Quote from Max E. Pad:
Since you seem to have gotten mixed up in your blame bush apologise for Obama speech, the repeal of glass steagall which was the number one cause of the housing crisis happened under Clinton.
Maybe you don't know this fact, but modern version of
deregulation began with President Ronald Reagan and specifically lead to the first and the second Savings & Loan Bailouts respectively. It was through Reagan, that the mostly Republican Congress (during the periods when he had one) that the country began to see what would eventually leak its way into financial and banking industries. Gramm/Leach/Bliley, while signed into law by Clinton, was authored and pushed by three (3) Republican Congressmen.
But, GLB had little to no impact whatsoever, on the CRAs. And, it was the former President and his majority Congress, that allowed the CRAs to get away with lying to its customers and the public in general. The CRAs, knowing full well that toxic waste was being pumped into the system via CDS/CDO and hyper-exotic derivatives born of underlying failures waiting to happen, were allowed by the Bush Administration to et away with murder in the first degree. Because, even foreign banks were using CRA output in their risk management models.
And, you can absolutely lay the blame on the doorstep of the then Federal Reserve, who shortly after 911, began their mortal assault on the USD, driving it into the ground against most major global currencies, as it reduced interest rates
too low and too fast between 2001 to the present.
There is a ton of blame to go around my dear friend and none of its rests on the doorstep of this current President. Any claim that this President either created or made worse the current economic hole we now live in each day of our lives, is a total, 100% lie - straight from the pits of hell, where it was originated, to cover the criminal tracks of those who WERE involved in setting this ticking time bomb off.
Quote from Max E. Pad:
Also since you are such a genius why dont you explain to us what the democrats would have done differently if they had control in 2000-2008??
I'm not a Democrat, I'm an Independent. I just dislike political hypocrisy and I see far too much of it coming from the Right these days.
Clinton, while having his problems with Monica in the White House, at least left behind a budget surplus that was both projected and real. Therefore, common sense tells me that continuing to follow that which gave you a budget surplus, just might keep you from digging yourself deeper into debt and deficit.
Second, it is my belief (as well as that of many intelligent people), mostly from having high-performance multi-engine jet aircraft flight experience, that 911 was not carried out according to the 911 Commission Report and that Neoconservative operatives were somehow involved in the plot against United States soil.
Now, if you want to look at the evidence for that declaration, I am more than happy to have that discussion with you, but it will have to be inside another thread, as such a discussion if off-topic here. It would also be a very technical discussion involving aerodynamics, flight performance factors, flight performance envelopes, flight physics, crash site signatures, crash sight geometries, NTSB investigative protocols, DNA typing and amplification protocols and processes, national airspace defense protocols, NORAD, FAA flight restriction protocols, Part 121 IFR flight procedures regarding departing flights on domestic soil and a host of other technical issues.
Therefore, I do not believe that 911 would have happened had Al Gore, been elected. There would have been no excuse to lower U.S. interest rates for fear of an economic cooling down period and there would have been no Trillions spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. Furthermore, under Clinton, millions of new jobs were created, with many new Hi-Tech jobs being added across the country. Many new Hi-Tech industries were born and more global trading partners were developed as a direct result. In fact, over in Silicon Valley, there were period of time when companies could not find enough qualified talent to fill certain technical jobs.
It was labeled as the Tech Bubble, but the jobs that it created were real. Real families paid real bills at the end of a real month and new business models were being created, nearly every week at the height of the so-called "Tech Bubble." But, the bubble only existed on Wall Street, as stock prices soared far beyond the earning potential of a new tech company and it was the expectations of those who were investing in those securities, that caused the real bubble - not the entrepreneurs in the Valley, and on Main Street, who were busting their butts everyday to create the new technologies that benefit the planet.
So, no. I don't think there would have been anywhere near the kind of explosive move to the downside for the U.S. economy, like we saw in 2008, had "President" Al Gore, been a reality - for all the reasons outlined above and herein.
Why?
Because mortgages don't cause economies to collapse -
job losses in very large numbers, are what causes economies to collapse. When the Middle Class is gainfully employed, people pay their bills. And, when people pay their bills, defaults remain within parameters of the credit markets and their business models work as designed. And, that is what this country had under Clinton, job creation. It was the strongest period of job creation the nation has ever seen. Even when it had cooled off, it was still producing more jobs per quarter, than were being produced at the peak of Ronald Reagan's Administration. So, that would have stemmed the tide of systemic collapse - jobs.
Now, would we have had a much needed correction? Absolutely - that is what economies around the world do. The expand for a period and then they contract for a period. That's Econ 101.
However, you can rest assured that 911, followed by the subsequent illegal invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, the subsequent slamming of interest rates by the Fed,
the total lack of focus on a domestic agenda by the Bush Administration here at home, coupled to the downsizing of the American Middle Class job, acted as the quintuple-trigger that eventually set-off job loss, increased national debt/deficit and catalyzed the implosion of the American economy, which then catalyzed the domino effect on the global economy that we all experienced in 2008.
Quote from Max E. Pad:
Do you really think the party that was the one who was pushing the idea of home ownership for low income people was going to put a stop to it when it was going on??
You spew the same tired, false, unfocused rhetoric that most Republican spew, when it comes time to taking
personal responsibility for the fact that they were in control during the build-up to the crash. You quote the same false statements that are a dime a dozen:
The Poor People Did It!
or
Congress allowed the poor people to do it!
Listen to yourself and the logic you use. When The People have jobs, and they qualify for a mortgage, that means that are able to pay that mortgage,
right up until the time they lose their job.
Job loss kills the economy, not mortgage underwriting.