I DON'T KNOW ABOUT CLINTON, BUT I DO KNOW ABOUT THESE GUYS

>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&feature=related<<

quote:

"Government regulators refused to approve such decisions when a lender was under investigation for not producing satisfactory statistics on loans to low-income people or minorities. Under growing pressures from both the Clinton administration and later the George W. Bush administration, banks began to lower their lending standards. Mortgage loans with no down payment, no income verification and other "creative" financial arrangements abounded."

that is not what you said though.

and banks were not required to lower their lending standards. Mortgage loans with no down payment, no income verification and other "creative" financial arrangements abounded because banks PUSHED those types of loans.

They didn't do it because they HAD to. They did it because they made TONS of money with them.

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:

quote:

"Government regulators refused to approve such decisions when a lender was under investigation for not producing satisfactory statistics on loans to low-income people or minorities. Under growing pressures from both the Clinton administration and later the George W. Bush administration, banks began to lower their lending standards. Mortgage loans with no down payment, no income verification and other "creative" financial arrangements abounded."

that is not what you said though.

and banks were not required to lower their lending standards. Mortgage loans with no down payment, no income verification and other "creative" financial arrangements abounded because banks PUSHED those types of loans.

They didn't do it because they HAD to. They did it because they made TONS of money with them.

Watch the video:

>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&feature=related<<

quote:

So are you dismissing this out of hand or do you have something to back up your opinion?

Personally I think the Banks caused the Banking problem. But I have nothing but the fact that most of the largest ones fail to back up my opinion

dismissing what out of hand?

I agree that Clinton allowed the much of the deregulation that helped cause this. so yeah he has a some "blood on his hands" as well. so he's NOT guiltless.

But I believe over all the issue was with the banks/wall street. They acted like kids in a candy store.

quote:

Watch the video:

I'm not watching edited cherry picked quotes.

point me to a piece of legislation if you want to but I'm not watch that tripe.

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:

quote:

Watch the video:

I'm not watching edited cherry picked quotes.

point me to a piece of legislation if you want to but I'm not watch that tripe.

Your position is duly noted. Hey as long as you're honest...not sure what is cherry picked...One side advocates reform and regulation, the other side does not...

I'm not a genius like the esteemed congressmen(and boy do they walk lock in step)

quote:

One side advocates reform and regulation

and what side wants regulation?

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:

quote:

One side advocates reform and regulation

and what side wants regulation?

I'm sure you watched the video already

Hey, the sooner we realize what the problem is(Government intervention, social engineering) the faster we can fix it...

quote:

I'm sure you watched the video already Wink

I asked what side you believe wants reform and regulation.

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:

quote:

I'm sure you watched the video already Wink

I asked what side you believe wants reform and regulation.

I'm just a dumb veteran, hell, i'm a chromosome away from dragging my knuckles. I wish I was as smart as those people in congress who ignored the warning signs on Freddie and Fannie, man they are smart!

Either way the video has 3+ million views already.

quote:

I'm just a dumb veteran, hell, i'm a chromosome away from dragging my knuckles. I wish I was as smart as those people in congress who ignored the warning signs on Freddie and Fannie, man they are smart!

Either way the video has 3+ million views already.

what side do you believe wants reform and regulation?

you said only one side wants those things so please name the "side" you believe wants them.

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:

quote:

I'm just a dumb veteran, hell, i'm a chromosome away from dragging my knuckles. I wish I was as smart as those people in congress who ignored the warning signs on Freddie and Fannie, man they are smart!

Either way the video has 3+ million views already.

what side do you believe wants reform and regulation?

you said only one side wants those things so please name the "side" you believe wants them.

I'm a grown man, i'm not siding with the,"cool guys" or any silly thing like that. I was just making an objective observation.

I'm just a concerned citizen looking out for our nation.

quote:

I'm a grown man, i'm not siding with the,"cool guys" or any silly thing like that. I was just making an objective observation.

A grown man would have just said the name of the party he was alluding to.

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:

quote:

I'm a grown man, i'm not siding with the,"cool guys" or any silly thing like that. I was just making an objective observation.

A grown man would have just said the name of the party he was alluding to.

Either way, I Hope your side is doing a great job!

quote:

Either way, I Hope your side is doing a great job!

The side that wants reform and regulation? you bet!

Reel him in, Karl.

quote:

Did Clinton cause the banking crisis?

Wasn't it Joe Kennedy back in 1929?

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:


But I believe over all the issue was with the banks/wall street. They acted like kids in a candy store.

That reminds me of something that Bush said. He said about this financial problem, "Wall Street got drunk". But, what he forgot to mention is the fact that the Fed was the one pouring the liquor.

quote:

Originally posted by 10tenths:

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:


But I believe over all the issue was with the banks/wall street. They acted like kids in a candy store.

That reminds me of something that Bush said. He said about this financial problem, "Wall Street got drunk". But, what he forgot to mention is the fact that the Fed was the one pouring the liquor.

...and the cops at the SEC were sleeping on the job...and Moody's, Standard and Poores and Fitch were spiking the ratings punch with roofies...and the drunk kids at this party all had rich parents with friends at Justice to keep them out of jail.

You blame bartenders for drunk drivers driving drunk?

quote:

Reel him in, Karl.

i have a feeling he wont be around much.

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:

quote:

Reel him in, Karl.

i have a feeling he wont be around much.

Too slick by half. Another wrestler?

that's my guess.

quote:

Originally posted by Yooper_tj:

quote:

Originally posted by 10tenths:

quote:

Originally posted by karlhungusjr:


But I believe over all the issue was with the banks/wall street. They acted like kids in a candy store.

That reminds me of something that Bush said. He said about this financial problem, "Wall Street got drunk". But, what he forgot to mention is the fact that the Fed was the one pouring the liquor.

...and the cops at the SEC were sleeping on the job...and Moody's, Standard and Poores and Fitch were spiking the ratings punch with roofies...and the drunk kids at this party all had rich parents with friends at Justice to keep them out of jail.

You blame bartenders for drunk drivers driving drunk?

No, I blame the system in which this happens. If you give your kid car keys and a bottle of Makers Mark, you should not be surprised if the car gets wrapped around a tree. We have a system that will always have booms and busts. While the Fed is the main contributor, there are other fundamentals at play here. Fractional-Reserve Banking is a key player, as is interest rate manipulation. Every single crisis we have had can be attributed to the system of Fractional-Reserve Banking. But, those early panics did not always take hold of the entire economy, because it was not always centralized as it is today. Then, after 1922 those panics became increasingly more common. What used to happen every decade or more, started to happen in periods of time calculated in months. So, what happened in 1922? Well, the Fed started it's open market operations (i.e. artificially setting interest rates).

You cannot control the economy, you can only give it pushes. But, when that push is easy credit (free money, essentially), that is one hell of a push. And, it is that push that creates the boom. And, all booms created by nothing more than easy credit (rather than by market forces alone) will always end in a bust. That is the way it has always been and people have known this for thousands of years (even the Babylonians knew this, except their economy was goods based rather than fiat based). It is not a new idea, it is just that people forget or they simply do not wish to know. Ignorance is bliss.

quote:

Originally posted by DMarkUhler:

quote:

and not let this happen again.

Now that is funny. How are you going to stop it? More regulation? More big governament? I thought you was one of them libertarians....

Classic Dave. Dont reply to the topic but the poster in order to make yourself feel smarter. You're getting bitter. I thought with your saviour in office you would be better but no.\

BTW, Im not a libertarian, butnice try at pigeon holing.

GRAYMAN

quote:

Dont reply to the topic but the poster....

It was a question to your point. If you don't care to defend your own comment, that is fine by me. Oh and you are now distancing yourself from the libertarians? How interesting.

EXACTLY 10Tenths, exactly. Add to the mix that most don't even know what "money" is/represents , much less understand how it flows, and we have a disaster in the making. Disaster complete when even those making policy don't understand (or forgot, or refuse to acknowledge) what money is and pretend it is a piece of paper off of an Intaglio press !

quote:

Originally posted by threerings:
+++http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/did-clinton-cause-the-banking-crisis.aspx

On Wall Street and Main Street they call William Jefferson Clinton the "Comeback Kid," but it's not because of some Election Day surprise.

It's because almost everything he did regarding financial-services regulation has come back to haunt us.

If it wasn't apparent before, the former president's handiwork became clear when President Barack Obama announced his plans for sweeping financial-services reforms. Obama's efforts to bring fair dealing to the mortgage markets, rules to the derivatives marketplace and restraint to big financial companies underscore the missteps of Clinton's second term.

We had weakly regulated markets when Clinton took office, but by the time he left, they were an invitation to lawless dealing. For the ease of it, Willie Sutton would have traded his gun and mask for a briefcase and necktie.



