Obama: lowest annual real GDP growth post WW2 = still worst

[Unknown Pleasures]

Reality is the only economy Obama inherited that is remotely comparable is the great depression.

The world is too much of a different place now compared to the 30's to make comparisons of the recovery of these two disasters comparable or meaningful.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

I think I speak for everyone here when i say to Mr. Obma: BYE FELICIA!!!

 

[steveflynn]

It's very disingenuous to compare GDP rates of past presidents like that. The US economy and the overall world economy (especially in developed countries---which the US obviously is) is a lot different now than in the 40's, 50's, etc. In all likelihood, it's all but impossible for the US to ever grow at 4-5 percent annually again. I have no idea how someone could argue in good faith that the economy isn't better now than it was in 2009.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

It's very disingenuous to compare GDP rates of past presidents like that. The US economy and the overall world economy (especially in developed countries---which the US obviously is) is a lot different now than in the 40's, 50's, etc. In all likelihood, it's all but impossible for the US to ever grow at 4-5 percent annually again. I have no idea how someone could argue in good faith that the economy isn't better now than it was in 2009.

It is obviously people with an agenda moving goal posts in such a way to frame things that happened under Obama as the most negative possible.

Low I.Q. people like TS eats it up obviously.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

community reinvestment act had nothing to do with the crisis, and the other 2 had moderate effects on it.

You could make the case to blame Greenspan for not acting fast enough to curb an excess in money supply.

The community reinvestment act encouraged banks to issues home loans to low income earners -- and Commodity Futures Modernization Act which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation -- so how the fuck can you say 1 had no merit and the 2nd how minimal?? Those were two central cogs in the in the failing mechanism.

PLEASE show me sources in which state those two issues had nothing to do with the crisis -- or am i supposed to take your opinion above, Time and the WSJ?

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877322,00.html

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323477604579000571334113350

"
The CRA forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?

According to one enforcement agency, “discrimination exists when a lender’s underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants.” Note that these “arbitrary or outdated criteria” include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history–the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring."

http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/18/fannie-freddie-regulation-oped-cx_yb_0718brook.html#

 

[Rational Poster]

So in your opinion would the financial collapse have happened if Obama had served two terms from 2000?

It's hard to say, I feel like Obama's response to 9/11 wouldn't have been so emotional and Cheney wouldn't have been involved either.

 

[Pixelated Porn]

I'd take steady growth over crashing the economy.

Saying GWB did better than Obama is like saying a guy who spent 8 days in vegas, and won $75 for 7 days, but on the 8th day lost everything including his house and car did better "on average" then the guy that won $50 every day including the last day.

So you have no dispute with my facts...cool.

Obama has had a steady SHITTY economy

Oh, Obama also had the WORST ECONOMIC RECOVERY IN THE MODERN ERA

 

[Pixelated Porn]

The community reinvestment act encouraged banks to issues home loans to low income earners -- and Commodity Futures Modernization Act which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation -- so how the fuck can you say 1 had no merit and the 2nd how minimal?? Those were two central cogs in the in the failing mechanism.

PLEASE show me sources in which state those two issues had nothing to do with the crisis -- or am i supposed to take your opinion above, Time and the WSJ?

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877322,00.html

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323477604579000571334113350

"
The CRA forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?

According to one enforcement agency, “discrimination exists when a lender’s underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants.” Note that these “arbitrary or outdated criteria” include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history–the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring."

http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/18/fannie-freddie-regulation-oped-cx_yb_0718brook.html#

IMO a lot of it came to the Clinton practice of giving loans not based on credit but based on race like your state here, Katrina and the high gas prices following it also fucked america's economy.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

IMO a lot of it came to the Clinton practice of giving loans not based on credit but based on race like your state here, Katrina and the high gas prices following it also fucked america's economy.

Bush continued the the trend of deregulation and his handlers blocked a lot of attempts at reform -- especially with William Donaldson. That, coupled with wasting surpluses left the US unable to diffuse a ticking bomb. Clinton, Bush and even Carter have blame with this.

 

[Rod1]

The community reinvestment act encouraged banks to issues home loans to low income earners -- and Commodity Futures Modernization Act which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation -- so how the fuck can you say 1 had no merit and the 2nd how minimal?? Those were two central cogs in the in the failing mechanism.

PLEASE show me sources in which state those two issues had nothing to do with the crisis -- or am i supposed to take your opinion above, Time and the WSJ?

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877322,00.html

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323477604579000571334113350

"
The CRA forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?

