If that's the case, why is a minority Democratic Congressman setting Housing Policy for a Republican controlled Congress and Republican President? I don't buy it, they don't have the power to push that through.
what a president is going to go against home ownership publically? the same idiots complaining about "preditory lending" were the same idiots talking about how banks were racist against minorities and the same idiots that pushed hte banks and fannie and freddie to loosen their standards to loan to these people. that is the fact and it is well documented. do some research before you blame bush.
these are businesses that still generate billions in positive free cash flow.
what a president is going to go against home ownership publically? the same idiots complaining about "preditory lending" were the same idiots talking about how banks were racist against minorities and the same idiots that pushed hte banks and fannie and freddie to loosen their standards to loan to these people. that is the fact and it is well documented. do some research before you blame bush.
However, claims that there was no warning of the crisis were repudiated in an August 2008 article in the The New York Times, which reported that Richard F. Syron, the CEO of Freddie Mac, received a memo from David Andrukonis, the company's former chief risk officer in 2003, warning him that Freddie Mac was financing risk-laden loans that threatened Freddie Mac's financial stability. In his memo, Mr. Andrukonis wrote that these loans "would likely pose an enormous financial and reputational risk to the company and the country."[35] The article revealed that more than two-dozen high-ranking executives said that Mr. Syron had simply decided to ignore the warnings. Other cautions came as early as 2001, when the late Federal Reserve governor Edward Gramlich warned of the risks posed by sub-prime mortgages.[36] Reuters reported in October 2007 that a Merrill Lynch analyst too had warned in 2006 that companies could suffer from their subprime investments.
I did research this. The agency responsible for regulating Fannie and Freddie told Bush repeatedly that they were in trouble, and when he begun to speak publicly about it, Bush fired him.
Free cash flow based on what? Seriously, what are banks actually creating? I still haven't figured out what wealth they actually create that isn't paper funny money.
I have much respect for you guys Droski, honestly, and it is why I am not an investor, trader, or banker. This stuff is witchcraft as far as I'm concerned.
Time and time again, Frank insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were in good shape. Five years ago, for example, when the Bush administration proposed much tighter regulation of the two companies, Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing.
Frank's fingerprints are all over the financial fiasco - The Boston Globe
One of many articles pointing out the truth.
the banks borrow at a lower rate than they loan at. they make that profit. traders generate cash by profitable trades. brokers generate cash flow by buying and selling.
the banks borrow at a lower rate than they loan at. they make that profit. traders generate cash by profitable trades. brokers generate cash flow by buying and selling.
I did research this. The agency responsible for regulating Fannie and Freddie told Bush repeatedly that they were in trouble, and when he begun to speak publicly about it, Bush fired him.