Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-15-2015, 12:26 PM
 
Location: Carpinteria
1,199 posts, read 1,635,114 times
Reputation: 1184

Advertisements

Does anybody really believe the United States is a democracy of, "We the people". It only makes sense to me if you replace "people" with "business". Doing so makes our life in the U.S. today, all so clear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-15-2015, 12:42 PM
 
28,107 posts, read 63,374,410 times
Reputation: 23222
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
Who actually caused the housing bubble? two words..GEORGE BUSH
I guess it conveniently absolves hundreds of millions Americans from any responsibility?

Every day my phone would ring with refi offers and people peddling property in Las Vegas and Arizona... just because someone puts out bait doesn't mean everyone is stupid enough to take it.

My city was hit hard... a bank owned property on every block...

I also know the grocery clerk at the local Safeway store bought 5 homes in 24 months and walked away from all of them.

President Bush made it his business to remove barriers to home ownership... the rest of the story is greed/human nature.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2015, 01:12 PM
 
Location: So California
8,704 posts, read 11,041,227 times
Reputation: 4794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
I guess it conveniently absolves hundreds of millions Americans from any responsibility?

Every day my phone would ring with refi offers and people peddling property in Las Vegas and Arizona... just because someone puts out bait doesn't mean everyone is stupid enough to take it.

My city was hit hard... a bank owned property on every block...

I also know the grocery clerk at the local Safeway store bought 5 homes in 24 months and walked away from all of them.

President Bush made it his business to remove barriers to home ownership... the rest of the story is greed/human nature.

Not Bush. That barrier removal started with Clinton not Bush. The Fed kept the housing bubble afloat adjusting rates down instead of allowing a correction. And Barney Frank was the key instigator pushing for lower banking standards. His most successful effort was to impose what were called "affordable housing" requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 1992. Before that time, these two government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) had been required to buy only mortgages that institutional investors would buy--in other words, prime mortgages--but Frank and others thought these standards made it too difficult for low income borrowers to buy homes. The affordable housing law required Fannie and Freddie to meet government quotas when they bought loans from banks and other mortgage originators.
At first, this quota was 30%; that is, of all the loans they bought, 30% had to be made to people at or below the median income in their communities. HUD, however, was given authority to administer these quotas, and between 1992 and 2007, the quotas were raised from 30% to 50% under Clinton in 2000 and to 55% under Bush in 2007 in a compromise with the democrats.
Barney Frank even admitted it in 2010: In an interview on Larry Kudlow's show in August 2010, he said "I hope by next year we'll have abolished Fannie and Freddie ... it was a great mistake to push lower-income people into housing they couldn't afford and couldn't really handle once they had it."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2015, 01:21 PM
 
17,815 posts, read 25,502,192 times
Reputation: 36262
I'm no fan of George Bush, but people who took out mortgages they couldn't afford caused their own grief.

No money down, it used to be you needed a certain percentage in order to buy a house. It gave you a vested interest because you put your own money into it.

You put nothing down, you don't care as much.

I know of a situation of someone who lost their home and also blamed Bush, but she also said and I quote "we knew we couldn't afford it when we bought it"..sigh.

They also had included in their mortgage a new car.

It's the "entitlement" mentality today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2015, 01:27 PM
jw2
 
2,028 posts, read 3,249,397 times
Reputation: 3386
Quote:
Originally Posted by slo1318 View Post
Not Bush. That barrier removal started with Clinton not Bush. The Fed kept the housing bubble afloat adjusting rates down instead of allowing a correction. And Barney Frank was the key instigator pushing for lower banking standards. His most successful effort was to impose what were called "affordable housing" requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 1992. Before that time, these two government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) had been required to buy only mortgages that institutional investors would buy--in other words, prime mortgages--but Frank and others thought these standards made it too difficult for low income borrowers to buy homes. The affordable housing law required Fannie and Freddie to meet government quotas when they bought loans from banks and other mortgage originators.
At first, this quota was 30%; that is, of all the loans they bought, 30% had to be made to people at or below the median income in their communities. HUD, however, was given authority to administer these quotas, and between 1992 and 2007, the quotas were raised from 30% to 50% under Clinton in 2000 and to 55% under Bush in 2007 in a compromise with the democrats.
Barney Frank even admitted it in 2010: In an interview on Larry Kudlow's show in August 2010, he said "I hope by next year we'll have abolished Fannie and Freddie ... it was a great mistake to push lower-income people into housing they couldn't afford and couldn't really handle once they had it."
It seems no matter which problem our government attempts to fix, it never works and the rich just end up with more money. In the case of housing, we are back to the normal owner occupancy rates and the rich picked up a lot of housing largely on the taxpayers dime.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2015, 01:41 PM
 
