Did President Clinton bring the mortgage crisis because he mandate that the poor carry these "bad" loans?
Answers:
No..it be caused by greedy GOP rich folks in the bank , mortgage, insurance, construction,,and investment firms
If you think that the cause of this crisis is of late some lending in minority areas, afterwards you don't know squat about the crisis.
What is at the heart of the crisis is the market for credit evasion swaps and other exotic derivatives that took mortgage and other debt and sliced them up and then were traded between brokerage houses, investmentment bank, insurance companies and the like. The firms took on risk that was masses times the capitalization of their firms because these securities were completely unregulated. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are mere drops in the bucket compared to the amount of risk these general public took. When the housing market went south the ripple effects be magnified many times over because of the risk taken in uninsured instruments, not because of Fannie and Freddie bonds.
Stop listen to the natterings of right-wing radio hosts and cable TV talking heads that are trying to divert us from the unadulterated cause: Wall Street and insurance company execs that sought profit from taking more and more risk until the entire scheme imploded. Source(s): http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/23/busine…
No, the loans be not mandated by President Clinton. They were made because corporate official were greedy and took advantage of society wanting their share of the American dream. They charged rates of interest that started out as manageable but soon escalated to the point they knew these culture couldn't pay, placed fees on the loans that would have never be charged on a traditional borrower, inflated incomes and appraisals, etc. Then they bundled the loans and sold them to unsuspecting middle class investors who didn't realize these were not traditional loans and who are the ones who often will stand the loss as these loans backfire while the corporate officials happily scamper stale with huge payouts, leaving the corporations an withdraw from shell.
Basically. The management, once again, stuck its nose in where on earth it didn't belong because it felt that everybody deserves to own a home, whether they could afford it or not. This lead directly to the sub-prime mortgage industry taking past its sell-by date. There was definitely greed involved on the bank part as well but if the rule hadn't mandated it the banks never would enjoy done it.
Why would you knowingly give out a loan that you know would be bad for business unless you had to?
No. And you don't enjoy a link for your lie, do you?
In a word...No. Blame has to be put exactly where it should...on greedy mortgage lenders selling sub-prime ARM mortgages. Their target were lower income people looking to purchase a home and promised them the world. Enticements be lower 'trial' interest rates to make purchases seem more affordable after they were. In many cases, the lender would generate promises of the ability to later move mortgages to a fixed rate with no penalties or fees, singular to have the homeowner find out it wasnt' true (a.k.a. lies)
The next step of the greed of the mortgage companies be to sell these mortgages to another company. By doing this, the orginal company didn't care if the loan be paid or not. They got their money wager on by selling to someone else to deal with it. And next it would be sold again....and again. They would wind up being repackaged within securites and banks from around the world would buy them up. (Many homeowners noticed if they call thier mortgage company, alot of times it was a foreigner they were speaking to) Many individuals would also lose track of who their mortgage company actually was after a while.
Now, the trial rates expire on the ARM, and the interest shoots up to above the cost of living that the homeowner make. A mortgage payment of say $1,000 a month could jump up to $1,500, with most of the payment single going toward interest and not the principal of the home. On top of that, with the housing crunch, the homeowners $200,000 house is now worth $150,000. So the homeowner presently has to come up with another $500 and still have not paid anything off of the house however. Now the homeowner can't afford it, when they could when they bought it and the house is worth less. Whichever mortgage company or securities firm was the ending to buy the mortgage, now has a impossible loan in their lap.
The government fault in this is no oversight. No regulation keeping these nation (the mortgage companies) in check.
Now, I've seen these 'it's Clinton's fault' messages adjectives over the place. But the truth is, the changes those people be talking about be yes, signed by Bill Clinton, but were mitigated by republicans. Clinton was forced to sign into regulation changes that were passed by a republican controlled house and senate.
Check out the links below to take a little more background. Source(s): http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steag…
Your premise is false.
Bill Clinton did not mandate that poor people get these fruitless loans.
However when Barack Obama was a "community organizer" shakeodwn artist, Obama and his thugs accused lenders of not racism for not giving loans to the poor who could not repay those loans.
If anything Barack Obama and his street thugs are responsible for shaking down lenders and intimidating them into making discouraging loans that they would not otherwise have made.
Barack Obama has much more to do near the bad loans than Bill Clinton. Source(s): My experience. Over 40 years of Democratic Party Politics.
Hillary Clinton in 2012
John McCain surrounded by 2008
P.U.M.A.
