DODD-FRANK says banks MUST loan money to people who can't pay it back because EVERYBODY deserves a house regardless of circumstance and if the bank doesn't loan the money a) you're racist b) we, the gov't, will fine you into oblivion.

Before Dodd-Frank, the banks had a formula they used to determine who got how much. It worked.

Like student loans, the Dems kicked the banks out and took over. How's that student loan thing going?

Such respect for the people of Iran as they try to take back their corrupt government. You will see great support from the United States at the appropriate time!

“Some 40 U.S. companies have responded to President Trump’s tax cut and reform victory in Congress last year by handing out bonuses up to $2,000, increases in 401k matches and spending on charity, a much higher number than previously known.”

Stock Market had another good day but, now that the Tax Cut Bill has passed, we have tremendous upward potential. Dow just short of 25,000, a number that few thought would be possible this soon into my administration. Also, unemployment went down to 4.1%. Only getting better!

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

Many mostly Democrat States refused to hand over data from the 2016 Election to the Commission On Voter Fraud. They fought hard that the Commission not see their records or methods because they know that many people are voting illegally. System is rigged, must go to Voter I.D.

As Americans, you need identification, sometimes in a very strong and accurate form, for almost everything you do.....except when it comes to the most important thing, VOTING for the people that run your country. Push hard for Voter Identification!

With all of the failed “experts” weighing in, does anybody really believe that talks and dialogue would be going on between North and South Korea right now if I wasn’t firm, strong and willing to commit our total “might” against the North. Fools, but talks are a good thing!


-Tweeter in Chief

Posted by DougOut on 1/4/2018 7:32:00 AM (view original):
DODD-FRANK says banks MUST loan money to people who can't pay it back because EVERYBODY deserves a house regardless of circumstance and if the bank doesn't loan the money a) you're racist b) we, the gov't, will fine you into oblivion.

Before Dodd-Frank, the banks had a formula they used to determine who got how much. It worked.

Like student loans, the Dems kicked the banks out and took over. How's that student loan thing going?

Wasn't Dodd-Frank passed after the housing collapse? That means the banks formula wasn't too good, but if your description of the act is true then that would explain the number of bad loans being given today.

HERE'S something from the ATLANTIC magazine, 2011. THE ATLANTIC is NOT a conservative publication.

A member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission responds to our interview with Barney Frank, arguing that without the government's intervention, there would be no housing crisis

Reuters

On December 9, The Atlantic published online an interview with Congressman Barney Frank. In it, he called me a "real extremist." This name-calling was not only false but also inappropriate to the seriousness of the issue -- which is whether government housing policy, and not the banks or the private sector, caused the 2008 financial crisis. I decided to respond to both Congressman Frank's statements and the questions he was asked about government housing policy and the financial crisis.

We're hearing Republicans in the presidential primary blame the housing crisis on the Clinton-era push to lend more to poor people. In your view, what caused the mortgage crisis and subsequently the financial crash?

Congressman Frank, of course, blamed the financial crisis on the failure adequately to regulate the banks. In this, he is following the traditional Washington practice of blaming others for his own mistakes. For most of his career, Barney Frank was the principal advocate in Congress for using the government's authority to force lower underwriting standards in the business of housing finance. Although he claims to have tried to reverse course as early as 2003, that was the year he made the oft-quoted remark, "I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing." Rather than reversing course, he was pressing on when others were beginning to have doubts.

His most successful effort was to impose what were called "affordable housing" requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 1992. Before that time, these two government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) had been required to buy only mortgages that institutional investors would buy--in other words, prime mortgages--but Frank and others thought these standards made it too difficult for low income borrowers to buy homes. The affordable housing law required Fannie and Freddie to meet government quotas when they bought loans from banks and other mortgage originators.

At first, this quota was 30%; that is, of all the loans they bought, 30% had to be made to people at or below the median income in their communities. HUD, however, was given authority to administer these quotas, and between 1992 and 2007, the quotas were raised from 30% to 50% under Clinton in 2000 and to 55% under Bush in 2007. Despite Frank's effort to make this seem like a partisan issue, it isn't.

PRESIDENT BUSH tried to investigate but was rebuffed by the House and Maxine Watters declared BUSH a racist.

Within 2 years the housing market collapsed and FAKE NEWS blamed BUSH and the war for the economic collapse which was actually caused by their policies.

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/4/2018 8:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by DougOut on 1/4/2018 7:32:00 AM (view original):
DODD-FRANK says banks MUST loan money to people who can't pay it back because EVERYBODY deserves a house regardless of circumstance and if the bank doesn't loan the money a) you're racist b) we, the gov't, will fine you into oblivion.

Before Dodd-Frank, the banks had a formula they used to determine who got how much. It worked.

Like student loans, the Dems kicked the banks out and took over. How's that student loan thing going?

Wasn't Dodd-Frank passed after the housing collapse? That means the banks formula wasn't too good, but if your description of the act is true then that would explain the number of bad loans being given today.

MY BAD. It was passed in response to the FRANK debacle. I get the Frank screw ups mixed up.

After the collapse FRANK came back in with Dodd for round 2. I not sure what, if any change were made in Fannie and Freddie but Banks are now required to insure themselves more from bad loans (Forced upon them in the first place) by keeping more liquid assets and cash instead of investments. The banks can then get more money quicker to stop the bleeding or repair the damage HOWEVER they now have less money to loan. That has crippled the economy. They loan less and invest less. They hold on to their money. It's harder to loan money or start and grow business.

