Mac, and other that think the republican party is the cause of the economic collapse, here is something to chew on.

Might not want to read it since it does lay the blame at the demoncrats feet.

[Link: ngoldfarb.wordpress.com]



It's amazing how fast things like ACORN are forgotten about. If you blame the bank you missed a lot of info. The banks were coerced into making the idiot loans to people that had no chance in hell of paying the loans back.

By who?

Democrats, because it was a "Make us look like the good guys" program, much the same as "College tuition will be free" and so may other tax give a way programs the democrats push in their extremely liberal plans. Their HUGE government is good policy.


You think Hillary will reverse the course of the party?

Riiiight...

LOL

Why no mention of Jade Helm in that nonsense?

The republican party is the cause of the economic collapse...and so is the democratic party.

Or if you don't want to blame them...at the very least they did nothing to stop it from happening.

Isn't that why the republicans are wasting my tax dollars investigating "bengayzee"? They think Hillary didn't do enough to stop the attack? (reality check...republicans cut funding for bengeezeey make it less safe but lets not get into facts this early in the evening)


It should...just like it should lay blame at the republicans feet.


Jimmy Carter is the guy who put solar panels on the white house in the 70's. it took the rest of the cavemen 40 years to catch up. During those 40 years the oil companies made the middle east rich and funded the creation of dictators and terrorists....that we are still fighting today. I cant seem to remember the moron that removed those solar panels...Hint...his VP is an oil man.


The banks were coerced lmfao! They had a gun to their heads as they wrote bonus checks to themselves every quarter until the crash...and then they got tax dollars to bail themselves out so they could steal houses from the people who bailed them out.


I think you are confused about who was the president between 2000-2008.


No way. I think shes a horrible choice. She wont change anything. She will keep killing people for oil...erm i mean freedom. She wont eliminate citizens united. She wont fix the ACA.

But since the other option is a crybaby megalomaniac shes got my vote.


I prefer Leeeeft...

The Carter Doctrine is responsible for the troubles in the Middle East.. don't let history go to waste.

Resource theft is responsible for the troubles in the Middle East.

The Carter Doctrine was a note to other resource thieves that "we are here first".

Communism boogie man wants oil too so we have to fight for freedom!

Why do you call it nonsense?

It is after all, a matter of record. Carter started it with what should have been a good idea, then Clinton altered it, and Obama did his part as well.

Can't deal with the truth Mac?

TSS,

I used to think 39 was cool, Mac is an immature imbecile.

It is like his nine year old brother took over!

Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har Har

It's a matter of you posting a blog post from some obscure idiot that made no sense nor reference regurgitating a hastily crafted ideological narrative from usual suspects right when it was going down. Some random person on the internet you think relevant. Maybe it would be relevant if it wasn't a simplistic narrative easily debunked.

How about an actual journalist who made a lot more sense 5 days later with much more sound reasoning and factual backup that history has shown to be correct?

Look: There was a culture of stupid, reckless lending, of which Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the subprime lenders were an integral part. But the dumb-lending virus originated in Greenwich, Conn., midtown Manhattan, and Southern California, not Eastchester, Brownsville, and Washington, D.C. Investment banks created a demand for subprime loans because they saw it as a new asset class that they could dominate. They made subprime loans for the same reason they made other loans: They could get paid for making the loans, for turning them into securities, and for trading them—frequently using borrowed capital.

Zombie narratives never die, they just get beat back in an orgy of intellectual carnage only to return another day, trying to eat more brains.

No, the CRA Did Not Cause the Financial Crisis
June 22, 2016 3:00pm by Barry Ritholtz

Now consider that much of the rest of the developed world also had a boom and bust in residential real estate that was worse than in the U.S. Oh, right — those countries didn’t have the CRA.

What’s more, many of the lenders that made the subprime loans that contributed so much to the collapse were private non-bank lenders that weren’t covered by the CRA. Almost 400 of these went bankrupt soon after housing began to wobble.

I have called the CRA blame meme “the big lie” — and with good reason. It’s an old trope, tinged with elements of dog-whistle politics, blaming low-income residents in the inner cities regardless of what the data show.

Dog whistle politics keep on keeping on. I bought this BS line at first but upon further study (try it sometime) found that the CRA blame game was merely a defensive move to shift blame to the poors to cover for a vacuous ideological position. The narrative was crafted and delivered so fast any rational person has to wonder if there was an element of guilt driving it.

Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?

The Federal Reserve Board has found no connection between CRA and the subprime mortgage problems. In fact, the Board's analysis (102 KB PDF) found that nearly 60 percent of higher-priced loans went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods, which are not the focus of CRA activity. Additionally, about 20 percent of the higher-priced loans that were extended in low- or moderate-income areas, or to low- or moderate-income borrowers, were loans originated by lenders not covered by the CRA. Our analysis found that only six percent of all higher-priced loans were made by CRA-covered lenders to borrowers and neighborhoods targeted by the CRA. Further, our review of loan performance found that rates of serious mortgage delinquency are high in all neighborhood groups, not just in lower-income areas.

go look for planes

Mac Burke (39) is single-handedly kicking your butts in this thread.

It's so funny to watch your frustrations drive you to this kind of grade school response.

Har

If you want a moment to cool off, go rent the movie "The Big Short" and watch it. It's a pretty interesting look at what happened in the housing crisis, and a very entertaining movie as well.

Trying to blame someone or something for it is a waste of time. Everyone was involved. How many people here wrote their Congressman and asked him to vote for policies that would slow down economic growth during the late 90s and early 2000s? I doubt anyone did, though everyone knew that there was a bubble, and it wasn't that big a jump to realize that that bubble was going to have knock on effects elsewhere when it collapsed and the huge demand for everything dropped dramatically. No one wants to know how the sausage is made as long as they have a lot of sausage.

And of course the fact that there were folks betting big money on the fact that the housing market was going to crash should have been a pretty good sign as well. There are always doom sayers, but most of those doom sayers are people on the internet who just keep saying it until it finally happens, they don't invest hundreds of millions of dollars on said doom to arrive at a very specific time or risk losing it. Those that did made a killing, and of course they couldn't do it secretly. It was well known they were doing it. You'd think that would have caught some people's attention.

One very evil thing that some of the banks did apparently do though was to try to prevent those now bad funds from being downgraded until they could dump them on unsuspecting investors. Once they'd gotten rid of them, and presumably made some of their own bets against the housing market using that money, then they could stop trying to hide how bad it was and let the suckers they sold them to eat the damage.

thought I forgot huh?