to 55%, by the time that passed, subprime loans were already down 42% and by 2008 down to essential zilch.

Nothing Bush did caused the relaxation of lending standards - this was done by the regulator put into place under the CRA who required the banks to exhibit flexibility and creativity (but not fiscal sanity) in loaning to minorities.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I didnt say it years ago, I said it on this thread and in response to you a couple times. You shouldn't rely on things said years ago, you are not good at it, becuase you now confuse decades based on nutsuckerism.

I have done that timeline several times, and still want an explanation of how that timeline worked. It doesnt work with what established numbers are from the same sources, that is, MrRogers, Yours, Phydeauxs, and my established facts. Some new facts will have to be made up by nutsuckers to make it work, CRA won't get it.


read
post 3
post 8
post 10 (hilarious, since the meltown was in 2007-2009 but democrats had control in 2011)
post 14
https://www.ncsha.org/blog/unc-center-study-debunks-role-cra-housing-crisis
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/loans-to-low-income-households-did-not-cause-the-financial-crisis/
http://www.frbsf.org/community-development/files/cra_lending_during_subprime_meltdown11.pdf
http://fortune.com/2015/06/17/subprime-mortgage-recession/
http://www.federalreservehistory.org/Events/DetailView/55
https://business.cch.com/images/banner/subprime.pdf
https://fcic.law.stanford.edu/
https://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications/community-dividend/did-the-cra-cause-the-mortgage-market-meltdown
You chime in post 53.

I posted the timeline in post 56,61,64,73 which you ignored and deflected in post 74.

You agreed in post 80 with the characterization of what really happened.
timeline again, 112, 113.

Here is what you posted in post 56:

So if we accept this bit of hallucinatory statistics, that then leads us to the very vexing question: why a law in 1977 and revised in 1995 caused a meltdown of mortgages less than two years old in the years 2007 thru 2009?

The cause and effect is not apparent. And, it never will be, given the actual facts presented. Compared and contrasted to conjured assumptions and statistical prestidigitation.

You know statistically, if the election were held today (its not going to be) trump would win ohio (he wont) and lose florida and pennsylvania (he wont win them) and hillary would still be president. So the statistics are assumptions that are not causal or correlated to the meltdown. There is a 5 year leap of faith that is nutsuckers and deregulation, and asleep at the wheel that doesn't figure into the magic numbers.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/10/2016 12:54:28 PM >

_____________________________

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

absolutely no timeline, so you're spreading manure once again. And oh, I answered the question you posed in this post in one of my posts and it was linked.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

~FR~

This thread is a cynical, disingenuous screed aimed at deflecting blame for the 2006-2008 catastrophe away from the true culprits, the investment banks, and playing the old racial/poor blame card. Here is a time line of illustrative events from 2000 until the collapse. Clearly, low interest rates and lack of regulation of the casino brought the house of cards crashing down. Now, these lackeys come along and try to shift the blame to liberals and the poor and to minimize all of the major factors involved in the greedy run-up to the crash.

1999: September: Fannie Mae eases the credit requirements to encourage banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is not good enough to qualify for conventional loans.[62]

November: The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Financial Services Modernization Act) passes. It repeals the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. It deregulates banking, insurance, securities, and the financial services industry, allowing financial institutions to grow very large. It also limits Community Reinvestment Coverage of smaller banks and makes community groups report certain financial relationships with banks. Congressmen key to the effort include Phil Gramm, Jim Leach, Thomas J. Bliley, Jr., Chuck Schumer, and Chris Dodd.[60]

2000: Lenders originating $160 billion worth of subprime, up from $40 billion in 1994. Fannie Mae buys $600 million of subprime mortgages, primarily on a flow basis. Freddie Mac, in that same year, purchases $18.6 billion worth of subprime loans, mostly Alt A and A- mortgages. Freddie Mac guarantees another $7.7 billion worth of subprime mortgages in structured transactions.[21] Credit Suisse develops the first mortgage-backed CDO[20]

Lehman Brothers convicted of 'aiding and abetting' the fraud of bankrupt subprime lender Famco, pays a tiny fine.[63]

October: Fannie Mae commits to purchase and securitize $2 billion of Community Reinvestment Act eligible loans,[64][65]

