Who REALLY Caused the Financial Crisis??

[lhopp77]

Interesting question and it looks more like Clinton all the time. :eek:

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/did-clinton-cause-the-banking-crisis.aspx

Lee

[ShiuludeSVX]

My thoughts exactly.

How can anyone say that the present admin is the problem, or even the immediate previous.

But then I think Clinton is a Lying, Sneaking, Sh&%faced, BagOBigBrown Hairy Donkey Nuts anyway. As a matter of fact, I think everyone should refer to him {the one who's name should not be spoken}, as Ex-Was-Not-Worth-Talkin-About-Anyways-Rats-Ass.

But ..... I'm open to suggestions for a better reference name.
How Bout It???

[Manarius]

Interesting question and it looks more like Clinton all the time. :eek:

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/did-clinton-cause-the-banking-crisis.aspx

LeeLast time I checked, the Republicans controlled Congress in the late 90's and if I recall, Congress is the one who proposes and passes bills. So, you might want to take it up with the REPUBLICAN controlled congress at the time.

Also, as I recall, Phillip Gramm, co-sponsor of Gramm-Leech-Bliley, is a Republican. So....is Clinton really at fault? Might want to ask the Republicans.

[SilverSpear]

I say Saddam Hussein was working on it and this is why Bush kicked his arse! :D:D:D:D:D

[lhopp77]

Last time I checked, the Republicans controlled Congress in the late 90's and if I recall, Congress is the one who proposes and passes bills. So, you might want to take it up with the REPUBLICAN controlled congress at the time.

Also, as I recall, Phillip Gramm, co-sponsor of Gramm-Leech-Bliley, is a Republican. So....is Clinton really at fault? Might want to ask the Republicans.

Read the whole article--most of it was from executive decisions or decisions or nondecisions by administration appointees. :rolleyes:

It is always interesting to go back and actually review votes by party no matter who controls. That frequently gives a different prospective. Like Bush (read republicans) will be blamed for the initial huge $700B bailout when the full impact is felt in monumental budget deficits. But when you look at it only 3 Repub Senators and no House Repubs voted for it.

I just let the article stand on its own with no editorializing or other opinion on my part. You believe what you want and any other readers can do the same--just the facts jack. :p

Lee

[Zandar]

just the facts jack. :p

Facts are superfluous if they don't support your ideology. Besides, it's far more fun to make up your mind on an issue and then manufacture "facts" to support it. Plus, if you do it well enough, you might get an Oscar for best documentary.

[lhopp77]

Back on Uncle Sam's Plantation by
Star Parker - Syndicated Columnist
(in case you don't know--a black female)

Six years ago I wrote a book called Uncle Sam's Plantation. I wrote the book to tell my own story of what I saw living inside the welfare state and my own transformation out of it.

I said in that book that indeed there are two Americas -- a poor America on socialism and a wealthy America on capitalism.

I talked about government programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS), Emergency Assistance to Needy Families with Children (EANF), Section 8 Housing, and Food Stamps.

A vast sea of perhaps well-intentioned government programs, all initially set into motion in the 1960s by Democrats, that were going to lift the nation's poor out of poverty.

A benevolent Uncle Sam welcomed mostly poor black Americans onto the government plantation. Those who accepted the invitation switched mindsets from "How do I take care of myself?" to "What do I have to do to stay on the plantation?"

Instead of solving economic problems, government welfare socialism created monstrous moral and spiritual problems -- the kind of problems that are inevitable when individuals turn responsibility for their lives over to others.

The legacy of American socialism is our blighted inner cities, dysfunctional inner city schools, and broken black families.

Through God's grace, I found my way out. It was then that I understood what freedom meant and how great this country is.

I had the privilege of working on welfare reform in 1996 which was passed by a Republican controlled Congress.

I thought we were on the road to moving socialism out of our poor black communities and replacing it with wealth-producing American capitalism.

But, incredibly, we are now going in the opposite direction.

Instead of poor America on socialism becoming more like rich American on capitalism, rich America on capitalism is becoming like poor America on socialism.

Uncle Sam has welcomed our banks onto the plantation and they have said, "Thank you, Suh."

Now, instead of thinking about what creative things need to be done to serve customers, they are thinking about what they have to tell Massah in order to get their cash.

There is some kind of irony that this is all happening under our first black president on the 200th anniversary of the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.

Worse, socialism seems to be the element of our new young president. And maybe even more troubling, our corporate executives seem happy to move onto the plantation.

In an op-ed on the opinion page of the Washington Post, Mr. Obama is clear that the goal of his trillion dollar spending plan is much more than short term economic stimulus.

"This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America 's long-term growth and opportunity in areas such as renewable energy, healthcare, and education."

Perhaps more incredibly, Obama seems to think that government taking over an economy is a new idea. Or that massive growth in government can take place "with unprecedented transparency and accountability."

Yes, sir, we heard it from Jimmy Carter when he created the Department of Energy, the Synfuels Corporation, and the Department of Education.

Or how about the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 -- The War on Poverty -- which President Johnson said "...does not merely expand old programs or improve what is already being done. It charts a new course. It strikes at the causes, not just the consequences of poverty.."

Trillions of dollars later, black poverty is the same. But black families are not, with triple the incidence of single-parent homes and out-of-wedlock births.

It's not complicated. Americans can accept Barack Obama's invitation to move onto the plantation. Or they can choose personal responsibility and freedom.

Does anyone really need to think about what the choice should be?

"The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money"

I thought this was interesting and appropriate.

Lee

[SorelyVeXed]

I agree with her whole-heartedly – well, I do have one point of contention. But, she does not go far enough. The ultimate horror is that Massah will eventually run out of money too. And then, the plantation will be up for grabs to anybody. By that time, the plantation residents will be so busy ripping each other and themselves apart, that they won’t see the thieving claws of hell until it’s too late. This country is rapidly becoming filled with entitled, self-absorbed miscreants of all races and social ideologies who have forgotten what it is to strive (yeah, WORK :eek:) for the greater good of all of the country’s citizens. People who, instead, only choose to “look out” for themselves and “their own”. We are looking at a recipe for self-destruction if I’ve ever seen one. And nobody's cache of AK-47s is going to save us.

My point of contention? Barack Obama is not now, and never has been, black. It is bio-genetically impossible for him to be black, just as it is bio-genetically impossible for him to be white.

I love to tell people that I voted for the only black guy running for president, and that would not be Obama.:D

[svxthc]

The same people that claimed that the world would end if we did not bail out the banks caused the financial crisis. After that it was the Federal Reserve with a less than 1% interest rate that was anything but market based. As we know it we cannot even trace where the majority of this "emergency rescue" money has gone or why it was even needed to begin with. Under capitalism some companies fail and some do not. Our own chief financial regulator spokeswoman said bankruptcy court would have handled this problem just fine, and we would not be in a permanent downward spiral that will endlessly decimate jobs in light of tax raises.

I might add that no one could over the long term run a large business and profit from lowering the standard of living of everyone in America and burning trillions of dollars of the face of the earth. The only people that could have profited were the people selling the idea that the world would end without this bailout. It was a government orchestrated event to establish greater fascist control over banks, the auto industry, and the insurance industry - which sets the stage perfectly for "health care reform".