March 30, 2008

So, how's that "Ownership Society" working out for America now Mr. Bush?


Well, let's see

* The banks are failing
* Millions of Americans have been financially destroyed
* The last suckers in - women and minorities - got hurt the worst after being encouraged to buy at the top regardless of price
* Trillions have been lost with trillions more to go
* Hundreds of thousands have lost their jobs
* Neighborhoods are filling up with foreclosures and falling into decay
* The world financial system is collapsing
* America is in recession

Well, I'd say it's working out pretty good! Almost as good as that Iraq strategy. Almost as good as that Social Security reform.

George W. Bush - the Worst and Most Destructive President in the History of the United States.

President Bush's Policies Promoting the Ownership Society

The President believes that homeownership is the cornerstone of America's vibrant communities and benefits individual families by building stability and long-term financial security.

In June 2002, President Bush issued America's Homeownership Challenge to the real estate and mortgage finance industries to encourage them to join the effort to close the gap that exists between the homeownership rates of minorities and non-minorities.

65 comments:

Democraatus said...

George W. Bush - the Worst and Most Destructive President in the History of the United States.

The American Voter 2000/2004 - the Worst and Most Dumbest voter in the History of the United States.

There is no better argument against democracy and/or general voting rights.

Anonymous said...

To think all of this because America and Ohio hate gays

satan said...

Hey Keith,

have you seen the most recent CNN 'mortgage meltdown' program. It has a lot of people who say exactly what housingbubble blogs have been saying.. biggest ponzi scheme in history, wallstreet methlab, toxic debt, greenspan caused this etc..

Almost felt like watching HP on TV. The MSM can no longer avoid the real issues.

satan said...

http://money.cnn.com/real_estate/foreclosures/

Anonymous said...

The CNN financial people have been pretty good for the past few months. I don't remember the blonde's name, but she has been talking about how bad it is and is going to be. The bald guy they have on in the mornings is also usually honest, though he is probably still a little too optimistic.

DOPES said...

I TOLD GEORGE HAVING ORANGE MAN OVER FOR DINNER AT THE WHITE HOUSE WAS ONLY GONNA LEAD TO BIG PROBLEMS...

BUT ANGELO REASSURED HIM THEY WERE JUST "DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL" LOANS...

DOPES!!!

Anonymous said...

Keith, do you have any sense of whether Europeans (or the greater world) have begun to realize that the US financial intitutions have polluted the world's financial institutions with a toxic virus that will take down millions of people? Some Americans are waking up...but how ugly will Americans be when this really hits the fan?

america has never been better said...

B-bu-but.... he's a good christian man!

My church minister said I should always support him!

I do whatever my church (and REALTOR™) tells me!

Even Fox news says he's the greatest president of all time!

i've had it said...

A number of months ago I made the point here that as much blame has to be put on the non-profit housing activist groups as there is on the banks, realtors, mortgage brokers, etc. because they are the ones who published report after report about how minorities were being discriminated against by 1) not getting loans to buy houses and 2) getting charged higher interest rates when they did get them. Every year you would read in the papers a report issued by some group "proving" that discrimination was rampant in the lending industry because of the above.

Well, now we know the truth about why those folks could not get loans: they were bad risks, not because their skin wasn't white.

In all fairness to Bush and the banks (it's hard for me to say that), they were kind of forced into this policy of low interest rates by the liberal groups who badgered and humiliated the banks into creating subprime and other loans. They created these loans to get the liberal groups off their damn backs...and look what happened...financial armaggedon. And now that everything has imploded, all you hear from these groups and the left wing is that the banks "preyed" upon these poor people by offering loans they knew they simply couldn't repay.

So the libs badger the banks and govt. into making loans available to poor minorities and then when they can't repay the libs castigate and blame the lenders!

There is nothing worse than the mind and actions of a liberal.

Thanks a lot you effing geniuses!

Afterthought said...

This is a back-handed endorsement of the opposite; namely a benign, pro-middle class, socialist state. A state where the rich were taxed to provide a safety net for the poor, regulators to police the rich, and good jobs for the middle class (have you followed science funding under Bush? Let's just say it has tracked the "ownership society" NO COINCIDENCE!")

The "Anglo" model is a failure. It has failed in England twice now, it is failing in the US now. It has failed in countless third-world countries, and places like Russia etc.

Like, communism, extreme capitalism has failed, and must be placed onto the dustbin of history for the same reason: too much power in too few hands. The evil that human beings can do doesn't disappear when they put on a suit and tie! It sounds obvious but how many "libertarians" think otherwise?

America prospered because we played China to Europe's America for a couple of centuries. We prospered because we avoided costly wars (save for the Civil War). We prospered because all the overhead of a modern society; schools, universities, and all the technology created by Europe flowed here freely because the inventors could actually make money and be somebody, rather than be the slave of some aristocrat!