Yes he did But There's Plenty of "Blame Pie" to go around for Both Parties and The Lobbyists that are Well Paid! Ineffective regulation of the Banks is the other The Last Factor occurred this year when Congress removed every Protection, Consumers have and Have allowed Predatory Lenders to do as they please. They can change the terms and Increase Interest rates after you sign an agreed rate of interest. Lenders can also and charge Exobatant interest rates within excess of 33%.
Remember the First Influx of Illegals when the gettin' was good? They get the Majority of those loans and to add fuel to the fire was Identity pinching committed by them. The Creditors Did Nothing About it, except Expect for you to pay it After they Ruin your Credit! Add to that mix the Fact that Congress Recently Repealed Every Law that Protected Consumers. There you have it, A Financial Disaster!
I influence Let them All Suffer without Bail OUTS and Close the Borders and Deport the Rest! Source(s): Here's Where to Find the Facts:
Numbersusa.com
Immigration'shumancost.org
Freedom21.com
Virginnia Watchdog.com
TwistedPolitics.com
sauduction.com
OUTTHERETV.com
Time Life Almanac 2000-2005 History Timeline
Yes, I be VP of a National Mortgage Banking Corp. and delt directly with Fannie and Freddie as well as several bank and we discussed that this would happen back when Clinton be putting these rules into play. It's common sence and simple economics. Clinton set this up to be a redistribution of fortune and that is exactly what will happen. Bush tried at lowest 12 times to investigate the illegal activity of Fannie and Freddie and it be blocked by the Democrats every time. Democrat Chris Dodd has received the most money from Fannie and Freddie, Democrat Obama comes in second though if you just look at the time Obama has been contained by office he's received by far the most money. Why is a quasi-gov't agency that takes charge payer's money allowed to give millions of dollars to the Democrats that over see (in this case protect from prosecution) their maintenance?
This is reaching WAY back, and anyway the bill be written by 3 Republicans, and Clinton signed it be bipartisan so to blame it on him is just ridiculous.
And Bush had 8 years to coppers it and never did, just like he never did anything just about radical Islam until after 911 happened.
Right...because inflation couldn't possibly have anything to do with that...
Yes It reminds me of Lydon Johnson great society which have led to generations of blacks ensnared in the welfare and dependency culture. it also reminds me of the statement The road to hell is paved next to good intentions.
Well he was a part of it, but he be not the only cause of the problem.
Clinton was only one factor that have caused this collapse ... It is The Government that is to blame ... Democrat and Republican alike
Yes, it be the Clinton Administration changes of 1995 to the Community Reinvestment Act. However, republicans let it surpass as well. Both parties are at failing, but the Clinton Administration urged for it. The revisions, went into affect on January 31 in 1995 and they be to increase the number of loans to small businesses and to low and moderate-income borrowers for home loans. Word for word. There it is.
Then, in 2003, Bush tried to reform the Act by implement his own changes to correct Clinton's screw up but it be turned down. Bush's change was to move governmental supervision of two of the primary agents guaranteeing subprime loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac beneath a new agency created within the Department of the Treasury. Then again contained by 2006, McCain urged Bush and the Congress to pay attention to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac however the Congress failed to implement McCain's plea for regulation.
Both Clinton and the Republican controlled Congress. Both parties are involved over their heads contained by this NO BAILOUT!
No... as with most issues nearby is more than enough blame to go around for both party. The Democrats forced mortgage companies to offer loans to those that did not meet the lend criteria. Republicans deregulated the industry, letting them go to town. The corporate heads used that freedom to proffer loans in excess of what borrowers could afford in a greedy attempt to thier stockholders and their own pockets. The surge within gas prices forced people that were not quite making ends meet (because of their own stupidity in taking loans of property they couldn't afford) to failure to pay on thier mortgages. It was a confluence of things that led to this, not merely ONE individual or party.
The Republicans run the show for 8 years and you are still reaching that far rear legs to blame it on Democrats. Amazing.
Yes and Obama and the rest of the democrats in Congress pushed them mortgage companies to provide loans to the people with fruitless or no credit- they thought it would solve the housing crisis! DUMB! Loans DO NEED TO BE PAID !
No. Source(s): http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?arti…
No, nearby was no such mandate. The deregulation happened while he be president, but I am loathe to give any president credit or blame for the economy.
This be a good idea at the time - more lower income family were homeowners than ever before.
Related Questions: