Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-18-2009, 02:14 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,794,135 times
Reputation: 4174

Advertisements

...or in case you've taken the media's word for the causes (which amounts to the same thing).....

Dr. Sowell gives a succinct description of most of the events leading up to the present financial meltdown. He leaves politics mostly out of it, which unfortunately eliminates accounts of who tried to stop the crisis and who tried to keep it going.

A good summary, all the same.

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

Thomas Sowell : Upside Down Economics - Townhall.com

Upside Down Economics

by Thomas Sowell
Wednesday, February 18, 2009

From television specials to newspaper editorials, the media are pushing the idea that current economic problems were caused by the market and that only the government can rescue us.

What was lacking in the housing market, they say, was government regulation of the market's "greed." That makes great moral melodrama, but it turns the facts upside down.

It was precisely government intervention which turned a thriving industry into a basket case.

An economist specializing in financial markets gave a glimpse of the history of housing markets when he said: "Lending money to American homebuyers had been one of the least risky and most profitable businesses a bank could engage in for nearly a century."

That was what the market was like before the government intervened. Like many government interventions, it began small and later grew.

The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 directed federal regulatory agencies to "encourage" banks and other lending institutions "to help meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered consistent with the safe and sound operation of such institutions."

That sounds pretty innocent and, in fact, it had little effect for more than a decade. However, its premise was that bureaucrats and politicians know where loans should go, better than people who are in the business of making loans.

The real potential of that premise became apparent in the 1990s, when the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) imposed a requirement that mortgage lenders demonstrate with hard data that they were meeting their responsibilities under the Community Reinvestment Act.

What HUD wanted were numbers showing that mortgage loans were being made to low-income and moderate-income people on a scale that HUD expected, even if this required "innovative or flexible" mortgage eligibility standards.

In other words, quotas were imposed-- and if some people didn't meet the old standards, then the standards need to be changed.

Both HUD and the Department of Justice began bringing lawsuits against mortgage bankers when a higher percentage of minority applicants than white applicants were turned down for mortgage loans.

A substantial majority of both black and white mortgage loan applicants had their loans approved but a statistical difference was enough to get a bank sued.

It should also be noted that the same statistical sources from which data on blacks and whites were obtained usually contained data on Asian Americans as well. But those data on Asian Americans were almost never mentioned.

Whites were turned down for mortgage loans more often than Asian Americans. But saying that would undermine the reasoning on which the whole moral melodrama and political crusades were based.

Lawsuits were only part of the pressures put on lenders by government officials. Banks and other lenders are overseen by regulatory agencies and must go to those agencies for approval of many business decisions that other businesses make without needing anyone else's approval.

Government regulators refused to approve such decisions when a lender was under investigation for not producing satisfactory statistics on loans to low-income people or minorities.

Under growing pressures from both the Clinton administration and later the George W. Bush administration, banks began to lower their lending standards.

Mortgage loans with no down payment, no income verification and other "creative" financial arrangements abounded. Although this was done under pressures begun in the name of the poor and minorities, people who were neither could also get these mortgage loans.

With mortgage loans widely available to people with questionable prospects of being able to keep up the payments, it was an open invitation to financial disaster.

Those who warned of the dangers had their warnings dismissed.

Now, apparently, we need more politicians intervening in more industries, if you believe the politicians and the media.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-18-2009, 02:15 PM
 
553 posts, read 837,621 times
Reputation: 197
Sowell is a brilliant man who truly understands economics.. All should read this carefully.

Thanks for posting!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2009, 02:21 PM
 
4,989 posts, read 10,032,879 times
Reputation: 3285
Bingo! Hit the nail right on the head!

The government got us into this mess. But yet over half of our voting population has now been duped into believing that government is the only solution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2009, 02:27 PM
 
12,964 posts, read 13,694,677 times
Reputation: 9695
what about the glut of new houses on the market fueled by cheap labor, even commercial buildings were being built by imigrants who were paid only $9.00 per hour where I'm from. with cost of construction being so low every body turned into a contractor, the banks simply could'nt find enough people to buy these "add water houses" ten or fifteen years from now when these houses start comming apart there will be a whole new group of home owners holding the bag

Last edited by thriftylefty; 02-18-2009 at 03:33 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2009, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
1,105 posts, read 2,735,195 times
Reputation: 602
Media's trying to coverup Vince Foster's role in the housing meltdown. Why do you think he was murdered?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2009, 02:56 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,083,710 times
Reputation: 15038
Let's clarify the causes of current circumstances. Ask yourself the following questions about the impact of the Community Reinvestment Act and/or the role of Fannie & Freddie:

• Did the 1977 legislation, or any other legislation since, require banks to not verify income or payment history of mortgage applicants?

