Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 39 of 39
  1. #26
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    The didn't start hitting the fan until summer 2007, after the democrats took congress.
    No law passes unless it's signed by the prez...

    And I'm pretty sure the rules that created the housing bubble predate even Bush Jr...

  2. #27
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    What specific legislation did the Dems pass with dubya's signature that caused the criminal housing bubble to pop?

    Whose regulator blocked 19 states' efforts to shutdown predatory, sub-prime lending?

  3. #28
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    No law passes unless it's signed by the prez...

    And I'm pretty sure the rules that created the housing bubble predate even Bush Jr...
    I agree, and I never said president Bush was without fault. I wish he vetoed more items from all four congresses than he did while he was in office.

    Still, he was the lesser of two other evils, even though he proved not to be as conservative as I like.

    The worse damage in history past, and present, is when both houses and the presidency are controlled by democrats.

  4. #29
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    can't get much more evil than lying the country into Iraq, wasting 100s of 1000s of lives, to grab the oil.

  5. #30
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    What specific legislation did the Dems pass with dubya's signature that caused the criminal housing bubble to pop?

    Whose regulator blocked 19 states' efforts to shutdown predatory, sub-prime lending?
    My memory of time may be flaky, but I think it was about 2003 that several republicans in congress tried to change the regulations governing housing loans, saying a disaster was coming if the regulations were not changed. They didn't have enough republican support, and were blocked by prominent democrats with little or no democrat support. The regulations/laws they were trying to change were passed in the early Clinton years if i recall correctly.

  6. #31
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    can't get much more evil than lying the country into Iraq, wasting 100s of 1000s of lives, to grab the oil.
    When you say something you believe to be true at the time, and find out later you were wrong, do you call yourself a liar?

  7. #32
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    "believe to be true at the time"

    they didn't believe it then. They knew they were fixing up the intelligence all along.

    CPAC and such neo- ilk wanted Clinton to invade Iraq.

    Iraq was on dubya's/Repug agenda when he swore in, and dubya mentioned Iraq in his first cabinet meeting.

    in 2002 and 2003, we heard "justificaiton-of-the-week" of why Saddam had to go. That odiferous bull was proven to be bull .

    "belief" ain't good enough when you're starting a war.
    Last edited by boutons_deux; 06-01-2011 at 05:39 PM.

  8. #33
    i hunt fenced animals clambake's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    25,321
    you mean they believed their own bull ?

  9. #34
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    I won't go so far as to call it direct control, but I do think it's a fair observation to say that the Fed & the executive branch have consistently remained like-minded.
    I wonder if this is true because the main bankers that the president speaks with are the federal reserve govenors. (i.e. the president doesn't "tell the fed what to do" rather, the fed "tells the president what his position should be."

    Edit: Oops, this was covered upstream.

  10. #35
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    Which do you think is the tail, and which do you think is the dog?
    This. The perception I get is that most of the time the Fed simply tells the executive how it's gonna be.

  11. #36
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    153,473
    The worse damage in history past, and present, is when both houses and the presidency are controlled by democrats.
    I disagree, I think it was just as bad when the GOP controlled both the executive and the legislative. Frankly, when it was mixed, it used to be better (at least it was on part of the Clinton administration), but lately it's hard to distinguish the parties apart.

  12. #37
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    “We Are on the Verge of a Great, Great Depression"

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/...+capitalism%29

    =========

    Some, I "believe" the Repugs have the solution ... to keeping economic hole going until Nov 2012. After which, if they win, they won't do all about the economy, because they believe that that hated govt has no role to play.

  13. #38
    Scrumtrulescent
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Post Count
    9,724
    This. The perception I get is that most of the time the Fed simply tells the executive how it's gonna be.
    With Greenspan, definitely. Greenspan spoke, presidents listened. But Bernake sure looked to me like he was taking orders from Paulson/Bush (read: Paulson). I think that still holds and he pretty much takes his lead from whatever Geitner/Obama (read: Geitner) are thinking.

  14. #39
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    51,121
    But with the current round of QE about to end, Mr Bernanke gave no hint that a third programme was on its way in a keenly awaited speech this week, acknowledging merely that “economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal-funds rate for an extended period.”

    The alternative, less palatable thesis is that the stimulus delivered by central banks and governments since late 2008 and early 2009 is now starting to fade. The authorities are running low on ammunition, as Mr Bernanke has in effect admitted. There appears to be little political appe e for a further round of fiscal stimulus or easier monetary policy. In Europe the emphasis has shifted to fiscal austerity and the European Central Bank has started to push up interest rates.
    http://www.economist.com/node/18805359

    FWIW

    The much hated stimulus is fading, and those who hated it the most will be among those who lose the most in the coming double dip. I am among those who never really considered us out of the first recession though.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •