To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (421068 ) 9/30/2008 8:31:58 PM From: tejek Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1571928 David, > This problem rests squarely on the Dems policy of requiring the funding of loans for people who cannot afford to repay them. I disagree, but I do think that's a part of the story that the mainstream media networks won't cover. Just so you know.......lending in the inner city was not required as inoys suggests but it was strongly encouraged. There was a time in American cities when lenders would not provide mortgages in neighborhoods that were heavily minority. It was called redlining and it included black, Latino and Asian neighborhoods......however, it was not as great problem for Asian neighborhoods because they would get monies sent to them from overseas. Otherwise, people in minority neighborhoods no matter how good their credit were rarely given loans and when they were, the interest rates were at usury levels. Its part of the reason why minority neighborhoods deteriorated at a much faster rate than white neighborhoods. Every body rented.........there was no pride of ownership. And it didn't just apply to residences.......commercial properties in minority neighbhorhoods were also redlined. Eventually, the practice was outlawed and lenders were encouraged to lend in those neighborhoods. Its part of the reason why historic neighborhoods in many cities began to revive.....places like Park Slope in Brooklyn, Adams Morgen and Dupont Circle in DC, Back Bay in Boston etc. However, there was never a waving of good lending practices..solid appraisals, money down and good credit were all required. The subprime thing was a whole different story. Appraisels were fixed, solid down payments were not required, dicey mortgages were used and bad credit was not a problem.