TheRealMafoo said:
Home ownership, leaving the banks alone to regulate themselves, has always had home ownership at 60% of the population. Clinton wanted to get it to 66%, so the government games the system. They realized this meant giving loans to those higher risk. The reason Clinton wanted to stop at 66%, is he knew any number above that, meant giving loans to people who were a ridicules risk. By the time the bubble broke, home ownership was at 75%. Washington had to know the people getting the loans were wildly unqualified to own them. They just knew as soon as the number stopped going up, everything was going to collapse, so they took the short sided route, and kept trying to give loans. There is no way you can wash the governments hands on this. They caused this problem, and they know it was a problem years before it fell. |
I don't think I am saying we should wash the Governments hands on this. But I think they aren't as much to blame for the problem as the banks and the individuals who took out the bad loans. Its not the governments fault for all of our problems.
I do believe that all of those people who are losing their homes deserve a home. I just think most of them should have went with a cheaper model. If they had they would probably still be living in their homes instead of them being homeless and the house empty. If your making $50k a year and you own a $250- $350k home mortgage there is simply no way you can afford it. The banks knew it and so did the guy making $50k.
"If you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow."
Quote by- The Imortal John Wayne, the original BADASS!








