What Caused the Financial Meltdown?

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by UPS Lifer, Sep 17, 2008.

  1. UPS Lifer

    UPS Lifer Well-Known Member

    This needs to be prefaced - This financial crisis hits both sides of the isle The Democrats and Republicans are responsible, BUT it did start with the Clinton Administration back in the '90s.

    The Clinton Admin wanted to see more Americans owning homes. This is a good thing but you can't go about it the way the Clinton Admin did.

    Jim Johnson was the first CEO of Freddie Mac during that administration. He was basically ordered to make home loans inclusive to low income families. He and his successor Franklin Raines, softened the rules which led to this implosion of our financial institutions.

    Congress went along with this and supported the Clinton administration and the regulations that were put in place.

    The reason the democrats do not want a commission to be formed to get to the bottom of this debacle is it will lead right back to the former administration.

    In the time of an election, that would not be good would it? !

    This is the disaster we face. We have a Congress that is to busy protecting and defending their reputation and their turf. We are up to at one half trillion in bail outs and other measures or should I say band-aids to fix the problem. There is no confidence that this will not continue to rise and cost us more than one trillion or more in the near future.

    If I were McCain's or Obama's campaign mgr, I would be telling them to call the president and get a special session of Congress moving right now to put some stop gap measures in place to restore confidence and start a process of repair. The first to do that will probably be the next president.

    I don't think the American people want to see blame being placed on the other candidate. Right now, I think America wants to see action to get rid of the fear that our economy is going to collapse!

    Your thoughts.
  2. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    Imagine that; the actions of the predecessor president often affects the results of the current president.

    Then again its probably some kind of destructive neo con conspiracy to ruin the country.

    Or is it the actions of some bleeding heart liberal again ruining the country.

    Naaaah blame it on Bush.
  3. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    Hello.....Mcfly, this is late 2008......


    and what about the congress during the Clinton Administration up until 2007, they get a pass?
  4. UPS lifer: are you seriously going to repeat and plagarize something Rush Limbaugh has been saying all this week? Why is it, that everyone fails to FACT CHECK what they post on here before they go all out and embarass themselves?

    This is what President Bush said "word for word" when he took office in 2000, I ask that you read it carefully and then go back and edit your original post. Thank you.

    "But I believe owning something is a part of the American Dream, as well. I believe when somebody owns their own home, they're realizing the American Dream. They can say it's my home, it's nobody else's home. (Applause.) And we saw that yesterday in Atlanta, when we went to the new homes of the new homeowners. And I saw with pride firsthand, the man say, welcome to my home. He didn't say, welcome to government's home; he didn't say, welcome to my neighbor's home; he said, welcome to my home. I own the home, and you're welcome to come in the home, and I appreciate it. (Applause.) He was a proud man. He was proud that he owns the property. And I was proud for him. And I want that pride to extend all throughout our country.

    One of the things that we've got to do is to address problems straight on and deal with them in a way that helps us meet goals. And so I want to talk about a couple of goals and -- one goal and a problem.

    The goal is, everybody who wants to own a home has got a shot at doing so. The problem is we have what we call a homeownership gap in America. Three-quarters of Anglos own their homes, and yet less than 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanics own homes. That ownership gap signals that something might be wrong in the land of plenty. And we need to do something about it.

    We are here in Washington, D.C. to address problems. So I've set this goal for the country. We want 5.5 million more homeowners by 2010 -- million more minority homeowners by 2010. (Applause.) Five-and-a-half million families by 2010 will own a home. That is our goal. It is a realistic goal. But it's going to mean we're going to have to work hard to achieve the goal, all of us. And by all of us, I mean not only the federal government, but the private sector, as well.

    And so I want to, one, encourage you to do everything you can to work in a realistic, smart way to get this done. I repeat, we're here for a reason. And part of the reason is to make this dream extend everywhere.

    I'm going to do my part by setting the goal, by reminding people of the goal, by heralding the goal, and by calling people into action, both the federal level, state level, local level, and in the private sector. (Applause.)

    And so what are the barriers that we can deal with here in Washington? Well, probably the single barrier to first-time homeownership is high down payments. People take a look at the down payment, they say that's too high, I'm not buying. They may have the desire to buy, but they don't have the wherewithal to handle the down payment. We can deal with that. And so I've asked Congress to fully fund an American Dream down payment fund which will help a low-income family to qualify to buy, to buy. (Applause.)

    We believe when this fund is fully funded and properly administered, which it will be under the Bush administration, that over 40,000 families a year -- 40,000 families a year -- will be able to realize the dream we want them to be able to realize, and that's owning their own home. (Applause.)

    The second barrier to ownership is the lack of affordable housing. There are neighborhoods in America where you just can't find a house that's affordable to purchase, and we need to deal with that problem. The best way to do so, I think, is to set up a single family affordable housing tax credit to the tune of $2.4 billion over the next five years to encourage affordable single family housing in inner-city America. (Applause.)

    The third problem is the fact that the rules are too complex. People get discouraged by the fine print on the contracts. They take a look and say, well, I'm not so sure I want to sign this. There's too many words. (Laughter.) There's too many pitfalls. So one of the things that the Secretary is going to do is he's going to simplify the closing documents and all the documents that have to deal with homeownership.

    It is essential that we make it easier for people to buy a home, not harder. And in order to do so, we've got to educate folks. Some of us take homeownership for granted, but there are people -- obviously, the home purchase is a significant, significant decision by our fellow Americans. We've got people who have newly arrived to our country, don't know the customs. We've got people in certain neighborhoods that just aren't really sure what it means to buy a home. And it seems like to us that it makes sense to have a outreach program, an education program that explains the whys and wherefores of buying a house, to make it easier for people to not only understand the legal implications and ramifications, but to make it easier to understand how to get a good loan.

    There's some people out there that can fall prey to unscrupulous lenders, and we have an obligation to educate and to use our resource base to help people understand how to purchase a home and what -- where the good opportunities might exist for home purchasing.

    Finally, we want to make sure the Section 8 homeownership program is fully implemented. This is a program that provides vouchers for first-time home buyers which they can use for down payments and/or mortgage payments. (Applause.)

    So this is an ambitious start here at the federal level. And, again, I repeat, you all need to help us every way you can. But the private sector needs to help, too. They need to help, too. Of course, it's in their interest. If you're a realtor, it's in your interest that somebody be interested in buying a home. If you're a homebuilder, it's in your interest that somebody be interested in buying a home.

    And so, therefore, I've called -- yesterday, I called upon the private sector to help us and help the home buyers. We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers. And I'm proud to report that Fannie Mae has heard the call and, as I understand, it's about $440 billion over a period of time. They've used their influence to create that much capital available for the type of home buyer we're talking about here. It's in their charter; it now needs to be implemented. Freddie Mac is interested in helping. I appreciate both of those agencies providing the underpinnings of good capital.

    There's a lot of faith-based programs that want to be involved with educating people about how to buy a home. And we're going to have an active outreach from HUD. (Applause.)

    And so this ambitious goal is going to be met. I believe it will be, just so long as we keep focused, and remember that security at home is -- economic security at home is just an important part of -- as homeland security. And owning a home is part of that economic security. It's also a part of making sure that this country fulfills its great hope and vision."
  5. UPS Lifer

    UPS Lifer Well-Known Member


    This is the only time I will say this because you are anon for a reason! The original line comes up as anonymous coward. I rest my case!

    HELLO read the first line of my post I prefaced this. I said the problem lies on both sides of the isle!!! But it started in the '90's!

    I don't listen and never have listened to Rush Limbaugh or subscribe to anything he says, He is to far to the right for me! So if he said this than he agrees with me, not the other way around!!! All I know about Rush is that he had an addiction to prescription medication!

    Some folks unfortunately just can't afford home ownership and the loan process should not be compromised to give these unqualified people a loan that has a high risk factor of never being paid back forcing a foreclosure.

    I believe in affordable housing but even then, there are people who will not be able to afford that! Unfortunately these folks will be renters. You can not give people loans who can't afford to pay them back.

    YOU - give me a break! LOL! - If you had $50,000 to front a loan to someone and this was money you counted on for your retirement would you loan that $50 K to someone who had a high probability of not paying it back? ???

    If you say yes - I would submit that you are not telling the truth!
    Please answer that one!!!
  6. UPS Lifer

    UPS Lifer Well-Known Member

    Hey Diesel,
    All that Democratic blood must be clogging the arteries to your brain. Apparently you can't read either!

