The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Who Caused The Housing Bubble - A Report

  1. #1
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112

    Default Who Caused The Housing Bubble - A Report

    Here is the report:

    http://republicans.oversight.house.g...isisReport.pdf

    BTW, it isn't a long read, only 26 pages

    Here is the Press Release:

    Report: The Role of Government Affordable Housing Policy in Creating the Global Financial Crisis of 2008

    July 7, 2009
    WASHINGTON. D.C. – A report released today by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform finds that the housing bubble that burst in 2007 and led to a financial crisis can be traced back to federal government intervention in the U.S. housing market. The report’s findings are particularly significant and relevant since President Barack Obama’s announced financial reform initiatives do not include reforms to address flawed government housing initiatives.

    “The spin on the financial crisis by those who favored government efforts to erode lending standards is that the housing bubble didn’t cause this recession,” said Rep. Darrell Issa the Committee’s Ranking Member. “The findings in this report should remind this Congress that ignoring the role of politics and government in causing the housing crisis and the economic collapse while pursing other regulatory reforms will not fix the underlying problem.”

    Government intervention, according to the report, “created ‘affordable’ but dangerous lending policies which encouraged lower down payments, looser underwriting standards and higher leverage. Finally, government intervention created a nexus of vested interests – politicians, lenders and lobbyists – who profited from the ‘affordable’ housing market and acted to kill reforms. In the short run, this government intervention was successful in its stated goal – raising the national homeownership rate.”

    Key Facts and Conclusions from the report:

    • Political pressure led to the erosion of responsible lending practices:
      In the early 1990s, Fannie and Freddie began to come under considerable political pressure to lower their underwriting standards, particularly on the size of down payments and the credit quality of borrowers. (p.6)

    • Lower down payments led to housing prices that outpaced income growth: Once government-sponsored efforts to decrease down payments spread to the wider market, home prices became increasingly untethered from any kind of demand limited by borrowers’ ability to pay. Instead, borrowers could just make smaller down payments and take on higher debt, allowing home prices to continue their unrestrained rise. Some statistics help illustrate how this occurred. Between 2001 and 2006, median home prices increased by an inflation-adjusted 50 percent, yet at the same time Americans’ income failed to keep up. (p. 11)

    • Members of an “affordable housing” coalition shared profits with political allies to help legitimize their business practices: Fannie Mae created and used The Fannie Mae Foundation to spread millions of dollars around to politically-connected organizations like the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. It also hired well-known academics to give an aura of academic rigor to policy positions favorable to Fannie Mae. One paper coauthored by now-Director of the Office of Management and Budget Peter Orszag, concluded that the chance was minimal that the GSEs were not holding sufficient capital to cover their losses in the event of a severe economic shock. The authors suggested that “the risk to the government from a potential default on GSE debt is effectively zero,” and that “the expected cost to the government of providing an explicit government guarantee on $1 trillion in GSE debt is just $2 million.” (p.7)

    • The Government Sponsored Enterprises led the way into the housing crisis: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were leaders in risky mortgage lending. According to an analysis presented to the Committee, between 2002 and 2007, Fannie and Freddie purchased $1.9 trillion of mortgages made to borrowers with credit scores below 660, one of the definitions of “subprime” used by federal banking regulators. This represents over 54% of all such mortgages purchased during those years. (p.24)
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Matt McKenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    1,630

    Default

    There you go again, putting your foot on the neck of the "less fortunate".
    Matt McKenzie

    It takes as long as it takes. Sometimes longer.

    "It is better to own a $50,000 dog and have an old truck and crummy equipment than to own $50,000 worth of new equipment and a crummy dog..." EdA

  3. #3
    Senior Member Brent McDowell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Arlington, TN
    Posts
    299

    Default

    Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s (Obamacare's)dominance in the secondary mortgage (healthcare) market was made
    possible by numerous competitive advantages stemming from their unique relationship
    with the federal government. These advantages for the two GSEs were justified by the
    government as an implicit subsidy to American homeowners (medically insured) in the form of reduced
    mortgage rates (insurance rates). With the help of these subsidies, Fannie and Freddie (Obamacare) were able to squeeze
    out their competition and corner the secondary mortgage (healthcare) market.

    The best indicator of future performace is past performance.

Similar Threads

  1. Housing Market
    By Gerry Clinchy in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 11-29-2009, 11:13 AM
  2. Housing Prices
    By Thomas D in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-12-2009, 12:41 PM
  3. TCU offers gay housing
    By Matt McKenzie in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-09-2009, 10:18 AM
  4. Another Burst Bubble
    By Bubba in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-15-2008, 04:16 PM
  5. What caused you to become a pro?
    By Gruntinbuck in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 11-15-2007, 09:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •