Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
isnt that government's fault? arent they supposed to regulate business? i guess not when its convenient for them and their wive's get 500k salaries, their kids get jobs, their campaign funds get filled with cash, they get free rides in corporate jets, etc. etc. etc. our government needs better regulation for itself.
My entire post had something in it about how the government has allowed itself to become corrupted.
How can they regulate business when they've got ex-businessmen in the Government helping the companies and industries that got them there?
I agree though, that our gov't needs it's own regulations on itself, but that has to run hand in hand with regulations on corporations.
I think 'lobby money' or 'campaign funds (anonymously)' is a big synonym for a bribe.
doh - Let's hope it doesn't escalate - perhaps then you'll get it.
You see it as "Complaining" ~~ many see it as explaining their position.
They are drawing a lot of people which tells me that people are interested.
All civil movements in the history of the U.S. started somewhere, with peaceful marches, sit-ins, etc., whether it was Prohibition, opposing unjust wars, opposing slavery, or guaranteeing civil rights for all Americans. Anyone dismissing this as "just complaining and doing nothing" shows a lack comprehension of the Democratic process in a Democratic nation--a ridiculous putdown of an earnest civilian attempt at change. Either the movement will define itself and take hold and spread, or it will lack leadership, direction, and focus and will fizzle.
My entire post had something in it about how the government has allowed itself to become corrupted.
How can they regulate business when they've got ex-businessmen in the Government helping the companies and industries that got them there?
I agree though, that our gov't needs it's own regulations on itself, but that has to run hand in hand with regulations on corporations.
I think 'lobby money' or 'campaign funds (anonymously)' is a big synonym for a bribe.
the entire political system is set up for bribery. business is like a river that flows in one direction. that is to do whatever they can thats legal to make money. government is supposed to set up the dams and diversions to allow them to make money but protect consumers and other stakeholders. so the failure isnt wall street/business, the fault lies in government.
Not every bank recieved a bailout. The ones that didn't could've taken up the slack
Unfortunately the ones that didn't receive a bailout were too small to have been able to take up the slack. As distasteful as the bailouts were, they probably saved much chaos and utter misery. That we had even reached that point is a severe inditement of the whole system, but once at that point of implosion, there is a legitimate argument about what was the best thing to do.
Unfortunately the ones that didn't receive a bailout were too small to have been able to take up the slack. As distasteful as the bailouts were, they probably saved much chaos and utter misery. That we had even reached that point is a severe inditement of the whole system, but once at that point of implosion, there is a legitimate argument about what was the best thing to do.
Postponed and exponentially increased the pain.
If the too big to fails, actually followed the free market model.
I believe that if the too bigs, actually failed we had a chance of averting disaster.
Now it is eminent, and surely a reality. This summer will be hell on earth.
The root cause of the mess, of course, was re-writing the regulations implementing the Community Reinvestment Act to simultaneously (a) require banks & mortgage originators to extend more credit to those farther down the economic ladder who couldn't otherwise qualify for a loan coupled with (b) authorizing securitization of loans into MBSs, CDOs, and the alphabet soup about which we all know more than we wish we did.
You can thank Henry Cisneros & Roberta Achtenberg from HUD for this mess - -they led the efforts to rewrite the regulations in the first place.
Wrong, the cause of this mess was banking industry created derivatives.
The community reinvestment act did contribute to the overall fiasco, but seriously, how far do you think this housing bubble would have expanded if the banks knew they had to keep all the bogus loans they were writing.
The banks did not care if the applicants could make their payments or not, because they knew they would not be servicing the loans they were writing. They knew they were going to be bundling the bogus loans into CMO's and selling them worldwide to pension funds and mutual funds. It was the creation of and the regulations allowing derivatives that caused the bubble and the economic collapse.
The really scary part is that we have not even seen a fraction of the damage that derivatives are going to cause going forward.
The current amount of derivatives in existence at this time is larger that the entire GDP of the world, and they are almost all based on inflated asset values that make them as Warren Buffet said the weapon of mass destruction of the world wide economy. Stop listening to political motivated radio, and do some real research and find out the whole story.
Start with researching Brooksley Born and how the entire political establishment under the direction of Wall St. prevented her from regulating the derivatives that caused the disaster.