28,107 posts, read 63,374,410 times
Reputation: 23222
Pretty much seems to be the case... and fixes are costly too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2015, 02:24 PM
 
3,229 posts, read 6,252,025 times
Reputation: 4878
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyChrono View Post
Honestly though, if I had a 190k income, I would save up and buy a 1 million dollar home in a CA hot spot like the SF Bay Area and watch as that home goes up to 2 million in a few years. I can even rent it out to those techies in Silicon Valley for exorbitant prices while I wait for it to appreciate.
It is also very possible that when the next major earthquake hits in the SF Bay area that million dollar home will fall to $500k and you will be financially devastated. The Tectonic Time Bomb Hayward fault has large earthquakes about every 140 years and the last one was in 1868. An earthquake that causes a trillion+ dollars of damage won't be good for housing prices.

"According to newly updated information from members of the 1868 Hayward Earthquake Alliance, a major earthquake on the Hayward fault would impact more than 5 million people and property and contents valued in excess of $1.5 trillion in the six counties surrounding the fault."

USGS Release: The Hayward Fault: America’s Most Dangerous?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2015, 02:33 PM
 
2,645 posts, read 3,306,814 times
Reputation: 7358
Quote:
Originally Posted by capoeira View Post
It is also very possible that when the next major earthquake hits in the SF Bay area that million dollar home will fall to $500k and you will be financially devastated. The Tectonic Time Bomb Hayward fault has large earthquakes about every 140 years and the last one was in 1868. An earthquake that causes a trillion+ dollars of damage won't be good for housing prices.

"According to newly updated information from members of the 1868 Hayward Earthquake Alliance, a major earthquake on the Hayward fault would impact more than 5 million people and property and contents valued in excess of $1.5 trillion in the six counties surrounding the fault."

USGS Release: The Hayward Fault: America’s Most Dangerous?
Anyone who avoids investment risk worrying about such an extremely unlikely situation is best to put their cash in a federally insured CD and enjoy the .1% rate of return.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2015, 02:38 PM
 
3,229 posts, read 6,252,025 times
Reputation: 4878
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoriBee62 View Post
Anyone who avoids investment risk worrying about such an extremely unlikely situation is best to put their cash in a federally insured CD and enjoy the .1% rate of return.
Its not extremely unlikely, its almost 100% certain to happen, the only question is the timing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2015, 02:42 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,766,313 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoriBee62 View Post
To expand on that, it was caused very much by Republican philosophies on unregulated free market and the deregulation of the financial sector: The notion that if you leave businesses alone, they will put the interests of the public ahead of profit without the need for government intervention, that government needs to get out of the way and let them do what they want, without checks or rules. It's not coincidentally the same environment that brought on the great stock market crash of 1929 which led to the Great Depression.

Even Greenspan ultimately said he was wrong in his financial philosophies because he hadn't factored greed into the equation.

What's ridiculous is that this philosophy has been tried so often with disastrous consequences EVERY TIME, yet there is still a percentage of the population which thinks that if we try it again, we will have a different outcome. And boobs like Trump are holding on to the rings in their noses and laughing all the way to the bank.
We havnt had a free market in 100 years and the deregulation you are talking about happened under Clinton.

When the government forces companies to make bad business decisions HD then covers loses it leads to a free for all. It happened in the housing loan problem in 07/08 and it will happen with obamacare as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top