This continues till today. Look at our universities, our graduate programs. Entitled white kids don't study (on the whole). It is the Indians, Chinese, and Eastern Europeans who do the heavy lifting of a technologically dependent society. What do white Americans go for? Jobs where they can make money via charisma! Because that is all they have since they squandered their youth on sports and chasing skirt!

Look at who actually works in farm fields, and construction? Who does the dirty work? Not Bush voters! But immigrants!

Can we go back to petite-bourgeois capitalism? Where power isn't allowed to coalesce into the hands of a few? Yes, but you need things like unions and government intervention. You need a functioning democracy. You need federalism, you need a multi-party parliament system.

Above all you need a CULTURE that backs this system up!

We had this in America, it was called the New Deal.

The very moment the benefits of the New Deal were extended to blacks etc. the Southern White Male abandoned the system.

The rest is history.

I really don't care if people hate others; it is a sad inevitability of human nature. Christians say all men are sinners; I agree.

But for the love of God, LOVE YOURSELF!

Hicks, rednecks, "blue-collar" workers, white middle class America: LOVE YOURSELF!

Don't worry about whether the black guy is prospering too, worry about whether YOU are prospering. Since the election of Nixon, the middle class has been gutted, sold out,and all its wealth and power transferred to the global elite!

And yet the people kept voting for it because they heard whispering campaigns to the effect that, one day (after the Rapture?) when we get rid of "the bad people" the middle class utopia built by FDR will be restored; only this time without blacks, gays, Mexicans, and those nasty liberals who want you to live with just a little less evil in your heart!

Love of self before hate of others! This is the cure to America's woes (especially the Red counties).

You know I am right.

Mike said...

"George W. Bush - the Worst and Most Destructive President in the History of the United States."

So far. Let's see what November brings. He could just be the opening chorus.

Anonymous said...

Wasn't 'The Ownership Society' the original name of Skull and Crossbones?

The elite 1% are always looking out for our best interests, aren't they?

Plutocracy isn't an astronomical term??

I'm so confused...

Stoic said...

I used to just call him an imbecile. Now I call him a malignant imbecile. Cheney is just malignant.

malignant:

1.disposed to cause harm, suffering, or distress deliberately; feeling or showing ill will or hatred.

2.very dangerous or harmful in influence or effect.

3.Pathology.

a.tending to produce death, as bubonic plague.

b.(of a tumor) characterized by uncontrolled growth; cancerous, invasive, or metastatic.

Anonymous said...

I just cannot stand it. 9 more months of Bush and Cheney! 9 months is what it takes before a pregnant woman delivers!

God knows what Bush and Cheney have in store for us before they leave for good. I just cannot trust them.

MAX

Anonymous said...

I am guilty of being the dumbest voter in America. I voted for Bush in 2000... I'm sorry .... of course as Governor he stated he was not into nation building you know the rest of the story.... he flip flopped more than a fish out of water

DUMBS!!!

Ed said...

"the Worst and Most Dumbest voter in the History of the United States."

Oh the irony of someone saying most dumbest calling someone else dumb.

Ed said...

The concept of an ownership society is a good one. It is far superior to the Keith/DailyKook/Obama vision of government owning everythig.

That being said, ownership should truly mean ownership. Not ownership through debt.

But that's OK. I hear once Obama gets in her will buy everyone a new house, free and clear.

Anonymous said...

Hey, people warned me that Bush would screw our economy but I was concerned about TERROR! Bush and Cheney had me scared and I knew they would be tough on terrorism. I figured, they might be tough on the economy, but not this bad. WE WERE ALL FOOLED!

Blissex said...

«* Trillions have been lost with trillions more to go»

That's complete bullshit! Lots of people have made lots of money, as professional or banking or other fees, bonuses, options, fabulous pension entitlements, and by selling assets all the way up while the Fed, the President and most economists were shilling them to the benefit of those who wanted to unload them to a greater fool.

The *right* people (the Republican campaign donor class, and a good chunk of the Democratic campaign donors too) have made lots of money, and losers have lost lot of money, including lower and middle class taxpayers who will have to make good the losses that the slower among the *right* people have unfortunately have had to suffer.

A lot of people, including ONeill, Mozilo, Rayne have been laughing all the way to their (presumably foreign, in a tax heaven) bank accounts.

As to the losers, article #0 of the USA constitution is "It is immoral to let suckers keep money".

Anonymous said...

fu..5785747 ed

Blissex said...

«The very moment the benefits of the New Deal were extended to blacks etc. the Southern White Male abandoned the system.»

