Who Caused the Economic Crisis?

The Bush Depression

In a few weeks we will make a choice that will decide our future.
I follow an economist named Bob Proctor. He has called the top and bottom of every market crash since the 70s correctly.
Also, he perfectly predicted the current real estate market meltdown and the picture he paints about what will happen in the next couple years
is terrifying.He thinks it will be worse then the great depression.
The banks in the U.S. are going under one after the other. Countrywide the largest morgage bank in the world,Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch which are 3 out of the top 5 wall street firms. Also, Fanny and Freddy Mae which hold 50 percent of the home loans in the United States.
The government took them over because they are essentially bankrupt.If they didn't the entire financially system would virtually shut down, the stock market would crash and we would suffer beyond what any of us have seen before.

McCain just like Bush " doesn't understand the economy".
That not just my opinion its his own words. Not only does he not understand how to fix it but he does not understand exactly what is broken.
It is no surprise that he doesn't. The people that make up these securities use complex mathematical models very few people understand.
Bush and McCain both can take the credit for this mess since they helped deregulate the laws that were protecting us.

Bush's economic advisor Phil Graham wrote the deregulation bill that allowed banks to take huge risks with all of our future.
Now, Phil Graham is the head of McCain's economic policy.He is also McCain's choice for the next secretary of the treasury.
No one in this country can afford for that to happen. The last time Bush met with his economic advisors was in March. He either didn't care or didn't realize that anything was wrong. Phil Graham had the guts to say that we are in a mental recession after he helped create the worst economy meltdown in our lifetime.
It will take the best and brightest minds in the world to get us out of this nightmare. As bad as Bush has done, McCain would be
even more destructive because things are in much worse shape. The next president will not inherit a surplus like Bush did but a tanking economy and a 11,600,000,000,000 (trillion) dollars deficit.Bush created a national debt larger then the first 42 presidents combined
If you do what you have always done then you will get what you have always got.
When it comes to policy Bush and McCain are the same 90 percent of the time.
So why isnt obama 25 points ahead
The chairman of McCains campaign recently said that people don't vote on issues they vote on a personality composite. Which means he is trying to sell you personality instead of results.
Let's teach him we are smarter than that .

31 states are voting now, dont wait
Elect Obama Biden 2008




Check out this video of sarah palins interview before you vote


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r36Xc0GG4iQ

A Poll was taken by The Universal Health Institute recently, here are the Facts on Obesity. It states, " The reason that Republicans are twenty -five lbs. heavier than the average Human Being is from Stuffing themselves with Pork. Their gluttonous compulsions are from wallowing , in Troffs o, Pork ala Mode, Pork on The Cuff,, Pork Pie , Pork Salad Fannie..

First of all, MoveOn is an elitist liberal organization that would blame the Republicans for the darkness that occurs every evening after the sun sets if they could. This organization DOES NOT represent the interests of this country, and hopefully never will.

That being said, all of Washington is to blame for this mess, largely for making loans too available to borrowers that everyone knew were all too unlikely to actually be able to repay them. The only difference between Democrats and Republicans on this is their driving reasons, namely social ones for the Democrats, i.e., trying to make big houses available to the less wealthy so they could "keep up with the Jones's", despite the fact that these "Jones's" may be earning twice the salary -- and business reasons for the Republicans, i.e., once you've exhausted your "wealthy" audience, you've got to start reaching out to "less wealthy" people in order to maintain growth, thus attracting more speculation, and increasing your company's value.

So to that end, they're both to blame -- for making too many things too easy to buy for too many people -- perhaps for all the right reasons, whatever they may be -- but it still doesn't change the fact that all too many of these people may never have the means to actually pay for these things. And this is how both parties managed to scam the entire country's taxpayers of $700 billion.

First of all, MoveOn is an elitist liberal organization that would blame the Republicans for the darkness that occurs every evening after the sun sets if they could. This organization DOES NOT represent the interests of this country, and hopefully never will.

That being said, all of Washington is to blame for this mess, largely for making loans too available to borrowers that everyone knew were all too unlikely to actually be able to repay them. The only difference between Democrats and Republicans on this is their driving reasons, namely social ones for the Democrats, i.e., trying to make big houses available to the less wealthy so they could "keep up with the Jones's", despite the fact that these "Jones's" may be earning twice the salary -- and business reasons for the Republicans, i.e., once you've exhausted your "wealthy" audience, you've got to start reaching out to "less wealthy" people in order to maintain growth, thus attracting more speculation, and increasing your company's value.

