There is an element of that. But reviews have shown that as many as 2/3 of the people who got sub-prime mortgages could have qualified for regular mortgages. And the simple fact is that the real estate bubble was just that. . . a bubble. Plenty of blame to go around everywhere.
My beef, which is with Bush and Obama equally, is why did they use taxpayer money to prop up these banks? And if they were to do it at all, why didn't they make the bailouts conditional on cutting mortgagees more favourable deals?
Could it be because Bush, Obama, and their respective Treasury Departments and Congresses didn't give a rap about American homeowners, and were in it for the banks?
I don't disagree with your thoughts on this... My bone to pick rests on the unilateral blaming of banks for these woes. Sure, they are responsible for a chunck of this mess, but they also responded to the demand from the public.
Poor decisions were made all around by all parties (incl gvt) and objective analysis is needed if one truly doesn't want to go down this path in the future