What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral.

[mookiemookie]

Why are people trying to rewrite the history of the crisis? Some are simply trying to save face. Interest groups who advocate for deregulation of the finance sector would prefer that deregulation not receive any blame for the crisis.

Some stand to profit from the status quo: Banks present a systemic risk to the economy, and reducing that risk by lowering their leverage and increasing capital requirements also lowers profitability. Others are hired guns, doing the bidding of bosses on Wall Street.

It's funny to watch people not only trying to rewrite history, but trying to rewrite such recent history. It's so brazen. And sadly, it seems to be working on some level.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...OqM_story.html

[Ducimus]

[JU_88]

@mookie, so they blame their government, wow their arrogance is just incredible, they blame those that allowed them the freedom to carry out there crimes in the first place.
Cant these people be locked up under the anti terrorism act? - because thats what it is, financial terrorism.
Many People love there lies, so I'm sure they'll swallow this lastest lie whole and wash it down with a glass of ignorance - then scratch their heads when everything collapes around them and those responisble walk free.
Bon apetite!

@Ducimus, good video.. so much info like this is avaliable, yet many still cry "its not the co-operations or bankers" - idiots.

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be". Thomas Jefferson

[Hottentot]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

It's funny to watch people not only trying to rewrite history, but trying to rewrite such recent history.

Offtopic sidenote: history is supposed to be rewritten. History is being rewritten all the time. History being rewritten is history being a science. "Past" and "history" are not synonyms.

Sorry. Carry on, please.

Does anybody anywhere know what their doing

[Skybird]

By the end of the day, when all intellectuality and arguments is done, it comes down to this simply fact: an economy that runs by making debts, but never paying them back but instead increasing them in a bid on future generatons cleaning up the growing mess, is a snowball system and necessarily must fail. The details of that failure may differ in the cosmetic display, but the failure is not any less real.

Our economic theories to me are very much messed, FUBAR, and hopelessly designed to party on the present at the cost of the future. And after us - the great flood. Not our business, isn't it?

We must not seek to try curing the symptoms and saving the old system that has brought us to where we are. We need a new system that focusses on real valure instead of abstract, fictional value, and where "Nachthaltigkeit" (=sustainability?) and stability overrule short-termed profit interest and the insane hallucination that there could be something like endless growth. We need a stability that fluctuates around a certain treshhold that guarantees sustainability but does no longer aim at a system of boosted growth and "always more".

Truthz is this philosophy would be needed in almost all fields of conflictg today: ressources, fertile ground and farming, sweet water, population sizes - and finances and economy as well.

But I fear this is just calling in the desert.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

By the end of the day, when all intellectuality and arguments is done, it comes down to this simply fact: an economy that runs by making debts, but never paying them back but instead increasing them in a bit oin future generatons cleaning up the growing mess, is a snowball system and necessarily must fail. The details of that failure may differ in the cosmetic display, but the failure is not any more real.

Which brings a question to my mind, in all of the "Left-Right" accusations. How much can we expect a government to regulate industries that function that way when that is the exact same way the government operates? The government bails corporations out with borrowed money, and never actually pays off the interest, much less the principal.

[JU_88]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Which brings a question to my mind, in all of the "Left-Right" accusations. How much can we expect a government to regulate industries that function that way when that is the exact same way the government operates?.

The answer is, We cant,
Talk of tougher regulation, dealing our defecits and stimulating growth... all of that is just re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Its too late, we are screwed.

[Sea Demon]

Wow. This thread is pure comedy. We certainly have a number of Hugo Chavez wanna-be's here. In speaking about the financial mess, I notice that people who rail against "Big" capitalism and "Big" business tend to forget government's role in Fannie and Freddie. Take a look here and note the date:

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/bu...e-lending.html

For the few of you who support OWS, I'll post a very important part for you:

"In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.
The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring."

