Manufacturing Growing 714% Faster Under Trump than Obama

And I keep showing you the Democrats killed the only bill that would have done any good. And as I said Fannie and Freddie played a significant role in the collapse.

Role During the Housing Crisis
Government regulations prohibited Fannie and Freddie from buying high-risk mortgages. But as the mortgage market changed, so did their business.


Between 2005 and 2007, they acquired few conventional, fixed-interest loans with 20 percent down. They loaded up on subprime, interest-only, or negative amortization mortgages. Those were the types of loans banks and unregulated mortgage brokers issued.


Fannie and Freddie made things worse by their use of derivatives to hedge the interest-rate risk of their portfolios. But as private sector companies with shareholders to please, they were doing this to remain competitive with other banks. They were all doing the same thing.


Fannie Mae's loan acquisitions were:

• 62% negative amortization
• 84% interest only
• 58% subprime
• 62% required less than 10% downpayment

Freddie Mac's loans were even more risky, consisting of:

• 72% negative amortization
• 97% interest only
• 67% subprime
• 68% required less than 10% downpayment

These exotic and subprime mortgages made Fannie and Freddie's loan acquisitions toxic.


acquired more of these loans to maintain market share in a very competitive market.


In 2005, the Senate sponsored a bill that prohibited them from holding mortgage-backed securities in their portfolio. Congress wanted to reduce the risk to the government. In total, the two GSEs owned or guaranteed $5.5 trillion of the $11.2 trillion mortgage market.


But the Senate bill failed, and Fannie and Freddie increased their holdings of risky loans. They could make more money from the loans' high interest rates than from the fees they got from selling the loans. Again, they were seeking to maintain high stock prices in a very competitive housing market.


As government-sponsored enterprises, Fannie and Freddie took on more risk than they should have. They didn't protect the taxpayers who ultimately had to absorb their losses. But they didn't cause the housing downturn. They didn't flood the market with exotic loans. Instead, they were a consequence, not a cause, of the mortgage crisis.

Derivatives Helped Cause Fannie's Downfall
By 2007, only 17 percent of their portfolio was subprime or Alt-A loans. But then housing prices declined, and homeowners began defaulting. As a result, this relatively small percentage of subprime loans contributed 50 percent of the losses.

 

repeatedly refuted





TIMELINE FOR FANNIE/FREDDIE REGULATION 1995-2006

No legislation to further regulate GSEs is passed by a Republican-controlled Congress.

October 7, 2004

The House Financial Services Committee Chairman Michael Oxley (R-OH) cancels a markup on legislation to reform GSEs at the request of President Bush. According to CBS Marketwatch: "Strong opposition by the Bush Administration forced a top Republican congressman to delay a vote on a bill that would create a new regulator for mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

May 25, 2005

The House Financial Services Committee, under control of House Republicans and Chairman Oxley, passed a GSE Reform bill, H.R. 1461, by a vote of 65-5. Every Democrat on the Committee voted for the bill. Five Republicans, arguing that the bill did not go far enough, voted against H.R. 1461: Reps. Ed Royce, Ron Paul, Tom Feeney, Jeb Hensarling, and Scott Garrett.

July 28, 2005

The Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, then chaired by Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), passed S. 190, the Bush Administration’s bill, out of Committee. The bill was passed by a party-line vote of 11-10. The bill did not reach the Senate floor for a vote.

October 26, 2005

On the day the House was scheduled to vote on H.R. 1461, the Bush Administration issued a Statement of Administration Policy opposing the House Republican GSE bill.

October 26, 2005

H.R. 1461 passes House by a vote of 331-90, with 122 Democrats voting in favor. Note: Frank voted against the bill when it reached the floor, but not because of any opposition to reforming the GSEs, but because the Republican leadership decided to cut out funding for faith-based charities that provide low-income rental housing from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund.

September 2006

Oxley and Frank send a bipartisan letter to Senator Shelby urging GSE reform. Many Democrats and Republicans signed this letter urging the Senate to act.