Obviously, because they were tired of being persecuted and exploited by the luxury loving parasitical Welfare Queens and Strapping Young Bucks with their Cadillacs and T-Bone Steaks. As Saint Ronald preached to them. :-)

As Lee Atwater said:

"You start out in 1954 by saying, 'Nigger, nigger, nigger.' By 1968 you can't say 'nigger' - that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.
"And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me - because obviously sitting around saying, 'We want to cut this,' is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than 'Nigger, nigger.'"

Sometimes I think that just as the Republicans had a Southern Strategy, the Southerners ended up having a Republican Strategy.

Problem with that for most Southern Whites is that a lot of things that hurt poor blacks hurt poor whites too, both to the benefit of rich Southern, Northern or Western whites. But then a large number of poor Southern whites died *enthusiastically* in a war to defend the wealth and power of their elites, who were keeping them poor, and their poor black compatriots enslaved.

Anonymous said...

"...forced into this policy...by the liberal groups..."

HAH!

THAT was a good one. The prospect of profit had NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

Anonymous said...

"Helping minorities" has been an easy public relations ploy for 40 years now. As for "ownership society", one could say that corporate america now owns a greater percentage of the human resources so mission accomplished.

Anonymous said...

"Look at our universities, our graduate programs. Entitled white kids don't study (on the whole). It is the Indians, Chinese, and Eastern Europeans who do the heavy lifting of a technologically dependent society."

D'oh!

Now why is this?

Because the white hypercapitalists have arranged to beat down the wages and working conditions of the remaining high-IQ jobs!

It's not that Americans are too dumb (at the top 0.1% level capable of engineering advances, there are plenty of natives), it's because they're smart and looking out for #1.

What is the *relative* social value and career path of a good high level (but not Nobel Prize) scientist or engineer today, as compared to, 1957? Back then, unemployment was not in your conception. Your wages were similar to most lawyers, and your work was more rewarding. You would definitely advance, and your contributions be important. You would have a career until age 70 if you wanted.

And now?

I'm one of the few white Americans working in a mathematical modeling division of a software company. (65%+ PhD's) Most of the recent hires are Asian, naturally. I was talking to a (middle eastern) immigrant co-worker, who saw the same thing in his PhD program. He wondered "where are all the smart Americans"?

Then he consulted for a quant hedge fund, and he found them.

Anonymous said...

So the libs badger the banks and govt. into making loans available to poor minorities and then when they can't repay the libs castigate and blame the lenders!

GMAFB!

Countrywide etc did it for enormous fat fees from securitization.

There was no public service motivation or pressure whatsoever to do this. It was nothing but greed greed greed greed and greed. Subprime with toxic balloon rates and prepayment penalties payed much much more in fees than 30 year fixed conforming loans.

Actual liberals don't like predatory lending.

Anonymous said...

WE NOW HAVE THE OWNERSHIP SOCIETY:

Most American's are now OWNED by the banks! Welcome to the new serfdom you plebian motherfkrs. You get what you deserve for turning your back on the constitution, science and reason. Good ridance to the new underclass. Maybe some of the very poor, who know how to live cheap and avoid debt will now climb up and over you wannabe rich that are the new indentured. Just looking for any brightspot here...

-MattC

Anonymous said...

ANON @ March 30, 2008 5:16 PM

I second your comments. Me, white, punk PhD in high tech. I am total minority. But the funny part will be when we have the reverse brain drain, and all the imported "tallent" starts to go back home. Will be interesting to see if we get wage inflation then! Lets see who gets called on to solve peak oil problems then, eh?

-MattC

Anonymous said...

Did rich boy George ever have a mortg, or a car loan, or a credit card with a balance for years?! I knew that George was no Christian (perhaps Judas) when he wanted people to put their Social Security into Wall Streets hands. Was not Social Security brought about because people were broke from Wall Street 1929. No person who has a care for people who can not care for themselves allows Wall Street to handle their money. I am sure if Jesus was walking around Wall Street he would be overturning the money changers tables. George Bush's Ownership society really means you are on your own. George always says that government is inefficient at taking care of people. Then that is not government worth having George.

Anonymous said...

So the libs badger the banks and govt. into making loans available to poor minorities and then when they can't repay the libs castigate and blame the lenders!

GMAFB!

Countrywide etc did it for enormous fat fees from securitization.

There was no public service motivation or pressure whatsoever to do this. It was nothing but greed greed greed greed and greed. Subprime with toxic balloon rates and prepayment penalties payed much much more in fees than 30 year fixed conforming loans.

