Davin News Server

Read it all faggot, and learn.

Democrat Bahney Fwank's $10 Trillion Crash

That's right, shut-in.

Fwank's Fingerprints Are All Over The Financial Fiasco

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=boston.com+barney+frank+fingerprints&ia=web

************************************************

KEY DEMOCRATS OPPOSED THE FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT 
of 2005, which would have established a single, independent regulatory 
body with jurisdiction over Fannie and Freddie - a move that the 
Government Accountability Office had recommended in a 2004 report. 

************************************************

BARNEY FRANK AND DEMOCRAT PARTY MOST RESPONSIBLE FOR 2008 ECONOMIC 
COLLAPSE

It's beyond asinine that Democrats blame Bush for ruining the economy, and 
praise Clinton as having the mostest wonderfulest economy ever, when it 
was a Clinton program that ruined the Bush economy.  But that's the 
mainstream media narrative for you.

************************************************

'THE PRIVATE SECTOR got us into this mess. The government has to get us 
out of it."

That's Barney Frank's story, and he's sticking to it. As the Massachusetts 
Democrat has explained it in recent days, the current financial crisis is 
the spawn of the free market run amok, with the political class guilty 
only of failing to rein the capitalists in.

The Wall Street meltdown was caused by "bad decisions that were made by 
people in the private sector," Frank said; the country is in dire straits 
today "thanks to a conservative philosophy that says the market knows 
best." And that philosophy goes "back to Ronald Reagan, when at his 
inauguration he said, 'Government is not the answer to our problems; 
government is the problem.' "

In fact, that isn't what Reagan said. His actual words were: "In this 
present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government 
is the problem." Were he president today, he would be saying much the same 
thing.

Because while the mortgage crisis convulsing Wall Street has its share of 
private-sector culprits -- many of whom have been learning lately just how 
pitiless the private sector's discipline can be -- they weren't the ones 
who "got us into this mess." Barney Frank's talking points 
notwithstanding, mortgage lenders didn't wake up one fine day deciding to 
junk long-held standards of creditworthiness in order to make ill-advised 
loans to unqualified borrowers. It would be closer to the truth to say 
they woke up to find the government twisting their arms and demanding that 
they do so - or else.

The roots of this crisis go back to the Carter administration. That was 
when government officials, egged on by left-wing activists, began accusing 
mortgage lenders of racism and "redlining" because urban blacks were being 
denied mortgages at a higher rate than suburban whites.

************************************************

Only people can who understand how politics and the economy work know 
this.

Whose Fault was It?

By far the most dangerous myth is that deregulation is the root cause of 
the problem.

The culprit was a system geared toward loaning money to people who were 
not in a position to pay it back. Two policies underpinned that system: 
easy money by the Federal Reserve and the government-induced lowering of 
standards for approving loan requests.

In a recent paper for the Independent Institute, University of Texas 
professor Stan Liebowitz argues that "in an attempt to increase 
homeownership... virtually every branch of the government undertook an 
attack on underwriting standards starting in the early 1990s... the 
Clinton era."

Starting with the creation of the Federal Housing Administration in 1934 
and all the way to the norms that made Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae acquire 
substantial loans given to people with weak credit. 

Not surprisingly, once the Fed expanded credit, astronomical amounts of 
capital poured into a housing market that people assumed was protected by 
the government. What came next was a consequence of the original sin.

Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, H.U.D., Bahney Fwank, Bill Clinton, Andrew Cuomo.

Who is responsible for the crash?

Democrats' lobbyist-induced denial to regulate Housing, led to Wall Street 
collapse:

Barney Frank: I don't see anything in this report that raises safety 
and soundness problems.

"These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing 
any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of
Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services 
Committee.

"The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there 
is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable 
housing."

************************************************

Anatomy of a bubble

Step 1. The intoxication: "My house is worth millions!" From 1995 - 
2005, the number of sub-prime mortgages skyrocket. So did the house 
prices.

