Did Republican President Bush deliberatly crash the economy? 43 replies

Please wait...

emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#41 10 years ago

Bush? Cheney? Whats the difference?

Its the Bush administration, regardless of what happens Bush is the figurehead and thus gets the focus and blame.

And dont underestimate the underwear gnomes...crafty little devils.




The Fat Controller

the renegade codpiece emulator

50 XP

7th September 2006

0 Uploads

483 Posts

0 Threads

#42 10 years ago
WiseBobo;4809672Government DID regulate Fannie or Freddie by FORCING THEM to give loans to people who had horrible credit.

Assuming you mean the 1992 FHEFSSA, I don't see anything that sounds like risky loans were forced. Furthermore, this amendment to the CRA has been around for years.

They weren't about to let their pet project pipe dream of "everybody having a home" by jacking up interests rates. That would defeat the purpose. Congress is to blame more than anyone else. I don't like what Greenspan did, but he did not start the avalanche.

Greenspan is a self-described free market libertarian, and essentially had his way in keeping interest rates low. You're making out that he was a puppet of "them", whoever they may be. And it isn't just interest rates you can talk about, the Fed has a great deal of regulatory responsibilities.




WiseBobo

Most loved forum member.

50 XP

9th February 2004

0 Uploads

5,668 Posts

0 Threads

#43 10 years ago
The Fat Controller;4814812Assuming you mean the 1992 FHEFSSA, I don't see anything that sounds like risky loans were forced. Furthermore, this amendment to the CRA has been around for years.

:rolleyes:

The Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. ยง 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.[1][2][3] Community activists had lobbied the US Congress to pass the Act in order to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining.[4] The Act requires the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound operation. (See full text of Act and current regulations.[1]) To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions.[5]

I'm done arguing with you.




The Fat Controller

the renegade codpiece emulator

50 XP

7th September 2006

0 Uploads

483 Posts

0 Threads

#44 10 years ago

WiseBobo;4815415:rolleyes:

I'm done arguing with you.

And I'm done with you. Stopping redlining is not the same as forcing risky loans. The CRA is a 1977 Act and the provisions therein have effectively applied to Fannie and Freddie since 1992; so why did the crisis happen now and not 10 or 15 years ago? There isn't any evidence that the CRA was responsible for even encouraging subprime lending and then the housing bust. You've just been regurgitating something Ron Paul said on CNN.