Actual liberals don't like predatory lending.

exactly, it’s the same over and over with these idiots. They read that goof ball ayn rand once in high school and think they understand how things work and view everything through the lens of this understanding. so they try to punch square pegs into round holes with zero facts for evidence. so then they make up things that didn't happen to make it fit their limited preconceived worldview. crazy thing is, no matter how much evidence they are provided showing the problem is with greedy corporations criminally co-opting our government they will basically say nah nahanah can't hear you and insist it was the damn liberal social policies and those damn poor people. This is how we end up with dubya. Idiots!

Anonymous said...

Bush is not done destroying America yet. Expect to see another disastrous war in Iran before he leaves office. It sounds like they're already gearing up according to the Ruskies:

US Military buildup on Iranian border

And of course, Iraq is blowing up again...

"The surge is working"

"The military is saying 'let us win', 'let us win'"

"Mission accomplished"

Anonymous said...

Hey, people warned me that Bush would screw our economy but I was concerned about TERROR! Bush and Cheney had me scared and I knew they would be tough on terrorism. I figured, they might be tough on the economy, but not this bad. WE WERE ALL FOOLED!

Concerned about TERROR. Americans are such a bunch of pussies. The biggest military and biggest intelligence organisation in the world by far and everyone gets all worked up about some arabs hiding out in caves.

And you think these a-rabs could have pulled off 9/11 without even a whimper from the CIA, FBI, Norad, USAF, DoD etc etc.. What a crock. It should be no surprise to anyone that 9/11 was at the very least allowed to happen by the US military. This doesn't seem so outrageous an idea when you read up on Operation Northwoods which is a documented example of how the Joint Chiefs of Staff concocted plans to use false flag terrorism against the US population to achieve their desires for war with Cuba:

Operation Northwoods

So f*cking stupid.

consultant said...

Afterthought,

One of the most concise, correct articulations of modern American social/economic history I've seen on the web. With permission, I'd like to post this on my website.

CommunityProfits.com

k.w. - southern ca. said...

The bigger mortgage mess is now just beginning with "Alt-A" and "Prime" loans - these loans are also suspect, and they were given to higher income earning people who got themselves roped into the same mess.

