Great Youtube Clip…

[TheBreeze]

It looks like OFHEO does have the power to control the GSEs underwriting standards:

Commenting on the OFHEO Safety and Soundness regulation (12 CFR part 1720), MICA stated that OFHEO should,

[[Page 19986]]

by regulation, bar the Enterprises from purchase of mortgages or mortgage-backed securities that exceed the 80% LTV. However, the Enterprises are already limited to the purchase of mortgages and
mortgage-backed securities that are similar in risk to those with an 80% LTV. Further, this proposal would not reduce regulatory burden,
which was the subject of this document.

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-3762.htm

So if OFHEO had/has the power to limit the GSEs from purchasing mortgages with an LTV > 80%, then what does it matter what the Congress says? And by the way, what does “similar in risk to those with an 80% LTV” mean? It sounds like OFHEO was allowing the GSEs to buy/guarantee mortgages with an LTV > 80%.

Anyhoo, I see the clip mentioned above as nothing more than a bunch of Congresspeople blowing hot air (they have no real power because the Presidentially-appointed director of the OFHEO is the only body that has the power to regulate the GSEs). It makes for great political theatre and it allows those Congressfolks to go back to their representatives and say “hey look, I stood up for you and tried to make it easier for you to get a mortgage.” But in reality, the Congresspeople have no real power as it was OFHEO (who’s director was appointed by the President) who implemented the very lax underwriting standards of the GSEs.

Now, I’ve done some real research that shows how Bush was mostly responsible for this housing bubble and crash. I look forward to responses from the Bush apologists that show me where I’m wrong. And no, I don’t want to see another Rush-Limbaugh-featured YouTube clip that shows a bunch of politicians with no power who were quoted out-of-context.

[LA_Renter]

I agree with SD Realtor the Fannie and Freddie thing has Democratic hands all over it so we can safely lay blame on both parties. It is tempting to blame Bush for everything, most of that has something to do with anger over foreign policy. Here is critique of the Bush administration in the form of a letter to Obama from Bill Gross at Pimco, a long time registered Republican.

“Dear President Obama:

You have inherited a mess. Your predecessor, fixated on emulating a former Republican icon from a far different economic era, chose to emphasize tax cuts for the rich and excessive consumption for all Americans. He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love. Over eight years, he failed to put forth a coherent energy policy. He needlessly invaded Iraq and lowered worldwide esteem for this nation as a symbol of freedom and benevolence.”

http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Featured+Market+Commentary/IO/2008/IO+July+2008.htm

It is this part that stands out to me

“He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love.”

It pains me to read this because I am an independent that leans Libertarian. The words free markets and deregulation always had positive connotations to me. It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Now whether you like it or not Laissez-faire capitalism is now officially on trial. I guess its the result of the whole melt down of the western financial credit market thing. Fair enough. My fear is that the pendulum swings too far back the other way into Keynesian economics. Read Republican Bill Gross’s letter to Obama and its pretty much suggesting pump-priming of cutting taxes, increasing government borrowing, and spending during an economic down-turn which is classic Keynesian economics or better known as Stagflation. There has to be a better way to all this.

[LA_Renter]

I agree with SD Realtor the Fannie and Freddie thing has Democratic hands all over it so we can safely lay blame on both parties. It is tempting to blame Bush for everything, most of that has something to do with anger over foreign policy. Here is critique of the Bush administration in the form of a letter to Obama from Bill Gross at Pimco, a long time registered Republican.

“Dear President Obama:

You have inherited a mess. Your predecessor, fixated on emulating a former Republican icon from a far different economic era, chose to emphasize tax cuts for the rich and excessive consumption for all Americans. He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love. Over eight years, he failed to put forth a coherent energy policy. He needlessly invaded Iraq and lowered worldwide esteem for this nation as a symbol of freedom and benevolence.”

http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Featured+Market+Commentary/IO/2008/IO+July+2008.htm

It is this part that stands out to me

“He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love.”

It pains me to read this because I am an independent that leans Libertarian. The words free markets and deregulation always had positive connotations to me. It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Now whether you like it or not Laissez-faire capitalism is now officially on trial. I guess its the result of the whole melt down of the western financial credit market thing. Fair enough. My fear is that the pendulum swings too far back the other way into Keynesian economics. Read Republican Bill Gross’s letter to Obama and its pretty much suggesting pump-priming of cutting taxes, increasing government borrowing, and spending during an economic down-turn which is classic Keynesian economics or better known as Stagflation. There has to be a better way to all this.

[LA_Renter]

I agree with SD Realtor the Fannie and Freddie thing has Democratic hands all over it so we can safely lay blame on both parties. It is tempting to blame Bush for everything, most of that has something to do with anger over foreign policy. Here is critique of the Bush administration in the form of a letter to Obama from Bill Gross at Pimco, a long time registered Republican.

“Dear President Obama:

You have inherited a mess. Your predecessor, fixated on emulating a former Republican icon from a far different economic era, chose to emphasize tax cuts for the rich and excessive consumption for all Americans. He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love. Over eight years, he failed to put forth a coherent energy policy. He needlessly invaded Iraq and lowered worldwide esteem for this nation as a symbol of freedom and benevolence.”

http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Featured+Market+Commentary/IO/2008/IO+July+2008.htm

It is this part that stands out to me

“He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love.”

It pains me to read this because I am an independent that leans Libertarian. The words free markets and deregulation always had positive connotations to me. It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Now whether you like it or not Laissez-faire capitalism is now officially on trial. I guess its the result of the whole melt down of the western financial credit market thing. Fair enough. My fear is that the pendulum swings too far back the other way into Keynesian economics. Read Republican Bill Gross’s letter to Obama and its pretty much suggesting pump-priming of cutting taxes, increasing government borrowing, and spending during an economic down-turn which is classic Keynesian economics or better known as Stagflation. There has to be a better way to all this.

[LA_Renter]

I agree with SD Realtor the Fannie and Freddie thing has Democratic hands all over it so we can safely lay blame on both parties. It is tempting to blame Bush for everything, most of that has something to do with anger over foreign policy. Here is critique of the Bush administration in the form of a letter to Obama from Bill Gross at Pimco, a long time registered Republican.

“Dear President Obama:

You have inherited a mess. Your predecessor, fixated on emulating a former Republican icon from a far different economic era, chose to emphasize tax cuts for the rich and excessive consumption for all Americans. He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love. Over eight years, he failed to put forth a coherent energy policy. He needlessly invaded Iraq and lowered worldwide esteem for this nation as a symbol of freedom and benevolence.”

http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Featured+Market+Commentary/IO/2008/IO+July+2008.htm

It is this part that stands out to me

“He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love.”

It pains me to read this because I am an independent that leans Libertarian. The words free markets and deregulation always had positive connotations to me. It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Now whether you like it or not Laissez-faire capitalism is now officially on trial. I guess its the result of the whole melt down of the western financial credit market thing. Fair enough. My fear is that the pendulum swings too far back the other way into Keynesian economics. Read Republican Bill Gross’s letter to Obama and its pretty much suggesting pump-priming of cutting taxes, increasing government borrowing, and spending during an economic down-turn which is classic Keynesian economics or better known as Stagflation. There has to be a better way to all this.

[LA_Renter]

I agree with SD Realtor the Fannie and Freddie thing has Democratic hands all over it so we can safely lay blame on both parties. It is tempting to blame Bush for everything, most of that has something to do with anger over foreign policy. Here is critique of the Bush administration in the form of a letter to Obama from Bill Gross at Pimco, a long time registered Republican.

“Dear President Obama:

You have inherited a mess. Your predecessor, fixated on emulating a former Republican icon from a far different economic era, chose to emphasize tax cuts for the rich and excessive consumption for all Americans. He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love. Over eight years, he failed to put forth a coherent energy policy. He needlessly invaded Iraq and lowered worldwide esteem for this nation as a symbol of freedom and benevolence.”

http://www.pimco.com/LeftNav/Featured+Market+Commentary/IO/2008/IO+July+2008.htm

It is this part that stands out to me

“He promoted deregulation and free markets when, in fact, the markets and their institutions needed tough love.”

It pains me to read this because I am an independent that leans Libertarian. The words free markets and deregulation always had positive connotations to me. It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Now whether you like it or not Laissez-faire capitalism is now officially on trial. I guess its the result of the whole melt down of the western financial credit market thing. Fair enough. My fear is that the pendulum swings too far back the other way into Keynesian economics. Read Republican Bill Gross’s letter to Obama and its pretty much suggesting pump-priming of cutting taxes, increasing government borrowing, and spending during an economic down-turn which is classic Keynesian economics or better known as Stagflation. There has to be a better way to all this.

[TheBreeze]

It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Pssst…hey LA_Renter, the Republicans had majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate from 2002-2006. Please show me the law that the Democrats passed that allowed the GSEs to go crazy with loose underwriting, thus causing the housing bubble.

This may surprise you, but I lean libertarian myself. However, unlike you, I don’t evaluate the parties based on their slogans. Instead, I dig deeper and look at what each party has actually done.

[TheBreeze]

It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Pssst…hey LA_Renter, the Republicans had majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate from 2002-2006. Please show me the law that the Democrats passed that allowed the GSEs to go crazy with loose underwriting, thus causing the housing bubble.

This may surprise you, but I lean libertarian myself. However, unlike you, I don’t evaluate the parties based on their slogans. Instead, I dig deeper and look at what each party has actually done.

[TheBreeze]

It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Pssst…hey LA_Renter, the Republicans had majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate from 2002-2006. Please show me the law that the Democrats passed that allowed the GSEs to go crazy with loose underwriting, thus causing the housing bubble.

This may surprise you, but I lean libertarian myself. However, unlike you, I don’t evaluate the parties based on their slogans. Instead, I dig deeper and look at what each party has actually done.

[TheBreeze]

It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Pssst…hey LA_Renter, the Republicans had majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate from 2002-2006. Please show me the law that the Democrats passed that allowed the GSEs to go crazy with loose underwriting, thus causing the housing bubble.

This may surprise you, but I lean libertarian myself. However, unlike you, I don’t evaluate the parties based on their slogans. Instead, I dig deeper and look at what each party has actually done.

[TheBreeze]

It seems to me that many of the seeds of loose lending standards rest with the Democrats, allowing financial institutions to leverage 30, 40 50 times, rest with the MO of this administration. The result was a perfect storm of handing out bad loans and leveraging them to the hilt.

Pssst…hey LA_Renter, the Republicans had majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate from 2002-2006. Please show me the law that the Democrats passed that allowed the GSEs to go crazy with loose underwriting, thus causing the housing bubble.

This may surprise you, but I lean libertarian myself. However, unlike you, I don’t evaluate the parties based on their slogans. Instead, I dig deeper and look at what each party has actually done.

[Arraya]

Lets not forget Greenspan’s call to ARM’s in 2004.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/fed/2004-02-23-greenspan-debt_x.htm

Greenspan says ARMs might be better deal
By Sue Kirchhoff and Barbara Hagenbaugh, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Monday that Americans’ preference for long-term, fixed-rate mortgages means many are paying more than necessary for their homes and suggested consumers would benefit if lenders offered more alternatives.
In a standing-room-only speech to the Credit Union National Association meeting here, Greenspan also said U.S. household finances appeared generally sound, despite rising debt levels and bankruptcy filings. Low interest rates and surging home prices have given consumers flexibility to manage debt, he said.

“Overall, the household sector seems to be in good shape,” Greenspan said. HAHA 2004 we were way into bubble territory.

Same article a Bush appointee pushing risky loans on low income buyers.

Joseph McKenzie, deputy chief economist at the Federal Housing Finance Board, says buyers like the stability of fixed-rate mortgages, but there is increasing flexibility in products. “There are lots of innovative programs, especially targeting low-income and first-time buyers,” he says

*This article was practically an advertisement.

[Arraya]

Lets not forget Greenspan’s call to ARM’s in 2004.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/fed/2004-02-23-greenspan-debt_x.htm

Greenspan says ARMs might be better deal
By Sue Kirchhoff and Barbara Hagenbaugh, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Monday that Americans’ preference for long-term, fixed-rate mortgages means many are paying more than necessary for their homes and suggested consumers would benefit if lenders offered more alternatives.
In a standing-room-only speech to the Credit Union National Association meeting here, Greenspan also said U.S. household finances appeared generally sound, despite rising debt levels and bankruptcy filings. Low interest rates and surging home prices have given consumers flexibility to manage debt, he said.

“Overall, the household sector seems to be in good shape,” Greenspan said. HAHA 2004 we were way into bubble territory.

Same article a Bush appointee pushing risky loans on low income buyers.

Joseph McKenzie, deputy chief economist at the Federal Housing Finance Board, says buyers like the stability of fixed-rate mortgages, but there is increasing flexibility in products. “There are lots of innovative programs, especially targeting low-income and first-time buyers,” he says

*This article was practically an advertisement.

[Arraya]

Lets not forget Greenspan’s call to ARM’s in 2004.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/fed/2004-02-23-greenspan-debt_x.htm

Greenspan says ARMs might be better deal
By Sue Kirchhoff and Barbara Hagenbaugh, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Monday that Americans’ preference for long-term, fixed-rate mortgages means many are paying more than necessary for their homes and suggested consumers would benefit if lenders offered more alternatives.
In a standing-room-only speech to the Credit Union National Association meeting here, Greenspan also said U.S. household finances appeared generally sound, despite rising debt levels and bankruptcy filings. Low interest rates and surging home prices have given consumers flexibility to manage debt, he said.

“Overall, the household sector seems to be in good shape,” Greenspan said. HAHA 2004 we were way into bubble territory.

Same article a Bush appointee pushing risky loans on low income buyers.

Joseph McKenzie, deputy chief economist at the Federal Housing Finance Board, says buyers like the stability of fixed-rate mortgages, but there is increasing flexibility in products. “There are lots of innovative programs, especially targeting low-income and first-time buyers,” he says

*This article was practically an advertisement.

[Arraya]

Lets not forget Greenspan’s call to ARM’s in 2004.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/fed/2004-02-23-greenspan-debt_x.htm

Greenspan says ARMs might be better deal
By Sue Kirchhoff and Barbara Hagenbaugh, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said Monday that Americans’ preference for long-term, fixed-rate mortgages means many are paying more than necessary for their homes and suggested consumers would benefit if lenders offered more alternatives.
In a standing-room-only speech to the Credit Union National Association meeting here, Greenspan also said U.S. household finances appeared generally sound, despite rising debt levels and bankruptcy filings. Low interest rates and surging home prices have given consumers flexibility to manage debt, he said.

“Overall, the household sector seems to be in good shape,” Greenspan said. HAHA 2004 we were way into bubble territory.

Same article a Bush appointee pushing risky loans on low income buyers.

Joseph McKenzie, deputy chief economist at the Federal Housing Finance Board, says buyers like the stability of fixed-rate mortgages, but there is increasing flexibility in products. “There are lots of innovative programs, especially targeting low-income and first-time buyers,” he says

*This article was practically an advertisement.

[Author]

Posts