Thanks Democrats (or Here We Go Again)

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Wolfpack, Dec 14, 2009.

  1. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    About 10 years ago, a bunch of Democrats thought it would be a good idea to force banks to lend money and assign mortages to more and more poor people (especially in the minority community). Then everyone was shocked - shocked! - when all of a sudden we saw a record amount of foreclosures. Who could have ever possibly foreseen that it was a bad idea to give a $450,000 mortgage to a guy making $28,000 per year?

    Now Obama wants to pretty much force more of the same. Isn't it Democrats forcing banks to lend money to unqualified recipients what got us into this mess in the first place?

    Obama Tells Wall Street Bank Executives to Help Borrowers, Homeowners - ABC News

    Obama to 'Fat Cat Bankers': Time to Start Lending
    President Wants Wall Street to Do More to Help Borrowers, Homeowners
    WASHINGTON, Dec. 14, 2009

    In a face-to-face meeting with the country's leading financial executives at the White House today, President Obama insisted that the nation's banks do more in "every responsible way" to increase lending to consumers and small businesses and help repair the U.S. economy.

    Obama calls on banks to make "extraordinary commitment" to rebuild the economy. "Given the difficulty business people are having as lending has declined and given the exceptional assistance banks received to get them through a difficult time, we expect them to explore every responsible way to help get our economy moving again," Obama said.

    The 90-minute summit comes as the president grapples with swirling economic discontentment, high unemployment and tight credit markets.
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2009
  2. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    You know you've really gone 'round the bend when you can find anything objectionable about what Obama did with respect to this meeting.
  3. Michael

    Michael Moderator Staff Member Supporter

    #12 Jersey

  4. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    What a wonderfully incorrect understanding of the roots of the mortgage crisis.
  5. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    I find it very objectionable that the President of the United States is using his bully pulpit, trying to force banks to make loans they are clearly not comfortable making. I don't see how it is possible for someone not to find that behavior objectionable.
  6. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    #80 Jersey

    My thoughts exactly...

    Lets not look at the "Ownership Society" that was pushed by the last administration...

    NO, look away, its "a bunch of Democrats" fault from 10 years ago....

    ...if you own something, you have a vital stake in the future of our country. The more ownership there is in America, the more vitality there is in America, and the more people have a vital stake in the future of this country. - President George W. Bush, June 17, 2004

    We're creating... an ownership society in this country, where more Americans than ever will be able to open up their door where they live and say, welcome to my house, welcome to my piece of property. - President George W. Bush, October 2004.

    Idiots, instead of listening to thos ewho tell you that "somesay..." and "There are those who say..."

    and start reading what REALLY happened.

    Bush's "ownership society" goes bust. - By Daniel Gross - Slate Magazine

    Glass Steagall was *****-slapped, and then came the OWNERSHIP SOCIETY... Talk about a recipe for disater...
  7. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Here is an article from 1999 which nails it dead on.

    Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending -

    Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
    Published: September 30, 1999

    WASHINGTON, Sept. 29— In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

    Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

    In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2009
  8. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    To support your claim of the roots of the events in 2007-8 you cite an article from 1999? I have never heard anything more ridiculous.

    Here's a little post-mortem reading you might find both illuminating and slightly more nuanced than your absurdly simplistic presentation.

    Subprime mortgage crisis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  9. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Pro Bowl Player

    #80 Jersey

    I'm assuming you've never heard of Phil Gramm ..... gramm.jpg

    I'd like to ask if Barney Frank was also at fault for the dinosaurs going extinct?
  10. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    He's not forcing them to do anything.
  11. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member Supporter

    That's not accurate, Wolfpack. Democrats (and probably some others) encouraged more lending, but there was nothing in the law that required banks or mortgage companies to make bad loans. They did that on their own, taking advantage of the encouragement to reap short-term profits.

    A similar thing happened many years ago in New York City. At a time when the House of Representatives was ready to urge cities to borrow less, bankers testified that cities needed to borrow more. The result was cities did borrow more, and then we ended up in the 1970s with a severe crisis that put many cities on the verge of bankruptcy.

    You may have an image of the noble banker moral enough to walk in the footsteps of Jesus, so it might surprise to learn that many of these people actually implement legal short term lending policies to drive stock values up. After all, it is the responsibility of a bank's board of directors to increase shareholder wealth. This is not always in the interest of the national economy, but is in the interesting of the dominant shareholders, who will wisely lock in large parts of their profits prior to a fall. If you read about how Wall Street works, you would know that Wall Street runs like a business, exploiting loopholes for their own gain.

    The failure of Congress was to lift regulations. That actually started under Carter, but Reagan is the name most often associated with it.
  12. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Why is that? You don't think the something that happened in the world of finance could have a negative impact 8 years later on?

    The article nails it perfectly. It says during good times, everything will be fine. But once we hit a downturn, the crap will hit the fan.

    EDIT: If you think my 1999 article is bad, what do you have to say to Patters? He's still trying to blame Reagan.
    LOL! Did you just call Wikipedia "illuminating" and "nuanced"? ROFLOL! I guess I've seen it all!
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2009
  13. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    And how is this any different from your Montgomery Burns image of bankers?

    You're darn right bankers are in it for money. That's why they tend not to want to give $450,000 mortgages to people who can't afford to pay it bank. Unfortunately, the Clinton administration put tremendous pressure on them to do so.
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2009
  14. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Yeah. Sure. And the mob never forced anyone to do anything either. All those merchants were just gladly "donating" their money to local mafia bosses for "protection". They certainly weren't "forced" to do anything :rolleyes:
  15. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member Supporter

    You're wrong. They were happy to make $450,000 mortgages to those who can't afford it. As long as those people could pay make their mortgage payments for a few years, stock values climbed, and a great many people did extremely well, especially those in know who locked in their profits.

    There is nothing in the law, nor was there ever, anything that required banks to make bad loans. They did that on their own because most regulations were lifted during the 1980s. You are right that they were encouraged to make loans, but not bad loans. That was their own doing, and it was very profitable to them.
  16. apple strudel

    apple strudel Banned

    Sounds like somebody doesn't understand what it means to cite multiple sources.
  17. ljuneau

    ljuneau Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

    Here is a good read for all those who think it was all caused by greedy lenders, or for those who think it was all caused by the government:


    The Housing Boom and Bust by Thomas Sowell

    Both the government and greedy lenders are to blame.

  18. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    #18 Jersey

    ANYTHING Obams said to encourage banks to lend to high risk borrowers is objectionable. Sorry Jack, but that's a fact!

    As a professional economist and a businessman, I can tell you as fact that banks should not lend unless the lendee is extremely well qualified. Our economy was built upon a solid banking system. One that takes very little risk. Why? Because it's the life blood of not only our economy, but the world economic infrastructure.

    The disease our economy is suffering from is largely due to lax lending standards. unqualified people (yup, ESPECIALLY if they are poor) don't get large loans. All of us, democrats and republicans should be appalled that Obama wants banks to lend despite the inherent risks involved.

    So tell us Jack, do you believe banks should once again begin the process of foolish lending standards?

    ARe you one of those who think everyone should be able to own their own home?...even if they can't afford one?

    What can banks do to ensure this nation that we'll never have to bail them out again?
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2009
  19. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    No offense, but that might be the single dumbest analogy I've ever read.
  20. JackBauer

    JackBauer Pro Bowl Player

    Where does it say any of this in the article Wolfpack posted?

Share This Page