Not every bank recieved a bailout. The ones that didn't could've taken up the slack
There are really two issues here. The first issue doesn't even deal with whether alternatives existed to the banks receiving bailouts. The issue was what would the psychological effect have been on the whole economy if a series of large banks had imploded. The panic that alone would have touched off would have been enormous. I would anticipate there would have been a "run" on virtually every bank in this country. The Federal Reserve System and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation function pretty well when it comes to dealing with a small number of bank failures. The system would have been sorely strained dealing with hundreds of financial institutions demanding help because all their depositors showed up on the same day asking for their money back. Because it didn't happen, we have no way of knowing how severe the degree of national distress might have been. I personally am glad we never found out.
The administration of George W. Bush made a decision not to help the investment bank, Lehman Brothers, when they failed. Its widely considered that this move broadly made the initial crisis worse than it otherwise might have been.
The second issue is whether the surviving banks (assuming there would be some) after the type of widespread panic I mentioned above took place would have had the capacity to take up the slack for the banks that failed. The first thing that needs to be taken into consideration is that many small communities in America are served by a number of small community banks. Small community banks are probably less responsible than large banks for this problem in the first place. However, because they don't have the assets that large banks do, they probably would have been the first to fail. The result? People who live in small towns and middle America would have been the most affected and received the worst injuries from this financial crisis. I've never seen anyone do an actual estimate. However, if banks like the Chase Bank and Bank of America had gone under the contraction of the nation's money supply would have been huge. The housing market would not have been weak, it would have utterly collapsed along with financial institutions.
I think the effect on this nation and on its economy would have been profound. I frequently see posts here that either seem ignorant of all the harm that could have been done or gloss over it. I suppose if you are a single person with a bomb shelter out in the desert stocked with food and water for 3 years, you might not have much to worry about (a category which sadly seems to fit a number of the posters I see on CDF). For the rest of us who live in a society that is interdependent on others for everything from the food we eat to the natural gas we purchase to heat our homes this kind of crisis could easily have been a catastrophe.
I'm sorry we have 9.1% unemployment. Its a tired refrain to suggest things could be worse. The truth is though that they absolutely could have and would have if bold action hadn't been taken.
There are really two issues here. The first issue doesn't even deal with whether alternatives existed to the banks receiving bailouts. The issue was what would the psychological effect have been on the whole economy if a series of large banks had imploded. The panic that alone would have touched off would have been enormous. I would anticipate there would have been a "run" on virtually every bank in this country. The Federal Reserve System and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation function pretty well when it comes to dealing with a small number of bank failures. The system would have been sorely strained dealing with hundreds of financial institutions demanding help because all their depositors showed up on the same day asking for their money back. Because it didn't happen, we have no way of knowing how severe the degree of national distress might have been. I personally am glad we never found out.
The administration of George W. Bush made a decision not to help the investment bank, Lehman Brothers, when they failed. Its widely considered that this move broadly made the initial crisis worse than it otherwise might have been.
The second issue is whether the surviving banks (assuming there would be some) after the type of widespread panic I mentioned above took place would have had the capacity to take up the slack for the banks that failed. The first thing that needs to be taken into consideration is that many small communities in America are served by a number of small community banks. Small community banks are probably less responsible than large banks for this problem in the first place. However, because they don't have the assets that large banks do, they probably would have been the first to fail. The result? People who live in small towns and middle America would have been the most affected and received the worst injuries from this financial crisis. I've never seen anyone do an actual estimate. However, if banks like the Chase Bank and Bank of America had gone under the contraction of the nation's money supply would have been huge. The housing market would not have been weak, it would have utterly collapsed along with financial institutions.
I think the effect on this nation and on its economy would have been profound. I frequently see posts here that either seem ignorant of all the harm that could have been done or gloss over it. I suppose if you are a single person with a bomb shelter out in the desert stocked with food and water for 3 years, you might not have much to worry about (a category which sadly seems to fit a number of the posters I see on CDF). For the rest of us who live in a society that is interdependent on others for everything from the food we eat to the natural gas we purchase to heat our homes this kind of crisis could easily have been a catastrophe.
I'm sorry we have 9.1% unemployment. Its a tired refrain to suggest things could be worse. The truth is though that they absolutely could have and would have if bold action hadn't been taken.
All the bailout did was allow the insiders of our financial system, to get prepared for the worst. It wasn't to help the average consumer.
As well all the bailout did was delay the inevitable reality that this countries financial system is NOT Sustainable.
What's happening with the Occupies near you today? I'm visiting a friend in Portland today and while there will see what's going on there.
Not a darn thing in Cocise County AZ, although Occupy Tucson is sloowly getting going. I've diverted my support to the Fraternal Order of Police defeating Issue #2 in Ohio in November. Even the Police know that the GOP is after their Pay, Benfits and pensions
We are the 99%
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's hope it doesn't escalate - perhaps then you'll get it.
