Bush had barely taken office when Legislators were trying to end predatory sub-prime loans.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D07E2DE163EF937A35757C0A9679C8B63&fta=y
In that story you will see that the NC took the lead banning the predatory practices in 1999. Which was before Bush even ran for President.
All of this was based on practices specifically run on the Sub-Prime market. The idea that Bush somehow magically caused this crap is delusional.
The fact is that between 1993 to 1999 sub-prime lending rose by 900%.
In 1995, largely due to the urging of Bill Clinton, legislators strengthened the 1977 CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) and because of it Clinton was credited with getting loans for small businesses and for people who otherwise could not get a home, however many of these loans were of the sub-prime variety and only later would the bill come due for the US.
What was a magical "good" suddenly turned "bad" only later as the long-term implications arrived and when somebody of a different political persuasion came into office.
While the CRA can do much good, it can also do much bad, and the promotion of such sub-prime lending (often by our own politicians of both political persuasions) just to appear to be magically getting more people into the "American Dream" can show how politics can trump what is good for the nation, regardless of political persuasion.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D07E2DE163EF937A35757C0A9679C8B63&fta=y
In that story you will see that the NC took the lead banning the predatory practices in 1999. Which was before Bush even ran for President.
All of this was based on practices specifically run on the Sub-Prime market. The idea that Bush somehow magically caused this crap is delusional.
The fact is that between 1993 to 1999 sub-prime lending rose by 900%.
In 1995, largely due to the urging of Bill Clinton, legislators strengthened the 1977 CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) and because of it Clinton was credited with getting loans for small businesses and for people who otherwise could not get a home, however many of these loans were of the sub-prime variety and only later would the bill come due for the US.
What was a magical "good" suddenly turned "bad" only later as the long-term implications arrived and when somebody of a different political persuasion came into office.
While the CRA can do much good, it can also do much bad, and the promotion of such sub-prime lending (often by our own politicians of both political persuasions) just to appear to be magically getting more people into the "American Dream" can show how politics can trump what is good for the nation, regardless of political persuasion.