President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.
As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings, following a decade in which Obama and other progressives pushed banks to provide mortgages to poor African Americans.
The startling failure rate among Obama’s private sector clients was discovered during The Daily Caller’s review of previously unpublished court information from the lawsuit that a young Obama helmed as the lead plaintiff’s attorney. [RELATED: Learn about the 186 class action plaintiffs]
Since the mortgage bubble burst, some of his former clients are calling for a policy reversal.
“If you see some people don’t make enough money to afford the mortgage, why would you give them a loan?” asked Obama client John Buchanan. “There should be some type of regulation against giving people loans they can’t afford.”
Banks “were too eager to lend to many who didn’t qualify,” said Don Byas, another client who saw banks lurch from caution to bubble-inflating recklessness. [RELATED: Obama's Citibank plaintiffs hit hard when housing bubble burst]
“I don’t care what race you are. … You need to keep financial wisdom from trying to help your people,” said Byas, an autoworker.
Nonetheless, Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.
Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans. [RELATED: Obama's African-American clients got coupons, not cash]
Progressive activists’ ambition instead contributed greatly to a housing bubble that burst in 2007, crashed the nation’s economy in 2008, wiped out at least $4 trillion in equity, kept unemployment above 8 percent for four years, and damaged the intended beneficiaries of looser mortgage lending standards.
In the White House, Obama has continued to intensify regulatory pressure on banks to provide more risky loans to African-Americans and Latinos. He has used lawsuits to fund his allies. And taxpayers are now unwittingly contributing to a re-inflation of housing prices.
Meanwhile, the president has blamed the housing bubble on supposed GOP deregulation, even though President George W. Bush expanded the regulation-expanding, anti-redlining policies established by progressives during Bill Clinton’s presidency.
“Governor Romney’s plan would… roll back regulations on big banks,” Obama says of his Republican challenger Mitt Romney in a 2012 TV ad titled “The Choice.” O admits it in his own ad!! “But you know what? We tried that top-down approach. It’s what caused the mess in the first place.”
Rumple4skinStoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, England UK980 posts
Lending money to useless Blacks is just the tip of the iceberg. Encouraging the banks to lend money to dickheads is the modern way of pretending there's a lot more money around than there actually is; store cards, credit cards etc..
But at the bottom of it all if you're either a rent-seeker, don't do a proper job or you spend money on imported crap that you didn't really need then you, personally, helped ruined the economy.
Rumple4skin: Lending money to useless Blacks is just the tip of the iceberg. Encouraging the banks to lend money to dickheads is the modern way of pretending there's a lot more money around than there actually is; store cards, credit cards etc..
But at the bottom of it all if you're either a rent-seeker, don't do a proper job or you spend money on imported crap that you didn't really need then you, personally, helped ruined the economy.
The point here is O was a 'pioneering contributor' to devastating subprime lending bubble... O filed the class action law suit that led to this housing crisis. With this court precedent the other banks either followed or faced the same such suits.
IamTab: Then stay off my threads. Deny all you wish this is real and has the courts to prove it.
it's fun to bother you. and I don't have to deny anything - as well as I certainly don't have to care about this conspiracy web you are trying to weave.
JeanKimberley: it's fun to bother you. and I don't have to deny anything - as well as I certainly don't have to care about this conspiracy web you are trying to weave.
what exactly is your agenda? whack-a-do politics?
]
"In the counsels of Government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the Military Industrial Complex ( or any other Gov branch). The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense ( or any other Gov branch) with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.
President Eisenhower's farewell address to the nation, January 1961
"Few men are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world which yields most painfully to change." -- Robert F. Kennedy 1966 Speech Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes... the ones who see things differently -- they're not fond of rules... You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can't do is ignore them because they change things... they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do. -- Steve Jobs, US computer engineer & industrialist (1955 - 2011)
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed people can change the world; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead, anthropologist
Rumple4skinStoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, England UK980 posts
IamTab: The point here is O was a 'pioneering contributor' to devastating subprime lending bubble... O filed the class action law suit that led to this housing crisis. With this court precedent the other banks either followed or faced the same such suits.
