Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by slurper_la, Jan 30, 2009.
MotherJones Blog: Phil and Me: Ex-Sen. Gramm Says of the Economic Collapse, Don't Blame Me (Video)
Fuck ya. Nothing better than betting on your own company to default
notice who hasn't commented on this thread yet?
the silence from the right-wing whackos, when they can't defend something, is deafening.
If they had regulated the swaps, lending would have tightened up considerably - particularly sub-prime; and you liberals would have been screaming and whining because low-mid income earners couldn't buy homes.
You can never win with liberals. You keep lending strict - and they cry because all people should own a home. Then you give them what they want, it blows up, and they blame you.
So - the point of this thread - you are blaming Phil Gramm for the meltdown?
Funny, I never heard anyone bitching when they could show up and buy a home with ZERO money out of pocket. Or when plumbers and cops were buying 2 and 3 high end condos in Fla.
Where oh where were the critics?
Where were all of the critics of default swaps then? They were blaming Bush for every other problem in their lives.
Gimme gimme gimme. Then scream bloody murder when we have to pay the consequences for loaning money to anyone with a heartbeat.
jesus christ....do some research
everyone knows that the GLB Act was passed OVERWHELMINGLY through the Senate and House with strong bi-partisan support. it passed 90 votes for 8 against and two not voting in the Senate alone
here is the breakdown of its vote in the house and the senate
File:Gramm-Leach-Bliley Vote 1999.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
the democrats and republicans were equally at fault.
Dodd and Schumer were only too happy to assist Gramm, as was Barney Frank.
Clinton signed it into law.
Yep, but more like 60/40.
This was a political hot-potato, a no vote was construed as being racist and against blacks, minorities and low income people.
Also since the changes in the CRA it almost mandated the GLB HAD to be passed. The only other option was to change the CRA act but that was an even hotter potato.
Not exactly, the Genesis of this was the change of the CRA act that was championed by the Democrats and Clinton. Once those changes were enacted we started a row of domino's falling.
Ironically it was the republicans that had tried to enact stronger regulations over Fannie and Freddie but the Democrats fought vociferously against it.
PS I'm not a Republican or a Democrat and I don't have a political axe to grind, but in this case it appears that Dem's are much more at fault then the Repub's.
My mother's husband would like us to believe that irresponsible liberal-inspired prohibitions against redlining forced Fanny and Freddy into steering us into the current financial meltdown.
I think star would like him.
You should spend more time with your mom and husband.
Even with a list that shows fault on both sides, it STILL amazes me that some conservatives are willing to ignore the majority of the list just to focus on a couple of bullet points that were not as important or smaller pieces of the puzzle. It's so easy to just point blame at the people or the political party who passed the Community Reinvestment Act. That is, if you seriously want to believe that this action was the major culprit.
But to do that, you'll have to excusing all of the banks & financial loan institutions and their questionable ways of handling credit. You'll have to excuse all of the civil services out there that heavily engaged in redlining. Decades of wrongdoing to inner cities, poor families and impoverished people. Also you'll have to excuse all of the real estate brokers and contractors who thought it would be wise to enter into areas where the majority of its inhabitants were poor and build condos that were far beyond the financial reach of those who really need homes. If you're heartless enough to ignore all of this, then by all means go on ahead and think that it was "liberals" that caused Freddie & Fannie to crumble.
But as a person who grew up in a poor inner city, who've seen MANY people denied credit or loans just because of where they lived, and still see new buildings being built with price tags close or near the $1 Million mark in areas where the average income is less than $35K, nobody can sit here and tell me that the passing of the CRA was the main problem. If anything, that was supposed to help people in poor areas get a necessity for survival... HOUSING! Instead, financial institutions used the loopholes in the rules to try and milk out more money from people. When are we going to look at the people managing the money, instead of pointing fingers at the people who were doing whatever they could to maintain a roof over their head?
Seriously... I have no idea how some so-called adults can be this blind. Maybe if they started to look at things on a social class level and not as a political issue it'll open some eyes? Wishful thinking I suppose...
I know this is a large task, but... Somebody, connect the dots for me, please.
How does an ongoing financial crisis triggered by the rise in mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures in the U.S. (and a Senate that aided high risk individuals from receiving loans from private financial companies)... and credit default swaps....
How does all this translate into national panic and plummeting unemployment rates and massive job layoffs?
The unemployment rate for Los Angeles County, for the month of December, 2008, just hit 9.9% -- 1 out of every 10 is unemployed, to say nothing of the under-employed (cut wages, hours).
1 out of every 6 people in Louisiana is accepting Food Stamps.
Are we missing pieces of the puzzle? Doesn't a government that spends a trillion and a half (mostly borrowed) dollars to finance "wars on terror" also contribute to financial instability? Is it solely a housing market meltdown that is causing many states (including my own, California) to declare bankruptcy and demand government assistance from this new stimulus package? (btw, Sarah Palin was in D.C. this weekend lobbying for stimulus dollars for Alaska).
