114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 12:42 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

okie, That still doesn't excuse any financial institution that provided loans to unqualified buyers. That Frank told congress that "Fannie and Freddie is sound" doesn't mean much when they continued to lend to unqualified buyers. Did Frank make it illegal not to?



It wasn't so much their direct lending to unqualified buyers that accelerated the mortgage bubble & collapse as it was their widespread buying and securitizing of mortgages let by Countrywide and other third party lenders. This had the effect of decoupling lenders from the possibility of borrower default and quickly replinishing the capital on which they could make more loans - all guaranteed by our idiot government. The public bill for this aspect of the bubble hasn't yet been paid. Still nothing was wrong, because as the esteemed Maxine Waters said of the Bush attempt to rein in Fannie and Freddie, "Don't fix it. It ain't broke."
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 12:52 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob, If you have been reading my posts on this subject, I'm probably more in agreement with you then not. What I'm responding to are the direct connection of Fannie and Freddie per Frank's statement to the finance committee.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 12:53 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

It wasn't so much their direct lending to unqualified buyers that accelerated the mortgage bubble & collapse as it was their widespread buying and securitizing of mortgages let by Countrywide and other third party lenders.

George, I think you have captured the central point or reason why this all happened. Anytime you take the risk out of something, everyone wants to get in on the act.

I have used this analogy many times, asking primarily cyclops the question, "What would happen if the government set up GSE's with regulations mandating loans be made to everyone to buy cars, even those with marginal or bad credit, and those GSE's would buy packages of loans from the banks that made those loans, thus providing those banks with a profit in the process of making loans? What would happen to the price of new cars and used cars over a period of years, and what would ultimately happen to the auto industry. I think we all know a huge auto bubble would occur and huge bust of auto prices and bundles of auto loans going bad, also the GSE's and the banks that participated in those bundles of loans would end up in sad condition. That would be my bet at least.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  0  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 01:03 pm
Georgeob1 understands the reality of the distructive consequences of Fan&Fred.
Georgeob1 wrote:
It wasn't so much their direct lending to unqualified buyers that accelerated the mortgage bubble & collapse as it was their widespread buying and securitizing of mortgages let by Countrywide and other third party lenders. This had the effect of decoupling lenders from the possibility of borrower default and quickly replinishing the capital on which they could make more loans - all guaranteed by our idiot government. The public bill for this aspect of the bubble hasn't yet been paid. Still nothing was wrong, because as the esteemed Maxine Waters said of the Bush attempt to rein in Fannie and Freddie, "Don't fix it. It ain't broke."
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 01:25 pm
Coincidentally, the Fed today released a survey (taken near the end of July) showing that U.S. banks have been easing their lending standards to small businesses. It is the 1st time in 4 years that has happened.
A small business is defined as one with sales of less then $50M.
The survey of large and small banks indicates that there has also been a relaxing of various types of consumer loans ranging from prime mortgages, credit cards and for purchases such as autos.
0 Replies
 
Richy22
 
  0  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 01:31 pm
All I know is its not in the right direction, we got to stop all theses job losses.
http://www.dailyjobcuts.com
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 01:36 pm
@okie,
It was all done with GWB's watch. He had eight years and he never even looked at it and it consumed his Administration.
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 01:57 pm
@talk72000,
As well as the stupid citizens who want to return a Republican government that caused our recession/depression with their Bush policies. Most voters have the attention span of a one year old and I say that because the republicans are spouting the same tax cut for the rich and less regulation that caused all the trouble!
ican711nm
 
  0  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:06 pm
@talk72000,
72000 wrote:
It was all done with GWB's watch. He had eight years and he never even looked at it and it consumed his Administration.

FALSE! Bush looked at it and multiple times advocated fixing it!
Yes, "This happened during Bush's watch." It happened because Bush was incapable of convincing the Democrat's Congressional majority to address the underlying economic problems caused by Fannie and Freddie.

Quote:
2007
*06/23—Two Bear Sterns hedge fund groups collapse due to their mortgage investments.
*08/09— President Bush requests Congress pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
*12/06— President Bush warns Congress of need to pass legislation reforming GSEs.

2008
*03/14—J.P. Morgan and the Federal Reserve recognize extent of Bear’s toxic assets, including sub-prime mortgages, and credit default swaps, and interconnection with other banks.
*03/14—At Economic Club of New York, President Bush requests Congress take action and reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
*04/14—President Bush issues a plea to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
*05/03—President Bush issues a plea to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
*05/19—President Bush issues a plea to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
*05/31—President Bush issues a plea to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
*06/06—President Bush issues a plea to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
*07/11—Senator Chris Dodd says: "There’s sort of a panic going on today, and that’s not what ought to be. The facts don’t warrant that reaction, in my opinion … Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were never bottom feeders in the residential mortgage market. People ought to feel comfortable about that. "

talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:12 pm
@ican711nm,
The Democrats only gained a slim majority Congress in 2006. He did not have the foresight to fix them before 2006. It was only when things began to unravel that he went to Congress i.e. after Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson gloated denying a bailout for Lehman Bros. which precipitated the Financial Meltdown.
ican711nm
 
  0  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:17 pm
@rabel22,
IT IS the stupid ODDM (i.e., Obama Democrat Disassembler Maligners) who greatly expanded Bush's errors and added many more of their own that converted our recession into a depression.