So to that end, they're both to blame -- for making too many things too easy to buy for too many people -- perhaps for all the right reasons, whatever they may be -- but it still doesn't change the fact that all too many of these people may never have the means to actually pay for these things. And this is how both parties managed to scam the entire country's taxpayers of $700 billion.

If you bother to check back in time, you'll find that the Democrats removed controls from the financial markets with a series of bills during the Carter and early Clinton administrations. Also, idiots like Barney Frank, even in the midst of this financial crisis, wanted to pressure lenders into making even more bad loans to people who couldn't pay them off. Clearly, the Republicans may not be angels, but the liberal Democrats are the authors of this whole debacle.

If you want to see the REAL vote tally, check http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s106-900#votes

It's interesting to see people clain the GLBA was voted for by both sides. The real vote number were: 54-44 on party line in Senate and 343-86 in the house. Everyone loves to give out the votes for the conference committee rework. THAT vote was on the final language, NOT on the merits of the law. It was already passed by that point in time, so voting no wouldn't have changed anything

Actually the Colbert Report from Oct 2 Thursday night has a very education and entertaining segment that clearly explains the cause of the economic meltdown

Actually, The Colbert Report from Thursday Oct 2 has a segment that very clearly outlines the cause of the meltdown. Try to find it for very entertaining and educational content.

Nice red herring - It is not the G-L-B that earns Phil Gramm a place in hell, it is the 'Enron' loophole promoting speculation. Speculators, hedge funds, flip this house scammers - the people who steal the 'quick buck' always leave a mess for the rest of us. God will sort it out.. I wish them merscy, they wouldn't like justice.

The savings and loans debacle, the sub-prime loan mess, and the current collapse of brokerage firms have their root in one thing - the attempt to mask investment risk. By allowing investment companies to mask the riskiness of their investments either by repackaging bad loans or relying on the backing of the government have only replaced short term risks and smaller downturns with bigger ones that come less frequently but are too big for even the largest companies to handle all at once. It is time to remove the abstraction and let the riskiness of investments become naked for all to see without any significant assurance of the government bailing them out. Let each bad loan and investment fail and hurt those who made them directly. Forget all this layer of bureaucracy that tries to hide or push back the bad news. If you are looking for the ones to blame for setting us up for failure, just look at congress including Obama, Biden and McCain. Every time they "do something", they introduced more government when there is actually a need for less.

n a few weeks we will make a choice that will decide our future.
I follow an economist named Bob Proctor. He has called the top and bottom of every market crash since the 70s correctly.
Also, he perfectly predicted the current real estate market meltdown and the picture he paints about what will happen in the next couple years
is terrifying.He thinks it will be worse then the great depression.
The banks in the U.S. are going under one after the other. Countrywide the largest morgage bank in the world,Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch which are 3 out of the top 5 wall street firms. Also, Fanny and Freddy Mae which hold 50 percent of the home loans in the United States.
The government took them over because they are essentially bankrupt.If they didn't the entire financially system would virtually shut down, the stock market would crash and we would suffer beyond what any of us have seen before.

McCain just like Bush " doesn't understand the economy".
That not just my opinion its his own words. Not only does he not understand how to fix it but he does not understand exactly what is broken.
It is no surprise that he doesn't. The people that make up these securities use complex mathematical models very few people understand.
Bush and McCain both can take the credit for this mess since they helped deregulate the laws that were protecting us.

Bush's economic advisor Phil Graham wrote the deregulation bill that allowed banks to take huge risks with all of our future.
Now, Phil Graham is the head of McCain's economic policy.He is also McCain's choice for the next secretary of the treasury.
No one in this country can afford for that to happen. The last time Bush met with his economic advisors was in March. He either didn't care or didn't realize that anything was wrong. Phil Graham had the guts to say that we are in a mental recession after he helped create the worst economy meltdown in our lifetime.
It will take the best and brightest minds in the world to get us out of this nightmare. As bad as Bush has done, McCain would be
even more destructive because things are in much worse shape. The next president will not inherit a surplus like Bush did but a tanking economy and a 11,600,000,000,000 (trillion) dollars deficit. Most of it Bush created and it will take decades to pay it back.
When it comes to policy Bush and McCain are the same 90 percent of the time.
So why are the polls even close then ?