    Read the post again starting with the very first line. You seem to just filter out what you want to filter out to suit your purpose!
  7. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

  8. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    when the liberal tree hugger has nothing else to use he throws out Rush limbaugh or fox news :happy-very:
  9. Lifer: Lets be clear on one thing first. This site provides the option of making an ANNONOMOUS opinion. The threads contain here are for discussions on TOPICS, not posters. I have seen a pattern of attacks on posters rather than on TOPICS.

    The "annon" feature does not disqualify an opinion from being addressed nor does it diminish its value as information.

    To the point, indeed, its amazing how you can "word for word" post the exact words spoken by rush limbaugh all week regarding the financial crisis and its root causes.

    I provided the actual "text" spoken by President Bush where he outlines the whole creation of the subprime market and its intentions. He himself stated that home ownership was his top priority and further, making LOW INCOME EARNERS home owners was a priority,

    In fact, he stated he wanted 1 million black and hispanic low income earners as homeowners by the year 2010 and also wanted to see a total of 5.5 million new home owners as well. HE GAMBLED your future and the the futures of all americans on this risky task.

    Now, those of you looking to place blame elsewhere other than directly on Bush want to blame blacks and Hispanics by saying they should have never taken a loan in the first place..! But, they never asked for it, it was BUSH who wanted this to happen, it did, it collapsed and now he has to take total responsiblily for it and fix it.

    He did. The goverment is now going to use our tax dollars to bail out his master plan and hopefully prevent the total collapse of our financial institutions in the USA.

    I just wish you folks would take time to read facts, remember what steps were taken by this president and the republican controlled congress that created this mess.

    Back in 2002, Former Fed chief Alan Greenspan WARNED Bush about this practice and he was ignored and eventually forced to retire. In 2003, Greenspan testified to congress that the creation of the subprime industry was going to have DIRE consequences in the coming years because of violations of law and unscrupulous lending practices. His exact words were: AN IMPENDING FINANCIAL DOOM.

    This was in 2003. He was right. He was the only one RIGHT.

    You are seeing it today.
  10. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    Indeed it does. As such you're a leech on society. Cheryl the founder of this site has worked hard to provide us this medium. When you anonymously post here you disrespect her hard work. You become a site scab. A website welfare recipient. As such Whale poop would be more warmly recieved.
  11. UPS Lifer

    UPS Lifer Well-Known Member

    I certainly agree with you on this. So my feeling is not to acknowledge a coward who hides. You and I as well as those who have opposite views have no problem posting under our site name!

    i may not agree with folks like Diesel, and paidslave, etc. but I certainly respect the fact they have no issue speaking their mind. Our discussions are spirited and can sometimes be aggressive but we don't mean to banish anyone for their opinion. How could we have a spirited intellectual dialog if we all agreed on everything? How would we make progress or learn about others or their points of view?

    So why should we give credibility to nameless, faceless person who is afraid to come out and take a stand for fear of an attack or maybe a tarnished name?

    Anons don't get it. They are pinheads because they may have something important to say but will not get any respect standing behind mommy's skirt.
  12. Tie, I see you have a pattern of speaking for Cheryl on this site. If yours and Lifers are the opinions of the owner of this board, than let "her" speak for herself.

    The "annon" issue by you and lifer, is one of mere cowardess (to use lifers terms) to avoid addressing the points made and having to rebut any information posted.

    I will take both yours and lifers failure to address the posted "facts" as a victory for my annonomous opinion.

    Remember, you made several attacks on me that border on childish and I will not respond in kind.

    I can simply feel honored that what I said was "too tall" for you to tackle head on and "you" chose to hide behind blasting my annon status.

    I welcome the "annon" feature as do many other posters on this board who dont want to be blasted by you and the right wing loonies.
  13. scratch

    scratch Least Best Moderator Staff Member

    There are anonymous posters on this site whose registered members account have been permanently banned for insulting other members. BS.
  14. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    I thought I heard something.....there's that god awful smell again. :peaceful:
  15. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member


    Robert Higgs, remembering an August weekend in 1971', was very worthwhile reading in light of this current weekend.


    BTW Annon, I got no problem with you being here. IMO, we are all annon ourselves as wkmac ain't the name on my birth certificate as I'm sure the other "regisitered" alias' we see here aren't either. We all hide behind self created fictions. The email address we have to use for registration? Mine's a yahoo account so how absolute is that in pointing out who I am? It's the IP that pinpoints you anyway so unless your out with a laptop at a local wi/fi hotspot or hijacking your neighbor's or other unsuspecting wireless signal, you really aren't completely annon IMO. If Cheryl's cool with you being here then welcome to the fray!