January 2007

Democrats take control of the House and Senate; Barney Frank is named Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

March 28, 2007

The House Financial Services Committee passes H.R. 1427, the GSE reform bill, by a vote of 49-15. The legislation had the support of the Bush Administration and represented a tougher bill than the 2005 effort. Incredibly, 19 Republicans opposed the bill.

 

Actually you are loudly parading your basic lack of understanding.

GDP = C + I + G + NX.

C- Consumption (Consumer Spending)
I - Investment (Business Investment)
G - Government Spending
NX - Net Exports.

Here's an explanation of how the Bureau of Economic Analysis divides U.S. GDP into the four components.

In 2017
C = $12.6T (all in inflation adjusted real numbers)
I = $3.197 trillion
G = $3.1T
NX = MINUS $859B SUBTRACTED FROM GDP

GDP was $18.05T

In 2016 it was $17.66T

So 2017 saw about 2.2% real growth. Without the trade deficit we would have had 7% GDP growth last year.

It's a very big deal. Trump is focusing his efforts RIGHT WHERE THEY NEED TO BE FOCUSED if one wants massive advancement for the US Worker.

 

First time it has been posted.........................go troll someone else.

 

I'm sorry that your claims are proven bullshit. You should probably stop making them if you don't want it pointed out. I gave you the congressional voting record showing your claim is in fact bullshit. republicans killed EVERY single attempt to regulate fanny/freddy from 2001-2007



TIMELINE FOR FANNIE/FREDDIE REGULATION 1995-2006

No legislation to further regulate GSEs is passed by a Republican-controlled Congress.

October 7, 2004

The House Financial Services Committee Chairman Michael Oxley (R-OH) cancels a markup on legislation to reform GSEs at the request of President Bush. According to CBS Marketwatch: "Strong opposition by the Bush Administration forced a top Republican congressman to delay a vote on a bill that would create a new regulator for mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac."

May 25, 2005

The House Financial Services Committee, under control of House Republicans and Chairman Oxley, passed a GSE Reform bill, H.R. 1461, by a vote of 65-5. Every Democrat on the Committee voted for the bill. Five Republicans, arguing that the bill did not go far enough, voted against H.R. 1461: Reps. Ed Royce, Ron Paul, Tom Feeney, Jeb Hensarling, and Scott Garrett.

July 28, 2005

The Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, then chaired by Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), passed S. 190, the Bush Administration’s bill, out of Committee. The bill was passed by a party-line vote of 11-10. The bill did not reach the Senate floor for a vote.

October 26, 2005

On the day the House was scheduled to vote on H.R. 1461, the Bush Administration issued a Statement of Administration Policy opposing the House Republican GSE bill.

October 26, 2005

H.R. 1461 passes House by a vote of 331-90, with 122 Democrats voting in favor. Note: Frank voted against the bill when it reached the floor, but not because of any opposition to reforming the GSEs, but because the Republican leadership decided to cut out funding for faith-based charities that provide low-income rental housing from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund.

September 2006

Oxley and Frank send a bipartisan letter to Senator Shelby urging GSE reform. Many Democrats and Republicans signed this letter urging the Senate to act.

January 2007

Democrats take control of the House and Senate; Barney Frank is named Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.

March 28, 2007

The House Financial Services Committee passes H.R. 1427, the GSE reform bill, by a vote of 49-15. The legislation had the support of the Bush Administration and represented a tougher bill than the 2005 effort. Incredibly, 19 Republicans opposed the bill.

 

Don't bother...the "timeline" he keeps copying and pasting he doesn't even bother to actually read.

With that said...thanks Mr President and the GOP Congress for creating such a booming economy!

 

it's ****ing hilarious you trumpers can look at verifiable congressional data (voting record) and claim it's fake. Lol

Trump does not have a time machine, so your statement is silly. The economy has been booming for quite a while. The trend started in 2010.

 

I didn't claim it was fake...it's true...your link shows the Bush Admin and the GOP working to get reform done.

He doesn't need a time machine...

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/lns14000000

As you can see the it didn't start in 2010...it started after that, when the GOP took the House, and took off as they gained more power...undoing the horrible polices of the left.

2010 was a rough year...the peak of 4 years of Dem leadership in Congress and two of Obama in the Oval

 

MEA CULPA, on the calculation. Face is red, but glad to correct my snarky assumption.

OTOH, how much of that trade deficit was in raw materials and component parts for american workers to produce goods for domestic production and consumption? IOW, the internal consumer demands of the nation is in part fuel for the trade deficit, especially within the largest consumer market on the planet?

 

by killing every single attempt to reform? lol

lol, nope

 

No worries.

That's a good question. It would seem to me that shortages would show up in the Producers Price Index, but as you can see, so far, no signs of inflation there that I can see in the near term while this pushing and shoving has been more intense on trade negotiation.



And we have no inflation problems at the retail level either. It may be that in order to maintain as much market share as they could that rather than ship less product, by devaluing the yuan, the Chinese are just getting paid less for it, in order to cover the tariffs.

 

Now the statement from the Bush administration AT THE TIME: "Oxley's plan to reform oversight of the nation's biggest home lenders "falls short of real reform," a senior Treasury Department official said Tuesday in Washington."

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/oxley-pulls-fannie-freddie-bill-under-heat-from-bush
*chuckles*

So a bill that passed and did not stop the GSE disaster was actually opposed ONLY by some Republicans that said the bill "did not go far enough". Are you intent on making yourself and all left wingers look stupid? You are doing a fine job.

Once again, you are proving us correct. A bill that would actually have ENACTED REFORM was passed by ONLY Republicans out of Committee but never made it to the floor because no Democrats were going to vote for it so the 60 vote threshold would never have been reached. Once again, you are making yourself and Dems look like a disgusting criminal enterprise.

Frank: "There is no crisis with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac".

The actual voting for HR 1461 from Republicans was 209 yes votes, 15 no votes. The 15 who voted no said it "did not go far enough". Just as the administration said. Democrats BARELY voted yes with 122 yes votes, 74 no votes. The 74 no votes came because Democrats wanted no reform. Thanks for proving to us once again what a bunch of hate that exists towards America on the left.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll547.xml

You are now dismissed in complete and utter left wing humiliation AGAIN. Lulz

 

Do you seriously believe Obama is responsible for the Republican economic crisis that led to the collapse of the economy?

Learn to think.

 

I don't know how meaningful it is to back a decade. Back to the near term, Trump's first two years of Full Time vs Part Time is quite a bit better than Obama's final two years. Trump's just doing a lot better job than folks like you predicted, and hey, if you love the American People, you are glad for that.



We're all about the unity these days.

 

What the be the change in C without cheap imports? What would happen to NX without access to cheap and efficient supply chains? Your conclusion about 7% GDP is wildly optimistic as is your claim about trump having a gdamn clue WTF he's doing.

 

It's straight math. With the subtraction of Net Exports, real GDP was 2.2%. Without the subtraction of nex exports, GDP would have been 7%

2016 GDP $17.66T
2017 GDP $18.08T (after the subtraction of $0.86T in net exports)

 

LMAO it's anything but straight math. The values of the GDP formula are related. You don't simply get to lower one and keep the others static! Further, even if we imported zero it's asinine to think net exports wouldn't be affected.

 

Of course, positive exports would be an addition, negative exports are a subtraction. Our Trading Partners love that we increased THEIR GDP by $860B last year at the expense to OUR GDP of $860B.

There are a number of ways to reduce the imbalance, we can export more, or import less or, pay less for what we import since it's measured in dollars.

You don't have eliminate all of it to have an impact on GDP, every reduction has a dollar for dollar increase on OUR GDP.

What do you have against the US increasing our GDP growth?

Wait a minute.... you aren't one of those stupid Degrowthers are you?

