FACTS on Dubya's great recession

LOL, raising taxes did not stop the bubble from bursting and taking away all that revenue.

 

It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that he was President that entire time.

What changed in 2004? Reserve requirements for banks were radically lowered that year, flooding the market with cheap money at the same time as unregulated default swaps and unregulated ratings agencies encouraged bankers to make liar loans that appeared safe and unload them quickly by packaging them against a swap and selling them through their own investment arms (now that Gramm Leach Bliely had destroyed the separation of those two functions)

Did Bush himself do this? Almost certainly not. His record in business, and his comments on finances indicate he understood very little about banking other than how take contributions from Wall Street.

 

lol

"The banks did not make the loans by and large they bought them."

ACTUALLY brokers mainly did loans NOT because of Gov't policy. BANKS (WALL STREET INVESTMENT HOUSES( overtook F/F in the


Private lenders not subject to congressional regulations collapsed lending standards. Taking up that extra share were nonbanks selling mortgages elsewhere, not to the GSEs.



"Banks don't guarantee loans that's what Fannie and Freddie do"

Weird, so banks DIDN'T lose money since F/F guaranteed them right? lol

•Nonbank mortgage underwriting exploded from 2001 to 2007, along with the private label securitization market, which eclipsed Fannie and Freddie during the boom.

"Check the mortgage origination data: The vast majority of subprime mortgages — the loans at the heart of the global crisis — were underwritten by unregulated private firms. These were lenders who sold the bulk of their mortgages to Wall Street, not to Fannie or Freddie. Indeed, these firms had no deposits, so they were not under the jurisdiction of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp or the Office of Thrift Supervision. The relative market share of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac dropped from a high of 57 percent of all new mortgage originations in 2003, down to 37 percent as the bubble was developing in 2005-06."

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/1...ow-the-facts-of-the-economic-crisis-stack-up/

- - - Updated - - -

lol,. Neither did Dubya/GOP gutting them from Clinton's 20%+ of GDP to 15% (a 25% reduction in federal revenues). Weird how those 'job creator' policies failed, again right?

- - - Updated - - -

"What changed in 2004? Reserve requirements for banks were radically lowered that year. Did Bush himself do this? Almost certainly not. "



Agency's 2004 Rule Let Banks Pile Up New Debt

2004 Dubya allowed the leverage rules to go from 12-1 to 35+ to 1 which flooded the market with cheap money!


The SEC Rule That Broke Wall Street

www.cnbc.com/id/46808453#

 

Does the OP want to talk about the recession Clinton had going when Bush took over?

 

According to the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), which is the private, nonprofit, nonpartisan organization charged with determining economic recessions, the U.S. economy was in recession from March 2001 to November 2001 , a period of eight months at the beginning of President George W. Bush's term of office. However, economic conditions did not satisfy the common shorthand definition of recession, which is "a fall of a country's real gross domestic product in two or more successive quarters," and has led to some confusion about the procedure for determining the starting and ending dates of a recession.

The NBER's Business Cycle Dating Committee (BCDC) uses monthly, rather than quarterly, indicators to determine peaks and troughs in business activity,[4] as can be seen by noting that starting and ending dates are given by month and year, not quarters. However, controversy over the precise dates of the recession led to the characterization of the recession as the "Clinton Recession" by Republicans, if it could be traced to the final term of President Bill Clinton.

The Labor Department estimates that a net 1.735 million jobs were shed in 2001




22+ MILION JOBS CREATED UNDER BJ BILL? HOW MANY UNDER DUBYA?


LOL

Unemployment rose from 4.2% in February 2001 to 5.5% in November 2001



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession#United_States

 

HR 1461 was supported by over 90% of the REPUBLICANS as well as over 60% of the Democrats.

Party - Ayes - Nays
Republican 209 15
Democratic 122 74

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll547.xml

I was the only bill every passed by either chamber of the Republican controlled Congress.

It was also supported by the then acting head of the Administration's OFHEO:


In a speech yesterday to the Global Bond Summit, [Stephen Blumenthal, acting director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO). White House agency responsible for Fannie and Freddie oversight] Blumenthal said, "It is important, however, to commend the actions of the House in passing a comprehensive bill that will significantly improve the regulatory climate for GSE supervision. It is worth noting that under the House-passed bill, the agency will receive significant new authority as well as a stable source of funding independent of the congressional appropriations process. These are both needed changes that have been identified as such by numerous studies and congressional hearings over the years and endorsed by the Administration. While the House bill can certainly be improved, the important point is that Congress act - and soon - before this current pro-reform climate passes. If Congress does not act, OFHEO will continue to do its job, but it will face the increasing pressure of inadequate regulatory authority and an unpredictable funding mechanism that makes planning and management extremely difficult."

It was the only bill every passed to increase F/F oversight and regulation, and was killed by the Bush administration.

"the Administration opposes the bill"

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24851

Here's links to an article about Republican Mike Oxley, of Sarbannes-Oxley fame, then ranking Republican majority member and chair of the House Financial Committee on Financial Services and sponsor of that bill, saying how they "got a one-finger salute” from the Bush White House.


