It is not the sub-prime interest rates which are key here, but the qualifications of the borrowers. I used to work in real estate, and, in order to buy a house, your credit history, your job stability, and your verifiable income were key issues in order to obtain a loan.
During the end of the Clinton administration, these qualifications were relaxed considerably where people could simply state what their income was and, if they were first-time buyers or minorities, they could get a home loan with shaky credit
Also, a down payment requirement was waved in many cases. I had tenants who were on section 8 housing (the government paid the bulk of their rent for them). The government then offered to match whatever they had paid me, and allow them to use this money to purchase a home. So, without saving money, the government pretended that they saved money and gave it to them to buy a house with.
During the Bush administration, the housing market soared, which had a lot to do with the powerful economy under George Bush. Of course, as a million or more new homeowners came into the market suddenly, this drove housing prices sky high. So, as an example, a house might be selling for $100,000 but then there are suddenly 10 people who want to purchase this house. Some of them are going to offer more than $100,000.
As more and more people became aware of these loans and how easy they were to obtain, more flooded the market, and this sent housing prices through the roof.
At the same time, many homeowners saw that their house was now worth twice what they paid for it, so they refinanced their house and took money from the closing and spent it, also driving the economy.
So, President Bush could have stepped in and said, "People of the United States, this great boom time we are in could end at any time, because this is all based upon artificially high housing prices, which will crash." He did not do this. Remember, all of this meant additional revenues for the government and a strong Stock Market. So everyone was happy with the economy.
Bush did go to Congress and questioned the stability of FNMA and FHLMC (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), and he was told in no uncertain terms, by Democrats running these institutions, that everything was fine.
So, the lion's share of the blame is to be placed on Democratic policies which started this bubble off; with a reasonable amount of blame to the Bush administration for not stopping it. However, can you imagine what would have happened if President George Bush said, "I know we are in great economic times right now, but I want to stop it, and we are going to experience some economic pain as a result"? I venture to say that few politicians would have been willing to be that honest with the people of the United States.
Alexander Hamilton was most responsible for the development of America's financial system.
Democratic-Republicans. The leaders of the party were Thomas Jefferson and James Madison
I would say that the person or company who hired the financial advisors would be responsible for paying for them. Any decent financial advisor will have a contract to be signed before they begin work, and in it the fees should be clearly spelled out.
Federal Reserve
Democrats were able to take over a majority in Congress thanks to the prevailing distrust of Americans toward the Republican Party, since Grant was a member of the Republican Party, and were able to enact regulations involving speculation that could prevent another financial panic. New oversight, rebuilding the railroad industry, and new investments in the economy eventually ended the financial depression of the 1870s.
a financial panic.
As long as the bank does not require you to prove your income before approving you.
accountat for responsible for periodic financial statement analysis?
opposed the plan
a financial panic. the depression of 1893. a weakening U.S. currency.
Management is initially responsible for preparing financial statements and auditors are responsible for reasonable assurance
Monthly counseling and audits by the Financial Manager.
Yje Clinton Government allowed a considerable lowering of standards for banks to allow lower income applicanys house loans. Later, Republicans in Congress, including John McCain tried to increase acceptance to a higher financial level, but were outvoted by the Democrats in Congress. Since then, financial institutions went overboard in allowing very low level earners to apply for home loans.
who regulates financial reproting
Alexander Hamilton was most responsible for the development of America's financial system.
Director's
The New York Post recently did a study on this question and found that: 73 House Democrats are millionaires 101 House Republicans are millionaires 37 Senate Democrats are millionaires 30 Senate Republicans are millionaires This is based on overall wealth, not annual income. The wealth criteria comes from required financial reports that are generally done in ranges. ($10,000 - $50,000, for example) They don't always report exact figures. The total number above is 241, out of 435 House members and 100 Senate members. So 40% of the House are millionaires and 67% of the Senate are millionaires. And your question should be "How many millionaires are Democratic congressmen?" Democratic congressmen (and women) are members of the Democratic Party. You could also ask "How many democrats in congress are millionaires?" Members of the Democratic Party are called Democrats (with a capital "D") Members of the Republican Party are called Republicans (with a capital "R") You wouldn't say "How many millionaires are republic congressmen?"