Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
gs had zero to due with bad loans secured by the government
gs had very liitle to do with the housing bubble, that started in 1995....
As I've stated over and over, no one thing is to blame. My argument was that reinstituting G/S would have went a lot further in addressing the issue than Dodd/Frank.
The banks gave the loans in the first place because they knew that the government would gaurantee them. How do I know this? That is exactly what has happened. The government has bought them up through F&F and left us to pay them off.
The issue that i'm trying to point out is that the GSE's marketshare dropped substantially in the period denoted as the time the bubble was inflating meaning they held fewer fewer notes. The % securitized solely by the private market and then passed along to investors (not gse's) EXPLODED from 2000-2006. The GSE's in a misguided business decision bought up a bunch of alt-a (not subprime) loans and these were the one's that suffered the majority of defaults...obviously we know now that this was a bad move but at the time Alt-A loans were considered (slightly) safer...they were generally issued to borrowers with higher incomes and better credit scores. But hindsight is always 20/20...
And yes, I agree it sucks they needed a bailout but the opposite would have been considerably worse.
Well... when you're right you're right...I am scared of him and his popularity. His policies are destructive and I don't want to see this country dismantled by an idiot that would prefer the US be reduced to 50 countries.
I think the only thing anyone has to be afraid of as far as Ron and Rand Paul goes is splitting the republican vote. They're never going to win a R primary for a nation wide office, and the libertarian candidates who ran on the libertarian ticket managed to split the vote in a number of states, spoiling 9 races for republicans. The GOP’s growing Libertarian problem
I think the only thing anyone has to be afraid of as far as Ron and Rand Paul goes is splitting the republican vote. They're never going to win a R primary for a nation wide office, and the libertarian candidates who ran on the libertarian ticket managed to split the vote in a number of states, spoiling 9 races for republicans. The GOP’s growing Libertarian problem
The only worry that I genuinely had is that the popularity of the Tea Party is entrenched in libertarianism as opposed to the old guard. It's my hope that Rove and his cronies get this pending "GOP Civil War" started up soon enough to fragment the party for the 2014 elections.
The only worry that I genuinely had is that the popularity of the Tea Party is entrenched in libertarianism as opposed to the old guard. It's my hope that Rove and his cronies get this pending "GOP Civil War" started up soon enough to fragment the party for the 2014 elections.
Most Libertarians (although the Pauls don't fit this) really do support small government, meaning they want the government out of your personal life too. That might fit with a small percentage of the Tea Party, but the majority is also heavily evangelical christian, and they've been the ones pushing the crazy social policy and not much in the way of jump starting the economy. I don't think the Tea Party is libertarian at all, or at least not on social issues or military spending.
Most Libertarians (although the Pauls don't fit this) really do support small government, meaning they want the government out of your personal life too. That might fit with a small percentage of the Tea Party, but the majority is also heavily evangelical christian, and they've been the ones pushing the crazy social policy and not much in the way of jump starting the economy. I don't think the Tea Party is libertarian at all, or at least not on social issues or military spending.
I'm not denying that they are hardcore invasive into personal issues like reproductive rights and gay rights but the foundations are pretty decidely libertarian...ideologically anyway. But regardless...they're lunatics and it warms my heart to see the fractioning within the GOP.
The issue that i'm trying to point out is that the GSE's marketshare dropped substantially in the period denoted as the time the bubble was inflating meaning they held fewer fewer notes. The % securitized solely by the private market and then passed along to investors (not gse's) EXPLODED from 2000-2006. The GSE's in a misguided business decision bought up a bunch of alt-a (not subprime) loans and these were the one's that suffered the majority of defaults...obviously we know now that this was a bad move but at the time Alt-A loans were considered (slightly) safer...they were generally issued to borrowers with higher incomes and better credit scores. But hindsight is always 20/20...
And yes, I agree it sucks they needed a bailout but the opposite would have been considerably worse .
Experts from the Fed and a multitiude of indepedent economists from both sides of the political aisle agreed that this would have brough the US housing market to it's knees, paralyzing the financial system. But government conservatorship can't last forever. The question becomes....what do we do with them?
Most agree that some form of government assistance in the mortgage market is necessary to retain the 30 year mortgage, but even those on the left agree that it is looking like time to wind down F&F as long as we retain access to mortgage credit for those across all communities, transparancy, and strong consumer protections.
However the answer is not a fully free market mortgage market. We don't want the relics of the 20's and 30's to come back where a 50% down payment is the only option with very short term mortgage. Only the wealthy will be homeowners...because lets face it...how many people have 100k laying around for a down payment? On top of that the mortgage markets were topsy turvy as hell before federal involvement...when investors would withdraw large sums of cash from the banks it essentially neutered the banks ability to lend...for anything.
So...it's a tough cookie to crack. I'm certainly not the one to ask for solutions, and i'd wager no one on city-data is either.
Experts from the Fed and a multitiude of indepedent economists from both sides of the political aisle agreed that this would have brough the US housing market to it's knees, paralyzing the financial system.
Of course the Fed did. What do you expect them to say? They led the way and their main objective is to keep the markets rolling in the money. It would have been a temporary pain for those that the government bailed out, but they screwed up, why should we be making them whole again?
Quote:
But government conservatorship can't last forever. The question becomes....what do we do with them?
Most agree that some form of government assistance in the mortgage market is necessary to retain the 30 year mortgage, but even those on the left agree that it is looking like time to wind down F&F as long as we retain access to mortgage credit for those across all communities, transparancy, and strong consumer protections.
However the answer is not a fully free market mortgage market. We don't want the relics of the 20's and 30's to come back where a 50% down payment is the only option with very short term mortgage. Only the wealthy will be homeowners...because lets face it...how many people have 100k laying around for a down payment? On top of that the mortgage markets were topsy turvy as hell before federal involvement...when investors would withdraw large sums of cash from the banks it essentially neutered the banks ability to lend...for anything.
So...it's a tough cookie to crack. I'm certainly not the one to ask for solutions, and i'd wager no one on city-data is either.
None of that matters when no one is worried about ever being held responsible for anything.
The four graphs on this link show the history of GSE exposure and CRA linked loans....notice the period of spike and correlate that to GSE marketshare. Wall Street is the catalyst...not the government.
No doubt Wall Street was irresponsible during the crash. But who regulated the housing industry by changing the rules which set the stage for the collapse? >>> Congress
Congress had the matches, without the matches the fire doesn't get started.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