According to one enforcement agency, “discrimination exists when a lender’s underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants.” Note that these “arbitrary or outdated criteria” include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history–the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring."

http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/18/fannie-freddie-regulation-oped-cx_yb_0718brook.html#

Little piece of advice always ignore those that phrase their articles like a dialogue, these people are just looking to stroke their own egos, and thats has been true since the times of Galilei.

Other economists have examined the issue and concluded that the CRA did not contribute to the financial crisis, notably New York Times left of center

columnist and Nobel laureate Paul Krugman,[110] Tim Westrich of the Center for American Progress,[111] Robert Gordon of the American Prospect,[112] Ellen Seidman of the New America Foundation,[113] Daniel Gross of Slate,[114] and Aaron Pressman from BusinessWeek.[115] Law professor Michael S. Barr, a Treasury Department official under President Clinton,[63][116] stated that approximately 50% of subprime loans were made by independent mortgage companies that were not regulated by the CRA, and another 25% to 30% came from only partially CRA regulated bank subsidiaries and affiliates. Barr noted that institutions fully regulated by CRA made "perhaps one in four" sub-prime loans, and that "the worst and most widespread abuses occurred in the institutions with the least federal oversight".[117]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act#cite_note-118

Its just plain illogical to assume that poor people which represent just a tiny fraction of the American economy and wealth would be able to break such a large country.

 

[Rod1]

IMO a lot of it came to the Clinton practice of giving loans not based on credit but based on race like your state here, Katrina and the high gas prices following it also fucked america's economy.

Effing lol.

Lets blame black people for breaking a 15 trillion dollars economy.

 

[Rod1]

So you have no dispute with my facts...cool.

Obama has had a steady SHITTY economy

Oh, Obama also had the WORST ECONOMIC RECOVERY IN THE MODERN ERA

Not as shitty as Bush, and you conveniently leave out the fact that there were almost 8 years of republican congress that blocked everything that Obama tried to do to make recovery better.

Because spending 2 trillions on war? no problem

Spending 1 trillion to fix the economy? socialism.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Little piece of advice always ignore those that phrase their articles like a dialogue, these people are just looking to stroke their own egos, and thats has been true since the times of Galilei.

Other economists have examined the issue and concluded that the CRA did not contribute to the financial crisis, notably New York Times left of center

columnist and Nobel laureate Paul Krugman,[110] Tim Westrich of the Center for American Progress,[111] Robert Gordon of the American Prospect,[112] Ellen Seidman of the New America Foundation,[113] Daniel Gross of Slate,[114] and Aaron Pressman from BusinessWeek.[115] Law professor Michael S. Barr, a Treasury Department official under President Clinton,[63][116] stated that approximately 50% of subprime loans were made by independent mortgage companies that were not regulated by the CRA, and another 25% to 30% came from only partially CRA regulated bank subsidiaries and affiliates. Barr noted that institutions fully regulated by CRA made "perhaps one in four" sub-prime loans, and that "the worst and most widespread abuses occurred in the institutions with the least federal oversight".[117]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act#cite_note-118

Its just plain illogical to assume that poor people which represent just a tiny fraction of the American economy and wealth would be able to break such a large country.

Sorry, i take those dialogue pieces with more validity than i take your opinion -- but, feel free to direct me to the articles you've written on the matter. Or, better yet, CC me on the email you are going to send to those publications explaining to them why they are wrong.

And i didnt say the CRA was the cause of the crisis, but a cog in the mechanism of failure -- Banks encouraged to lend to applicants with high risk of defaults -- coupled with the credit swap regulation exemption played a significant role. This goes against your disingenuous narrative that the CRA had nothing to do with it.

But, please -- draft up a letter to those four publications -- im sure they would love to know how you prove them wrong.

Also, a study did lead to show that banks undergoing CRA-related regulatory exams took additional mortgage lending risk

http://www.nber.org/digest/may13/w18609.html

"Using data that track loan performance, the authors also show that loans originated by treatment-group banks around CRA exams are 15 percent more likely to be delinquent one year after origination than loans originated by control-group banks. Thus the evidence shows that around CRA examinations, when incentives to conform to CRA standards are particularly high, banks not only increase lending rates but also appear to originate loans that are markedly riskier."

 

[7437]

So you have no dispute with my facts...cool.

Obama has had a steady SHITTY economy

Oh, Obama also had the WORST ECONOMIC RECOVERY IN THE MODERN ERA

Do you prever an economic recovery, or an economic crash?