November: Fannie Mae announces that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) will soon require it to dedicate 50% of its business to low- and moderate-income families" and its goal is to finance over $500 billion in Community Reinvestment Act related business by 2010.[66]

December: Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 (based on a report by Summers, Greenspan, Levitt, & Rainer) declares credit default swaps (and other derivatives) to be unregulated, banning the SEC, Fed, CTFC, state insurance companies, and others from meaningful oversight.[67] CDS eventually destroy AIG & others.[68][69][70]

2001-2004[edit]

2000–2003: Early 2000s recession spurs government action to rev up economy.[citation needed]

2000-2001: US Federal Reserve lowers Federal funds rate 11 times, from 6.5% (May 2000) to 1.75% (December 2001),[71] creating an easy-credit environment that fueled the growth of US subprime mortgages.[72]

2001: Ex-Wall Streeter John Posner writes A Home Without Equity is just a Rental with Debt, criticizing the massive growth in home equity loans and refinancing for consumer purchases, amongst other things. Charles Kindleberger of Manias, Panics, and Crashes finds it insightful; it is largely ignored.[73][74]

2002-2006: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac combined purchases of incorrectly rated AAA subprime mortgage-backed securities rise from $38 billion to $90 billion per year.[75][76][77] Lenders began to offer loans to higher-risk borrowers,[78] Subprime mortgages amounted to $600 billion (20%) by 2006.[79][80]

Speculation in residential real estate rose. During 2005, 28% of homes purchased were for investment purposes, with an additional 12% purchased as vacation homes. During 2006, these figures were 22% and 14%, respectively.[81] As many as 85% of condominium properties purchased in Miami were for investment purposes which the owners resold ("flipped") without the seller ever having lived in them.[82]

2002–2003: Mortgage denial rate of 14 percent for conventional home purchase loans, half of 1997.[47]

2002: Annual home price appreciation of 10% or more in California, Florida, and most Northeastern states.[83] Paul O'Neill (Secretary of the Treasury) is fired by Bush. Among other things, he had wanted to take action on executive compensation and corporate governance.[84]

June 17: Bush unveils his "Blueprint for the American Dream".[85] He sets goal of increasing minority home owners by at least 5.5 million by 2010 through billions of dollars in tax credits, subsidies and a Fannie Mae commitment of $440 billion to establish NeighborWorks America with faith based organizations.[86]

2003: Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan lowers federal reserve’s key interest rate to 1%, the lowest in 45 years.[87]

August: Borio and White of Bank of International Settlements speak at the Jackson Hole Economic Symposium. Their warnings about problems with collateralized debt obligations and rating agencies are rejected or ignored by attendees, including Alan Greenspan.[88]

September: Bush administration recommend moving governmental supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. The changes are blocked by Congress.[89]

2003-2007: U.S. subprime mortgages increased 292%, from $332 billion to $1.3 trillion, due primarily to the private sector entering the mortgage bond market, once an almost exclusive domain of government-sponsored enterprises like Freddie Mac.[90][91] The Federal Reserve fails to use its supervisory and regulatory authority over banks, mortgage underwriters and other lenders, who abandoned loan standards (employment history, income, down payments, credit rating, assets, property loan-to-value ratio and debt-servicing ability), emphasizing instead lender's ability to securitize and repackage subprime loans.[67][92]

2004-2007: Many financial institutions issued large amounts of debt and invested in mortgage-backed securities (MBS), believing that house prices would continue to rise and that households would keep up on mortgage payments.[93]

2004: U.S. homeownership rate peaks with an all-time high of 69.2 percent.[94] Following example of Countrywide Financial, the largest U.S. mortgage lender, many lenders adopt automated loan approvals that critics argued were not subjected to appropriate review and documentation according to good mortgage underwriting standards.[95] In 2007, 40% of all subprime loans resulted from automated underwriting.[96][97]Mortgage fraud by borrowers increases.[98]

HUD ratcheted up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac affordable-housing goals for next four years, from 50 percent to 56 percent, stating they lagged behind the private market; they purchased $175 billion in 2004—44 percent of the market; from 2004 to 2006, they purchased $434 billion in securities backed by subprime loans[39]

October: SEC effectively suspends net capital rule for five firms—Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Morgan Stanley. Freed from government imposed limits on the debt they can assume, they levered up 20, 30 and even 40 to 1, buying massive amounts of mortgage-backed securities and other risky investments.[99]

