This started during the Clinton administration, not Bush, as restrictions were lowered on the banking industry in the early 90's.

President George W. Bush addresses the White House Conference on Increasing Minority Homeownership at George Washington University, Oct. 15, 2002:

 

THE PRESIDENT: …. I appreciate your attendance to this very important conference. You see, we want everybody in America to own their own home. That's what we want. This is -- an ownership society is a compassionate society.

More and more people own their homes in America today. Two-thirds of all Americans own their homes, yet we have a problem here in America because few than half of the Hispanics and half the African Americans own the home. That's a homeownership gap. It's a -- it's a gap that we've got to work together to close for the good of our country, for the sake of a more hopeful future.

 

We've got to work to knock down the barriers that have created a homeownership gap.

 

I set an ambitious goal. It's one that I believe we can achieve. It's a clear goal, that by the end of this decade we'll increase the number of minority homeowners by at least 5.5 million families. (Applause) … And it's going to require a strong commitment from those of you involved in the housing industry ...

Still a toss up for me.

 

Even to an unabashed lib like me, that's funny right there.

Fair to say the govt started it with good intentions and then bankers and Wall Street found a way of get an extra buck.

To save space, I won't quote the above.

 

You might find this interesting.

 

The Financial Crisis and the Bank Deregulation Myth | Cato Institute

Fair to say the govt started it with good intentions and then bankers and Wall Street found a way of get an extra buck.

 

The government through it's agencys participated. They competed against the banks. They defradued the public with their rating agencies.

 

1. Mark to market accounting

2. Reducing the recommended credit score for applicants. Past credit is by far the biggest determinent to whether a person will pay their debts.

3. Reducing the down payment requirements.

 

Trust me I made mortgages in the 1990's. If you denied someone, especially a minority, you had better had a heck of a reason.

It was Clinton and Bush that promoted this not one or the other.

... Trust me I made mortgages in the 1990's. If you denied someone, especially a minority, you had better had a heck of a reason.

Now we're getting to the heart of your argument. Are you saying the financiers are totally blameless?

Again, banks are in business to make money... Does anyone think a bank would make a 120% loan with no money down and no POI unless they were pressured to do so ?? Of course they would not...

There are a lot of culprits for the housing collapse. Politicians (Clinton definitely started it...Barney Frank... don't even get me started on that clown - TTP's favorite word - had a role), greedy bankers (and I am one although not in the mortgage business), loan brokers who wanted to place the loan, get a fee and get out of dodge, regulators who looked the other way, ratings agencies who decided if you bundle a bunch of bad loans and use a big word like "securitize", they magically become a great pool of loans and consumers themselves, who thought they could afford a $500,000 home making $40,000 per year. To try to blame one person or political party or one industry is not fair. It was a perfect storm of collusion by a whole lot of folks...

Hillary is old and boring without any real qualifications to be president. We currently have a president that had no qualifications to be president, and we see how that has worked out.

Hillary is old and boring without any real qualifications to be president. We currently have a president that had no qualifications to be president, and we see how that has worked out.

 

Not that I necessarily disagree with you...but what EXACTLY are the qualifications for President beyond those set forth in the Constitution? It may be the highest profile job in America that technically doesn't require even a high school degree.

Not that I necessarily disagree with you...but what EXACTLY are the qualifications for President beyond those set forth in the Constitution? It may be the highest profile job in America that technically doesn't require even a high school degree.

 

I guess there are no actual qualifications to be president. That explains why we have what we have and why we could have Hillary as president. In reality it would be nice to have someone with leadership abilities, economic common sense, be a problem solver (not a problem creator) and the willingness to do what it takes to protect our country. This may be an oversimplification but it is a start.

Not that I necessarily disagree with you...but what EXACTLY are the qualifications for President beyond those set forth in the Constitution? It may be the highest profile job in America that technically doesn't require even a high school degree.

 

1. 35 years old

 

2. natural born Citizen. (Or a citizen at time of adoption of Constitution. Known as grandfather clause. )

 

3. Resident of US for 14 years.

 

Thats it.

 

Aricle II, Section 1.

 

 

 

No background check required. No security check. No education training required.

Now we're getting to the heart of your argument. Are you saying the financiers are totally blameless?

 

Please explain your first comment. If you are implying that the reason I have posted facts is because I made mortgages 22 years ago then you are way off.

 

Of course bankers etc played a role but if you believe that banks were looking for a reason to lower the credit quality of their mortgages then you are nuts.

It's simple..I wouldn't ...