Instead of putting a down payment on a 600K shack, they did it on a 1.5M (and above) shack.

~~~~

i've had it said...
A number of months ago I made the point here that as much blame has to be put on the non-profit housing activist groups as there is on the banks, realtors, mortgage brokers, etc. because they are the ones who published report after report about how minorities were being discriminated against by 1) not getting loans to buy houses and 2) getting charged higher interest rates when they did get them. Every year you would read in the papers a report issued by some group "proving" that discrimination was rampant in the lending industry because of the above.

Well, now we know the truth about why those folks could not get loans: they were bad risks, not because their skin wasn't white.

In all fairness to Bush and the banks (it's hard for me to say that), they were kind of forced into this policy of low interest rates by the liberal groups who badgered and humiliated the banks into creating subprime and other loans. They created these loans to get the liberal groups off their damn backs...and look what happened...financial armaggedon. And now that everything has imploded, all you hear from these groups and the left wing is that the banks "preyed" upon these poor people by offering loans they knew they simply couldn't repay.

So the libs badger the banks and govt. into making loans available to poor minorities and then when they can't repay the libs castigate and blame the lenders!

There is nothing worse than the mind and actions of a liberal.

Thanks a lot you effing geniuses!

k.w. - southern, ca. said...

Many people I knew voted for Bush - TWICE!!. Now, these same people are crapping in their pants as more and more of their income goes to paying for living expenses.

Again, it had to hit them *personally* before any of them saw a problem - very short-sighted.

9 more months is enough time for Bush to make things even worse in this country.

The next President - Democratic or Replublican - I feel will be nothing more than a figure head, since the economy will be too damaged to salvage anytime soon.

Anonymous said...
I just cannot stand it. 9 more months of Bush and Cheney! 9 months is what it takes before a pregnant woman delivers!

God knows what Bush and Cheney have in store for us before they leave for good. I just cannot trust them.

MAX

Lost Cause said...

It is no coincidence that we have a financial crisis now. This is called saving the best for last. This country is going to be fully on its knees by the time these criminals leave office. Hopefully, there will be brave souls to arrest them on the way out, when they do not have the power of the military and government behind them.

mairca izda debol said...

Viva la Jorge Bush!!!

El Presidente Jorge Bush is muy bueno. El da mucho dinero por la Raza

Anonymous said...

Too bad its not Bush. Too bad electing different President isn't going to change anything. We have a shadow government that has decided to cull our nation.

God Help Us All

Anonymous said...

What is the infatuation with gays and marijuana on this board? Somehow every blog entry turns into a pro-gay or pro-marijuana rant

Anonymous said...

It's a good thing the much more intelligent Europeans don't have a housing bubble. I mean $300,000 for a 70sf flat in London isn't a ridiculous price.

Anonymous said...

Afterthought,

"New Deal" was the oldest deal there ever was. Government "support" for the poor and elderly were among the policy proposals by the Bismark "Junkers" (German aristocrats) administration as a way to reign in the middle class "petit bougeoise." In fact, many of the "New Deals" policies were at least as old as the late Roman Empire, if not the 2000BC Egyptian Empire, with all the government handouts and programs to create artificial "jobs."

What we have here today is not a failture of the free market, but a failure of the socialist economic managers: The whimsical central banking money management since 1913, creating huge cycles of booms and bust. If it were up to the free market to choose what currency to use, few would take the pieces of color paper at face value without backing.

Government intervention by definition is concentrating power into the hands of a tiny minority: the lawmakers number only a few hundred at the national level . . . that's out of a population of hundreds of millions! Laws and regulations are by definition tools with which the tiny minority use to control the entire population. When we have a society of individuals interacting with each other on a voluntary basis, without excessive government internvetion, it wouldn't be possible for the tiny minority to control the entire population.

Anonymous said...

"George Bush's Ownership society really means you are on your own. George always says that government is inefficient at taking care of people. Then that is not government worth having George."

There is nothing wrong with what he is saying. It's what he's been doing is the problem:

(1) If we were indeed left alone on our own, we wouldn't have a humongous homeland security bureacracy wasting money and resources snooping on people; we wouldn't have a mushrooming medicine bill robbing us.

(2) Government is indeed inefficient at taking care of people. It failed miserably in the war on poverty, and the war on drugs; that's what we get for government taking care of people in the inner cities. Now, the problem with W administration policy is that, what makes anyone think that US government intervention would be good at taking care of Iraqis?!

(3)Government is indeed not worth having. Just look at the huge boom an dbust cycles that we have been having ever since having the government taking care of our money's worth, which has now lost 98% of its worth since the FED started in 1913.

Anonymous said...

"Countrywide etc did it for enormous fat fees from securitization. There was no public service motivation or pressure whatsoever to do this. It was nothing but greed greed greed greed and greed."

Of course it's greed greed greed and greed. Even the man who is so fondly remembered for "ask what you can do for your country" had this to say when asked why he was running for president: "That's where power is!" --- JFK. "Public service motivation"? No, service by high-price hookers at public expense is more like it. That's just human nature. Power brings out the worst in people; government intervention in the market place is a major source of power.

"crazy thing is, no matter how much evidence they are provided showing the problem is with greedy corporations criminally co-opting our government they will basically say nah nahanah can't hear you and insist it was the damn liberal social policies and those damn poor people."