Fannie is called a GSE ... a Government Sponsored Entity. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were doing all they could to back up the banks and lending institutions who were making these subprime, almost worthless loans. No lender is going to make a loan that they feel is a mistake unless there is someone out there to back them up. The entities backing them up were Fannie and Freddie. Who in government was giving them directives to do this stuff? And the Bush administration proposed to alter the regulation of GSE's like Fannie and Freddie, and the Democrats fought those efforts. Look what Barney Frank (Democrat) had to say about it:



http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23617.html


I hate to bring this guy up as well, but John McCain tried in 2005 to enact a bill that would bring some oversight to Fannie and Freddie.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/1...e-mac-in-2005/

This causes disbelief in liberals, but that bill was stopped cold by a Democrat solid party line vote. But here we have leftist dolts blaming the free market for our current problems. And completely ignoring the governments role in enabling the bad mortgages and blocking reform. All these "revisions" of history, including Mookie's revisionists at the Washington Post, can't deny the role played here, the impacts, and the snowball effect across other sectors of the economy. Well, unless they themselves have an agenda to push.

Here's another tidbit:



And let me be clear about one more thing. Those of you who rail against capitalism, free markets, and financial institutions.....I invite you to live in areas of the world that don't have these things. I think these ignorant types (with no knowledge of finance whatsoever) need to live in places without financial institutions, banks, and private enterprise. Let's see what you think about your standard of living in those places. There are a number of places in the world without them. You are free to move there. I'm certain that Kim Jong Il has room for you.

This is why OWS is useless in the first place. They're targeting the wrong bunch if they hold any sense of intellectual honesty. But these people as we've seen are full of crap.

[JU_88]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Wow. This thread is pure comedy. We certainly have a number of Hugo Chavez wanna-be's here. In speaking about the financial mess, I notice that people who rail against "Big" capitalism and "Big" business tend to forget government's role in Fannie and Freddie. Take a look here and note the date:

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/bu...e-lending.html

For the few of you who support OWS, I'll post a very important part for you:



Fannie is called a GSE ... a Government Sponsored Entity. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were doing all they could to back up the banks and lending institutions who were making these subprime, almost worthless loans. No lender is going to make a loan that they feel is a mistake unless there is someone out there to back them up. The entities backing them up were Fannie and Freddie. Who in government was giving them directives to do this stuff? And the Bush administration proposed to alter the regulation of GSE's like Fannie and Freddie, and the Democrats fought those efforts. Look what Barney Frank (Democrat) had to say about it:



http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23617.html


I hate to bring this guy up as well, but John McCain tried in 2005 to enact a bill that would bring some oversight to Fannie and Freddie.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/1...e-mac-in-2005/

This causes disbelief in liberals, but that bill was stopped cold by a Democrat solid party line vote. But here we have leftist dolts blaming the free market for our current problems. And completely ignoring the governments role in enabling the bad mortgages and blocking reform. All these "revisions" of history, including Mookie's revisionists at the Washington Post, can't deny the role played here, the impacts, and the snowball effect across other sectors of the economy. Well, unless they themselves have an agenda to push.

Here's another tidbit:



And let me be clear about one more thing. Those of you who rail against capitalism, free markets, and financial institutions.....I invite you to live in areas of the world that don't have these things. I think these ignorant types (with no knowledge of finance whatsoever) need to live in places without financial institutions, banks, and private enterprise. Let's see what you think about your standard of living in those places. There are a number of places in the world without them. You are free to move there. I'm certain that Kim Jong Il has room for you.

This is why OWS is useless in the first place. They're targeting the wrong bunch if they hold any sense of intellectual honesty. But these people as we've seen are full of crap.

Who said we are pro OWS leftists and anti-capitalist against big businesses? Where did you get that from?? Capitalism alone is not why we in such a mess, it is only contributing factor.
Once again you are missing the big picture, go and do some proper research in to current affairs, learn to stop making stupid assumptions, leave your phoney partisan baggage at door -then come back and maybe we can talk.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Which brings a question to my mind, in all of the "Left-Right" accusations. How much can we expect a government to regulate industries that function that way when that is the exact same way the government operates?