Obama is a contributor but he is no pioneer. Bloating the finance sector keeps our consumer, joke of a society alive.
Don't expect any different from any government until Westerners undergo a personality transplant and suddenly and miraculously decide they want to do proper jobs.
Rumple4skin: Lending money to useless Blacks is just the tip of the iceberg. Encouraging the banks to lend money to dickheads is the modern way of pretending there's a lot more money around than there actually is; store cards, credit cards etc..
But at the bottom of it all if you're either a rent-seeker, don't do a proper job or you spend money on imported crap that you didn't really need then you, personally, helped ruined the economy.
They didn't just encourage the banks, they flat-out forced the banks to make the loans or they would not get their permits to operate. The government under Jimmy Carter and the Community Reinvestmet Act told the banks that they had to make a certain quota of these loans because Jimmy thought everyone should have the right to own a home regardless of their ability to pay. During that time MANY bankers testified before congress and told them it was a foolish proposition. Only one supported the program.
Clinton made the situation worse by giving more teeth to the bill.
In truth, McCain and Bush were among the most vocal opponents and tried on numerous occasions to create more oversight to Freddie and Fannie, who backed the loans. Every time they were voted down by a party line vote from the dems.
If the government had not meddled in the private sector, and had not started telling the banks how to run their business, who knows if we would have even had a problem?
Rumple4skin: Obama is a contributor but he is no pioneer. Bloating the finance sector keeps our consumer, joke of a society alive.
Don't expect any different from any government until Westerners undergo a personality transplant and suddenly and miraculously decide they want to do proper jobs.
That probably will never happen now that the country has been over run by low level government employees who get paid for sitting on their butts eating bon bons.
JeanKimberley: suggest you go into blogs...... these are too lengthy and full of crap....
yet each to your own.....
Jean , Please don't send him to the blogs . We have enough crazy people there as it is . Even now it is being run over by the lunatic religious fanatics .
Frankinstien: Jean , Please don't send him to the blogs . We have enough crazy people there as it is . Even now it is being run over by the lunatic religious fanatics .
O really??? Thanks for the tip Franky...I cant resist!!!
And just when you think they couldn't be anymore stupid...
"The economy needs another shot of Federal Reserve stimulus and this time around, it needs it indefinitely, said Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco President John Williams
...further easing should bascome on an open-ended is, meaning the Fed would announce plans to do what it takes as long as it takes to get the economy going again (meaning we want to continue throwing gasoline on the fire - and we hope you are stupid enough to let us).
Economists have pointed out that quantitative easing carries diminishing returns, meaning the more it is used the less effective it is since it works by pushing down interest rates, which are already low enough as it is, though Williams suggested otherwise.
A recent CNNMoney survey of investment strategists finds that 93 percent said they don’t think the Federal Reserve should announce more stimulus at its next meeting, while 77 percent of economists surveyed agreed.
No it should not , rates should rise to teach consumers a lesson . A period of top down direction distroying a bad bonus system , overpaid employees .Getting banks back to banking needs to happen . The only way to safeguard peoples assets is to make sure every one has a chance at employment , housing , health otherwise with rising numbers the great unwashed will take , burn the show to the ground cause us all misery .
epirb: No it should not , rates should rise to teach consumers a lesson . A period of top down direction distroying a bad bonus system , overpaid employees .Getting banks back to banking needs to happen . The only way to safeguard peoples assets is to make sure every one has a chance at employment , housing , health otherwise with rising numbers the great unwashed will take , burn the show to the ground cause us all misery .
You'll get no argument from this wench! Totally agree, which is why I find this so frustrating. The not only want more stimulus, but they want it indefinitely.
And just when you think they couldn't be anymore stupid...
