Trump is in

Ah, here we go again.

"Evils" and "evil." I didn't say that. It wasn't in the article. You made it up. You're trying to marginalize this by making it seem emotional. You still haven't explained how the banks led to the highest home ownership in US history, or how that is the same as BPV saying it was due to the CRA and how all that jives with your subsequent comment about him referring to two govt agencies. Was it the banks or was it govt policy? Was the high home ownership evidence of the banks being great without interference, or bad govt policy and regulation? It can only be one. The contradictions continue to grow.

 

What? I said till 2008 where it was a quarter a percent from the highest in American history.

 

So if it wasn't the banks. What did it? I've already explained to you patiently why easy access to lending led to the highest home ownership rate in history. Give me your alternative explanation?

 

Ah, I didn't see "quarter a percent" anywhere in your post. Still don't. Weird. Your graph shows more than a full percentage point difference between the high in 2004 and 2008. Double weird. The "biggest" piece of regulation you fault for the decline was signed in July of 2010. Triple weird.

And on top of all that, you're touting that peak in home ownership as the work of the banks being awesome, while simultaneously saying BPV is correcting me by saying that it was due to regulation and was not in fact awesome. Quadruple weirdness on this.

 

I take it you didn't read the article I posted on this subject. Why did the home ownership rate get so high then? What is your explanation?

He's not saying it's due to regulation. He's saying the regulators ****ed it up. Read his post.

 

Ask BPV. He already said it. But you know that, since you (and probably he too) think he was correcting me, the guy who hadn't stated a reason. Buddy.

BPV says it was due to govt policy. You said it was all the banks. And just now, ever so subtly, you're backing off of that and transitioning to "easy access to lending" so you can abandon this banks ******* you're giving and switch to "CRA" and pretend you were there all along. Never mind that you specifically credited the banks for it.

 

What is your explanation?

Who the **** do you think provides easy access to lending? The ****ing govt? Who do you think lends people money?

 

Yes, the regulators after the recession ****ed it up and created the recession back in time. Or do you mean the CRA "****ed up" the highest home ownership in US history by causing the highest home ownership in US history but give the credit to the banks because boo?

 

What is your explanation?

 

What would be your take?

 

He doesn't give takes he just tells people that they are wrong and gives no reason why they are wrong.

 

Hahaha, you don't know how to get out of the web of contradicting statements you've made, so now you're looking for something you can pounce on.

 

What is your explanation?

 

No no, droski needs to explain how this all works. How all of these comments actually make sense.

 

I'd say it was due to the CRA broadening who banks lent to, which worked perhaps too well and contributed to the housing bubble. Flame away.

 

I've explained 1000 times, you just don't understand the subject and I'm sick of my Econ 101 lessons. Shit or get off the pot. What is your explanation?

 

Eh,I think droski is crazy.
Im looking for answers. What are your thoughts on this?

 

So it's bad for poorer people and minorities to own homes? Or you feel this was a good thing when they let the banks do their thing? And how does that make the banks greedy?

 

"Too well" as in, they were lending people money that couldnt pay it back? And those people who would be renting from the older class before are now back to that because they cant get a loan to own?

 

Read the article I posted. 4 million Americans couldn't qualify for loans that could have qualified BEFORE they lowered the lending standards.