2005[edit]

2005: c. 2005-2006: Head CDO trader at Deutsche Bank, Greg Lippman, calls the CDO market a 'ponzi scheme'. With knowledge of management, he bets $5 billion against the housing market, while other desks at Deutsche Bank continue to sell mortgage securities to investors.[100]

The Securities and Exchange Commission ceases an investigation of Bear Stearns "pricing, valuation, and analysis" of mortgage-backed collateralized debt obligations. No action is taken against Bear.[101]

Robert Shiller gives talks warning about a housing bubble to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. He is ignored, and would later call it an incidence of Groupthink. That same year, his second edition of Irrational Exuberance warns that the housing bubble might lead to a worldwide recession.[102]

January: Federal Reserve Governor Edward Gramlich raises concerns over subprime lending practices, says mortgage brokers might not have incentives for careful underwriting and that that portion of the subprime industry was veering close to a breakdown, that it's possible that it is a bubble but that the housing market did not qualify for specific monetary policy treatment at this point.[103]

The Bank of International Settlements warns about the problems with structured financial products, and points out the conflict of interest of credit rating agencies - that they are being paid by the same companies they are supposed to be objectively evaluating.[88]

February: The Office of Thrift Supervision implements new rules that allow savings and loans with over $1 billion in assets to meet their CRA obligations without investing in local communities, cutting availability of subprime loans.[104]

June: At Lehman Brothers, Mike Gelband & friends make a push to get out of the mortgage market and start shorting it. They are ignored and later fired. Dr Madelyn Antoncic, '2006 risk manager of the year', is shut out of meetings by CEO Dick Fuld and Joe Gregory; she is fired in 2007.[105]

June: The International Swaps and Derivatives Association smooths the process of creating credit default swaps against ABS CDOs; a boon for hedge funds.[106]

August: Raghuram Rajan delivers his paper "Has Financial Development Made the World Riskier?", warning about credit default swaps, at the Jackson Hole Economic Symposium. His arguments are rejected by attendees, including Alan Greenspan, Donald Kohn, and Lawrence Summers.[107][108]

September: The Mortgage Insurance Companies of America send a letter to the Federal Reserve, warning about 'risky lending practices' in US real estate.[88]

Fall 2005: Booming housing market halts abruptly; from the fourth quarter of 2005 to the first quarter of 2006, median prices nationwide drop 3.3 percent.[109]

TIMELINE

Miami condos . . hardly housing for the poor.

The US Home Construction Index in August of 2006 was down 40% year over year. MacMansions were a huge forfeiture risk, as were robopen approved liars loans. The CRA had little or no significance in this scenario.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

~FR~

This thread is a cynical, disingenuous screed aimed at deflecting blame for the 2006-2008 catastrophe away from the true culprits, the investment banks, and playing the old racial/poor blame card. Here is a time line of illustrative events from 2000 until the collapse. Clearly, low interest rates and lack of regulation of the casino brought the house of cards crashing down. Now, these lackeys come along and try to shift the blame to liberals and the poor and to minimize all of the major factors involved in the greedy run-up to the crash.

1999: September: Fannie Mae eases the credit requirements to encourage banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is not good enough to qualify for conventional loans.[62]

November: The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Financial Services Modernization Act) passes. It repeals the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. It deregulates banking, insurance, securities, and the financial services industry, allowing financial institutions to grow very large. It also limits Community Reinvestment Coverage of smaller banks and makes community groups report certain financial relationships with banks. Congressmen key to the effort include Phil Gramm, Jim Leach, Thomas J. Bliley, Jr., Chuck Schumer, and Chris Dodd.[60]

2000: Lenders originating $160 billion worth of subprime, up from $40 billion in 1994. Fannie Mae buys $600 million of subprime mortgages, primarily on a flow basis. Freddie Mac, in that same year, purchases $18.6 billion worth of subprime loans, mostly Alt A and A- mortgages. Freddie Mac guarantees another $7.7 billion worth of subprime mortgages in structured transactions.[21] Credit Suisse develops the first mortgage-backed CDO[20]

Lehman Brothers convicted of 'aiding and abetting' the fraud of bankrupt subprime lender Famco, pays a tiny fine.[63]