You cannot expect that at all. It'S essentially just two of the several heads of one and the same hydra, when seeing "industry" as the big economic players, and "government" as "parties".

We do not get robbed by states or the institution of "the government". We do get robbed by political parties and economic lobby groups. We do get robbed by individual human people who have clearly defined interests in the current constellation that are directed against the longterm interests of the people, the nations. For the politician, it is party's power, his individual career, and ideology. For the lobbyist, it is the maximising of financial profit in the shortest ammount of time, and after that avoiding to get hold responsible. Both the economic lobbyist and the politician in this understanding are acting absolutely asocial.

In my understanding,
- Mafia-like organisations of crime,
- religious institutions like lobby groups, churches, clerical unions,
- banks and big corporations,
- and political parties,
all count as different manifestations of what we call "the organised crime", again, they all are heads of the same hydra. That's why they work hand in hand so wonderfully. It'S not four different problems. It's one big problem, smiling and biting with four different faces. The venom the bites inject, is "control".

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by JU_88

Who said we are pro OWS leftists and anti-capitalist against big businesses? Where did you get that from?? Capitalism alone is not why we in such a mess, it is only contributing factor.
Once again you are missing the big picture, go and do some proper research in to current affairs, learn to stop making stupid assumptions, leave your phoney partisan baggage at door -then come back and maybe we can talk.

Your words give you away. You ain't foolin' anybody.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Wow. This thread is pure comedy. We certainly have a number of Hugo Chavez wanna-be's here. In speaking about the financial mess, I notice that people who rail against "Big" capitalism and "Big" business tend to forget government's role in Fannie and Freddie. Take a look here and note the date:

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/bu...e-lending.html

For the few of you who support OWS, I'll post a very important part for you:



Fannie is called a GSE ... a Government Sponsored Entity. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were doing all they could to back up the banks and lending institutions who were making these subprime, almost worthless loans. No lender is going to make a loan that they feel is a mistake unless there is someone out there to back them up. The entities backing them up were Fannie and Freddie. Who in government was giving them directives to do this stuff? And the Bush administration proposed to alter the regulation of GSE's like Fannie and Freddie, and the Democrats fought those efforts. Look what Barney Frank (Democrat) had to say about it:



http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23617.html


I hate to bring this guy up as well, but John McCain tried in 2005 to enact a bill that would bring some oversight to Fannie and Freddie.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/1...e-mac-in-2005/

This causes disbelief in liberals, but that bill was stopped cold by a Democrat solid party line vote. But here we have leftist dolts blaming the free market for our current problems. And completely ignoring the governments role in enabling the bad mortgages and blocking reform. All these "revisions" of history, including Mookie's revisionists at the Washington Post, can't deny the role played here, the impacts, and the snowball effect across other sectors of the economy. Well, unless they themselves have an agenda to push.

Yes, the entire GLOBAL housing bubble was all due to Fannie and Freddie.





Not to mention private labels securitized more subprime loans than Fannie or Freddie ever held in their investment portfolios (as they could only securitize conforming loans) but you wouldn't know anything about that because you have your facts so wrong that it's pointless to even begin to explain to you how the process actually worked. You're closed off to fact and data, and that's your loss.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Yes, the entire GLOBAL housing bubble was all due to Fannie and Freddie.

Never said it was. But it is a prime cause of the meltdown in the USA...which of course affected the rest of the world (which happens to buy our treasuries).

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Never said it was. But it is a prime cause of the meltdown in the USA...which of course affected the rest of the world (which happens to buy our treasuries).

Or maybe the global meltdown had its roots in the same causes of the U.S. crisis - historic low Fed rates, 40-1 leverage, demand for junk AAA-rated paper, too many derivatives?

Nah, easier to toe the party line and blame Fannie, Freddie, Barney Frank and the Democrats.