Thanks for confirming JackT’s assertion.

DS

Vvv,

Under Bush, low income people ended up in far more sub-prime loans than they did under Clinton. They were taken advantage of, as Wall Street found another cash cow to milk.

Democrats had been warning about the potential for a problem in the mortgage markets for some time, but Bush dragged his feet until it was far too late, threatening to veto reform.

In truth, the largest part of the damage was done in 2004-2006, before the GOP lost their majority in both houses. You can check details at the links provided. Your talking points are showing…

Peace.

DS

http://financialservices.house.gov/Timeframe%20for%20Fannie.pdf
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/sam-dealey/2008/9/12/speaking-frank-ly–barney-frank-fires-back-on-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac.html
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/blog/comments/how-sub-prime-lending-created-the-housing-bubble/

I agree that Bush and the Republicans failed to show leadership on the issue, but one of the primary reasons they failed to show that leadership was because to do so was to be denounced as being against lower-income people “owning” houses. Focusing solely on laws and implementations of those laws and ignoring the social pressure Democrats brought to bear on the issue is to ignore the greater part of the story.

If the Democrats, especially Frank and Dodd, had been warning about the potential for a blow-up in the mortgage markets, you’d have a point, but they weren’t. The Democrats were only too happy to run the show at Fannie and collect private-sector financial rewards for public-sector quality work.

The WSJ does a decent job explaining how to spread the blame around:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123215327787492291.html

While the Fed is most to blame, the Administration encouraged the credit excesses. It populated the Fed Board of Governors with Mr. Greenspan’s protégés, notably Ben Bernanke and Donald Kohn, who helped to create the mania and even now deny all responsibility. Meantime, Mr. Bush’s three Treasury Secretaries knew little about the subject, and if anything were inclined to support easier money and a weaker dollar in the name of reducing the trade deficit.

The fact is that the President, and only the President, was in a position to take direct and substantial action to forestall this type of crisis, via the Executive authority vested in him by Congress.

Congress can be blamed for writing the laws, but the Executive must bear responsibility for their implementation.

Bottom line is that Bush deserves most of the blame being directed his way, and pointing fingers at the Democrats is not going to change this fact.

Peace.

DS

Really? Really? The democrats destroyed the economy! They hate freedom and democracy! They want us to suffer! Uncritical, malevolent, boring, and, well, ignorant. Do you even really believe this? Every bad thing=Democrats. Every good thing=Republicans. Are you even interested in the actual structures and power relations within which this recession was caused? Do you really even care? If you did, why would you write this?

Rather than criticize what others say, why don’t you tell us your own, no doubt both brilliant and Democrat-exhonorating, version of what happened?

I’ve got it as, Democrats push lower underwriting standards on mortgage lending, followed by Wall Street and ratings agencies failing to do job of identifying and being compensated for risks, followed by Republicans warning things were getting out of control, followed by Democrats playing race card to shut down Republican criticism, followed by Republicans failing to show spine and pass reforms anyway, followed by present day. Notice who set the ball in motion: Democrats. Notice too who wanted to keep the party going after it had been realized that it was a mistake: Democrats.

Overall larger share of blame, then, has to go the the Democrats.

That’s how you do an analysis of causes and effects.

As far as the distribution of wealth, this is the essence of the debate. Dems just feel like the little guy should get more of the pie. It’s just not fair. That’s just childish thinking. It’s based on the fiction that it all belongs to us all.

The fact is wealthy people have a lot of money… and it belongs to THEM. Period. It’s not your damned money! You don’t get to determine how it’s spent. The money doesn’t belong to the government either! When the government taxes people, it is TAKING the money away from them. All this pity for the poor and bitterness towards the rich is simply covetousness. Thou shalt not covet. Thou shalt not steal. Be thankful for what you have, not bitter for what you don’t have. Redistribution is Marxism. Marxism is always Godlessness.

One more thing about redistribution. Money in rich people’s hands is productive. It creates more wealth. Don’t give productive resources to unproductive people or the resources will become unproductive. That’s why Marxist States are always less productive. The degree to which wealth is redistributed determines the amount ot which the economy is less productive.

Rich people can just sit on their money if they want. If the risk exceeds the reward, that’s what they’ll do. It’s not like they’ll actually miss any meals. They just stop playing the game, and the most productive people stop being productive. Atlas Shrugs.