I'll look later to see how much the original Frank policy in Fannie has changed but I have heard commentators on financial shows lament that we're still writing bad paper.

THIS IS FROM 2009:

It wasn't greed that caused the mortgage mess. In large part, the mess was the product of government policies designed to increase homehownership among the poor and ethnic minorities.

Today Peter Wallison points out how Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the FHA created a demand for bad mortgages that encouraged mortgage brokers to generate millions of them.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Mortgage brokers had to be able to sell their mortgages to someone. They could only produce what those above them in the distribution chain wanted to buy. In other words, they could only respond to demand, not create it themselves. Who wanted these dicey loans? The data shows that the principal buyers were insured banks, government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the FHA—all government agencies or private companies forced to comply with government mandates about mortgage lending. When Fannie and Freddie were finally taken over by the government in 2008, more than 10 million subprime and other weak loans were either on their books or were in mortgage-backed securities they had guaranteed. An additional 4.5 million were guaranteed by the FHA and sold through Ginnie Mae before 2008, and a further 2.5 million loans were made under the rubric of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), which required insured banks to provide mortgage credit to home buyers who were at or below 80% of median income. Thus, almost two-thirds of all the bad mortgages in our financial system, many of which are now defaulting at unprecedented rates, were bought by government agencies or required by government regulations.

The role of the FHA is particularly difficult to fit into the narrative that the left has been selling. While it might be argued that Fannie and Freddie and insured banks were profit-seekers because they were shareholder-owned, what can explain the fact that the FHA—a government agency—was guaranteeing the same bad mortgages that the unregulated mortgage brokers were supposedly creating through predatory lending?

The answer, of course, is that it was government policy for these poor quality loans to be made. Since the early 1990s, the government has been attempting to expand home ownership in full disregard of the prudent lending principles that had previously governed the U.S. mortgage market. Now the motives of the GSEs fall into place. Fannie and Freddie were subject to "affordable housing" regulations, issued by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which required them to buy mortgages made to home buyers who were at or below the median income. This quota began at 30% of all purchases in the early 1990s, and was gradually ratcheted up until it called for 55% of all mortgage purchases to be "affordable" in 2007, including 25% that had to be made to low-income home buyers.

I would agree with that.

I CAN'T FIND ANYTHING that suggests the rules have changed since the crash other than Dodd-Frank regulation, some of which is good by the way.

I can only think we'll eventually have another bubble. The Glass-Steagall legislation, in place since the early 1930's, separated commercial and private banking from investment banking, which is riskier. It was repealed in 1999 under another act and signed into law by Bill Clinton, although I'm not blaming him.

Many have suggested we re-instate it, but thus far Congress has done nothing. There's a ton of old farts and crooks that need to leave. I'm doing what little I can do every election in my state by voting against the incumbents and trying to primary them out. I'm almost always in the minority.

Yeah, people always ***** and moan about their congressman, but then they reelect him/her more times than not.

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/4/2018 8:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by DougOut on 1/4/2018 7:32:00 AM (view original):
DODD-FRANK says banks MUST loan money to people who can't pay it back because EVERYBODY deserves a house regardless of circumstance and if the bank doesn't loan the money a) you're racist b) we, the gov't, will fine you into oblivion.

Before Dodd-Frank, the banks had a formula they used to determine who got how much. It worked.

Like student loans, the Dems kicked the banks out and took over. How's that student loan thing going?

Wasn't Dodd-Frank passed after the housing collapse? That means the banks formula wasn't too good, but if your description of the act is true then that would explain the number of bad loans being given today.

Yeah, regulation didn’t cause the collapse. Lack of regulation caused it.

Posted by bad_luck on 1/4/2018 1:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/4/2018 8:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by DougOut on 1/4/2018 7:32:00 AM (view original):
DODD-FRANK says banks MUST loan money to people who can't pay it back because EVERYBODY deserves a house regardless of circumstance and if the bank doesn't loan the money a) you're racist b) we, the gov't, will fine you into oblivion.

Before Dodd-Frank, the banks had a formula they used to determine who got how much. It worked.

Like student loans, the Dems kicked the banks out and took over. How's that student loan thing going?

Wasn't Dodd-Frank passed after the housing collapse? That means the banks formula wasn't too good, but if your description of the act is true then that would explain the number of bad loans being given today.

Yeah, regulation didn’t cause the collapse. Lack of regulation caused it.

What regulation was lacking? What didn't Barney Frank cover?

Posted by bad_luck on 1/4/2018 1:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 1/4/2018 8:57:00 AM (view original):

Posted by DougOut on 1/4/2018 7:32:00 AM (view original):
DODD-FRANK says banks MUST loan money to people who can't pay it back because EVERYBODY deserves a house regardless of circumstance and if the bank doesn't loan the money a) you're racist b) we, the gov't, will fine you into oblivion.

Before Dodd-Frank, the banks had a formula they used to determine who got how much. It worked.

Like student loans, the Dems kicked the banks out and took over. How's that student loan thing going?

Wasn't Dodd-Frank passed after the housing collapse? That means the banks formula wasn't too good, but if your description of the act is true then that would explain the number of bad loans being given today.

Yeah, regulation didn’t cause the collapse. Lack of regulation caused it.

You're correct imo. The laws were already there to prevent a financial meltdown, but much like anything in Washington the regulators who were supposed to regulate the regulators weren't regulating the the regulators that were supposed to be regulating the financial industry. They still didn't regulate after the crash.... Has any CEO gone to jail yet? And one wonders why the Washington swamp is so despised!!

Those CEOs now hold cabinet positions, so it’s doubtful they will go to jail.