The Watering Hole

Here is the question.  I have repeatedly seen the Republicans blamed for deregulation in mortgages and seen them blame for causing the mortgage crisis in our country.  Q:  Do you believe this to be the case?  If so, please include some links to information that supports your answer.  Do you think it's the Dems fault?  Both?  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act

The bills were passed by a 54-44 vote along party lines with Republican support in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives.

McCain has "no regrets about deregulation".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUJ_Qn0AHTU

DreamTheaterRules — Oct 06, 2008Don't be put off by the topic.  This is a serious question.  But I while conservatives are welcome to chime in, I'd ask them to hold their peace until we get a good representation from the more liberally minded.

Here is the question.  I have repeatedly seen the Republicans blamed for deregulation in mortgages and seen them blame for causing the mortgage crisis in our country.  Q:  Do you believe this to be the case?  If so, please include some links to information that supports your answer.

They both had a hand in it, certainly, but it was the relaxing of rules and oversight (deregulation) that led to this, and only one party has championed that on a regular basis: Republicans.

The legislation they wrote and executed (and passed with a veto-proof majority) led us into this period of financial turmoil. The neutering of the SEC under Bush appointee Christopher Cox made it even worse. I'm going to pull a favorite tactic of the right (especially Fox News) out and share that "some say" he was given the job to slow down enforcement, since he was always a "faithful soldier of the right". He's the Michael Chertoff/Michael Brown of this crisis - asleep at the wheel.
(TIME magazine asked the question: http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1843519,00.html )

HECKUVA JOB, COXEY!

And Charger's links make it pretty clear where the problems came from originally. But it's been 20 years of deregulation...and the Republicans haven't always been in charge of Congress.

My view is that the Democrats definitely didn't do enough to make sure this sort of chicanery wasn't going to happen, though, so some blame definitely is theirs.

But a nasty mix of deregulation and no oversight is really what caused it all...and only one group of people has really been in charge the past 7 1/2 years, so you make your own judgment on the issue, as I'm sure you will (after all, Republicans in general don't generally like actual facts, they just like the ones they make up that agree with their ideals).
Tripper

LOL, Tripper!  I actually liked most of your answer.... right up til the end!  Just had to get that jab in there, didn't ya?   8-)

DreamTheaterRules — Oct 07, 2008LOL, Tripper!  I actually liked most of your answer.... right up til the end!  Just had to get that jab in there, didn't ya?   8-)

It's true, though, isn't it?  Obama isn't a terrorist, but if you listen to Sarah Palin, he is a terrorist who wants to destroy America.  A man running for president who has somehow duped a majority of the country into voting for him is actually a domestic terrorist!  

Things like these latest Palin gems, and the negative whisper campaign in 2000 against McCain, as well as the constant effort by Republicans to suppress the vote (because far more Democrats are registered than Republicans)* are the kinds of things that make me think that Republicans don't just espouse bad policy, but they are fundamentally warped.

*http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/10/05/DI2008100502672.html

"Real" fair and balanced reporting:  BOTH parties say a lot of shit that isn't true.  The main difference as I see it is that the Democrats say it in this annoying, loud, whiny, emotional voice while the Republicans tend to prefer an obnoxious, know-it-all, self-righeous and arrogant tone.

Personally, I can't stand either of them.

charger — Oct 07, 2008[quote author=DreamTheaterRules link=1223316661/0#4 date=1223404827]  ...as well as the constant effort by Republicans to suppress the vote (because far more Democrats are registered than Republicans)

Heh, a good example.  The Republicans realize that some people just aren't knowledgeable enough about the issues and try to supress the voting (which is wrong), and Democrats will sign up anyone (including some more than once) even if it requires unethical means since they don't really care about anything but getting a vote (which is also wrong).  They're famous for hitting up campuses and getting teens barely old enough to vote to join their party which many will do since, at that age, they really don't know squat yet (but think they do), are hormonal and emotional as well as very suggestible.  It takes them awhile to realize that most of what they're told is bullshit.  Of course, that probably makes the Republicans even more devious since it takes longer for people to see their BS which is usually more subtle.

The current economic cycle started from the bottom of the last recession around 2001/02.

i.e. The credit boom which turned into this huge credit crunch started in 2002 - the crunch hit first in summer 2007, most people would not have noticed.

You can analyse the various historical causes of this - events going back as far as you like, right back to Reagan and Thatcher but the current cycle of boom and bust has happened in this period between 2002 - 2007.