 

[Aegon Spengler]

Lets look oit the window and see how the economy looks now in comparison to 08.

Oh yeah, Bush wrecked the fucking country. Obama clearly has not. You have to be an utter retard to think that recession is better than a stable economy.

A total moron. Legitimatly, you should need a caretaker who has power of attorney, as you are mentally unfit to take care of yourself.

Yes, Pixelated Porn is fucking retarded. Every single thing the guy posts is pure stupidity and trolling. People like him make the internet look bad...and that's saying a lot.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

The community reinvestment act encouraged banks to issues home loans to low income earners -- and Commodity Futures Modernization Act which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation -- so how the fuck can you say 1 had no merit and the 2nd how minimal?? Those were two central cogs in the in the failing mechanism.

PLEASE show me sources in which state those two issues had nothing to do with the crisis -- or am i supposed to take your opinion above, Time and the WSJ?

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877322,00.html

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323477604579000571334113350

"
The CRA forces banks to make loans in poor communities, loans that banks may otherwise reject as financially unsound. Under the CRA, banks must convince a set of bureaucracies that they are not engaging in discrimination, a charge that the act encourages any CRA-recognized community group to bring forward. Otherwise, any merger or expansion the banks attempt will likely be denied. But what counts as discrimination?

According to one enforcement agency, “discrimination exists when a lender’s underwriting policies contain arbitrary or outdated criteria that effectively disqualify many urban or lower-income minority applicants.” Note that these “arbitrary or outdated criteria” include most of the essentials of responsible lending: income level, income verification, credit history and savings history–the very factors lenders are now being criticized for ignoring."

http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/18/fannie-freddie-regulation-oped-cx_yb_0718brook.html#

What's very interessting is I saw a movie... don't remember the exact name... Agent something or other. It was a doucmentary on Eliot Spitzer. It was amazing how much Wall Street hated the then Wall Street Sherriff. It even propositioned that big firms hired people to follow him around to try to scoop any dirt on him.

Of course, he wound up getting pinched for fucking whores, but the movie threw out the idea that if he didn't bang the whores, he might have changed things and avoided the financial crisis.

Kinda far fetched, but I like the idea of someone's insatiable appetite for ladies of the night having a trillion dollar impact to the global economy.

 

[BruceLeeOnTRT]

Glass-Steagal repeal didnt caused the 2008 crisis if thats what you are implying.

The crisis may or may not had been averted, but the capability of government to react to it would had been much better without the massive irresponsible spending of the Bush administration.

And even during Obama's first term republicans were more concerned with winning the midterms than trying to fix the country and it worked, since it seems that people have effectively forgotten the country that Bush Jr left.

Bush maxed the credit cards and Obama was left to pay the bills and like little children the electorate remembers Bush fondly and hates Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebat...ancial-crisis-was-foreseeable-and-preventable

Glass Steagall was put in place because thousands of banks failed in the great depression. It was created for the sole purpose of keeping commercial and investment banking separate entities, with the hope of preventing a repeat of the same mistake.

The Gramm/Leach/Biley act undid it, and allowed investment banks to merge with commercial banks and insurance companies. It's what allowed Citibank to merge with Traveler's Group. The same Citigroup that needed tax payers to bail them out. It's what allowed Bank of America to merge with NationsBank. Same Bank of America that also had to be bailed out. These companies shared information, and allowed high risk investments to be pushed to low risk clients. This repeal made these banks to big to fail, and made them fall in love with MBS/CMOs.

The very guy who pushed for Gramm/Leach/Biley during his time as Clinton's Secretary of Treasury, Robert Rubin, also served on CitiGroup's board when they made they were knee-deep in MBS/CMO strategies. They ignored all internal advice, and pushed it until it popped. They got rich, government bailed them out. Rubin took the blame, resigned, and fell on his sword.

There were a couple of other things that occurred during Bill Clinton years. Commodity Futures Modernization Act made credit default swaps a reality. Clinton also made changes to the Community Reinvestment Act in 1995, which forced banks to lend more in lower income neighborhoods. You can see how these little pieces contribute to the final result.

What people need to understand is that this is not a Bush or Clinton problem, it's a greedy politician problem. Both of these guys took bags of wall street money, and supported these mickey mouse schemes that got their friends (and themselves) RICH, then in the end made the taxpayers bail them out.