You are the one not hearing: when the government is powerful, who do you think have the money to co-opt it and get to pull the levers of that powerful government machine? Of course, the wealthy individuals, not the poor. Corporation is just an artificial entity put together by a bunch of individuals, under the government law, in pursuit of profit with limited liability. Enpowering the government is as simple as giving the poor and the middle class a rope to hang themselves.

wc said...

Dear "I've had it"...Don't you think the fact that there is a 250K single/500K joint deduction on the sale of a primary residence, or the fact that credit was kept artifically low for such an extended period of time or the fact that lending institutions can immediately turn around and resell their bad loans without any government oversight to government-backed groups like Fannie/Freddie had a little more to do with it than those "effing" liberals? It's lack of regulation that created this mess and you can very well blame Bush and his ownership-society cronies for that and I wouldn't exactly call them liberals. There is nothing more Christian than helping out your fellow man and I can't think of a single thing Bush has done for the "people" he's supposed to represent unless they have been in the top 10% of the wealthiest Americans. Our planet is being destroyed by these corrupt politicians that would rather let the ocean be polluted with oil spills and PVC from all of the plastic and teflon we've discarded than to put regulations into place that might be inconvenient to their corporate donors - even if what they do endangers your drinking water, your food chain and the very air you breathe.

Anonymous said...

I hear once Obama gets in her will buy everyone a new house, free and clear.

Do you call the above proper grammar, Ed? Talk about irony!

Ed is the most discredit and dumbest poster on HP.

Anonymous said...

What is the infatuation with gays and marijuana on this board? Somehow every blog entry turns into a pro-gay or pro-marijuana rant

--------------

Aqui aye mucho maricon liberal. Aye tanto maricon que este blog se llama
Los Maricones Que no Pudieron Compra Casa.

Anonymous said...

I figured, they might be tough on the economy, but not this bad. WE WERE ALL FOOLED!

I wasn't. I saw those 2 and the evil GOP for what they really are, a bunch of warmonger profiteers. Never voted for them and never will.

The next biggest lie will be Obama. I won't vote for him because I see an Empty Suit that's fooling the usual sheeple who should never pick a president.

Kiss your capital gains tax cut goodbye as Obama will give it all to Africa in foreign aid. Remember his only bill in the Senate? $1 trillion of American tax money in foreign aid to Africa. Does anyone care to doubt that this money won't reach the intended market? Lot's of secret society fronts disguised as charitable organizations out there.

Most people have no idea how they'll lose their retirement money, currently invested in Mutual Funds, when Obama erases the capital gains tax break. Oh, and he said in a speech that he'll do it.

You see, every time the turnover is high in your mutual fund, the financial institution has to pay capital gains on the profits to the government, which now has a lower tax rate. After Obama erases it, as he said he would, your egg's nest will drop considerably overtime. It could be the difference between retiring with $2 million dollars or with just $200k.

Those are the details that the ignorant sheep doesn't pay attention to or understand. Hillary won't erase the capital gains tax break. Enjoy your retirement in poverty by voting for Obama.

Anonymous said...

Liberals would rather have a leader like Chavez or Stalin. Do what they say or risk being killed. Much better than Bush.

Anonymous said...

MONKEY

Anonymous said...

"Power brings out the worst in people; government intervention in the market place is a major source of power."

Government intervention in the form of crony capitalism (no bid contracts, deregulation, corporate welfare, etc.)is a major source of ABUSE of power.

i've had it said...

You liberals who continue to deny your party's role and your housing activists' role in this debacle are simply acting like the fucked homebuyers out there who don't think there's a housing crash.

The fact of the matter is that organizations like ACORN, and hundreds of similar liberal activist organizations, are up to the eyeballs in responsibility for this problem, just like the banks, lenders, and buyers are.

You simply can't refute the FACT that year after year after year after year your crazy groups shamed banks into creating subprime loans that were targeted for poor minorities in the beginning. And yes, like profit driven companies do, the lenders and bankers then said, "Hey, we can peddle subprime to everyone!"...and so they did. And yes, their greed and fraudulent/criminal practices made this situation of catastrophic proportions. And then once they were done wringing out everyone with subprime, they invented alt-a's and option arms to get even worse people into homes, or wealthy people into them that were banking on huge leverage making them rich in an "always rising housing market". Yes, I agree with that. But plenty of poor people took out these loans too...many of which were minorities and ILLEGAL ALIENS who could not document their incomes since they were getting paid under the table. Yes, the same ILLEGAL ALIENS that you want to grant citizenship to. Yes, the 20 million ILLEGAL ALIENS, many of which who own homes bought with alt-a's and options arms...no documentation required. Another idiotic scheme promoted by your liberal activist organizations and grabbed onto by greedy bankers.

PLEASE don't sit there and yap about how your liberal activist groups had nothing to do with this humongous problem. For those on this site who have read my posts, I assign blame all around...it goes everywhere. The one area where NO blame has yet been given to are the housing activist groups and other liberal orgs that put out those surveys every year saying that poor minorities were unjustly getting the shaft by being charged higher interest rates or not getting loans at all. If you don't remember those reports then you simply are not an aware American. You couldn't miss them since they came out like clockwork every goddamn year for decades...that is, until the early 2000s, at which point they stopped since subprime, alt-a, and option arms were getting minorities into homes.

