Congratulations Argentina

@mozart,

you are diverting the question,..... but no matters, it's so easy to refute you,.... just going to wikipedia, there's no need of more specific sources:

"The United States housing bubble was an economic bubble affecting many parts of the United States housing market in over half of American states. Housing prices peaked in early 2006, started to decline in 2006 and 2007, and reached new lows in 2012.[2] On December 30, 2008, the Case-Shiller home price index reported its largest price drop in its history.[3] The credit crisis resulting from the bursting of the housing bubble is—according to general consensus—the primary cause of the 2007-2009 recession in the United States."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_housing_bubble

And to think that you are right saying "case closed" is so childish,..... mainly when you are not able to even explain what a "commodity super cycle" is or what a "commodity economy" is, let alone the influence of these cycles or super-cycles in the real economy of countries like Argentina or Brazil (which was your first statement)

 Basq, that is right from some perspective, but the property value was driven by finance structures that used the property value to irresponsibly grant debt that wasn't really feasible. Like a biochemical reaction imploding, suddenly there was nothing to feed the cycle...a chicken egg scenario of sorts.

  You are missing the point....the housing bubble and commercial real estate bubble were created by new credit products....the CDOs....and lax credit standards. Much of this was government mandated support for housing through Fannie Mae. Credit is the reason why prices went so high, and dropped so far. If the credit markets stayed intact in 2008 it would have been a normal real estate decline.

As for the commodity super cycle which apparently is new news to you, the chart explains it best:

 bla, bla, bla,..... appart from messing up the margins,..... bla, bla, bla

 Lol!

I checked it after you posted it and will give it an eyeball if my horrendous Nov/Dec schedule allows. Thanks. So, the toxic debt business was financial institutes categorising people into "Likely to pay their mortgage" all the way to "Highly unlikely to ever ever ever pay their mortgage" and then sell off said debt at a corresponding price. That sounds like pure genius to me! Strange it never worked. It was foolproof I tell you, foolproof.

 It was a well intended programme to extend home ownership among the lower middle classes. It wasn't based on sound economics....nor were the CDOs, look them up if you want to take another step into the swamp and understand what really happened.
In the meantime Basque can look up "appart"......wehe!

 @DbDraad,

I'm not denying that "finance structures (that) used the property value to irresponsibly grant debt", the existence of the subprime mortgages is a fact. In spanish they were called "hipotecas basura" which translated is something like "garbage mortgage".
And they were a factor that explained the real Estate bubble and its later burst , but only a factor btwin more others, btwin them, for example, the land prices.

But all this comes from mozart's answer to one of my posts:
"And no the crisis was not provoked by the "burst of the real-state(sic) bubble". It was provoked by credit products that were incorrectly given high credit ratings based on bundling. Can't you get anything right?"

which is completely wrong,.... as usual

 mozart,

"In the meantime Basque can look up "appart"......wehe!"

really? all your arguments are reduced to orthographic mistakes when English is not my native language ?

 this is too much, man,

"a well intended programme to extend home ownership among the lower middle classes"

       



yeah, yeah,... the bank owners are so worried about the well-being of the poors,...... they are so good and considerate persons,.....

wake up, man!!!!! ..... it was a programme to take as much money as possible from the poorest

Merely responding to your reduction of the argument to margins....you reap what you sow.  

 if you didn't understand I can explain it to you, what I was saying is that apart from messing up the margins your post was pure verbosity explaining nothing

 Not the bank owners you complete dunce...read my post above:
" Much of this was government mandated support for housing through Fannie Mae."
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac....read about them and educate yourself. There is nothing sillier than laughing at somebody else when y ou have completely missed the point yourself.

 it wasn't a "Fannie Mae and Freddie mac" thing, the whole banking system was implied,..... all the banks and all the bank owners,... reducing the blame to "Fannie Mae and Freddie mac" is as naive and simple as thinking it was well intended

 Implicated....you mean the whole banking system was implicated. But let me help you. Nobody got a mortgage who didn't ask for one. The government and the strike lawyers made a case out of the inability of applicants to understand simple English. And the banks settled rather than fighting cases which would have generated negative publicity. There might have been some abuses in marginal institutions but what the big banks did was fine. So having dealt with that little bit of propaganda you have been sold....let's get to why all this housing stuff happened.
George Bush had a strong belief home ownership would build the middle class, so he pushed Fannie and Freddie to extend mortgages ....this might help you understand. You know so little, but talk so much....

This Administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more people owning their own home. It is in our national interest that more people own their own home. After all, if you own your own home, you have a vital stake in the future of our country."

- President George W. Bush, December 16, 2003

The Accomplishments

Increasing Homeownership

• The US homeownership rate reached a record 69.2 percent in the second quarter of 2004. The number of homeowners in the United States reached 73.4 million, the most ever. And for the first time, the majority of minority Americans own their own homes.
• The President set a goal to increase the number of minority homeowners by 5.5 million families by the end of the decade. Through his homeownership challenge, the President called on the private sector to help in this effort. More than two dozen companies and organizations have made commitments to increase minority homeownership - including pledges to provide more than $1.1 trillion in mortgage purchases for minority homebuyers this decade.
• President Bush signed the $200 million-per-year American Dream Downpayment Act which will help approximately 40,000 families each year with their downpayment and closing costs.
• The Administration proposed the Zero-Downpayment Initiative to allow the Federal Housing Administration to insure mortgages for first-time homebuyers without a downpayment. Projections indicate this could generate over 150,000 new homeowners in the first year alone.
• President Bush proposed a new Single Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit to increase the supply of affordable homes.
• The President has proposed to more than double funding for the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP), where government and non-profit organizations work closely together to increase homeownership opportunities.
• The President proposed $2.7 billion in USDA home loan guarantees to support rural homeownership and $1.1 billion in direct loans for low-income borrowers unable to secure a mortgage through a conventional lender. These loans are expected to provide 42,800 homeownership opportunities to rural families across America.

 The other thing the Bush administration did was to allow banks to expand their balance sheets, almost 3 times. Meaning for a given deposit base they could create much more debt. This inevitably fed the CDO machine, with lower and lower quality mortgage pools being securitized into instruments that failed in 2008. Mortgage pools were being sliced into very risky tranches that the rating agencies blessed on the basis of risk diversification. Whereas in fact they all had systematic risk based on housing prices.
When credit tightened and demand tanked, housing prices plunged wiping out all the diminutive equity in the deals. And mortgage holders simply walked away and claimed they had not understood their contracts and been defrauded. Whereas most knowingly were betting their house prices were going up.
But of course it was all the big banks. In fact big banks like Bank America bought up mortgage originators in huge numbers, which probably saved the whole system. Only to be attacked afterwards and forced to pay huge fines on loans they never even originated.
It was a dark, cynical time....but I'm sure you will go on believing everybody was innocent except those dirty capitalist bankers, well educated by the fiction Hollywood puts out there in the movies.