Financial Meltdown due to Bush-McCain Economic Philosophy (house of representatives, democratic, biased)

[padcrasher]

Originally Posted by One Thousand

As far as I know, they always chose the LTV's. It's impossible for the government to have any real control of that because the industry (via appraisers) just massages the value to meet the LTV.

Further, the LTV is minor compared to the DTI ratios. Did the gov control either... ever?

Please cite source.

You sound like you know a little. Of course you don't have LTV ratios in the mortage industry now because there is no need for it. It's not needed since there are no regulations regarding it. It's gone. I just used it as an example simplify what is going on with bank lending and their rules, versus mortgage lending and their lack of rules.

Here is my source. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...prime_disaster

Along with a blurb about what went on.


The sub-prime lending crisis of the current decade closely repeats that pattern. In 1977, the investment-banking firm Salomon Brothers devised a highly lucrative financial device known as "securitization" of mortgage credit. Mortgages could be purchased from the originator of the loan, repackaged as bonds, sorted according to supposed risk, and certified by bond-rating agencies, thus allowing any number of investors to buy the bonds. Each player along the way took a cut, raising costs to borrowers.

Securitization enabled sub-prime lenders to throw away the rulebook. As long as some investment bank could be found to buy the loan, convert it to a bond, and peddle it to someone else, the mortgage companies could still turn a profit.

The union of securitized mortgage credit and sub-prime lending was a marriage made in hell, waiting to be consummated. Most of today's biggest mortgage companies are not federally regulated. Some are actually subsidiaries of banks, such as Wells Fargo, or own banks, such as Countrywide, the nation's biggest mortgage company. But while the loan portfolios of the parent banks are still strictly regulated, their mortgage affiliates are not, because the loans don't stay on their books. Still other such companies are independent but financed by big banks.



What I said was effectivly true. Mortgage lending was removed from bank regulation. A bank would have to keep with LTV rations with their own mortgage lending. This new law enabled these loans to be free of that regulation.






"

[Miborn]

Originally Posted by workingclasshero

sorry to INFORM you but these problems stem from: 1993, 1995, and 1999 and you can thank the liberals for it, and most of it goes back to the clinton era.
why because ECONOMICS run in 10(+/-4) year CYCLES and what we are facing NOW is in DIRECT RELATION to what happened back in the 90's



1993 NAFTA---- passed by the democrat controlled congress, pushed by clinton, signed by clinton---the consequence ......
60+ million HIGH PAYING jobs have been lost, 2 trillion worth of debt from the lost wages.



1995 clinton (through his chief of HUD (Henry Cisneros)) eased the rules on obtaining mortgages allowing more 'exotic' mortgages and 'no-dov' mortgages-----the consequence ......
housing SKYROCKETED causing low inventories causing a 'not normal' increase in home prices,
sellers got greedy,
buyers got even greedier (looking to PROFIT in a skyrocketing market by flipping) and bought
THINKING that prices would still increase and their ADJUSTABLE mortgage would pay it self off in MINIMUMAL years...

EVEN THOUGH THESE INCREASES IN HOME VALUES WERE TOTALLY UNHEARD OF,
AND MORTGAGE RATES WERE AT 40 YEAR LOWS
( what did they think an adjustable mortgage gotten at 40 year lows would do in the term(3 months-3years)
when it adjusted...of course it would go up, their CONTRACT even said after the term it would be 6% PLUS PRIME)))



For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home.
Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms.
Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership."

The above is the start of the mortgage meltdon: Clinton's National Homeownership Strategy...

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/cli (broken link)



1996 clinton signed The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (The Act was claimed to foster competition.
Instead, it allowed industry consolidation whose actions reduced the number of major media companies from around 30 in 1993 to 10 in 1996, and reducing the 10 in 1996 to 6 in 2005.)




1998 clinton does not allow drilling for OUR OWN OIL



1999 Clinton DEREGULATES the banking industry



2000 clinton signs the China trade bill



2000 clinton signs the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000..(which paves the way for ENRON)



2006 democrats PROMISE to lower gas prices.....they lied



2006 democrats promise to make a living wage....they lied, what did they pass???
a minimum wage increase that take 2.5 years to fully take effect that would

not even equal the inflation rate for those 2.5 years,,

and do they include a automatic annual cost of living increase???

NO they make sure they keep it as a VOTING SCAM



2008 the democrats led by pelosi, wont even ALLOW a vote for off shore drilling,
because QUEEN PELOSI says no
(funny how the democrats take the 'RIGHT of power of the people vote' on a subject.







just FACTS that the democrats don't care about the poor ,,,,just their votes

You totally ROCK!!!

[One Thousand]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

You sound like you know a little. Of course you don't have LTV ratios in the mortage industry now because there is no need for it. It's not needed since there are no regulations regarding it. It's gone. I just used it as an example simplify what is going on with bank lending and their rules, versus mortgage lending and their lack of rules.

I know a little.

There are-- and have always been-- LTV's in the mortgage industry. Every loan program has an LTV. LTV isn't a government thing, it's a lender thing. The lender wants to make sure if the borrower can't pay, the Value exceeds the Loan amount adequately to cover losses in the event of a foreclosure.

Here is my source.

First, that makes no mention of federally regulated LTVs. Further, when discussing regulation issues, it's only reasonable to expect the statute to be cited.

What I said was effectivly true. Mortgage lending was removed from bank regulation. A bank would have to keep with LTV rations with their own mortgage lending. This new law enabled these loans to be free of that regulation.

