Posted on 09/05/2012 8:06:09 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Bill Clinton is giving the keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention tonight.
The idea is to make people feel nostalgic for the last time when the economy was really booming, and hope that some of that rubs off on Obama.
However, in the New York Post, Charlie Gasparino uses the occasion to remind everyone that the seeds of our current economic malaise were planted during the Clinton years. Basically, it was under Clinton that Fannie and Freddie really began blowing the housing bubble, issuing epic amounts of mortgage-backed debt.
The story that Gasparino tells is basically: Liberal Bill Clinton thought he could use government to make everyone a homeowner and so naturally this ended in disaster.
Gasparino specifically cites the controversial Community Reinvestment Act, a popular conservative bogeyman:
How did they do this? Through rigorous enforcement of housing mandates such as the Community Reinvestment Act, and by prodding mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make loans to people with lower credit scores (and to buy loans that had been made by banks and, later, “innovators” like Countrywide).
The Housing Department was Fannie and Freddie’s top regulator — and under Cuomo the mortgage giants were forced to start ramping up programs to issue more subprime loans to the riskiest of borrowers.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Niall Ferguson has made the good point that economists are beguiled by mathematical models and are unable to factor in properly the historical and social elements that go into an economy. Gramm knew what he knew. He tried to use a tool that was not equal to the task.
If we ever had a media with honesty and integrity Clinton would have been a 1 term President due to many factors. He would never have been President for one. When he was running the lie that was told enough what the Economy Stupid. Well GHW Bush had a 5% growth in the economy but the Media felt it was doing its masters work by taking down their mortal enemy the Republicans. Well Clinton was lucky he got a economy that was not his. He got what Reagan started. They always made fun of Trickle down economics but if you look at it. It was Reagans policies with taxes that made it possible for Clinton to say Look at my economy. Well again the media never mentions Newt and the 104th congress in their propaganda. Man I hate the media.
Several years ago I looked this up and the expanded CRA took effect in Jan 1995. It was expanded and took effect just before/as the Republicans were seated in the House. They never voted on the expansion.
“Glass-Steagall was Rooseveltian fascism, and was rightly repealed.”
Unfortunately, you have FDIC and FSLIC. As long as the public is insuring bank deposits, bankers can’t be allowed to speculate wildly with that money. That results in the worst of crony capitalism. If the speculation pays off, the banks get the benefits. If it crashes, the public pays the losses.
If you eliminate Glass, you also have to eliminate FDIC and FSLIC insurance.
My personal thought, with nothing to prove I'm right is ... he was setting himself up for ex-president, and that habitat for humanity scam.
If the Republican members of congress bear any blame, it's for not succeeding in their attempts to roll back this mess during Bush 43's administration. After the Dems regained control, that opportunity vanished. But at least they *did* try to fix it before the problem reached critical mass.
I'm sure the roll call on those votes would show the usual back-stabbers like McCain helping the Marxists.
Agreed. Government guarantees are an illusory form of security. (If the markets go, what will hold up the government's assets? Barleycorns?) Since when did governments become trustworthy with other people's money? The're just ordinary folks watching over stuff that isn't theirs. They're not going to do as careful a job as people do with their own property.
My personal thought, with nothing to prove I'm right is ... he was setting himself up for ex-president, and that habitat for humanity scam.
Yes, Carter signed the CRA into law. As for the rest, I think it's more a case of the left's relentless legislative assault. They're willing to put *something* in the law books, even if it seems innocuous or non-threatening.... the sort of "throwaway" bills that generate no heavy opposition.
And then they come back a dozen years later and amend it, usually by attaching the amendment to some unrelated bill. They know how to game the system, it's as simple as that.
Surprisingly both McCain and Bush tried to rein in Fannie and Freddie. McCain introduced legislation in 2005 but it was defeated.
Problem is...that would be like the Repubs saying now they would roll back Social Security.
Sure, it's something that should be done at some point but all kinds of charges would be leveled insuring that the Repubs would lose seats meaning the thing would NEVER be dealt with.
Easy with 20/20 to say they should have done it, but at the time it would have been committing political suicide and would have imperilled the War AND the economy way more than it was.
Good point. Thanks.
You’re welcome. :-)
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.