Comments | darthcrank: A *very* interesting article on the mortgage mess

darthcrank

A very interesting article on the mortgage mess

Sep 24, 2008 17:01

In my muddling about trying to get an understanding on how and why the mortgage mess has happened (and now what the heck to do about it), I run across this article...a little history lesson from just a couple years ago. Look who the major players are in the story, it might affect your judgement come this November!

Direct Link: http://www.bloomberg ( Read more... )

Comments 14

Wait a minute... tricstmr September 24 2008, 22:54:17 UTC

Are you seriously trying to argue that a Senate Banking Comm in 2005--one that had a Republican Majority in it--because the Republicans were still the clear majority in the Senate at the time--couldn't get a bill out because the Minority Democrats opposed it.

And thus, it's the Minority's fault that a problem that has been brewing from before 2005 is somehow all their fault?

Scott, that's quite a stretch.

Also.. if you are going to talk about the problems of corruption at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-something McCain himself has done, calling the problem the result of lobbyists and bureaucrats--see his comments in Green bay, ``At the center of the problem were the lobbyists, politicians, and bureaucrats who succeeded in persuading Congress and the administration to ignore the festering problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,'' he said last week in Green Bay, Wisconsin ( ... )

Re: Wait a minute... nyhcx516x September 24 2008, 23:05:37 UTC

back to my point about putting both of these men on the edge of a crumbling cliff, and sitting back with some popcorn and a beer.....

neither man will be good in the long run....

Re: Wait a minute... darthcrank September 25 2008, 01:37:56 UTC

Actually, what I am learning is that you shouldn't create a government agency (or several) whose sole purpose for existing is to pump capital into the mortgage industry, artificially inflating the value of real estate for the last 40 years (since Freddie Macs existence).

This whole debacle reinforces my belief in libertarianism.

That the two main players this November are each knee or neck deep in this corruption is just icing on the cake.

i guess that's one lesson.. tricstmr September 25 2008, 02:00:34 UTC

.. but I think that's an odd way of seeing it, in my view. Yes, they are certainly central players in this whole escapade.. but merely claiming that by not having them exist, everything would be cool, is a very limited way of solving the problem ( ... )

lshiva September 24 2008, 23:50:16 UTC

It's about what I'd expect to hear from one of McCain's campaign advisers. You might try reading sources that aren't quite as biased if you're interested in the actual history of this sort of thing. Picking sources like this isn't going to give you anything near the actual facts, it's just going to give you the cherry picked pieces that make his platforms look good ( ... )

darthcrank September 25 2008, 01:42:14 UTC

Thanks, I'll see if I can listen to some of that at work tomorrow.
The biggest thing I am taking away from this so far is that I'm even more convinced that creating government agencies whose sole reason for being is to pump money into markets is BAD.

Yeah, and McCain's campaign manager was a major lobbyist for Fannie Mae celticgypsy September 25 2008, 01:09:29 UTC

McCain's campaign manager earned over $30 grand a month from Fannie Mae as a lobbyist. And McCain is the guy who is going to change Washington? Based on the people he has put in charge of his campaign (of which Mr. Davis is only one example of many) it looks like business as usual.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/09/22/america/22mccain.php

Re: Yeah, and McCain's campaign manager was a major lobbyist for Fannie Mae darthcrank September 25 2008, 01:47:57 UTC

works both ways...and that is partially my point.
Obama is neck deep too...
and we are all screwed by agencies of the government who have been pumping up the mortgage industry for 40 years artificially.

Do you think that this risky behavior would have taken place if it were left to free markets? I think not....it only happened because the government backed it all up.

Re: Yeah, and McCain's campaign manager was a major lobbyist for Fannie Mae celticgypsy September 25 2008, 02:45:14 UTC

I don't have the time to write out a dissertation here, but I think that you are wrong. The real problem was when the Republicans removed all the firewalls between banking and investments that were put in after the Great Depression to ensure that it would never happen again. If those were still in place, this would never have happened.

I'm not saying that the government didn't have too much involvement with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, but that doesn't properly explain the problems with IAG or the rest of it. Its something that went wrong, but it is a symptom of a larger problem that was spawned by the initial deregulation.

The Republicans thought that the Great Depression couldn't ever happen again, so those firewalls were obsolete. It is clear that position was dead wrong.

Re: Yeah, and McCain's campaign manager was a major lobbyist for Fannie Mae fencert September 25 2008, 13:31:50 UTC

I agree with celticgypsy- the Repubs pushed deregulation, it was really their rallying cry throughout their rise to power. The dems might have taken money from some bad players too, but you can't listen to a republican apologist's version of how things played out and expect to get a clear story. I'm dead certain that the republican crows have come home to roost and they're desperate to point fingers elsewhere.

Thread 5

The really screwed up part is... thesaj September 25 2008, 03:27:11 UTC

They keep pointing to this as a failure of capitalism and how we need to socialize and nationalize ( ... )

Looks like you may actually be more right... thesaj September 25 2008, 03:42:40 UTC

Allium-Sativum posted the following links. They pretty much support what you stated. Note, that the NY Times article is from like 2003. And the NY Times is never one to be accused of being a conservative rag, that's for sure ( ... )