I have no clue what you're talking about... except that you're repeating the same argument that lacks a credible reference.


Ultimately, the diarrhea you've flung into this thread is nothing more than a demonstration of what happens when a person who knows nothing about a topic seeks a scapegoat for some occurrence. Read more; talk less.

[Miborn]

Originally Posted by padcrasher

Well you're finally getting close. But what you fail to offer up is that almost every Dem Senator voted against the repeal as did 25 percent of Dems in the House.

So the only opposition to the bill came from Democrats.

In May 1998, the House passes legislation by a vote of 214 to 213 that allows for the merging of banks, securities firms, and insurance companies into huge financial conglomerates. And in September, the Senate Banking Committee votes 16-2 to approve a compromise bank overhaul bill. Despite this new momentum, Congress is yet again unable to pass final legislation before the end of its session.

[padcrasher]

Now you're just being an ass playing a word game.

Yes it's not known as LTV.

It's a reserve requirements and capital requirements that mortagage lenders don't have.


You can't argue with the gist of what I'm saying so you'll go off on a tangent with me not using precise terms for the sake of time. What's next grammer and spelling??

[One Thousand]

Originally Posted by Miborn

In May 1998, the House passes legislation by a vote of 214 to 213 that allows for the merging of banks, securities firms, and insurance companies into huge financial conglomerates. And in September, the Senate Banking Committee votes 16-2 to approve a compromise bank overhaul bill. Despite this new momentum, Congress is yet again unable to pass final legislation before the end of its session.

I think this might be the one you're referencing: Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Originally Posted by padcrasher

You can't argue with the gist...

That's true... but only because the gist will not defend itself...

Make a point and I will quickly remove the speck from your eye.

[mommabear2]

Originally Posted by workingclasshero

sorry to INFORM you but these problems stem from: 1993, 1995, and 1999 and you can thank the liberals for it, and most of it goes back to the clinton era. why because ECONOMICS run in 10(+/-4) year CYCLES and what we are facing NOW is in DIRECT RELATION to what happened back in the 90's



1993 NAFTA---- passed by the democrat controlled congress, pushed by clinton, signed by clinton---the consequence ...... 60+ million HIGH PAYING jobs have been lost, 2 trillion worth of debt from the lost wages.



1995 clinton (through his chief of HUD (Henry Cisneros)) eased the rules on obtaining mortgages allowing more 'exotic' mortgages and 'no-dov' mortgages-----the consequence ......housing SKYROCKETED causing low inventories causing a 'not normal' increase in home prices, sellers got greedy, buyers got even greedier (looking to PROFIT in a skyrocketing market by flipping) and bought THINKING that prices would still increase and their ADJUSTABLE mortgage would pay it self off in MINIMUMAL years...EVEN THOUGH THESE INCREASES IN HOME VALUES WERE TOTALLY UNHEARD OF, AND MORTGAGE RATES WERE AT 40 YEAR LOWS( what did they think an adjustable mortgage gotten at 40 year lows would do in the term(3 months-3years) when it adjusted...of course it would go up, their CONTRACT even said after the term it would be 6% PLUS PRIME)))



For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership."
The above is the start of the mortgage meltdon: Clinton's National Homeownership Strategy...http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/cli (broken link)



1996 clinton signed The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (The Act was claimed to foster competition. Instead, it allowed industry consolidation whose actions reduced the number of major media companies from around 30 in 1993 to 10 in 1996, and reducing the 10 in 1996 to 6 in 2005.)



1998 clinton does not allow drilling for OUR OWN OIL



1999 Clinton DEREGULATES the banking industry



2000 clinton signs the China trade bill



2000 clinton signs the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000..(which paves the way for ENRON)



2006 democrats PROMISE to lower gas prices.....they lied



2006 democrats promise to make a living wage....they lied, what did they pass??? a minimum wage increase that take 2.5 years to fully take effect that would not even equal the inflation rate for those 2.5 years,,and do they include a automatic annual cost of living increase??? NO they make sure they keep it as a VOTING SCAM



2008 the democrats led by pelosi, wont even ALLOW a vote for off shore drilling, because QUEEN PELOSI says no (funny how the democrats take the 'RIGHT of power of the people vote' on a subject.







just FACTS that the democrats don't care about the poor ,,,,just their votes

<Golf clap>... marvelous... simply marvelous...

[padcrasher]

Originally Posted by One Thousand

I think this might be the one you're referencing: Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)



That's true... but only because the gist will not defend itself...

Make a point and I will quickly remove the speck from your eye.

I rest my case.

You got nothing but petty mistake on my part using the term LTV, when I had in mind reserve and capital requirments. Had you been able to argue the

larger point you would have done so.

[TigerLily24]

Originally Posted by mommabear2

<Golf clap>... marvelous... simply marvelous...

So what has Pres. Bush done to correct these mistakes? Surely he's had ample time and opportunity. The congress only 'turned over' two years ago.

[dreamofmonterey]

Originally Posted by Alexus

You Conservatives can stick your heads in the sand and pretend this isn't true, but the economic problems we're experiencing are DIRECTLY the result of the Bush and McCain Economic philosophy.

Robert Creamer: Why the Financial Meltdown Reflects the Fundamental Failure of the Bush-McCain Economic Philosophy

I am listening to her speak , "huge investment banks go under bcs of their own bad practices, CEO's need to controlled"...

lol Palin sounds like she is talking to 6th graders.