    Also, and this as well is a minor point, the first time Bush used the word ownership society was in a speech at Kennesaw State University 20 plus miles north of Atlanta. This speech took place not in 2001' but rather Feb. 20th, 2003' in a speech to rally for tax cut proposals as reported at the time by Pittsburgh Post - Gazette, Bush OKs Funding Bill for Fiscal '03, Feb 21, 2003 Scott Lindlaw. The facts you reported are still the same regarding the speech, just thought I'd pass on the date as a historical footnote if you want to use in the future.

    I don't disagree with the concept at all but I do agree it's being co-opted not on the priciples of individual liberty and free markets but rather targeted into well defined market areas. Also I don't believe we've had true free market, lassez-faire capitalism for well over 100 years if not longer and I see today's economy a hybrid 19th century merchantilism/Mussolini corporatism/fabian socialism with a mixture of old world fuedalism over seen by a monarchial state. It's a Heniz 57 dog for sure.:happy-very:

    I think it ironic that I saw where this economic crisis has consolidated 80% of all banking in America into the hands of about 10 banks. What the 19th century robber barons were never able to achieve, the gov't and it's state policy has!

    And there are those here who still insist the gov't is here to protect you and must intervene in the market place. The 90' was Goldman Sachs Robert Rubin leading the economic charge (Rubin now head of Citigroup) and today it's Henry Paulson also formally of Goldman Sachs.

    Anybody starting to take hint of a slight trend here?
  16. UpstateNYUPSer

    UpstateNYUPSer Very proud grandfather.

    wkmac, what is your take on the govt mortgaging our kids' (and their kids') future to bail out lenders to the tune of 1/2 trillion dollars?
  17. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    I don't like it at all on many fronts and there's no guarantee all this will even work. Just have to see what rolls out from the weekend meetings but I honestly think at best you pass the problem downhill to our kids and we're likely to see more inflation with the inflate of money supply.

    I even saw yesterday on the CNBC ticker that the European banks like the US are dumping new money onto the economic markets. Now will come the worse tax increase of all and this is the inflation increase and this effects everyone.

    For my kids, I'd rather face that burden now instead of them facing it later when I might not be there to help but looks like the democrats and republicans are out to save themselves and let the next generations figure that out. Cowards!

    I don't see at this point going forward how we avoid some tax increase and one we don't like. I'm completely and absolutely opposed to all forms of complusary taxation on any level for any reason but whatever comes out this weekend I'm expecting something along those lines because gov't on bothsides have refused to make cuts and sacrifices to insure fiscal responsibility.

    Lifer asked who's at fault. Hell folks, be honest, we all are and that's another reason both sides corked the party election lipservice as they got handed the truth. They also realized how close they came to the balloon going up and the people waking up to see them all for what they realy are and walking away in droves in 6 weeks. This ain't over yet but trust me when I say they are sacred as hell.

    Charles Schumer never, ever says that something "made me gulp when I saw where we were" to the point of playing nice with the republicans. Only something as big as 9/11 attacks would do that so do the math boys and girls. This thing is a monster!
  18. LiL"Comet"

    LiL"Comet" New Member

    politicians are good for one thing Jokes!! They are all a bunch of slimy A..Holes out to line there own pockets with their speeches they get written for them by faculty. When they are attacking the competition on these great political commercials that are being paid for by wealthy with a good tax write off the need at the end of the year...Bla Bla BLA i would keep going but its to early to start drinking.....:happy2:
  19. UpstateNYUPSer

    UpstateNYUPSer Very proud grandfather.

    I am glad you mentioned Chuck Schumer. He has really begun to come in to his own since Hillary is no longer in the picture. Look for big things from him in the next few years.
  20. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    Gimme-a-break....Don't mind Tieguy and Lifer :grrr:, they just a little moody when it comes to Anon's. Especially if it's someone who doesn't support their views. But if someone has something legitimate to contribute by all means feel free to deliver your message. Of course expect personal attacks when the opposition doesn't really have a rebuttle to match your retoric response.

    Anyhow here's a simple short video explanation of "What caused the Financial Meltdown".....enjoy