Bush's idea of an ownership society is laudable, actually. There's nothing wrong with home ownership - even ACORN believes that! No limousine liberal in wealthy suburbs on the Coasts would disagree with that. The problem with it, unfortunately, is that not everyone can own a home, which we have just found out...the hard way...and so did you stupid liberals. But somehow, I know you will twist and turn the facts of history, as you usually do, to fit your narrow view of the world so that you don't have to take any of the blame for your idiotic beliefs, activism, and policies. And you will go on to harp, complain, whine, yell, and scream bloody murder for the rest of your lives since, when you get down to it, that's all you really like to do. It makes you feel like you're doing something good.

It is time for you to just face this fact: liberal groups and liberal housing activists are just as much to blame for this problem as the greedy bankers, lenders, buyers, and moronic govt. policy makers.

Anonymous said...

I hear once Obama gets in her will buy everyone a new house, free and clear.

Do you call the above proper grammar, Ed? Talk about irony!

Ed is the most discredit and dumbest poster on HP.

---------------------------------


Ed is wise. Bud-wise.

Anonymous said...

"You are the one not hearing: when the government is powerful, who do you think have the money to co-opt it and get to pull the levers of that powerful government machine? Of course, the wealthy individuals, not the poor. Corporation is just an artificial entity put together by a bunch of individuals, under the government law, in pursuit of profit with limited liability. Enpowering the government is as simple as giving the poor and the middle class a rope to hang themselves."



Now, you are arguing a different matter. One I won’t say is without merit but is essentially naive. There will always be government so the essential question is by and for whom. In a democracy it ideally works out that it’s for the greater whole vs. other forms of government such as this pseudo democracy we have which is somewhere verging on corporate fascism and is for the very few. Your argument is similar to those that argue for a free-market when there never has been in the history of the world such a thing and is no more possible in reality than working communism or unicorns for that matter. Some one will always have their finger on the scale in a market. The market is only an economic tool. The essential question is again for what or whom is the tool used? Those that argue for unregulated free-markets are often unwittingly arguing for markets that only benefit the few and most powerful as we have now. “Free markets” are only a means/tool for privatizing the gains into the hands of the few and socializing their losses on to the greater society. Who is it by and for is the first and most important question.

Anonymous said...

wc,

What do you think the 250k single /500k joint deduction is? What the artificially low interest rate is? What Fannie/Freddie are?

They are all products of regulations! And you want more regulations? Whenever there are regulations, the regulations only serve to distort the market place: what are the chances of regulators getting in the way of "helping the working class owning homes"? All three distortions that you mentioned and I quoted above were supposed to help the low-income family own homes! At the top of the market, the top regulator even went on record, during congressional hearings, praising the banks for "creative financial engineering"!

Too bad God is not applying for jobs; all we get for regulators are dumbhucks who don't see a bubble even as the bubble squash them like bugs. If the bureacrats had half a clue about market timing, they'd be hiring themselves out to investment bankers and making seven-digit salaries intead of those low-six-digit regulator jobs.

Anonymous said...

"Government intervention in the form of crony capitalism (no bid contracts, deregulation, corporate welfare, etc.)is a major source of ABUSE of power."

The ultmate expression of that are:
(1) government monopoly on the currency, fiat money;

(2) government monopoly determination on short-term interest rate without any bidding process;

(3) government underwriting of mortgages through FHA, FNM, FRE, etc.

(4) government tax preferential treatment of capital gain on housing: getting in the way of normal healthy competition for capital.

Deregulation per se is not the problem; the problem is the left-over regulations that have not yet be demolished just have their power amplified and hence become more corrupt. For example, the deregulation of Glass-Steegal served to increase competition among financial institutions . . . yet the left-over regulation on what can be counted as "money" and what the short-term interest rate is makes the financial market all the more dependent on FED interest rate policies. That's where the abuse came from.

Anonymous said...

McCain guru linked to subprime crisis:

"$300 million lobbying effort that drove deregulation"

Oh my, I was sooo wrong. Its just so obvious that the corporations spent 300 million in lobbying efforts for de-regulation because they were sooo anxious to help those poor and working class people

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9246.html

Anonymous said...

Reagan started the socialization of company losses, privatize their profits, and team Bus finished it. I can't wait for all the bush bots to get cornholed buy the men they elected. It will be glorious.

Talk about irony. But but, mommie said they were conservatives. ROTFLMAO, the bush built scheitt sandwich commeth, you have been given notice.

Anonymous said...

"Its just so obvious that the corporations spent 300 million in lobbying efforts for de-regulation because they were sooo anxious to help those poor and working class people"

No they were not; nor were the authors of the original regulations to begin with. All those regulations were written up by bankers decades ago. Every time there's new rules to be made, the parasites want their servings at the table first.

Anonymous said...

The one area where NO blame has yet been given to are the housing activist groups and other liberal orgs that put out those surveys every year saying that poor minorities were unjustly getting the shaft by being charged higher interest rates or not getting loans at all. If you don't remember those reports then you simply are not an aware American. You couldn't miss them since they came out like clockwork every goddamn year for decades...that is, until the early 2000s, at which point they stopped since subprime, alt-a, and option arms were getting minorities into homes.

Gee, so did anything change?