Some smart guy.... please respond with a post connecting the dots so I get an accurate picture of how we got to where we are now (hopefully without cheap political bashing!)
It should be no surprise the 'pro-business Republicans' now are fleeing the scene of the crime. The entire 'get Washington out of the way mentality' has literally capsized. Meanwhile back-at-the-ranch the perpetrators golden parachutes have deployed as expected and can barely spell foreclosure as they jet away to their Caribbean winter getaway on St Barts.
Yes, the foreclosures and defaults choked not only the supply of money that could be lent, but also the desire of the banking sector to lend. Many businesses rely on commercial lines of credit and loans to finance payroll, benefits, etc in times of volatile revenue.
The banks turned off the switch and closed down a substantial number of those lines.
With the economy slowing, the accounts payable are now going long overdue. For example, a printing company gets a printing order from ABC company. The printer buys the printing stock up front, and ships off the order to ABC co. with an invoice due in 30 days. ABC has cash flow issues and is running 90 - 120 days on Accounts payable. The printer already paid for the stock, his employees to run the job, but can't collect the bill and the bank won't loan him money against his accounts recievable, so he has to lay off workers.
The above scenario is common in almost every industry. Gov't and social services is the next major shoe to drop. Tax revenues are dropping so quickly that there is/will be huge layoffs and funding cuts.
P.S. You are still off on the war spending by $700 billion. You're getting closer to the actual number, tho:wink:
Shall we add in the lifetime productivity of the thousands of Americans that needlessly died in Iraq? Or leave it out?
Had to pull the heartstring card, didn't you?
The housing meltdown is a symptom, but it is not the disease. The current malaise points to a very large and fundamental problem in a world monetary system based on fiat currencies. The US Dollar is the chief offender amongst the worlds fiat currencies at present with a massive national and personal debt and failing economy (based on as much as 70% consumption). And now with interest rates at 0.25%, the only ammo left in the Fed is the printing press, which will onyl lead to the total collapse of the dollar by mid 2010.
Their have been many talks amongst central bankers from all over the world over the last couple of months about a "One world" reserve currency for commodity pricing and international transactions. This would be controlled by a "World Bank" (not The World Bank) as a way of stabilising valuations of resources, including carbon credits.
World economy | The disappearing dollar | Economist.com
The reality is that what we are witnessing could very well be the end of paper money.
Of course it does!
However, some people will ignore this because of their fear of a terrorist coming to their town to take out a herd of cows or knock over the neighborhood water tower.
That's what some people want you to think.
The Housing issue is a substantial component. We can't ignore that because people knew years ago that the market was heavily inflated and was destined to fail. At the same time, we just can't blame people from doing what they had to do to put a roof over their head. Many people in our country are stretched beyond their means... so much, that even a family night at McDonald's is considered a luxury. I highly doubt that these are the people who are living out of their means and causing the financial meltdown, yet leave it to so-called financial executives and bank CEOs to tell it another way.
There's just too many dots to connect. And the more we expose, the more opposition, bickering and finger pointing we'll have to go through.
What is wrong with that? The war was largely useless and the money that could have helped the U.S.A. was thrown to the wind.
is your heart of ice? Or do you just hide that idea when you tally up the numbers, and keep the human factor out of it?
starinvestor: "P.S. You are still off on the war spending by $700 billion. You're getting closer to the actual number, tho:wink:"
I took your original number (which you've naturally skewed to suit your conservative purposes) and I took liberal numbers (which are naturally skewed for maximum impact)... and I compromised.
Speaking of compromising, John McCain was just interviewed on CNN. Apparently, the GOP Senate is now ready to negotiate with the democratic Senate to pass a stimulus bill. McCain said the GOP House "made it's point" by unanimously voting against a stimulus bill, and now it's time for the Congress to play ball and get a bill together that works for the country. McCain even smiled and seemed human, pleasant. This is the old McCain again - before he became bitter and sarcastic with Palin by his side.
Many republican governors are not against a stimulus package and want a slice of this rescue plan money:
GOP govs break with party over stimulus
Most support economic plan that got no Republican votes in U.S. House
updated 11:44 a.m. PT, Sat., Jan. 31, 2009
NEW YORK - Most Republican governors have broken with their GOP colleagues in Congress and are pushing for passage of President Barack Obama's economic aid plan that would send billions to states for education, public works and health care.
Their state treasuries drained by the financial crisis, governors would welcome the money from Capitol Hill, where GOP lawmakers are more skeptical of Obama's spending priorities.
Next , Michael Steele is interviewed by Wolf Blitzer. Would I be considered jaded and racist if I suggested that republicans would never have elected this guy chairman of the RNC if the country had not first elected a black president?
I'm not saying Steele is not qualified. I am saying that it's curious timing - and the RNC is pandering for minority votes (something it routinely accuses dems of doing).