Pain is sometimes necessary for others to learn.
It would have been a nice cleansing.
Instead the pain is delayed.
In this case, the "pain" would be a cascade of bankruptcies in most major international banks (yes that includes American banks), airline companies (can you say bye bye Boeing?), and many other small, medium and large companies. You might not understand the "cascade" effect but it is very real and very dangerous. AIG was and is too big and should have been broken up years ago, but that does not change the fact that AIG was the worlds insurance company.
Democrats screamed for it.
The wrote the law.
Bush... signed it.
Conservatives opposed.
Because conservatives played politics and lost. Conservatives have not had a reliable sensible economic thought for 20 years, since we are in the situation we are now. Their whole argument has been deregulation, less oversight and lower taxes. Where has that let us... to markets that acted like drug addicts in a pill factory, and a massive economic problem.
False. Big time. Putting all blame on Freddie and Fannie is just wrong.
Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis | McClatchy
Freddie and Fannie had far far lower default rates than private lenders. It was also the private lenders that did a huge portion of the sub-prime lending, which all was unregulated because it was not under Freddie and Fannie Mae, which was regulated. The Republican arguments fail time and time again when faced with the facts, but the media as always side with the Republicans and fail to mention the facts.
Bush and McCain tried to correct their practices but Dems were vehement in the defense of these entities.
Wrong again. McCain and his buddies pushed more and more deregulation that lead to the possibility of unregulated banks and companies to provide sub-prime mortages to people. Repealing laws that had been in place since the the 30s on keeping banks and investment companies apart, basicly made it possible for AIG to provide the insurance policies that in the end sank them and many others. There are many to blame and yet the right seem only want to blame one thing.. Fannie and Freddie and the left, while totally ignoring that they had a large if not bigger role than the Democrats. Who was it that was in power in Congress when the deregulation was passed? Oh yea the Republicans. Yes it was a Democratic president that signed the law. Who was it that did not regulate or even keep an eye on the situation .. oh yea, the Republican administration and Congress.
You misunderstand a loathing of socialism with the a loathing of the man, though he is a work.
If I hated him, I wouldn't have said I liked what I heard about education.
I simply cannot stomach socialism, and he is a Marxist/socialist to the core.
And your "knowledge" of the subject seems to be that of a pin head. Obama is no where near a socialist, let alone a marxist.. which are not the same thing. You are just using the tired old slurs by the right to paint someone the "enemy" via cold war analogies. You know very well, that anything labelled "socialist, marxist, communist, islamist" will rally the right wing as no other, which is why you and other use it time and time again.
Dems were talking about the constrictions of Sarbanes-Oxley.
And lifting them.
Remember that?
I am for deruglation, but also for regulators to do their job.
Did you know Fannie and Freddie had 200 individuals looking at only these two companies for irregularities?
LOL.
That comes from Warren Buffett's mouth, and as he says... I look at more than two companies a day.
And so what? The right has been "after" Fannie and Freddie since they were formed, because they empowered the oppositions voting block and not their own. It is funny that the right is suppose to be for the "American dream" and yet they have been doing their damnest to prevent a large portion of the population in achieving it.. go figure.
Listen Freddie and Fannie were no angels in this whole mess, but they were not the main problem nore were they the biggest problem. They did not cause the problem nore did they make it worse much worse.
The Republican's have done a damn good job as usual with the help of the media to muddle the facts and blur reality into something it is not. They did it with Iraq and are doing it with this.
80% of subprime lending was via PRIVATE companies, not Fannie and Freddie. 20+% of these are in default, where as Fannie and Freddie are around 1% or so. It was also these PRIVATE companies that paid millions in bribes.. I mean campaign contributions to both sides, so to get passed deregulation that made it possible to provide the very financial assets that in turn has burned everyone and cause the problem.
See what? A youtube video that is heavily edited? And considering the "boner" the right has had with Fannie and Freddie, do you really think that anyone would take the seriously? It is funny that this from 2004... now who was it that was in absolute power then.. oh yea the Republicans. So why did they not investigate and expose then?
Seriously why do you and most conservatives deny the rights big fat paw prints on the whole problem? I can fully admit that it was a Democratic president that signed into law what is accepted by most sane people as one of the major pieces of legislation that tore down the barriers between banks and investment companies, legislation promoted and driven forward by a republican congress lead by a certain person called Graham, who happened to be good buddies with your last presidential candidate and called all American's a bunch of whiners.
There is plenty of blame to throw around.
Let them play with derivatives.
We shouldn't have to bail their failures.
Their failures are your failure, that is the whole freaking point. Derivatives and Credit default swaps "failed" because the housing bubble failed. That in turn was caused by lax legislation and regulation on the part of Congress, and greedy financial institutions, bankers and Americans who had to live beyond their means and live on credit.
Yep, and Obama wants to reneg on the contracts.
We aren't a Marxist society.
Different folks have different contracts.
No you are something worse, a nation where certain parts can legally not live up to their contractual obligations, but where others are forced to do so. Much like communist countries where the elite are given all the perks but where the poor masses are sent to the fields to spread horse and cow manure in hope that the crops grow.
Neither should have been bailed out.
And here again you fail to comprehend the reality of the situation and the consequences of letting such companies go belly up. This is not some mom pop company that will only effect a few people, we are talking about bank holdings, mortgages and many jobs that are dependant on keeping these "to big to fail" companies working.