 

My position is that the imbalance is not a necessarily a problem at all. We don't NEED to reduce it. Every bit of empirical evidence that I've seen shows that trade deficits have a negligible impact on employment. However, by mandating that consumers buy American products (via tariffs) you are effectively reducing consumption by raising costs and decreasing exports by American manufactures not having access to cheap raw materials. What you are advocating actually reduces GDP.
I'm not saying that the tariff has no useful applications but they should be focused and applied strategically - never wielded as a blunt and hamfisted weapon.

 

We don't mandate anything, other than foreign goods are subject to American Taxation, just as our domestic producers already pay US taxes.

No we aren't. US Consumption expenditures have been rising very nicely throughout Trump's very tough trade measures with these folks who are running trade surpluses against us.

We aren't seeing an inflation spike.

Exports aren't falling, they are climbing

GDP isn't falling either, in fact, it's growing very nicely.

We had 12,000 tariffs in place before Trump took over. Trump's added many more and it's not only added a new revenue stream to the US treasury, but everything else is looking really nice too.

I've heard all the BS about how running these huge trade deficits wasn't going to hurt the US worker, and that reducing them wouldn't help them, but, you have to step back and look at the real world. Employment and Wages are both strengthening in this country and the American Worker has A LOT of ground to make up.

This is working really well, so STEADY AS SHE GOES!

 

He would there be fewer jobs if that which is consumed is produced in the same place ?

 

.

 

Obama is far more responsible than any Republican because he was a Senator in Congress at the time who helped block efforts to regulate the GSE's and supported legislation that made subprime loans more common.

 

The GSE's went insolvent and required the infusion of billions of dollars of taxpayer money to prop them up....and the government intervened by placing them into conservatorship. They FAILED and the government bailed them out. Are you really this dumb or are just a kid who wasn't around at that time? Good lord.

They weren't just "hurting". It was far more than that. They went completely insolvent. Without government intervention they would have been dead. And you are absolutely right that it was deregulation that encouraged the GSEs to support risky lending..but it wasn't free markets. The GSE's didn't operate under true free market conditions. It was deregulation that Democrats refused to regulate because scaling back on their subprime mortgage market would have been "racist" since a disproportionate number of these loans were given to low income left wingers. Since the government had given an "implicit" guarantee to prop up the GSEs these entities engaged in ridiculous and speculative ventures that a typical business in the free market would never have engaged in. The natural brake on the free markets is the prospect of risk. Fannie and Freddie didn't consider it risky because of implicit government backing. They had no natural brakes and so they just went more and more extreme in the pursuit of profits. Since the GSE's had implicit guarantees of government backing by U.S. taxpayers it was the duty of the government to watch over and ensure they were not partaking in risk ventures that could put taxpayers on the hook for an enormous cost and it was the duty of the federal government to protect the American economy. The evil of the left prevented this. What's a few hundred billion to the U.S. taxpayers and an unemployment rate of 10%? No biggie if you're a left winger such as yourself who is likely unemployed and collects welfare either way, right? Smh.

Only a left wing tool could claim going insolvent, needing multi-billion dollar bailout, and being placed into government conservatorship as "not being in crisis". Not only was not a crisis but losing billions of dollars now is just simply "not making as much money as they were before". ROFL. You and your ilk are mentally sick.

It's not "government" that caused this problem. It's the left wing scourge that caused this problem. Deregulation is necessary for the free market to kick in and drive the economy. It's the engine that has made America an economic superpower. If we are going to place privately owned companies out on the free market and then tell them "we'll save you if you have problems" we've stripped the free markets ability to reign in risky behavior. Only the left could be dumb enough to regulate those with natural brakes and deregulate those with no natural brakes. F'ing morons. It's mental illness.

 

republicans controlled the house and senate, as well as presidency. every single bill attempting to regulate fanny/freddy was killed by republicans, as I keep showing you. The facts aren't going to change, no matter how hard you stomp your feet.