He fumes about the criticism of his House colleagues. “All the handwringing and bedwetting is going on without remembering how the House stepped up on this,” he says. “What did we get from the White House? We got a one-finger salute.”

The House bill, the 2005 Federal Housing Finance Reform Act, would have created a stronger regulator with new powers to increase capital at Fannie and Freddie, to limit their portfolios and to deal with the possibility of receivership.

Mr Oxley reached out to Barney Frank, then the ranking Democrat on the committee and now its chairman, to secure support on the other side of the aisle. But after winning bipartisan support in the House, where the bill passed by 331 to 90 votes, the legislation lacked a champion in the Senate and faced hostility from the Bush administration. Adamant that the only solution to the problems posed by Fannie and Freddie was their privatisation, the White House attacked the bill. Mr Greenspan also weighed in, saying that the House legislation was worse than no bill at all.


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8780c35e-7e91-11dd-b1af-000077b07658.html
http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/09/10/greenspan_bush_fannie_freddie/index.html
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/10/one-finger-salute/

They didn't need one.

 

Funny how that WashingtonTimes timeline never even mentions how Bush killed the *only* bill every to be passed by the Republican controlled Congress to increase F/F regulation.

 

the Democrats didn't take over until 2006. They took over in 2007. Frank, now head of the House finance committee, almost immediately reintroduced a bill to regulate F/F which passed the House (HR 1427) but stalled in the Senate. Pressure from the collapsing housing bubble finally caused action. The bill was finally passed on July 30, 2008. To late to have any affect the burgeoning financial crisis.

 

And how about how the Clinton administration killed any regulation of derivatives?

 

LOL, it's like this one RW propaganda video sums up the entire conservative knowledge bases of the housing bubble and implosion.

I bet it has been posted here 500 times, 400 times by Peabody alone.

 

Who's HUD pushed it up to 55%? Hint: check who was president in 2007.

 

There was no housing bubble during the Clinton years. Housing prices were within normal historical trend lines.

 

Of course. It was the fault of the guy who was out of office for 7 1/2 years and the guy who was a minority Rep who didn't have the power to bring bubble gum regulation up for a vote.

 

PLEASE give me the regulations on it the GOP supported? Irrelevant to Dubya's REGULATOR FAILURE, however

 

Only a tiny fraction if the revenue growth under Clinton is attributable to the dot com bubble.

 

PLEASE give my the regulations on it that the Clinton Administration supported? Irrelevant to Clintons's REGULATORY FAILURE, however.

 

Clinton's fault?

[video=youtube;hDou01X5d28]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDou01X5d28[/video]

I'd quote what O'Reilly says, but then *someone* will get upset and complain to the mods who will delete the post.

So you'll just have to watch it for yourselves.

 

LOL, that is probably why the surplus disappeared with the dot.com collapse. Naivety is strong in this one.

 

GOP HOUSE? GOP SENATE? LOL



At the same time, Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX), the Chair of the Senate Banking Committee, was quoted as insisting that any bill brought to the Senate Floor would need to be expanded to include prohibitions on SEC regulation of the swaps market



After the House passed H.R. 4541, press reports indicated Sen. Gramm was blocking Senate action based on his continued insistence that the bill be expanded to prevent the SEC from regulating swaps, and the desire to broaden the protections against CFTC regulation for "bank products."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000#H.R._4541_and_S.2697

 

The report also paints an unflattering picture of other regulators, including the Securities and Exchange Commission and banking overseers, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Office of Thrift Supervision.

The SEC, which had primary oversight over major investment banks, "failed to restrict their risky activities and did not require them to hold adequate capital and liquidity for their activities, contributing to the failure or need for government bailouts of all five of the supervised investment banks during the financial crisis," the report says.

An Administration with a "business can regulate itself" attitude and had no interest in strong regulations that might have impeded on the profits their friends in the banking business were making.

It's saying Bush all over it.

 

We have a crash under Clinton??? lol


CLINTON: Well, I think he's suggesting that when we -- I signed a bill that the banking industry wanted that let them get into securities issuance. There are some people who believe that that bill enabled them to somehow participate in some of the riskier housing investments. I disagree with that. That bill primarily enabled them to -- like the Bank of America, to buy Merrill Lynch here without a hitch. And I think that helped to stabilize the situation.

I think the main thing that you could blame the Democrats for, maybe, is that we should have made more of the problems of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and maybe the -- and tried more aggressively to regulate derivatives. But this thing really took off when the SEC, under this administration, exercised less oversight and they got rid of something called the uptick rule, which enabled betting down --

LAUER: Right.

CLINTON: -- on housing stocks to go crazy.

 

It wasn't Obama or Biden that blocked the *only* bill every passed (in 2005) by the Republican controlled Congress to regulate the GSEs:

"the Administration opposes the bill"

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24851

 

Except for the Clinton administrations history. Look up Brooksley Born.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, you did. The dot.com bubble began to pop under Clinton, wiping out his alleged surpluses.

 

Clinton wasn't president during the time housing prices blew up to their absurd levels and started imploding.

 

Facts are that "Dubya's" great recession ended in June of 2009 and from that day on it became Obama's economy and his recovery.

Where's the recovery after 5 years and 8 months ? A freaking snail moves faster than Obama's recovery of the economy.