Why is it the Bush Mortgage Bubble? Because Bush created it.

[Truth Detector]

Per the Federal Reserve Board of Governors:

"Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "
https://www.federalreserve.gov/image...3_analysis.pdf

Watch as Democrats attack the regulator and race hustle in the hearings in 2004 trying to get a handle on the impending crisis; yes the DEMOCRATS are the reason nothing was done folks:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Hearings 2004

[Truth Detector]

No, it's the Bush Mortgage Bubble because it was Bush's regulators who ceased the enforcement of lending standards beginning in 2004 and extending into 2007, like Bush's own Working Group said:

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-ce...s%20update.pdf

It's also the Bush Mortgage Bubble because Bush was the one who pushed increased subprime lending, with new subprimes totaling as much as 40% of all new mortgages issued by 2006. In 2003, that share was just 10%:

“Some 80 percent of outstanding U.S. mortgages are prime, while 14 percent are subprime and 6 percent fall into the near-prime category. These numbers, however, mask the explosive growth of nonprime mortgages. Subprime and near-prime loans shot up from 9 percent of newly originated securitized mortgages in 2001 to 40 percent in 2006.”

and

“In dollar terms, non-prime (subprime) mortgages represented 32 percent of all mortgage origination in 2005, more than triple their 10 percent share only two years earlier"
https://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/2008/200859/

Ouch. How embarrassing for you to be so wrong about everything all the time.

Watch as Democrats attack the regulator and race hustle in the hearings in 2004 trying to get a handle on the impending crisis; yes the DEMOCRATS are the reason nothing was done folks:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Hearings 2004

[LV426]

e get it anything bad is ALWAYS a republicans fault and the democrat party is perfect.

Do you get it?

Because it's doubtful you do.

Instead, you bleat about how unfair it is that your shitty beliefs are called to the mat for their consequences, so you have to play a victim and whine like a little bitch.

[Truth Detector]

Sounds like the OP already has her mind made up and isn’t interested in opposing views

One counter argument which the OP fails to think about (not surprising) is that Canada was virtually unscathed.

Why is that? Why would Canada have no housing bubble?

Only simplistic shallow thinkers try to take a complex issue and try to distill it’s cause down to one person.

We get it anything bad is ALWAYS a republicans fault and the democrat party is perfect. The democrat party always makes perfect decisions and their policies are 100% effective with ZERO unintended consequences.

[Eagle_Eye]

Per the Federal Reserve Board of Governors:

"Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "
https://www.federalreserve.gov/image...3_analysis.pdf

Sorry Mr. Economist but

The subprime mortgage crisis was also caused by deregulation. In 1999, the banks were allowed to act like hedge funds. They also invested depositors' funds in outside hedge funds. That's what caused the Savings and Loan Crisis in 1989. Many lenders spent millions of dollars to lobby state legislatures to relax laws. Those laws would have protected borrowers from taking on mortgages they really couldn't afford.

https://www.thebalance.com/what-caus...crisis-3305696

Thus it was caused by none other than William Jefferson Clinton not Bush.

[Truth Detector]

There are no opposing views on the truth. There is only the truth. The truth is that it was the dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for subprime loans beginning in 2004 that caused the bubble and subsequent crisis, and the Bush Administration and Federal Reserve Board of Governors both say so:

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-ce...s%20update.pdf

"Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "
https://www.federalreserve.gov/image...3_analysis.pdf

Who was President in 2004?

Who controlled Congress in 2004?

Who controlled SCOTUS in 2004?

Y'all did.

Watch as Democrats attack the regulator and race hustle in the hearings in 2004 trying to get a handle on the impending crisis; yes the DEMOCRATS are the reason nothing was done folks:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Hearings 2004

[Truth Detector]

Canadian regulators didn't dramatically weaken enforcement of lending standards for subprime loans, but Bush's regulators did starting in 2004.

The regulators were attacked by brain dead Democratic Party of the Jackass hacks who declared there was NOTHING wrong with the CRAs.

Watch as Democrats attack the regulator and race hustle in the hearings in 2004 trying to get a handle on the impending crisis; yes the DEMOCRATS are the reason nothing was done folks:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Hearings 2004

[LV426]

The democrat party always makes perfect decisions and their policies are 100% effective with ZERO unintended consequences.

Such a melodramatic drama queen!

What a fucking crybaby.