The first stop for apportioning blame HAS to be with those in government during the period a crisis was created.

Why ? Because they alone were in charge of economic policy at the time, they had the power to reform and regulate in that period regardless of the legacy they were handed.

So it is a simple question of who was in charge ?

Well clearly the republicans were in charge during that entire period in the White house.
Republicans were also in charge of congress for most of that period as well.

If they could not get legislation through congress in that period, then they have a claim to lay the blame at those in congress that blocked them taking action but it would simply be laying the blame at house republicans.

Democrats are not blameless but it was on the Republican watch.

OK - that said.

The thing that is really worrying about this crisis is the rank ignorance of  elected officials from both parties.
Ignorant ideological political crap driving decisions.

Yeah, joe average in the street is ignorant and is against a Wall Street bail out - sure - everyone is against a wall street bail out.

But the financial system is the foundation stone of the economy it is about the fundemental international security of money as a means of doing economic business in a capitalist system.

It is a national security issue - if the finance system fails - the capitalist system fails - it would be as serious as if energy supplies were simply cut.
Governments worldwide would be forced  to deal with it using emergency powers -  nationalization of the system.

i.e. The end of capitalism

These idiots who are arguing against supporting the financial system due to ideological reasons are now effectively asking for their ideological destruction much like an inverterate USSR communist circa 1989.

Economics is not a branch of religion! It is about being  pragmatic.

If the system fails you can't rely on FDIC schemes to reimburse you.

It has a fund of 45 billion to back up several trillions of deposits.

The only thing that backs money up is confidence in the system itself.

As FDR said - the only thing to fear is fear itself.

And it is still true.

If governments give the impression they are not willing and competent enough to back their own systems that system fails through fear.

This is a time for pragmatic leadership worldwide.

Ideologues and self servers show themselves up as the pointless "Fiddling while Rome burns" ignorant fuckers they are.

This crisis is serious but still recoverable - so long as you don't allow the government system to be gummed up with ignorant fuckers from either party.

Use the same criteria you would use for trusting anyone to guard anything precious to you.

i.e. you want to vote in the smartest most skilled people who know how to make a deal and compromise.
politics is the art of the possible.

Not people who smile nice, pretend to be like you and then incompetently fuck you over.

I don't include Bush in this - but he is restricted as a lame duck at them moment though.

I would like to see Obama to raise the seriousness of the issue in this coming debate,  and extend Bush some political credit on this issue.

Something along the lines that this is not a time for a lame duck presidency and he will work closely with the White House to organise a seamless administrative handover of the crisis and will be involved in supporting  presidential decisions to shore up stability in these critical  times.

Obviously he will need to call on McCain to do the same and McCain will attempt to call the same trick - but that is simply politics.

But this is getting beyond national politics now -  Only coordinated international action can save the system worldwide.

fingers — Oct 07, 2008 As FDR said - the only thing to fear is fear itself.

Ah, yes. The guy who started the greatest MLM scheme in history, Social Security.  Great for those in the beginning and crap for those of later generations... Seems like the Government didn't care much about the future even back then, did it?

Very informative post Trip Charger and Fingers.

I completely agree the edge would have to go the repuiblicans.

(I actually read the links and post closely this time.)

Please take note, I was on the dems side on this one. ;D ;D Interpreted, against repubs. ;D ;D

Just want to add this one observation, has anyone noticed that durring Bush's term, there has been nothing but fighting between repubs and dems? Especially with congress?

CraigBert — Oct 07, 2008

Ah, yes. The guy who started the greatest MLM scheme in history, Social Security.  Great for those in the beginning and crap for those of later generations... Seems like the Government didn't care much about the future even back then, did it?

FDR took over in the Great Depression with an economy sliding into an abyss.
His actions rescued the US economic and financial system from devastation

Sorry FDR made things really crap for you since that.

I would guess it is like a blaming a surgeon for the scar he left when he saved your life as a baby.

;D ;D

Can't stand scars.  Good analogy with the surgeon though, most of them only know how to "cure" a problem by cutting even when there are usually more beneficial (and less invasive) solutions available.

Fascinating read:

Freddie Mac secretly paid a GOP consultant to kill regulatory legislation
Firm got enough GOP votes in '05 to kill Senate bill

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/national_world/stories/2008/10/20/copy/freddie_influence.ART_ART_10-20-08_A7_NCBLAIE.html?adsec=politics&sid=101