Looks like the CONS managed to weasel out of more honest lending by shafting poor and minorities ONCE AGAIN! Oh, they certainly didn't mind shafting other people too---so I guess their greed isn't quite so blatantly racist as it could have been.

Yes, in many cases, they were sold subprime---high fee, toxic loans---even when they could qualify for better (for the debtor, worse for the lender) terms. And yes, more than whites.

This wasn't liberals fault---this was greedy conservative capitalists perverting, for a profit, the pressure that was deservedly placed them thanks to decades of unassailable statistical evidence.

FHA is a liberal program. It is full doc and comparatively conservative. And it hasn't blown up like Countryfried.

Anonymous said...

"It is time for you to just face this fact: liberal groups and liberal housing activists are just as much to blame for this problem as the greedy bankers, lenders, buyers, and moronic govt. policy makers."

Can this be construed to mean the Bush administration has fallen victim to liberal activistism in its efforts to prevent/resolve this problem?

Or, is this just another lame attempt to blame the liberals (Clinton did it!) for the abysmal failures of this greedy, moronic administration??

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Democraatus said...
The American Voter 2000/2004 - the Worst and Most Dumbest voter in the History of the United States.

There is no better argument against democracy and/or general voting rights.
===================================
Ahem. Have you forgotten the nine Republicans in Black robes who appointed Bush II Pretzldent back in 2000??

Or that Diebold was the one counting the ballots in 2004??

Ed said...

Make up your mind Keith. Is it Bush's fault? NAR? Greenspan? Bernanke? FBs? Countrywide?

Every day there is a new villain.

i've had it said...

To Anonymous 1:49am, 3/31

The "unassailable data" to which you refer was TRUTHFUL data. The lower percentage of home ownership and the higher interest rates charged to minorities were a reflection of their higher credit risks; not because of their skin color.

In fact, the lending regulations in place at the time PROTECTED them from taking out loans that they simply could not pay back. Unfortunately, the pounding the banks and politicians took from ACORN and the hundreds of other liberal orgs (the “yearly report”) finally wore everyone down and they invented subprime since they had the opportunity to do so with such low interest rates. They could get people into houses and then those folks could refinance to a lower rate when the interest rate reset…with the assumption that housing will always go up. So that was the model; that was the way to get poor minorities into home ownership...and ACORN and all the rest of the lib orgs approved of it.

Did a lot of bad and venal things happen along the way...yes indeed; no argument there. Once the lenders got subprime, alt-a's (for the ILLEGALS...again, to placate you liberals), and option arms, they went hog wild and sold them to everyone, regardless of race, creed, income, etc. Yes, they went for the fees...since that is the new model for lenders and bankers, not holding the mortgages. But they did it to all races, not just blacks and hispanics; whites are getting screwed too, and in larger absolute numbers.

I will keep repeating it: THE LIBERAL ACTIVISTS AND HOUSING ORGS PRESSURED BANKS AND POLITICIANS INTO CREATING TOXIC LOANS. THAT WAS THE BEGINNING OF IT...AND YES, IT SNOWBALLED FROM THERE.

Don’t you libs go running around as if you are blameless. You are not. You are just as guilty as the rest of the folks you (and I) blame for this mess.

So you have learned an important lesson. and that is: you know nothing about finance or the financial system, and therefore you should just shut up or you will end up contributing to a future debacle.

by the way, did it ever occur to you that prior to this mess, if banks thought they could make a buck on someone they would do so by lending them money? There is absolutely no reason for a bank not to lend money to someone who is a good credit risk. You say there is however: because banks are racist. I think you are completely out of your mind. If there's money to be made, then companies will do what they can to make it. I mean, if banks and lenders were so racist, then why is it that they started making all these loans to minorities recently? did the entire industry have a change of heart in a nano-second and say "we don't want to be racist anymore?" Of course not. they started making loans because interest rates were so low and they could create mortgages that they could then actually sell to minorities who were poor credit risks…loans that they could not have created before (due to legitimate regulations regarding high risk people) and which was the only way to get people who were poor credit risks into houses.

Anyway, you libs have a lot of explaining to do and a lot of mea culpas to make. And again, you should just shut the hell up going forward since you know nothing about finance or financial systems, unlike myself who actually has a master's degree in this field.

And once more, if banks were so racist in the past, why did they start lending tons of money to minorities starting in 2002? If they were true racists, they wouldn't have lent them anything. Oh, was it because they said "let's really screw the minorities by lending money to them when we know they can't repay, which will mean they will default and then we'll end up with their home when we foreclose on it"?....gee whiz, gimme a break!

Anonymous said...

"Ahem. Have you forgotten the nine Republicans in Black robes who appointed Bush II Pretzldent back in 2000??

Or that Diebold was the one counting the ballots in 2004??"

Watch out!! They're coming to get you!! In black helicopters!!

Anonymous said...

Watch out!! They're coming to get you!! In black helicopters!!


Haw haw haw "tinfoil hat" haw haw haw!

Anonymous said...

* The banks are failing
-- No banks are not failing only some greedy ones are in trouble.
* Millions of Americans have been financially destroyed
-- Only some stupid ones have been punished and number is not that high. By the way such people will be punished no matter what.
* The last suckers in - women and minorities - got hurt the worst after being encouraged to buy at the top regardless of price
-- No comment
* Trillions have been lost with trillions more to go
-- Sure.
* Hundreds of thousands have lost their jobs
-- Not exactly unless you count all the realty jobs created to get the suckers in.
* Neighborhoods are filling up with foreclosures and falling into decay
-- No comments
* The world financial system is collapsing
-- well not so but panic is there.
* America is in recession
-- Recession happens and it happens because of multitudes or reasons.