The Republicans are advocating EXTENDING the 2010 Income Tax Rates. Those rates cut the Clinton Tax Rates for EVERYONE who has a taxable annual income.
Quote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2051527/posts
Partial History of U.S. Federal Income Tax Rates
Highest and lowest Income Tax Rates 1971 to 2009
...
1971-1981: minimum = 14%; maximum = 70% [CARTER 1977-1981]
1982-1986: minimum = 11%; maximum = 50% [REAGAN 1981-1989]
1987-1987: minimum = 11%; maximum = 38.5%
1988-1990: minimum = 15%; maximum = 33% [BUSH41 1989-1993]
1991-1992: minimum = 15%; maximum = 31%
1993-2000: minimum = 15%; maximum = 39.6% [CLINTON 1993-2001]
2001-2001: minimum = 15%; maximum = 39.1% [BUSH43 2001-2009]
2002-2002: minimum = 10%; maximum = 38.6%
2003-2009: minimum = 10%; maximum = 35%
2009-2010: minimum = 10%; maximum = 35%[OBAMA 2001-2009]

0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  0  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:28 pm
@talk72000,
talk72000 wrote:
The Democrats only gained a slim majority Congress in 2006.

And the Democrats opposed doing anything to correct Fan&Fred thereafter--in 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010. Their bailout efforts in 2008 and thereafter have failed to correct the problems initiated and perpetuated by the Democrats who in December 2008 began evolving into ODDM (i.e., Obama Democrat Disassembling Maligners).
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:29 pm
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:

talk72000 wrote:
The Democrats only gained a slim majority Congress in 2006.

And the Democrats opposed doing anything to correct Fan&Fred thereafter--in 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010. Their bailout efforts in 2008 and thereafter have failed to correct the problems initiated and perpetuated by the Democrats who in December 2008 began evolving into ODDM (i.e., Obama Democrat Disassembling Maligners).


Nothing they could have done post-2006 would have averted the disaster, Ican. You have been patiently explained this fact over and over again, and I'm starting to conclude that you are just too stupid to understand the situation.

Cycloptichorn
ican711nm
 
  0  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:39 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Nothing they could have done post-2006 would have averted the disaster, Ican. You have been patiently explained this fact over and over again, and I'm starting to conclude that you are just too stupid to understand the situation.

THAT IS A CLAIM FOR WHICH YOU HAVE PROVIDED ZERO EVIDENCE, and it is a VACUOUS CLAIM.

Cutting back FAn&Fred poorly and inadequately backed housing loans would have been an excellent start.

Your claim is so dumb that I do not believe you are dumb enough to actually believe it true.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:39 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
bingo!
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:41 pm
@cicerone imposter,
No, Cicerone, it is bunko!
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:42 pm
@ican711nm,
And your "bunko" is supposed to mean, what? You are dumb.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:43 pm
@ican711nm,
The disaster precipitated by Paulson made him realize the extent of his mistake. He quickly wanted a carte blanche for bailout banks and the government to pay for the toxic assets.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 02:45 pm
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Nothing they could have done post-2006 would have averted the disaster, Ican. You have been patiently explained this fact over and over again, and I'm starting to conclude that you are just too stupid to understand the situation.

THAT IS A CLAIM FOR WHICH YOU HAVE PROVIDED ZERO EVIDENCE, and it is a VACUOUS CLAIM.

Cutting back FAn&Fred poorly and inadequately backed housing loans would have been an excellent start.


No, it wouldn't have. In fact, it wouldn't have stopped the crisis at all. The whole Credit Default Swap system was a house of cards, and all that would have done is push it over faster. After 2004 there was little that ANYONE could have done.

I have provided a great deal of evidence that this is true, in terms of both links to historical accounts and patient explanations to you. You have ignored everything I've written, because you aren't smart enough to understand it, and it doesn't blame the Democrats, so you aren't interested.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 07:49 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Nothing they could have done post-2006 would have averted the disaster, Ican. You have been patiently explained this fact over and over again, and I'm starting to conclude that you are just too stupid to understand the situation.

Cycloptichorn

It has patiently been explained to you numerous times that at least the Republicans recognized it as a problem and wanted to try to fix it, but Democrats said it is no problem, with some like Maxine Waters and others even insinuating racism in her opposition to fixing the problem. The only logical conclusion is that the Republicans are not without blame, but the Democrats deserve by far most of the blame. Only your extreme partisan defense of the incompetent Democrats will lead you to disagree with this, cyclops, and I think you know it.
 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.13 seconds on 03/11/2025 at 10:52:30