Democrats had nothing to do with your guy Bush dramatically weakening underwriting standards for subprimes and creating a bubble, while Conservatives the whole time denied there even was a bubble, like Larry "I've been wrong about everything my entire life" Kudlow (who is also Trump's top economic adviser) said in 2005:

The Housing Bears Are Wrong Again
June 20th, 2005
Homebuilders led the stock parade this week with a fantastic 11 percent gain. This is a group that hedge funds and bubbleheads love to hate. All the bond bears have been dead wrong in predicting sky-high mortgage rates. So have all the bubbleheads who expect housing-price crashes in Las Vegas or Naples, Florida, to bring down the consumer, the rest of the economy, and the entire stock market.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2005/...-larry-kudlow/

[Truth Detector]

Do you get it?

Because it's doubtful you do.

Instead, you bleat about how unfair it is that your shitty beliefs are called to the mat for their consequences, so you have to play a victim and whine like a little bitch.

It's obvious you don't get much of anything.

Watch as Democrats attack the regulator and race hustle in the hearings in 2004 trying to get a handle on the impending crisis; yes the DEMOCRATS are the reason nothing was done folks:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Hearings 2004

[LV426]

you have officially lost the argument, fascist.

Populist globalist populist globalist globalist globalist populist.

Populist globalist globalist populist.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

Canadian regulators didn't dramatically weaken enforcement of lending standards for subprime loans, but Bush's regulators did starting in 2004.

regulatory agencies failed, no doubt, but banks control them and lobbied them to do it.

due diligence is part of fiduciary responsibilities. did banks never check credit histories before feds made them do it?

so now banks can shirk their duties by saying "feds didnt force me!".

what large banks do is bubble-crafting, controlling and timing asset value ups and down, and insider trading off the trends they cause.

they created the housing bubble via robopen. resold bad assets, and then bet against them.

credit default swaps were created to give to complicit banks to manage the armageddon moment.

yes. it was a corrupt failure of regulatory safeguards, but the financial institution operate 24/7 in an amoral haze of human degeneracy.

two party politics keep society pointing fingers at each others instead of the alpha abuser, banks.

[LV426]

Plenty of people to blame you arrogant prick.

Weird because the Bush Administration and the Federal Reserve both blame Bush's regulators not enforcing lending standards and the Bush Admin inflating a bubble beginning in 2004.

And they do so right here:

"Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "
https://www.federalreserve.gov/image...3_analysis.pdf

And here:

"Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "
https://www.federalreserve.gov/image...3_analysis.pdf

Ouch. How embarrassing for you. The people you're trying to defend by socializing blame are literally telling you who and what is to blame for the crisis. You just don't want to accept it because doing so would throw your entire persona and belief system out of whack.

[cancel2 2022]

Wrong.

As you see from what I quoted, Clinton isn't to blame since the crisis is rooted in the performance of subprime mortgages issued from 2004-2007, like Bush's Working Group and the Federal Reserve Board of Governors all say:

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-ce...s%20update.pdf

"Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "
https://www.federalreserve.gov/image...3_analysis.pdf

There is no other blame to go around than on Bush and Conservatives whose regulators ceased the enforcement of lending standards for subprime loans, beginning in 2004, for the express purpose of inflating a mortgage bubble to give the impression the economy was growing as a result of tax cuts, when it was actually growing as a result of debt.

You're wrong Sonny, watch that Two John's video it's all in there. There were plenty to blame so your partisan bullshit should be flushed down the crapper where it belongs.

[LV426]

[SIZE=3]Sorry Mr. Economist

Ah, a lying Op-Ed. Just like I said you would provide earlier on this thread.

Here's the thing, yes, deregulation was the cause...but it was the deregulation of lending standards for subprime loans that caused a bubble to appear.

That's why subprime mortgages made up just 10% of all mortgages issued between 1993-2003, but then that share rose to 40% by 2006.

Going from 10% to 40% is a bubble, isn't it?

[cancel2 2022]

Wrong.

As you see from what I quoted, Clinton isn't to blame since the crisis is rooted in the performance of subprime mortgages issued from 2004-2007, like Bush's Working Group and the Federal Reserve Board of Governors all say:

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-ce...s%20update.pdf

"Since 1995 there has been essentially no change in the basic CRA rules or enforcement process that can be reasonably linked to the subprime lending activity. This fact weakens the link between the CRA and the current crisis since the crisis is rooted in poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2004 and 2007. "
https://www.federalreserve.gov/image...3_analysis.pdf

There is no other blame to go around than on Bush and Conservatives whose regulators ceased the enforcement of lending standards for subprime loans, beginning in 2004, for the express purpose of inflating a mortgage bubble to give the impression the economy was growing as a result of tax cuts, when it was actually growing as a result of debt.

Read the Time article you arrogant prick!!

http://content.time.com/time/special...877322,00.html