re: #661 Rightwingconspirator

CRA “compliant ” loans were numerous. Added to the mess. Again, “contributed”, as the word used int he article is very different from “caused”.

“Contributed” is a weasel word in that context and requires amplification. Does one bad CRA loan “contribute” to the problem? Do we think that ANYONE who uses “contribute” in that context means there was only one bad CRA load? Obviously not.

What most writers are trying to convey when they use “contribute” in this context is something like “substantially contribute” (and therefore substantially cause). Otherwise, why bother to bring it up?

And I note the lack of causative language after “CRA loans were numerous”. Of course they were numerous. But what was the default rate of CRA loans compared to subprime or Alt-A loans? I haven’t seen any data that leads me to believe CRA loans were a meaningful factor in the credit crisis.

Do you have any? Or to you, does one defaulted CRA loan mean that the CRA “contributed” to the mess?