We need to learn who these people are, and stop listening to them. The same Robert Rubin who thought Gramm/Leach/Biley Act was a good idea, the same Robert Rubin who encouraged aggressive MBS/CMO lending in Citigroup is now speaking on how we need to save our economy from Climate Change.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

We should've used the republicans plans that consisted of nothing but Monday morning quarterbacking.

We should've let them fix the economy after they crushed it and bankrupted us for a fake war that was gonna be a "slam dunk and last only a few months"

Lulz

 

[Rod1]

Sorry, i take those dialogue pieces with more validity than i take your opinion -- but, feel free to direct me to the articles you've written on the matter. Or, better yet, CC me on the email you are going to send to those publications explaining to them why they are wrong.

And i didnt say the CRA was the cause of the crisis, but a cog in the mechanism of failure -- Banks encouraged to lend to applicants with high risk of defaults -- coupled with the credit swap regulation exemption played a significant role. This goes against your disingenuous narrative that the CRA had nothing to do with it.

But, please -- draft up a letter to those four publications -- im sure they would love to know how you prove them wrong.

Also, a study did lead to show that banks undergoing CRA-related regulatory exams took additional mortgage lending risk

http://www.nber.org/digest/may13/w18609.html

"Using data that track loan performance, the authors also show that loans originated by treatment-group banks around CRA exams are 15 percent more likely to be delinquent one year after origination than loans originated by control-group banks. Thus the evidence shows that around CRA examinations, when incentives to conform to CRA standards are particularly high, banks not only increase lending rates but also appear to originate loans that are markedly riskier."

Except that im not expression my opinion i pointed you towards actual studies.

Congress did carried out their own studies and they found out that CRA didnt contributed significantly to the crisis.

If you had read what i posted instead of burying your head in your ass and shielding behind a hit piece of propaganda you would had read that what i posted showed that the vast majority of defaults happened on non-CRA compliant insitutions.

Also Congress carried their own investigation and they found that the CRA was not a factor thats why the CRA was not amended or repealed

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission formed by the US Congress in 2009 to investigate the causes of the 2008 financial crisis, concluded "the CRA was not a significant factor in subprime lending or the crisis".[118]Ben Bernanke, then Chairman of the Federal Reserve, wrote that experience and research contradict "the charge that CRA was at the root of, or otherwise contributed in any substantive way to, the current mortgage difficulties."[119]

But sure tell me how a journalist with an agenda OPINION is more valuable than actual studies carried by a bipartisan commission of the US Congress and the opinion of the last 2 Federal Reserve Chairmen and a Nobel-laureate economist

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Except that im not expression my opinion i pointed you towards actual studies.

Congress did carried out their own studies and they found out that CRA didnt contributed significantly to the crisis.

If you had read what i posted instead of burying your head in your ass and shielding behind a hit piece of propaganda you would had read that what i posted showed that the vast majority of defaults happened on non-CRA compliant insitutions.

Also Congress carried their own investigation and they found that the CRA was not a factor thats why the CRA was not amended or repealed

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission formed by the US Congress in 2009 to investigate the causes of the 2008 financial crisis, concluded "the CRA was not a significant factor in subprime lending or the crisis".[118]Ben Bernanke, then Chairman of the Federal Reserve, wrote that experience and research contradict "the charge that CRA was at the root of, or otherwise contributed in any substantive way to, the current mortgage difficulties."[119]

But sure tell me how a journalist with an agenda OPINION is more valuable than actual studies carried by a bipartisan commission of the US Congress and the opinion of the last 2 Federal Reserve Chairmen and a Nobel-laureate economist

I gave you FOUR different sources ALL from credible sources (BI, WSJ, Time and Forbes) ALL claiming the same thing, that the CRA did play a roll -- AND used a part from YOUR own source that counter your claim using a study done by the National Bureau of Economic Research that shows the CRA did play a role in the Crisis.... if you actually read my responses, you would know that

http://www.nber.org/digest/may13/w18609.html

"Using data that track loan performance, the authors also show that loans originated by treatment-group banks around CRA exams are 15 percent more likely to be delinquent one year after origination than loans originated by control-group banks. Thus the evidence shows that around CRA examinations, when incentives to conform to CRA standards are particularly high, banks not only increase lending rates but also appear to originate loans that are markedly riskier."

Also, because you fail to acknowledge the other sources:

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877322,00.html

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323477604579000571334113350

http://www.forbes.com/2008/07/18/fannie-freddie-regulation-oped-cx_yb_0718brook.html#

But, yes -- i surely did burry my head by using 4 sources an established study to show that the CRA, did have an impact.