Obama: Roosevelt Bought Up Homes To Save Market, Reality: No He Didn’t

A reader emails this interesting question and answer about the housing problem from the transcript of last night’s debate:

LEHRER: Before we go to another lead question. Let me figure out a way to ask the same question in a slightly different way here. Are you — are you willing to acknowledge both of you that this financial crisis is going to affect the way you rule the country as president of the United States beyond the kinds of things that you have already — I mean, is it a major move? Is it going to have a major affect?
OBAMA: There’s no doubt it will affect our budgets. There is no doubt about it. Not only — Even if we get all $700 billion back, let’s assume the markets recover, we’ holding assets long enough that eventually taxpayers get it back and that happened during the Great Depression when Roosevelt purchased a whole bunch of homes, over time, home values went back up and in fact government made a profit. If we’re lucky and do it right, that could potentially happen but in the short term there’s an outlay and we may not see that money for a while.

Setting aside the question of whether or not the government should be in the business of buying things and turning profits (it shouldn’t), did FDR really do that?
Because, much as FDR didn’t broadcast television addresses to the nation to calm Americans after the market crash in 1929 as Obama’s running mate Joe Biden suggested, FDR didn’t use taxpayer money to buy up homes to stabilize the nation’s markets either.
Obama wants to run this country, but neither he nor his running mate seem fit to run a high school history class.

Tags:


«
»
  • http://Array don

    This is what Obama was referring too.

    http://www.answers.com/topic/home-owners-loan-corporation

  • kbiel

    I’m starting to think that Obama and Biden are trying to work FDR into their rhetoric by hook or crook. It wouldn’t surprise me if they were doing deliberately in an attempt to appeal to the elderly vote since they think they’ll lose it to McCain.

  • http://rawdawgb.blogspot.com/ rawdawgbuffalo

    i turned the vol down, and could only think of the history of ole miss and james meredith

  • kbiel

    Oh, I didn’t say I was sweating it or that they would be successful. I only wondered if this was more than a coincidence and an attempt to get people who used to vote for the ghost of FDR to vote for them.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    I am fascinated by PBS liberal Jim Lehrer’s use of the word “rule” to describe the American president’s relationship with the American people.

    Scratch a liberal and find an autocrat underneath!

  • http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/ Chris Dudley

    I was curious about this too. The first thing I came across was your site which just denied that what Obama said was true. But, there wasn’t anything to back up what you were saying. It turns out that there was a New Deal agency called the Home Owner’s Loan Corporation which helped people to avoid foreclosure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOLC

    It did turn a profit in the end. If this is what Obama was referring to, then FDR only bought houses to get better loan terms for the occupants. This did keep them off the market, and with about a million such transactions, probably supported home prices a little.

    If we want to look at today’s situation, we probably have more homes than people to live in them so keeping things off the market would likely involve keeping them vacant. That is not a big problem if we buy the homes a $0.10 on the dollar or so using eminant domain. http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/4563#comment-412950 We’d still turn a profit.

  • atease

    Thanks. This was one question I had from last night. My understanding was we were about to enter unchartered waters with this bailout/whateveryouwanttocallit bill. Never before have we nationalized parts of the economy that are not in the constitution. This bothered me. I was hoping at the time that John would call him out. Hope in my world.

    atease

  • Bat One

    Quite aside from the fact that Obama either does not know what he’s talking about (hardly a surprise… he doesn’t know much about economics either), or was lying for effect, being too arrogant to believe he’d be found out, I am fascinated by PBS liberal Jim Lehrer’s use of the word “rule” to describe the American president’s relationship with the American people.

    Lehrer has been critical of President Bush for assuming too much “executive authority” on any number of occasions that I have seen, yet here he is, a man whose professional life is supposedly built on objectivity and linguistic precision, using the word “rule” as though the US president was supposed to be a world-class autocrat or even royalty. Most peculiar!

  • docdave

    Don’t think you have to sweat the elderly voter, kbiel (I’m 73). We’ve lived long enough to know from experience that everything that Obama/Biden says is b.s.

    Of course there are elderly who don’t have a clue but that goes for all ages. I think that the libs get most of their support from the naive idealistic college and 20s crowd.

  • Dan

    I picked up on the same thing. FDR never bought houses, that’s crazy talk. Obama stated that he never said he would attack Pakistan? i remember him looking square in the camera and saying he would attack Pakistan, just as he said he would have sent troops to Georgia when they had their conflict. Not only does he not know American history, or economics, but he knows nothing about foreign relations… He says he wants to improve America’s relationships in the world, but threatens to invade other countries and sit down and chat with terrorist dictators.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development