AEIdeas

The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (13 comments)

  1. Derrick Danger

    BHO certainly doesnt believe in once bitten twice shy; not in economics, not in politics, not in foriegn policy…what a doof.

    1. it’s not Obama’s doing…he was pumping for Johnson-Crapo…Watt is off-script…

    2. /Twice bitten, three times shy? What happened a few years back is what happened in the 10′s. I took a real estate law class in 1980. What happened that caused the great depression was excactly what happened in the mid 90′s. The laws that were put in place to prevent the kind of mortgages and irresponsible behavior were eliminated by Clinto os the dream (nightmare) of home ownership could be obtained by everyone. After the latest bubble burst, the laws were not replaced to keep it from happening again. Now they want to eliminate the one real roadblock. HOW STUPID CAN A PRESIDENT BE!!!!!!!! Is vote buying that important? Just my opinion

  2. Robert puharic

    The total mortgage debt in the US in 2006 was 10 trillion.

    The total credit default swap market, sold by Wall Street that same year was

    sixty two trillion.

    Yet it’s the housing market, right?

  3. Becky Hargrove

    Everyone continues the fight over loosening or tightening lending standards, because too many special interests don’t want to subject housing to an innovative marketplace: one that could be just as substantial as the digital gains of recent decades, were it allowed.

  4. Glenn Jericho

    Guess what schmuck said this?

    “The reason we have been in such a enormous economic crisis was prompted by reckless behavior across the board.

    “Now, it wasn’t just on Wall Street. You had loan officers were — that were giving loans and mortgages that really shouldn’t have been given, because the folks didn’t qualify. You had people who were borrowing money to buy a house that they couldn’t afford. You had credit agencies that were stamping these as A1 great investments when they weren’t.”

    Hint: he shares the same initials as “Body Oder”

  5. whirlwinder

    Obammy’s action makes perfect sense once you realize that he is working to destroy America.

  6. itsy_bitsy

    The first housing debacle can be laid directly at the feet of Obama and his lawsuit in Chicago which forced housing sales to unqualified buyers! Why would anyone be surprised that he is doing it again, after all the first time it won him the Presidency!

    1. I agree 100%

  7. Todd Mason

    What a steaming pile of dog do Mr P serves up here,
    The change? Fannie softened the rules surrounding its ability to force loan originators to buy back bad loans. Old rule, the “put back” club goes away after 3 years of on time payments. New rule, originators can skate after 3 years as long as the borrower has made 34 of 36 payments on time.

    This has exactly zip to do with funding marginal buyers in marginal neighborhoods. It affects almost everyone. In today’s mortgage market, you aren’t obliged to prove you don’t really need the money, but it helps.

    As to whether, looser underwriting “seemed to play a role” in the bust, as the blogger writes, we get three guesses from 2011 rather than this recent study (among a score with the same conclusion) from the Minneapolis Fed:

    “In total, of all the higher-priced [sub-prime] loans, only 6 percent were extended by CRA-regulated lenders (and their affiliates) to either lower-income borrowers or neighborhoods in the lenders’ CRA assessment areas, which are the local geographies that are the primary focus for CRA evaluation purposes. The small share of subprime lending in 2005 and 2006 that can be linked to the CRA suggests it is very unlikely the CRA could have played a substantial role in the subprime crisis.”

    The economy will not have a robust recovery until the construction industry is back to work. Idiot-baiting posts like this are a real reason we have made so little progress.

    As for Wallison, here he is in 2002 excoriating Fannie — for not doing enough for low-income homebuyers:

    “Despite Fannie’s claims about trillion dollar commitments, they are meeting their affordable and minority housing obligations by slipping through loopholes in the loosely written and enforced HUD regulations in this area. In other words, two companies that are immensely profitable and claim to have a government mission, are doing as little as they can get away with for those who most need assistance…”

    I was for it before I was I against it.

    1. Robert puharic

      I’m inclined to give Pethokoukis the benefit of the doubt, but being no specialist myself, the panic over the role of the CRA seems to be a conservative staple.

      I think there’s ALOT more going on here regarding ‘subprimes’, the CRA, ‘undeserving loan recipients’, etc., than folks like Jim are willing to admit.

    2. mesaeconoguy

      As usual, Turd failed to read the actual content of the lending rules change, and selectively opines on one miniscule aspect.

      Here is the rest of the story:

      Allowing homebuyers and people refinancing existing mortgages to make down payments of 10 percent rather than 20 percent of a property’s market value supposedly will jumpstart the weak national housing market, “a factor holding back the economic recovery”, according to Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and Janet Yellen, Chairwoman of the Federal Reserve System.

      http://blog.independent.org/2014/05/15/there-he-goes-again/

      Gee, that worked out great last time, didn’t it Turd?

      But since all the evil mortgage brokers have been purged from the industry, this time everything will be fine, right Turd?

      We actually need less housing, not more. What we are seeing now is more malinvestment, caused by ZIRP and other destructive Oblunder policies.

      This was the first step in additional catastrophic steps to buy votes.

  8. Thomas Mobley

    Consider, this will buy lots of votes for D’s and the calamity won’t happen until after Obama is out of office, so there is profit to be had and the next president will get to deal with the mess. D’s will they say “well you said we couldn’t blame Bush for the mess left to Obama, so now you get to shut up!”

    Of course, politicians passing crappy law because they know they can profit immediately and they’ll be retired or dead before the poo hits the fan is par for the course.

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:

Scholar

Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Open
Refine Content