[Civicsman]

Deregulation came in when greedy people tried to make profits over profits on the bad assets that would not have existed without federal medling to begin with.

Restated: Deregulation enabled banks and financial institutions to make huge profits by peddling bad assets.

So we agree on this. Maybe there was "federal medling (sic)", but it would have been brought up short of imminent worldwide financial collapse if the banking system hadn't been deregulated by people preaching "Free enterprise! Let the market dictate!". It dictated all right. It dictated hundreds of billions of dollars out of the pockets of hardworking Americans. Deregulation allowed it to happen.

Overly easy money cause them to be able to buy homes they could not afford in the first place, and then since they were dancing on the edge, and that edge fell apart, they lost.

This is a massive over-generalization. Millions who had loans that expired during the melt-down were forced to forfeit their homes, because they could not get new loans. Two reasons: The banks weren't loaning to ANYONE, and the collapse of the housing market (as part of the melt-down) caused the value of their homes to drop.

How, exactly is this the fault of those individuals? That they failed to anticipate the largest financial collapse since the Great Depresssion?

This seems to be one difference between today's "conservatives" and progressives. Progressives believe that bad stuff can happen to good people, and that a civilized society should care about these things and provide some level of assistance to people who need it. Too many of what pass for conservatives today seem to have the "I've got mine, so screw you" attitude.

The point of my original post is that when a person is backed into a corner, desperation may cause them to do something that they otherwise might not. Society can either try to help such people, or, if the problem gets big enough, bring out the tanks.