• 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision; another 30% were made by banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations. How was this caused by either CRA or GSEs ?

• What about "No Money Down" Mortgages (0% down payments)? Were they required by the CRA? Fannie? Freddie?

• Explain the shift in Loan to value from 80% to 120%: What was it in the Act that changed this traditional lending requirement?

• Did any Federal legislation require real estate agents and mortgage writers to use the same corrupt appraisers again and again? How did they manage to always come in at exactly the purchase price, no matter what?• Did the CRA require banks to develop automated underwriting (AU) systems that emphasized speed rather than accuracy in order to process the greatest number of mortgage apps as quickly as possible?

• How exactly did legislation force Moody's, S&Ps and Fitch to rate junk paper as Triple AAA?

• What about piggy back loans? Were banks required by Congress to lend the first mortgage and do a HELOC for the down payment -- at the same time?

• Internal bank memos showed employees how to cheat the system to get poor mortgages prospects approved that shouldn't have been: Titled How to Get an "Iffy" loan approved at JPM Chase. (Was circulating that memo also a FNM/FRE/CRA requirement?)



• The four biggest problem areas for housing (by price decreases) are: Phoenix, Arizona; Las Vegas, Nevada; Miami, Florida, and San Diego, California. Explain exactly how these affluent, non-minority regions were impacted by the Community Reinvesment Act ?

• Did the GSEs require banks to not check credit scores? Assets? Income?

• What was it about the CRA or GSEs that mandated fund managers load up on an investment product that was hard to value, thinly traded, and poorly understood

• What was it in the Act that forced banks to make "interest only" loans? Were "Neg Am loans" also part of the legislative requirements also?

• Consider this February 2003 speech by Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozlilo at the American Bankers National Real Estate Conference. He advocated zero down payment mortgages -- was that a CRA requirement too, or just a grab for more market share, and bad banking?

The answer to all of the above questions is no, none, and nothing at all.

RGE - Misunderstanding Credit and Housing Crises: Blaming the CRA, GSEs
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2009, 02:59 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,083,710 times
Reputation: 15038
Fresh off the false and politicized attack on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, today we’re hearing the know-nothings blame the subprime crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act — a 30-year-old law that was actually weakened by the Bush administration just as the worst lending wave began. This is even more ridiculous than blaming Freddie and Fannie.

The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations. As former Fed Governor Ned Gramlich said in an August, 2007, speech shortly before he passed away: “In the subprime market where we badly need supervision, a majority of loans are made with very little supervision. It is like a city with a murder law, but no cops on the beat.”

Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis - BusinessWeek
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2009, 03:01 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,083,710 times
Reputation: 15038
For one thing, the timeline is ludicrous. The Community Reinvestment Act was passed in 1977. Are we supposed to believe that CRA was working smoothly throughout the Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton years and then only under Bush II did overzealous anti-”redlining” enforcement come into play, perhaps a result of Dubya’s legendarily close relationship with ACORN? Or maybe overzealous enforcement back in the late 1970s is somehow responsible for a real estate blowout that only materialized 30 years later? It doesn’t even come close to making sense.

Beyond that, the mere existence of “subprime” loans — i.e., mortgages given to less-creditworthy individuals at higher interest rates — isn’t the problem here. The problems have to do with what was done with the loans after they were packaged, sold and used to make leveraged plays.

Matthew Yglesias » Blame the CRA
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2009, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Atlanta, GA
340 posts, read 704,851 times
Reputation: 104
House of Cards --- watch it....

I too am tired of the CRA chatter---one, just one, of the reasons behind the CRA was due to banks red-lining low-mod areas---LOOK THAT UP....

The CRA had NOTHING to do with people getting a mortgage with a 560 credit score at 100%---that was offered by Wall Street firms---not CRA...every bank had certain CRA specific mortgage products - which were not even compettive until VERY late in the game...sub-prime loans, offered by Wall Street firms, by people who had never originated, processed, or underwritten a morgage----nothing to do with CRA---I WILL COUNT TO 10....

House of Cards - watch it....MSNBC
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2009, 03:05 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,083,710 times
Reputation: 15038
Federal Reserve governor Randall Kroszner, a conservative economist on leave from a teaching post at the University of Chicago Booth Graduate School of Business, says the Community Reinvestment Act isn’t to blame for the subprime mess, despite some accusations to the contrary.

“First, only a small portion of subprime mortgage originations are related to the CRA. Second, CRA- related loans appear to perform comparably to other types of subprime loans. Taken together… we believe that the available evidence runs counter to the contention that the CRA contributed in any substantive way to the current mortgage crisis,” he said in a speech today in Washington.

Real Time Economics : Fed's Kroszner: Don't Blame CRA
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top