October: Fannie Mae commits to purchase and securitize $2 billion of Community Reinvestment Act eligible loans,[64][65]

November: Fannie Mae announces that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) will soon require it to dedicate 50% of its business to low- and moderate-income families" and its goal is to finance over $500 billion in Community Reinvestment Act related business by 2010.[66]

December: Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 (based on a report by Summers, Greenspan, Levitt, & Rainer) declares credit default swaps (and other derivatives) to be unregulated, banning the SEC, Fed, CTFC, state insurance companies, and others from meaningful oversight.[67] CDS eventually destroy AIG & others.[68][69][70]

2001-2004[edit]

2000–2003: Early 2000s recession spurs government action to rev up economy.[citation needed]

2000-2001: US Federal Reserve lowers Federal funds rate 11 times, from 6.5% (May 2000) to 1.75% (December 2001),[71] creating an easy-credit environment that fueled the growth of US subprime mortgages.[72]

2001: Ex-Wall Streeter John Posner writes A Home Without Equity is just a Rental with Debt, criticizing the massive growth in home equity loans and refinancing for consumer purchases, amongst other things. Charles Kindleberger of Manias, Panics, and Crashes finds it insightful; it is largely ignored.[73][74]

2002-2006: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac combined purchases of incorrectly rated AAA subprime mortgage-backed securities rise from $38 billion to $90 billion per year.[75][76][77] Lenders began to offer loans to higher-risk borrowers,[78] Subprime mortgages amounted to $600 billion (20%) by 2006.[79][80]

Speculation in residential real estate rose. During 2005, 28% of homes purchased were for investment purposes, with an additional 12% purchased as vacation homes. During 2006, these figures were 22% and 14%, respectively.[81] As many as 85% of condominium properties purchased in Miami were for investment purposes which the owners resold ("flipped") without the seller ever having lived in them.[82]

2002–2003: Mortgage denial rate of 14 percent for conventional home purchase loans, half of 1997.[47]

2002: Annual home price appreciation of 10% or more in California, Florida, and most Northeastern states.[83] Paul O'Neill (Secretary of the Treasury) is fired by Bush. Among other things, he had wanted to take action on executive compensation and corporate governance.[84]

June 17: Bush unveils his "Blueprint for the American Dream".[85] He sets goal of increasing minority home owners by at least 5.5 million by 2010 through billions of dollars in tax credits, subsidies and a Fannie Mae commitment of $440 billion to establish NeighborWorks America with faith based organizations.[86]

2003: Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan lowers federal reserve’s key interest rate to 1%, the lowest in 45 years.[87]

August: Borio and White of Bank of International Settlements speak at the Jackson Hole Economic Symposium. Their warnings about problems with collateralized debt obligations and rating agencies are rejected or ignored by attendees, including Alan Greenspan.[88]

September: Bush administration recommend moving governmental supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. The changes are blocked by Congress.[89]

2003-2007: U.S. subprime mortgages increased 292%, from $332 billion to $1.3 trillion, due primarily to the private sector entering the mortgage bond market, once an almost exclusive domain of government-sponsored enterprises like Freddie Mac.[90][91] The Federal Reserve fails to use its supervisory and regulatory authority over banks, mortgage underwriters and other lenders, who abandoned loan standards (employment history, income, down payments, credit rating, assets, property loan-to-value ratio and debt-servicing ability), emphasizing instead lender's ability to securitize and repackage subprime loans.[67][92]

2004-2007: Many financial institutions issued large amounts of debt and invested in mortgage-backed securities (MBS), believing that house prices would continue to rise and that households would keep up on mortgage payments.[93]

2004: U.S. homeownership rate peaks with an all-time high of 69.2 percent.[94] Following example of Countrywide Financial, the largest U.S. mortgage lender, many lenders adopt automated loan approvals that critics argued were not subjected to appropriate review and documentation according to good mortgage underwriting standards.[95] In 2007, 40% of all subprime loans resulted from automated underwriting.[96][97]Mortgage fraud by borrowers increases.[98]

HUD ratcheted up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac affordable-housing goals for next four years, from 50 percent to 56 percent, stating they lagged behind the private market; they purchased $175 billion in 2004—44 percent of the market; from 2004 to 2006, they purchased $434 billion in securities backed by subprime loans[39]

