Really? I mean friggin Really? They made 50,000 loans to minorities who had less than stellar credit, and you think that caused the housing crisis?
The number of forclosures last year alone was over one million. Similar amount the year before. You guys are out of your minds.
Next!
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Bravo pulled this crap before. He feels maybe if he pulls it on the new guy, it will miraculously become truth...
I debunked his crap before...
Bravo said:
YouTube - Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown
Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown
---------------------
YouTube - The Democrats and Obama caused the financial crisis of 08 by supporting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and covering up their bad books.
The Democrats and Obama caused the financial crisis of 08 by supporting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
------------------
YouTube - Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
-----------------
2004 Dem. coverup of Fanny and Freddie
YouTube - Explosive Video, Fannie Mae CEO calling Obama and the Dems the "Family" and "Conscience" of Fannie Mae
Fannie Mae CEO calling Obama and the Dems the "Family" and "Conscience" of Fannie Mae
------------------
YouTube - EVIDENCE FOUND!!! Clinton administration's "BANK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" They forced banks to make BAD LOANS and ACORN and Obama's tie to all of it!!!
Clinton administration's "BANK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" They forced banks to make BAD
-----------------
YouTube - Follow the Money: How Fannie Mae Bought the Democrat Party
How Fannie Mae Bought the Democrat Party
You post this as proof? A disingenuous pile of You Tube garbage. How can you watch that crap without realizing it is a hack job? All the hacking, cutting off of comments and editing was done for the sole purpose of slandering Democrats, not providing any truth. There is no context. Many of the comments and conversations were not even related to the subject. There were comments related to questions about pay and bonuses etc.
If this is what America has come to, this country is toast.
Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis
Commentators say that's what triggered the stock market meltdown and the freeze on credit. They've specifically targeted the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which the federal government seized on Sept. 6, contending that lending to poor and minority Americans caused Fannie's and Freddie's financial problems.
Federal housing data reveal that the charges aren't true, and that the private sector, not the government or government-backed companies, was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis.
Subprime lending offered high-cost loans to the weakest borrowers during the housing boom that lasted from 2001 to 2007. Subprime lending was at its height from 2004 to 2006.
Federal Reserve Board data show that:
* More than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions.
* Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year.
* Only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was directly subject to the housing law that's being lambasted by conservative critics.
The "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," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets reported Friday.
Fannie, the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., don't lend money, to minorities or anyone else, however. They purchase loans from the private lenders who actually underwrite the loans.
It's a process called securitization, and by passing on the loans, banks have more capital on hand so they can lend even more.
This much is true. In an effort to promote affordable home ownership for minorities and rural whites, the Department of Housing and Urban Development set targets for Fannie and Freddie in 1992 to purchase low-income loans for sale into the secondary market that eventually reached this number: 52 percent of loans given to low-to moderate-income families.
To be sure, encouraging lower-income Americans to become homeowners gave unsophisticated borrowers and unscrupulous lenders and mortgage brokers more chances to turn dreams of homeownership in nightmares.
But these loans, and those to low- and moderate-income families represent a small portion of overall lending. And at the height of the housing boom in 2005 and 2006, Republicans and their party's standard bearer, President Bush, didn't criticize any sort of lending, frequently boasting that they were presiding over the highest-ever rates of U.S. homeownership.
Between 2004 and 2006, when subprime lending was exploding, Fannie and Freddie went from holding a high of 48 percent of the subprime loans that were sold into the secondary market to holding about 24 percent, according to data from Inside Mortgage Finance, a specialty publication. One reason is that Fannie and Freddie were subject to tougher standards than many of the unregulated players in the private sector who weakened lending standards, most of whom have gone bankrupt or are now in deep trouble.
During those same explosive three years, private investment banks — not Fannie and Freddie — dominated the mortgage loans that were packaged and sold into the secondary mortgage market. In 2005 and 2006, the private sector securitized almost two thirds of all U.S. mortgages, supplanting Fannie and Freddie, according to a number of specialty publications that track this data.
In 1999, the year many critics charge that the Clinton administration pressured Fannie and Freddie, the private sector sold into the secondary market just 18 percent of all mortgages.
Fueled by low interest rates and cheap credit, home prices between 2001 and 2007 galloped beyond anything ever seen, and that fueled demand for mortgage-backed securities, the technical term for mortgages that are sold to a company, usually an investment bank, which then pools and sells them into the secondary mortgage market.
Read more:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/10/12/53802/private-sector-loans-not-fannie.html#ixzz17MSCaMMW
