Democrats mandated home loans to the poor, Banks followed orders?
Democrats mandated home loans to the poor, Banks followed orders
How balanced is your news organization with their Political Contributions
“CNN owned by Time Warner 81 percent to Democrats”
“CBS owned by National Amusements Inc 86 percent to Democrats”
“ABC owned by Walt Disney Co 76 percent to Democrats”
“NBC owned by General Electric 66 percent to Democrats”
“During the 2008 election cycle, the most contributions came from individuals and political action committees associated with News Corp., the media giant that owns Fox Broadcasting, HarperCollins Publishers and a variety of newspapers across the world including the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal. Their donations were split evenly between Republicans and Democrats. “- The Center for Responsive Politics
The Center for Responsive Politics is the nation's premier research group tracking money in U.S. politics and its effect on elections and public policy. Nonpartisan, independent and nonprofit, the organization aims to create a more educated voter, an involved citizenry and a mo
- Anonymous8 years agoFavorite Answer
Funny how you NEVER mention Bush's "Home of your Own" program and the American Dream Down Payment Fund passed by the Republicans and signed by GW Bush.
- Noah HLv 78 years ago
The mandate had to do with the elimination of 'red lining', there was no mandate that forced private banks to loan money to bad risks. Some large banks did make bad loans because there was no 'regulation' that prevented these banks from bundling good loans with mostly bad loans, getting rating companies to give these bundles AAA ratings and then selling them as investment grade instruments all over the world. Because so many 'bad' loans were made the price of real estate went up way above the real value of these properties. Banks didn't care because some sucker in Japan had bought these instruments, the banks acting then only as collectors of the payments, and making their money off of the fees charged. Banks that didn't get involved with this got hurt when the real estate market went under because of a world wide recession...at that point even the good loans went bad because so many people lost their jobs. None of this would have happened without the greed factor and the lack of federal oversight. Okay..it's happened...now we have to fix it. Barack has some good ideas that should be implemented...like his Jobs Program! The GOP/Tea/Fox/Jesus freak party says 'no deal'! The real estate problem and the recession isn't the problem anymore. Corporations and banks are doing fine...it's working class people are still taking it in the shorts. The problem is that the GOP/Tea/Fox/Jesus freak party WANTS this problem to continue so they can win big for their corporate masters. Bummer for 'our' country!
- Go ArizonaLv 78 years ago
Banks weren't mandated to give out loans.
Just part of the problem:
They were threatened with investigations by the Fed if they were in any way involved in not lending to minorities as a blanket policy - no "red-lining". The banks gave out loans, thinking that the value of the homes would stay high - guaranteeing their profit even if the buyer couldn't pay and had to be foreclosed.
It was a combination of factors - questionable loans, poorly qualified buyers, and an economic drop.
If no one can afford/qualify to buy, no one can sell.
- wayfaroutthereLv 78 years ago
Sorry, I got 2 minutes in and they can't bother tho leave a source up long enough to read it, which means it's probably a lie and not worth checking out.
I know it's fashionable for republicans to blame the bad loans on the democrats. First fact--the government can't mandate that a bank lend money. Next fact--the subprime problem was caused by the banks. Perhaps you don't remember all of the "vehicles" and "options" you had on a loan back then. There was the "no-doc loan"--if your credit score is high enough, they don't even check to see if there is any way you could possibly pay it off with your income--they figure if your credit is good, you know how to read contracts and do math. Turns out a lot of the math people were counting on started with "when the house's value goes up $30K". The banks weren't even trying to stop sub-prime borrowing, they were encouraging people to take on bad debt! Remember that, Republican, when someone tells you that we don't need no regulations.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- PatriciaLv 44 years ago
Because if they sanction 100% of home loan what will be left with you. Considering you are the only earner, banks sanction only 80% of loan so that you can continue your basic needs in rest 20% of your salary. Hope this clarifies.
- DustbindivaLv 78 years ago
Obama has pushed several home loan modification programs but he cannot force banks to comply. The federal government should become lenders so people dont have to deal with banks.
Edit: Bush Jr. pushed "home ownership" for people who could not afford to buy homes and the predatory lenders made them anyway and we know the result of that.
- WhateversLv 78 years ago
Nope. CRA-covered loan foreclosures were below average rates, and a minimal amount of the overall package.
Banks engaged in reckless speculation not at the regulated end, but with non-regulated institution and loans, then expected the rest of us to bail them out.
- 8 years ago
I'd certainly believe the CNN being 81% democrat number. You'd think Obama and the dems solved world hunger and cured all illnesses the way they write some of their articles and how their forums buy into all of it.
- Anonymous8 years ago
When? In 2007? The President was not in office yet...your logic is flawed like Mitt Romney who said the same thing.
- John J. SLv 78 years ago
Didn't mandate banks eliminate fiduciary responsibility. Diodn't tell them to approve $500,000 houses with no appraisals.