October: SEC effectively suspends net capital rule for five firms—Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Morgan Stanley. Freed from government imposed limits on the debt they can assume, they levered up 20, 30 and even 40 to 1, buying massive amounts of mortgage-backed securities and other risky investments.[99]

2005[edit]

2005: c. 2005-2006: Head CDO trader at Deutsche Bank, Greg Lippman, calls the CDO market a 'ponzi scheme'. With knowledge of management, he bets $5 billion against the housing market, while other desks at Deutsche Bank continue to sell mortgage securities to investors.[100]

The Securities and Exchange Commission ceases an investigation of Bear Stearns "pricing, valuation, and analysis" of mortgage-backed collateralized debt obligations. No action is taken against Bear.[101]

Robert Shiller gives talks warning about a housing bubble to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. He is ignored, and would later call it an incidence of Groupthink. That same year, his second edition of Irrational Exuberance warns that the housing bubble might lead to a worldwide recession.[102]

January: Federal Reserve Governor Edward Gramlich raises concerns over subprime lending practices, says mortgage brokers might not have incentives for careful underwriting and that that portion of the subprime industry was veering close to a breakdown, that it's possible that it is a bubble but that the housing market did not qualify for specific monetary policy treatment at this point.[103]

The Bank of International Settlements warns about the problems with structured financial products, and points out the conflict of interest of credit rating agencies - that they are being paid by the same companies they are supposed to be objectively evaluating.[88]

February: The Office of Thrift Supervision implements new rules that allow savings and loans with over $1 billion in assets to meet their CRA obligations without investing in local communities, cutting availability of subprime loans.[104]

June: At Lehman Brothers, Mike Gelband & friends make a push to get out of the mortgage market and start shorting it. They are ignored and later fired. Dr Madelyn Antoncic, '2006 risk manager of the year', is shut out of meetings by CEO Dick Fuld and Joe Gregory; she is fired in 2007.[105]

June: The International Swaps and Derivatives Association smooths the process of creating credit default swaps against ABS CDOs; a boon for hedge funds.[106]

August: Raghuram Rajan delivers his paper "Has Financial Development Made the World Riskier?", warning about credit default swaps, at the Jackson Hole Economic Symposium. His arguments are rejected by attendees, including Alan Greenspan, Donald Kohn, and Lawrence Summers.[107][108]

September: The Mortgage Insurance Companies of America send a letter to the Federal Reserve, warning about 'risky lending practices' in US real estate.[88]

Fall 2005: Booming housing market halts abruptly; from the fourth quarter of 2005 to the first quarter of 2006, median prices nationwide drop 3.3 percent.[109]

TIMELINE

Miami condos . . hardly housing for the poor.

The US Home Construction Index in August of 2006 was down 40% year over year. MacMansions were a huge forfeiture risk, as were robopen approved liars loans. The CRA had little or no significance in this scenario.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Just shows to go'ya, if the left would just get out of the way and let the marketplace work...we'd all be so much better off.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Just shows to go'ya, if the left would just get out of the way and let the marketplace work...we'd all be so much better off.

In this case - thats absolute fact. In this particular case, there can be no question that the CRA forced backs to make stupid loans over 29% of which in the final year would go broke.

Government intervention into the credit market directly caused this problem. Even barney frank admitted this by the way, in his interview after leaving the house.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Just shows to go'ya, if the left would just get out of the way and let the marketplace work...we'd all be so much better off.

In this case - thats absolute fact. In this particular case, there can be no question that the CRA forced backs to make stupid loans over 29% of which in the final year would go broke.

Government intervention into the credit market directly caused this problem. Even barney frank admitted this by the way, in his interview after leaving the house.

Man you are a stuck with a one-track mind. All of this occurred with the repubs in charge of everything and from 2001 to 2008. (executive) The executive branch with their controller, their regulators and their appointees. A repub congress with all of their political desires, lack of regulation and financial dreams coming true.

You insist on selectively choosing their people and (just like in the Flint fiasco) i.e., certain of those presidential appointees and staff and calling them democrats and as having created all of that policy. As many sources have confirmed, the CRA and all if its lofty goals...didn't actually amount to regulatory shit.

And you simply continue what the first line says... a cynical, disingenuous screed aimed at deflecting blame for the 2006-2008 (2002-2008) catastrophe away from the true culprits, the investment banks, and [by] playing the old racial/poor blame card.

.....funny how a CitiCorp executive is just covering up for of all people...democrats, yet and Barney Frank is the expert when in reality...he doesn't know shit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Just shows to go'ya, if the left would just get out of the way and let the marketplace work...we'd all be so much better off.

In this case - thats absolute fact. In this particular case, there can be no question that the CRA forced backs to make stupid loans over 29% of which in the final year would go broke.

Government intervention into the credit market directly caused this problem. Even barney frank admitted this by the way, in his interview after leaving the house.

Man you are a stuck with a one-track mind. All of this occurred with the repubs in charge of everything and from 2001 to 2008. (executive) The executive branch with their controller, their regulators and their appointees. A repub congress with all of their political desires, lack of regulation and financial dreams coming true.

You insist on selectively choosing their people and (just like in the Flint fiasco) i.e., certain of those presidential appointees and staff and calling them democrats and as having created all of that policy. As many sources have confirmed, the CRA and all if its lofty goals...didn't actually amount to regulatory shit.

And you simply continue what the first line says... a cynical, disingenuous screed aimed at deflecting blame for the 2006-2008 (2002-2008) catastrophe away from the true culprits, the investment banks, and [by] playing the old racial/poor blame card.

.....funny how a CitiCorp executive is just covering up for of all people...democrats, yet and Barney Frank is the expert when in reality...he doesn't know shit.

You also miss the post MNotter inadvertently cited, through no intention of his own, where Bush tried hard for six years:
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/barone/2008/10/06/democrats-were-wrong-on-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac

to have the laws changed and couldn't get it through congress. Look at earlier posts. At that time, and I've seen videos of it so you can google it, Barney Frank wanted to continue to roll the dice on the subprime loans and democrats in the senate kept any regulatory laws from being passed.

From 1991 until 1998 when all of the relaxation of banking standards occurred Barney Frank was dating the guy who was a director Fanny Mae while Frank wrote banking law.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2008/10/03/lawmaker-accused-fannie-mae-conflict-interest.html
Now that Fannie Mae is at the epicenter of a financial meltdown that threatens the U.S. economy, some are raising new questions about Frank's relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie’s assistant director for product initiatives. Moses worked at the government-sponsored enterprise from 1991 to 1998, while Frank was on the House Banking Committee, which had jurisdiction over Fannie

Frank is now working for the banking industry on Wall Street.

Then of course, all of Clinton (the rapist) people went to dig in at the trough and keep the money flowing:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/former-clinton-official-paid-26-million-fannie-mae-taxpayer-bailout-now-obama-shortlist

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I didnt say it years ago, I said it on this thread and in response to you a couple times. You shouldn't rely on things said years ago, you are not good at it, becuase you now confuse decades based on nutsuckerism.

I have done that timeline several times, and still want an explanation of how that timeline worked. It doesnt work with what established numbers are from the same sources, that is, MrRogers, Yours, Phydeauxs, and my established facts. Some new facts will have to be made up by nutsuckers to make it work, CRA won't get it.


read
post 3
post 8
post 10 (hilarious, since the meltown was in 2007-2009 but democrats had control in 2011)
post 14
https://www.ncsha.org/blog/unc-center-study-debunks-role-cra-housing-crisis
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/loans-to-low-income-households-did-not-cause-the-financial-crisis/
http://www.frbsf.org/community-development/files/cra_lending_during_subprime_meltdown11.pdf
http://fortune.com/2015/06/17/subprime-mortgage-recession/
http://www.federalreservehistory.org/Events/DetailView/55
https://business.cch.com/images/banner/subprime.pdf
https://fcic.law.stanford.edu/
https://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications/community-dividend/did-the-cra-cause-the-mortgage-market-meltdown
You chime in post 53.

I posted the timeline in post 56,61,64,73 which you ignored and deflected in post 74.

You agreed in post 80 with the characterization of what really happened.
timeline again, 112, 113.

I went and read post three. I followed your two first links. I found this:

First link did not address the earlier quoted statement that by 1995 congress and organizations like ACORN were forcing banks to lower standard for lending. What your link said was that W proposed using tax money to help people make down payments. Hardly a reduction in banking standards.