"The economy needs another shot of Federal Reserve stimulus and this time around, it needs it indefinitely, said Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco President John Williams
...further easing should come on an open-ended basis, meaning the Fed would announce plans to do what it takes as long as it takes to get the economy going again (meaning we want to continue throwing gasoline on the fire - and we hope you are stupid enough to let us).
Economists have pointed out that quantitative easing carries diminishing returns, meaning the more it is used the less effective it is since it works by pushing down interest rates, which are already low enough as it is, though Williams suggested otherwise.
A recent CNNMoney survey of investment strategists finds that 93 percent said they don’t think the Federal Reserve should announce more stimulus at its next meeting, while 77 percent of economists surveyed agreed.
WhatUwish4: No. Just the opposite. Here it is again.
And just when you think they couldn't be anymore stupid...
"The economy needs another shot of Federal Reserve stimulus and this time around, it needs it indefinitely, said Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco President John Williams...further easing should come on an open-ended basis, meaning the Fed would announce plans to do what it takes as long as it takes to get the economy going again (meaning we want to continue throwing gasoline on the fire - and we hope you are stupid enough to let us).
Economists have pointed out that quantitative easing carries diminishing returns, meaning the more it is used the less effective it is since it works by pushing down interest rates, which are already low enough as it is, though Williams suggested otherwise.A recent CNNMoney survey of investment strategists finds that 93 percent said they don’t think the Federal Reserve should announce more stimulus at its next meeting, while 77 percent of economists surveyed agreed.
QE didn't work twice before. It won't work a third time either. When Gov faces a problem it's throw "OUR" money at it. Seldom has that ever worked. Nothing says it will work!
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Read more:
President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.
As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings, following a decade in which Obama and other progressives pushed banks to provide mortgages to poor African Americans.
The startling failure rate among Obama’s private sector clients was discovered during The Daily Caller’s review of previously unpublished court information from the lawsuit that a young Obama helmed as the lead plaintiff’s attorney. [RELATED: Learn about the 186 class action plaintiffs]
Read more:
Since the mortgage bubble burst, some of his former clients are calling for a policy reversal.
“If you see some people don’t make enough money to afford the mortgage, why would you give them a loan?” asked Obama client John Buchanan. “There should be some type of regulation against giving people loans they can’t afford.”
Banks “were too eager to lend to many who didn’t qualify,” said Don Byas, another client who saw banks lurch from caution to bubble-inflating recklessness. [RELATED: Obama's Citibank plaintiffs hit hard when housing bubble burst]
“I don’t care what race you are. … You need to keep financial wisdom from trying to help your people,” said Byas, an autoworker.
Read more:
Nonetheless, Obama has pursued the same top-down mortgage lending policies in the White House.
Obama’s lawsuit was one element of a national “anti-redlining” campaign led by Chicago’s progressive groups, who argued that banks unfairly refused to lend money to people living within so-called “redlines” around African-American communities. The campaign was powered by progressives’ moral claim that their expertise could boost home ownership among the United States’ most disadvantaged minority, African-Americans. [RELATED: Obama's African-American clients got coupons, not cash]
Progressive activists’ ambition instead contributed greatly to a housing bubble that burst in 2007, crashed the nation’s economy in 2008, wiped out at least $4 trillion in equity, kept unemployment above 8 percent for four years, and damaged the intended beneficiaries of looser mortgage lending standards.
In the White House, Obama has continued to intensify regulatory pressure on banks to provide more risky loans to African-Americans and Latinos. He has used lawsuits to fund his allies. And taxpayers are now unwittingly contributing to a re-inflation of housing prices.
Meanwhile, the president has blamed the housing bubble on supposed GOP deregulation, even though President George W. Bush expanded the regulation-expanding, anti-redlining policies established by progressives during Bill Clinton’s presidency.
“Governor Romney’s plan would… roll back regulations on big banks,” Obama says of his Republican challenger Mitt Romney in a 2012 TV ad titled “The Choice.”
O admits it in his own ad!!
“But you know what? We tried that top-down approach. It’s what caused the mess in the first place.”