Bush's economy? Until when?

[PinFishKing]

I was having a discussion with some of my liberal friends. Their answer for everything economy related is "it's still Bush's economy". I have a question: When will it be Obama's economy? 6 months, 1 year, 2 years????? I would like for the Obama supporters to answer this question now - not after it turns around. I suspect the day it turns around (if it does) that is the day it will be Obama's economy.

If your answer is 2 years from now and it turns around in 1 year does Bush get credit?

Personally I think 1 year is a fair answer.

Looking forward to some straight precise answers, please don't dance around the question with "fuzzy" answers.

[Flint River Pirate]

The liberals will say that until we get another Republican in office, then it will become his fault. In their eyes it won't ever be a Democrat's economy if the economy is bad, personal accountability is not part of their vocabulary.

[MudDucker]

The liberals will say that until we get another Republican in office, then it will become his fault. In their eyes it won't ever be a Democrat's economy if the economy is bad, personal accountability is not part of their vocabulary.

Ding...ding....ding....ding... we have a winner!

[Tennessee]

No, we have inherited a snow ball of a mess, but it is all ours now. From here on out Dems have control of congress and the executive branch. Just like Kiffin here at Tennessee. People are not going to blame Fulmer anymore. At least not me anyway.

[Reel Cowboy]

Just like Kiffin here at Tennessee. People are not going to blame Fulmer anymore. At least not me anyway.

Now there is the poster child for responsibility.

[Littoral]

The same day he takes our guns.

[Sir reel]

Guns...?? ... probably just my imagination or my jaded perspective...but seems like the media is jumping on as many gun stories as possible. Could it be they are Democratic/Liberal in their reporting... preparation for a new surge in Gun Control legislation.... shades of the Clinton Admin?? Probably not, given I'm just a grumpy ole ....

[Reel Cowboy]

Guns...?? ... probably just my imagination or my jaded perspective...but seems like the media is jumping on as many gun stories as possible. Could it be they are Democratic/Liberal in their reporting... preparation for a new surge in Gun Control legislation.... shades of the Clinton Admin?? Probably not, given I'm just a grumpy ole ....

Now you know they'd never do anything like that, would they?

[Dubble Trubble]

No, we have inherited a snow ball of a mess, but it is all ours now. From here on out Dems have control of congress and the executive branch. Just like Kiffin here at Tennessee. People are not going to blame Fulmer anymore. At least not me anyway.

Once again, you are out of touch. The Dems have HAD control of congress.....You just will not read the facts about what caused the housing crash will you.

Dubble

[Tennessee]

No, we have inherited a snow ball of a mess, but it is all ours now. From here on out Dems have control of congress and the executive branch. Just like Kiffin here at Tennessee. People are not going to blame Fulmer anymore. At least not me anyway.

Once again, you are out of touch. The Dems have HAD control of congress.....You just will not read the facts about what caused the housing crash will you.

Dubble [/quote
No they had a simple majority in congress, until this past election. Double Trubble tell me what bill or act you are talking about and I will read it? I know he signed the financial Services Act of 1999. Is that the one you are talking about?

[Dubble Trubble]

Go here and read it ALL, not just the first sentence. You will see that Carter and Clinton started the wheels rolling on this mess. Things this massive do not just happen in a year or two.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act


By the way, I am not defending Bush. His administration in my opinion caved in to the "Politically correct" crowd on a lot of issues. But the democratic party is responsible for these folks getting loans they could not afford. You just need to face that fact.

Dubble

[Tennessee]

Did you read this part?

See also: Subprime mortgage crisis and Global financial crisis of 2008–2009
Some economists, politicians and other commentators have charged that the CRA contributed in part to the 2008 financial crisis by encouraging banks to make unsafe loans. Others however, including the economists from the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, dispute this contention. The Federal Reserve and the FDIC holds that empirical research has not validated any relationship between the CRA and the 2008 financial crisis.[56][57]

Economist Stan Liebowitz wrote in the New York Post that a strengthening of the CRA in the 1990s encouraged a loosening of lending standards throughout the banking industry. He also charges the Federal Reserve with ignoring the negative impact of the CRA.[51] In a commentary for CNN, Congressman Ron Paul, who serves on the United States House Committee on Financial Services, charged the CRA with "forcing banks to lend to people who normally would be rejected as bad credit risks."[58] In a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, Austrian school economist Russell Roberts wrote that the CRA subsidized low-income housing by pressuring banks to serve poor borrowers and poor regions of the country.[59] Jeffrey A. Miron, a senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University, in an opinion piece for CNN, calls for “getting rid” of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as policies like the Community Reinvestment Act that “pressure banks into subprime lending.”[60]

However, others dispute the involvement of the CRA in the crisis. San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank Governor Randall Kroszner has stated that no empirical evidence had been presented to support the claim that "the law pushed banking institutions to undertake high-risk mortgage lending."[56] In a Bank for International Settlements ("BIS") working paper, economist Luci Ellis concluded that "there is no evidence that the Community Reinvestment Act was responsible for encouraging the subprime lending boom and subsequent housing bust," relying partly on evidence that the housing bust has been a largely exurban event.[61] Others have also concluded that the CRA did not contribute to the current financial crisis, for example, FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair,[62] Comptroller of the Currency John C. Dugan,[63] Tim Westrich of the Center for American Progress,[64] Robert Gordon of the American Prospect,[65] Daniel Gross of Slate, and Aaron Pressman from BusinessWeek.[66]

Some legal and financial experts note that CRA regulated loans tend to be safe and profitable, and that subprime excesses came mainly from institutions not regulated by the CRA. In the February 2008 House hearing, law professor Michael S. Barr, a Treasury Department official under President Clinton,[67][34] stated that a Federal Reserve survey showed that affected institutions considered CRA loans profitable and not overly risky. He noted that approximately 50% of the subprime loans were made by independent mortgage companies that were not regulated by the CRA, and another 25% to 30% came from only partially CRA regulated bank subsidiaries and affiliates. Barr noted that institutions fully regulated by CRA made "perhaps one in four" sub-prime loans, and that "the worst and most widespread abuses occurred in the institutions with the least federal oversight".[68] According to Janet L. Yellen, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, independent mortgage companies made risky "high-priced loans" at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts; most CRA loans were responsibly made, and were not the higher-priced loans that have contributed to the current crisis.[69] A 2008 study by Traiger & Hinckley LLP, a law firm that counsels financial institutions on CRA compliance, found that CRA regulated institutions were less likely to make subprime loans, and when they did the interest rates were lower. CRA banks were also half as likely to resell the loans.[70] Emre Ergungor of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland found that there was no statistical difference in foreclosure rates between regulated and less-regulated banks, although a local bank presence resulted in fewer foreclosures.[71]

During a 2008 House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing on the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the financial crisis, including in relation to the Community Reinvestment Act, asked if the CRA provided the “fuel” for increasing subprime loans, former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines said it might have been a catalyst encouraging bad behavior, but it was difficult to know. Raines also cited information that only a small percentage of risky loans originated as a result of the CRA. Bob McTeer, president of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank from 1991 to 2004, said “There was a lot of pressure from Congress and generally everywhere to make homeownership affordable for poor and low-income people. Some mortgages were made that would not have ordinarily been made.” He also said “When a bank made a decision to purchase mortgaged-backed securities, they would somehow determine if some of them were in zip codes covered by the CRA, and therefore they could get CRA credit.”[72][73]


[edit] References

[Dubble Trubble]

Yes, and except for a couple of Liberals opinions from San Fransisco no less, it confirms what I have been saying.

Dubble

[Tennessee]

Yes, and except for a couple of Liberals opinions from San Fransisco no less, it confirms what I have been saying.

Dubble

80% of those loans did not even fall under this, doesn't confirm nothing. Are you saying the Federal Reserve is Liberal. 50% were private mortgage companies that did not fall under CPA. No this is just the conservatives trying to shift the blame to the poor.

[Dubble Trubble]

Ok Tennesee, you win, I tell you what. You pay for your house, I have already paid for mine. I sure am not going to pay for anyone else's.

I am done here, cuz we are never going to agree. I will see you in about 4 years. Then you can still blame conservatives.

Dubble