Posted on 10/06/2008 6:19:18 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
he doesn’t deserve prison
Furthermore, the small beginning of CRA was from the well-intentioned hand of the benevolent Jimmy Carter. Bill Clinton expanded it and assigned Janet Reno the job of threatening the banks with punishment if they did not “give” a certain percentage of bad CRA type loans to minorities and people who could not pay them back. This was the price of doing legitimate business.. McCain in 2006 sounded the alarm and tried to get the Democrats on board to allow regulation and responsible accounting of Fannie/Freddie, but the Democrats voted down the fix-it bill because Obama and crowd, Dodd, Barney and lover (Moses), and others were using F&F for their own personal little slush fund. - I’m afraid the man who said we are not far from an angry mob putting a stop to such antics, regrettably may be right. The American people are disgusted beyond belief and intend to have the truth.
Mises is the authority on credit bubbles not Marx.
It is nice to see that some peole get it. Too bad the republcians did not come out and explain this when the sh$t hit the fan. I suspect the reason they did not is because they were afraid that the democrats would play the race card, just like Frank did in this article.
When they bring out the race card, we know we have them on the run. The race card used to work. Not any more. It’s a new day, Democrats. No more PC politics.
Barney Frank hates women. He’s just saying this stuff because he’s a sexist and we’re running Sarah. Shame on him.
There is no doubt that there was a credit bubble. However, the subprime mess would not have happened to the extent that it has happened but for the democrat welfare housing/lending policies. A lot of the excess credit just flowed to the easy source—the subprime market set up by the democrats.
(Excerpt from Atlanta Journal Constitution, November 4, 2007)
Blacks dominate subprime loans.
By Carrie Teegardin (cteegardin@ajc.com)
National disparity: Lenders aggressively target minorities for mortgages with higher interest rates.
(COMMENT BY DB: GEE, COULD THAT HAVE BEEN BECAUSE, AMONG OTHER THINGS, LENDERS WERE BROWBEATEN AND PRESSURED TO DO SO VIA CHANGES IN THE HORRIBLY MISNAMED “COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT” BY THE LAST DEMOCRAT ADMINISTRATION AND THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO CREATED THIS MESS???)
Black Americans of all income groups were much more likely than whites to take out high-interest “sub-prime” mortgages when buying a home, making them more vulnerable in the ongoing mortgage meltdown.
Nearly half of the blacks who bought a house in 2005 or 2006 ended up in the high-interest mortgage, compared with 13 percent of white home buyers, according to an AJC analysis of federal mortgage debt.
The disparity was striking, even in a comparison of home buyers with similar incomes. Among black home buyers making more than $100,000 a year, 41 percent got a sub-prime mortgage, compared with 7 percent of whites in the same income category.
(For the rest of this piece, you may be able to find it at AJC.COM)
Plus, one thing people forget is that a lot of these Wall Street banks and firms were run by liberal democrats who had the same PC welfare ideas as the democrat congress.
Actually only reading the words “AJC analysis” is enough to make the entire piece suspect.
“Frank charged that conservatives aim to shift blame for the market meltdown away from Wall Street and toward minority-lending laws like the federal Community Reinvestment Act.”
Barney Rubble Frank is the racist in this.
To him CRA = “Blacks”.
But to the GOP CRA does not = “blacks”, instead it’s = to financial mismanagement, because how is any poor person, “black” or otherwise, been helped by being purposefully given a mortgage debt that they in truth cannot afford; simply to make guilty liberals feel better????
And Frank can deny the facts all he wants, that Fred and Fan were pushed by people like him to demand that community banks supply Fred and Fan with more CRA mortgages, to meet congressional CRA goals and knowing Fred and Fan cannot, and do not perform due diligence on the mortgages they buy.
No, Mr. Barney Rubble Frank is the racist and guilty of the worst form of racism - lowered expectations of blacks; he is the one who assumes CRA = black = in need of help, in need of a mortgage they can’t afford.
“the soft bigotry of low expectations,” is the phrase that comes to mind. Don’t know who coined it, but James Taranto utilizes the phrase a lot in his Best of the Web bit at WSJ’s opinionjournal.com
“wrong.
we blame it on you, barney.”
YES! Exactly.
You bet...
While I agree with your comment, please remember that the AJC is a left-leaning rag headquartered in a largely black city. Their general agenda is to portray blacks as blameless victims of a white dominated system.
What surprised me was that they even published those statistics as they actually finger the black community as willing participants in their problems.
Why not?
At 49 percent, blacks were the most likely minority group in metro Atlanta to end up with a subprime loan. For Hispanics, about a third of home buyers got a subprime loan in 2005 and 2006. Only 10 percent of Asians used a subprime loan to buy a house, the lowest of any group.
The disparity is not unique to metro Atlanta. Federal mortgage lending statistics show that blacks and Hispanics across the country are much more likely than whites and Asians to end up with a subprime loan.
-end excerpt-
--www.junesimmonsrealty.com/jsr_BlacksDominateSubprimeLoans.html
Side note: The only place I could find this article in full was at junesimmonsrealty.com, if you can believe it. I found a dead link to the original ajc.com article on another blog - http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2007/11/03/foreclosure_1104.html
It's like it disappeared down a rat hole.
For the longest time, I thought the same thing about Dan Rostenkowski.
I think you are using subprime as a euphemism for CRA, Fannie, and the other socialist housing policies. There’s truth to that and it was supported under both parties since FDR. And you are right, easy credit will always flow to the easiest destination. But the numbers do not favor your argument, we had subprime and alt-a as an entire industry filling up many square miles of suburbs. No democratic policies made them do that in those areas.
Another thought, credit bubbles always distort the market by making credit too cheap where it shouldn’t be. How that manifests is somewhat up to the market and somewhat up to govt policies. In the dot-com bubble, industry created some great new ideas, companies, etc (along with tons of fluff). In the case of the housing bubble the socialist housing policies created a very weak market floor. What’s happened now is that floor has disappeared. Here in Herndon where I am writing, all the low end houses on the market are short sales or bank owned. That sucks investment out of the higher end and is in the process of crashing the entire market. So bringing in weakness to the market (deadbeats rather than capitalists) was the kiss of death for the entire market.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.