Your second link says this:

ere are plenty of culprits, like lenders who peddled easy credit, consumers who took on mortgages they could not afford and Wall Street chieftains who loaded up on mortgage-backed securities without regard to the risk.

But the story of how the United States got here is partly one of Bush's own making, according to a review of his tenure that included interviews with dozens of current and former administration officials.

Bush did foresee the danger posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage finance giants. The president spent years pushing a recalcitrant Congress to toughen regulation of the companies, but was unwilling to compromise when his former Treasury secretary wanted to cut a deal. And the regulator Bush chose to oversee them - an old school buddy - pronounced the companies sound even as they headed toward insolvency.

Nothing about the topic which seems to be your style. I did see how it discussed what W did while the colaspe was happening, but that was 12 years after the actions described in my links to you which showed the roots of the problem. So, you're saying a melt down started when Bush talked about using taxes to help poor people make down payments and happened four years later under Bush's watch. While I'm providing links that policies congress tried to use based on racial politics to subvert banking standards were in full force by 1995 and came to fruition 12 years later under Bush...even though your second link describes how Bush tried to get congress to act against those policies established in 1995. Ya, I don't see your argument.

Secondly, I was considering whether or not to waist my time with the rest of your links in post 3, since the first two seemed to be your usual not related to anything and I saw post 4 which discuss each of your links and it appears from that, you did just throw out link that weren't relevant in the, I guess, assumption nobody would read them and you'd sound authoritative.

So, no, what you said you did, you didn't do.

quote:

Funny how we can agree with virtually every fact you post. And arrive at very different conclusions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Pdeuax!

quote:

Funny how we can agree with virtually every fact you post. And arrive at very different conclusions.

Only because you chose to ignore other salient events.

FACT: Fannie Mae guaranteed less than $8 billion of the $160 billion subprime loans issued by lenders in 2000.

quote:


FACT: The CRA goal was to increase subprime loans and middle class loans from 50% to 55% by 2010.

quote:


FACT: The CFMA of 2000 prevented the SEC, the FED and others to regulate derivatives and credit default swaps. This failure was a major, major cause of the casino surge.

FACT: By 2004, Alan Greenspan had lowered prime lending rates to 1.0%

FACT: High value condos and MacMansions were being flipped insanely.

FACT: The Fed failed to reign in the banksters lowering of lending standards. To say the CRA forced the bankers is an outrageous misrepresentation. I guess if you say it often enough you will believe the lie.

quote:


FACT: In 2007 40% of all subprime loans were approved by robopen.

quote:


FACT: Goldman Sacks and other investment banks sold MBS that were engineered to fail so they could collect on credit default swaps sold by AIG. They crushed AIG.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Just shows to go'ya, if the left would just get out of the way and let the marketplace work...we'd all be so much better off.

In this case - thats absolute fact. In this particular case, there can be no question that the CRA forced backs to make stupid loans over 29% of which in the final year would go broke.

Government intervention into the credit market directly caused this problem. Even barney frank admitted this by the way, in his interview after leaving the house.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Just shows to go'ya, if the left would just get out of the way and let the marketplace work...we'd all be so much better off.

In this case - thats absolute fact. In this particular case, there can be no question that the CRA forced backs to make stupid loans over 29% of which in the final year would go broke.

Government intervention into the credit market directly caused this problem. Even barney frank admitted this by the way, in his interview after leaving the house.

In this case it was an absolute disaster. Lack of government regulation and oversight caused this. The community reinvestment act is on the books today, and there is no mortgage meltdown, further proof this was a wholly nutsucker disaster.

quote:


FACT: Fannie Mae guaranteed less than $8 billion of the $160 billion subprime loans issued by lenders in 2000.


Which is just a misleading lie, because this was before Fannie changed its loan standards to accept subprime loans. by 2007 the number was %70.
And those loans issued in 2007 failed at 29% or higher.

So your quote is crap.

quote:

When the banks are giving no down payment loans, at 100% loan to value - which is what they were doing before the crash - why the hell do you need a loan review?

quote:

When clearly it was the definitive domino. WITHOUT THE CRA - NONE OF THE REST OF THIS HAPPENS.