Reading Response 1 / Sarah Row

The argument that is being put forth in Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: Anatomy of a Financial Collapse, is the lenders brought levels of risk that the U.S. financial system hasn’t seen by selling complex home loans with high-risk features. They state that there are four main causes those being high risk lending, regulatory failure, inflated credit ratings and investment bank abuse. On the other hand, the argument being put forth in The 2008 Housing crisis is the government was not to blame and that the consumers were buying risky products. They claim that the consumers only have themselves to blame from buying risky products, which would become unaffordable when the economic conditions changed. They also state that they support the government programs put in place to expand the housing market, which were to enable ownership throughout different classes.

Both articles state information that argue each other. Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: Anatomy of a Financial Collapse is biased more toward blaming the banks and that homeowners were misled because the banks were too busy trying to make money. While The 2008 Housing crisis is biased towards the government and their programs. I believe that the banks followed and took leverage of what the government put in place and were therefore misguiding homeowners into the wrong direction. In the articles the government does not admit that they are at fault but defends themselves and all of their programs. Overall, I don’t believe there are enough straightforward details to come to a complete conclusion on who is at fault.

While exploring more into this crisis I found a video that summed everything up into two minutes. With reading two bias articles it can sometimes be hard to get an overall view of what was happening. This video helped give me an overall look into what happened in the 2008 financial crisis.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/financial-crisis-review.asp