Step 2. The hangover: "Oh my God, my house isn't selling. What went 
wrong?"

WHY DIDN'T SOMEONE TRY TO STOP IT?

Someone did:

********* "The Bush administration today recommended the most 
significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since 
the savings and loan crisis a decade ago." - The New York Times, 
September 11, 2003.  ***************

But someone intervened to stymie the Bush administration. Who? The 
New York Times reports:

Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders 
tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans 
for lower-income families. . . . "These two entities - Fannie Mae and 
Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said 
Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on 
the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these 
problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we 
will see in terms of affordable housing."

"The Bush administration today recommended the most significant 
regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings 
and loan crisis a decade ago."

"Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new 
agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume 
supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored 
companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending 
industry."

http://tinyurl.com/6lp5qu

"McCain Letter Demanded 2006 Action on Fannie and Freddie"

"Sen. John McCain's 2006 demand for regulatory action on Fannie Mae 
and Freddie Mac could have prevented current financial crisis, as HUMAN 
EVENTS learned."


-- 
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics, alt.politics.trump, alt.politics.liberalism, alt.politics.democrats, 
alt.politics.usa.republican
============================================================================

Alan's Low Self Esteem FORCES Him To Reply, Even When There's NOTHING To Reply TO

This Is Why Alan Can't Admit He's Wrong

They say it takes a big person to admit their mistakes, but for Alan, saying he's wrong feels impossible.

But why does Alan do it? We've asked psychologist Dr. Tim Sharp, chief happiness officer at The Happiness Institute, to explain:

They think being wrong means they're unworthy - Yup... Low-Self-Esteem

For Alan, conceding that he's fallible can evoke a deep psychological anxiety regarding "the risks or the consequences associated 
with loss or failure," says Sharp.

"I think the reason Alan can't apologize isn't actually because he doesn't like to be wrong, but because it's seen as an inherent 
character fault," he explains.

Sharp says that for non-apologists, the irrational need to always be "perfect" rules their ego and they feel their screw-ups are 
unforgivable.

"The difficulty in admitting failure largely comes from the unrealistic expectation that 'I should get it right all the time, or 
not even try or make it seem as if I am'" he says.

Alan Thinks Never Admitting Fault Makes Him Look Stronger

For Alan, appearing wrong is congruent to appearing weak, but Sharp says they could not be more wrong, because a good leader 
admits their mistakes.

"There's some actually very interesting research that leaders who express vulnerability and are more open to being fallible tend 
to be more highly regarded," the expert explains.

"This makes sense because if someone is saying, 'I'm 100 percent perfect, I'm 100 percent right all the time,' that's pretty hard 
to believe," says the psychologist.

(But, THAT'S Ski Bunny)

"I'd find it hard to trust that person because there's no one I know 100 percent perfect.

Whereas if Alan would say, 'You know, I'm going to do my best but I'll make mistakes sometimes, I'll get it wrong, I'm sorry but 
I'll try to fix it,'... to me, that's more believable. I'd be more trusting of that sort of person."

They Don't Value The Truth

(NO liberal does... THAT'S their M.O.)

For Alan, the fact is he "doesn't necessarily value truth and honesty," says Sharp.

"While I personally value truth and honesty, what I've come to learn, which I find hard to understand but it's just a reality, is 
that Alan doesn't value those things as highly as me," says Sharp.

Taking political discussion as an example, the expert says Alan, who eats up "fake news" propaganda, doesn't value facts. When it 
comes to the truth, the expert warns that Alan "will literally say, 'I don't really care.'"

"Alan doesn't care about it because he values other aspects of what they're perceiving much more," he says.

Citing the upsurge of alt-left political movements around the world, Sharp says how Alan approaches a situation will often reveal 
whether facts or feelings will influence them more.

"[Logical people] will look for facts and information and data and make their decisions accordingly," he explains. "Other people 
make their decisions based on much more emotion. Now the problem comes when you try to talk logic to an emotional person because 
it just won't wear...  you're talking different languages.