Where is the US economy headed?

@okie,

Another link to buttress what I said above, the problem is gigantic, folks. As of 2008, F & F owned or guaranteed 56.8% of the 12 trillion mortgage market. My calculator says that is 6.8 trillion that we are exposed to as taxpayers backing all of these loans, folks. This is criminal, and it is our politicians that are directly responsible for setting up this disastrous scenario. And it is still going on unabated I think. If I am not mistaken, Obama is still giving bonuses to the execs at these GSEs.

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

"As of 2008[update], Fannie Mae and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) owned or guaranteed about half or 56.8% of the U.S.'s $12 trillion mortgage market.[27]"

Bonus info from 2009:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/19/fannie.bonuses/index.html
"Four Fannie Mae execs to get big bonuses"

1 Reply

@okie,

Quote:

"These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." [16] Congress, controlled by Republicans during this period, did not introduce any legislation aimed at bringing this proposal into law until the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, which did not proceed out of committee to the Senate. [17]

GWB and the Republican Congress did NOTHING.

2 Replies

@talk72000,

talk72000 wrote:

Quote:
"These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee.

You have absolutely no idea how reassuring this statement of Frank's is.

1 Reply

@talk72000,

This has been addressed, talk. The Repubs did not think they had the votes, so they did not bring it out for a vote. This happens all the time in regard to legislation. It was blocked, and haven't you seen the videos of folks like Maxine Waters insinuating Republicans of being racist in this? We all know that accusations of racism scare the living daylights out of any politician, without regard to their party, they will turn tail and run the other way from an issue if they think they are at risk of being labeled a racist.

The political stakes were raised to include all kinds of things besides simply regulating the home loan industry, talk. Actually, this is common practice by Democrats, they use race and bigotry charges all the time to intimidate their opposition in order to get their way on things, and I think this factor was in play in regard to Fannie and Freddie. I do however fault the Republicans for not going ahead and doing what was right and proper for us, the taxpayers, and at least try to pass the legislation even if it ultimately did not have the votes. But the fact remains that the primary blame falls directly upon the Democrats. I blame the Repubs for not fighting harder, but I understand why they did not.

2 Replies

@okie,

With a Republican majority you say Republicans did not have the vote yet at the same time you and Ican accuse Democrats of failing when they didn't have the vote.

0 Replies

@roger,

The mortgage situation by itself at that was not so large it was GWB's push to have Home Ownership to cover up for the Gulf War costs and the de-regulation or not enforcing existing regulations of Wall Street that made the problem large.

0 Replies

@okie,

In other words, the conservatives give up before they bring it for a vote, because the GOP has a majority in congress? huh?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

The problem is that all Republicans are not conservatives. You have heard of the term "Rhino" I think? Why do you think the Tea Party movement has gained strength? I can't go back and ask every congressman or congresswoman how they would have voted, but as I explained to everyone here, when Democrats start demagoging an issue with insinuations of racism in regard to some legislation, people start turning tail, including Republicans. and remember, you have a mainstream press that cooperates with them and expands on their demagoguery without pointing out the fallacies of it. I am not excusing the Republicans for this, as I have already said they deserve some blame in this, but the bulk of the blame should fall squarely upon the Democrats. If one took a poll, I feel sure that a much higher percentage of Democrats than Republicans would have opposed the legislation, and I keep repeating this, but folks like Frank and Waters were demagoging the issue, saying there was absolutely no problem whatsoever, it was the Republicans that were just raising a stink over nothing and wanted to punish poor people and minorities that wanted to buy homes.

1 Reply

@okie,

Funny you should say that, because you're always lambasting democrats and"liberals." Who the hell are you talking about? Do you really know?

The tea party has gained strength? Please prove this claim with some reliable sources, and not only your personal opinion.

Since you don't seem to have a good memory for history, you should stay away from topics where almost anyone on a2k can show you the opposite of what you say. You can latch onto one sentence made by Frank, but that's not how laws are established. It's only a personal opinion that was wrong.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

The post in which I presented a blog written by Robert Reich was voted down. The man has taught at some of the nation's leading school and held a cabinet position, which, obviously means that he has no idea what he is talking about. Who ever voted this down is brilliant and probably prescient and probably sells pencils on the corner for a living.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

The unqualified buyers part was at the end of a long process. It was the proverbial hair.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

ve said these things before - maybe using different words, but the concept is always the same.

okie resents that you tried to trick him by using synonyms, a flavoring he likes on his toast.

0 Replies

@okie,

Quote:

I am the first to admit I am no expert on banking.

This is the first time that Mr. Titanic Ego admitted to not knowing something. Generally, he bluffs.

0 Replies

@okie,

Quote:

I am expert enough to balance my checkbook every month, to pay my bills, and have a little money in the bank

1.) Balancing one's check book (if one still uses checks?!) in no way makes one an expert on banking.

2.) If you have a little money in the bank it is because you make enough money to stop contributing to Social Security.

As the Andrews Sisters sang: Straighten up and fly right.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

Quote:

2.) If you have a little money in the bank it is because you make enough money to stop contributing to Social Security

Thats a joke, right???
It couldnt be that someone actually spends less then what they make, thereby having some left over?

And if someone does know how to watch their money, is it your contention that they should stop contributing to Social Security, or should they take a pay cut instead?

1 Reply

@okie,

Cyclo wrote:

Quote:

I don't ask anyone's opinion when I need knowledge about something.

To which okie replied:

Quote:

So if you need to know something about how to plumb a new bathroom you may want built, you go to the library or internet or somewhere and try to figure it out yourself? You don't ask a friend that is a plumber or the plumbing inspector in your area for example?

okie is totally at odds with Cyclo's statement. Cyclo said he does not as an opinion when he wants knowledge.

An opinion is not knowledge.

okie's chief problem here is that he doesn't know that an opinion is NOT knowledge.

His response is ridiculous. Whether a homeowner consults a plumber or a library book or the internet or watches This Old House, he is not going to receive an OPINION on plumbing but INFORMATION on plumbing. Information becomes knowledge.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

the root of the problem was people buying homes they could not afford,

An oversimplification.

The root of the problem goes back to period between 1970 and 1978 when Baby Boomers were entering the housing market. You remember the Baby Boom, the result of the biggest homecoming since Ulysses? What happens when more and more people chase limited goods? The price goes up. Home prices started rising around 1971 or so.

George Goodman, who wrote as Adam Smith, observed in his 1981 book Paper Money that people were using houses as investments and not
simply as domicile.

That caused the price of homes to rise even faster. As the Boomers started families, they began to compete for space in those communities whose schools were recognized for their quality. Bidding wars went on and home prices soared.

Then the divorce boom came along and families were now living in two homes rather than a single house.

That loans were written for unqualified buyers was a consequence rather than a cause, but, even that is far and away too simple.

0 Replies

@realjohnboy,

Ah! a breath of fresh air.

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

okie mentioned that he makes enough money so that he doesn't pay into Social Security throughout the year.

I'm not certain which was the first year that my ex-husband could stop contributing to Social Security, but, he generally netted more than the average father of the average family grossed.

Stop asking me to explain things to you that should be obvious. You need to address your inability to follow a thread.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

Here is quote from cicerone imposter from Obama '08 thread on okie and opinions:

Quote:

okie is good at making false claims; I've yet to see anything he's posted supported by credible evidence. He thinks his opinion is the evidence.

1 Reply

Where is the US economy headed?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know