The chairman of McCains campaign recently said that people don't vote on issues they vote on a personality composite. Which means he is trying to sell you personality instead of results.




He believes people will vote against their own interests.

Let's teach him we are smarter than that .

Hold them accountable NOW!
Elect Obama Biden 2008




Check out this video of sarah palins interview it will blow you away


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r36Xc0GG4iQ

Kill the messenger. If you have the balls to point blame on Alan Greenspan then Phil gramm also deserves it. You are saying the move on.org claim is bogus and saying phil gramm had bipartisan support and all but you don't really say why phil gramm's legistlation is not to blame. fell asleep at the switch ? it is a good practice to review what you write before you post.

Obama is getting a bump out of this because people are not being reminded of the whole history where the economy is concerned, and who did what when. Call it bias by omission. The media simply says that the economy is Obama's strong issue, but never discusses the facts in detail. Further, who had a majority when is rarely relevant. If the simplistic Party In Power model were true, then the Democrats would not have needed the House Republicans when they tried to pass the bailout bill, as Democrats have the majority in both houses and there is no threat of a veto. In theory, they do not need the Republicans to vote at all. In fact, something like twelve (12) Democrats from Barney Franks own banking committee voted against the bill. Obviously, it is not so simple and the media does the voter a disservice by doing little more than reinforcing the error. A similar argument would be to say that the economy appeared to be doing fine until the Democrats took over control of Congress and the power of the purse, then it tanked. As an aside, the media also misleads regarding the Clinton economy when they fail to mention that it also ended in a recession, requiring the first round of Bush stimulus checks immediately after he took office..

Do Obama and the Democrats deserve a lift in the polls as a result of the financial and mortgage problems? The answer from history is a clear NO. Here's the lead of a New York Times story on September 30, 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending [link below]. That's 1999 folks. Clinton Administration, I believe.

Here's the lead of a New York Times story on Sept. 11, 2003: The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago. [see link below] The Democrats killed it.

McCain said in co-sponsoring the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190: "If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system and the economy as a whole. " The Democrats kiled it.

What was Barney Frank and fellow Democrats saying at the time of these attempted reforms? According to reports, Representative Barney Frank(D-MA) claimed of the thrifts "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." Representative Mel Watt (D-NC) added of the reforms "I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing." [ See Community Reinvestment Act, link below w/ history]

The link below contains a purported list of the top 25 in Congress who got contributions from the folks at Fannie and Freddie. Obama is listed third, after Dodd and Kerry, even though Obama is just a junior Senator. Obama is followed next by Clinton. Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi are on the list as well.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&artnum=1&issue=20080918


For an interesting article purporting to detail Barney Franks long history with Fannie Mae, See http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20080924145932.aspx
"Democratic House Financial Services Committee Chair promoted GSEs while former 'spouse' was Fannie Mae executive."

The last link below describes how some in Congress tried to use the original version of the bailout bill to divert money eventually recovered to groups like ACORN. See:

http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&artnum=1&issue=20080918

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=M2QwNDhkZTg2OGYzZjkzM2E2NDEwM2U5OGVkNTc0YzU=

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F958260

http://www.businessandmedia.org/printer/2008/20080924145932.aspx

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122247015469280723.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=16&artnum=1&issue=20080926

Interesting analysis but a critical piece of the puzzle is left unexamined: executive pay sapping a disproportional amount of profit and necessarily increasing overall operating expense. What kind of actual net profit margin does any business have to maintain to pay $20,000 to $80,000 million dollar golden parachutes on top of salaries in excess of $10 million annually plus stock options galore? There are numerous examples where executive amounts would have made significant contributions to recapitalizing the business itself. What might HP have done with $42 million paid to some one who could not effectively manage the business? What about the $18.5 million paid to WaMu CEO on the job for less than a month?

What needs to change very rapidly is stockholder control of BODs to put an end to this legalized robbery system of executive pay. In the absence of that control stability will not return to the markets. Investors should need to begin speaking out in the strongest terms about this matter. Stop being sucker into believing this is about "little people who bought bigger homes than they could afford" -- that thinking is simply blind to the reality of rape and plunder at the top.