My poor wife..I'm going to have a raging ****on for weeks over this article.

Clinton didn't cause it, but he did sign the legislation that caused it. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 caused the mess, and it was introduced by three Republicans, but the final version passed by overwhelming veto proof majorities in both the House and Senate. If you really want to blame someone blame Phil Gramm and Jim Leach for introducing the legislation.

quote:

Originally posted by peter3_1:
EXACTLY 10Tenths, exactly. Add to the mix that most don't even know what "money" is/represents , much less understand how it flows, and we have a disaster in the making. Disaster complete when even those making policy don't understand (or forgot, or refuse to acknowledge) what money is and pretend it is a piece of paper off of an Intaglio press !

The history of money is quite interesting. How paper notes came about is even more interesting, because it essentially came from criminal gold smiths issuing more receipts than gold they had (they were counterfeiting). Yet, this is essentially the same system that we have today. The only difference is that back then your paper notes were redeemable into gold, whereas today they are redeemable into nothing. The only thing that backs our currency today is confidence.

People must remember that the only reason that our currency even became the reserve currency for most of the industrialized world was because it was 100% redeemable into gold and it had a fixed exchange to foreign currencies. That is no longer true today. And, that is quite important. Because, during past crisis, we were on a gold standard. So, foreign banks and nations knew they could still redeem. After 1971, when foreign banks and nations could no longer redeem in gold, there was no worry when we had a crisis. The reason is that back then we had a huge industrial base that accounted for a large portion of our GDP and we had ample savings; we were the worlds largest creditor nation and we were the worlds largest producer of goods. So, there was no fear in a declining dollar.

Obviously, if you follow the currency markets as I do, you would find nothing but fear of a declining dollar. The only thing is that many nations are not in a position to flee... Yet. That is why I think they are pumping money into our system. They are trying to ensure that they get some of their money back, especially China, whose debt holdings are short term. Roughly 1/3 of our entire national debt comes due in the next 12 months, and China owns much of that debt, as do Japan and Saudi Arabia. So, it is pretty clear what they are doing.

Every crisis that we have ever had can be traced to overexpansion of credit by banks utilizing fractional reserve banking. That is the root of all of the bank runs, that is the root of all of the bubble bursts, that is the root of everything. Except, now we have a centralized inflation/credit expansion factory called the Federal Reserve.

Like I said, this is not new knowledge. This knowledge goes back thousands of years. But, I have made my focus the United States panics. And, every history that you read on these crisis you find the same exact trends. I am just now cracking open "The Panic of 1819" by Murray N. Rothbard. Sure, he is an Austrian. But, even the Statists, Keynesians and Monetarists cite this as the bee's knees for accounts and histories of that particular panic. And, wouldn't you know it, the parallels are amazing.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759

quote:

Originally posted by 10tenths:

quote:

Originally posted by peter3_1:
EXACTLY 10Tenths, exactly. Add to the mix that most don't even know what "money" is/represents , much less understand how it flows, and we have a disaster in the making. Disaster complete when even those making policy don't understand (or forgot, or refuse to acknowledge) what money is and pretend it is a piece of paper off of an Intaglio press !

The history of money is quite interesting. How paper notes came about is even more interesting, because it essentially came from criminal gold smiths issuing more receipts than gold they had (they were counterfeiting). Yet, this is essentially the same system that we have today. The only difference is that back then your paper notes were redeemable into gold, whereas today they are redeemable into nothing. The only thing that backs our currency today is confidence.

People must remember that the only reason that our currency even became the reserve currency for most of the industrialized world was because it was 100% redeemable into gold and it had a fixed exchange to foreign currencies. That is no longer true today. And, that is quite important. Because, during past crisis, we were on a gold standard. So, foreign banks and nations knew they could still redeem. After 1971, when foreign banks and nations could no longer redeem in gold, there was no worry when we had a crisis. The reason is that back then we had a huge industrial base that accounted for a large portion of our GDP and we had ample savings; we were the worlds largest creditor nation and we were the worlds largest producer of goods. So, there was no fear in a declining dollar.

Obviously, if you follow the currency markets as I do, you would find nothing but fear of a declining dollar. The only thing is that many nations are not in a position to flee... Yet. That is why I think they are pumping money into our system. They are trying to ensure that they get some of their money back, especially China, whose debt holdings are short term. Roughly 1/3 of our entire national debt comes due in the next 12 months, and China owns much of that debt, as do Japan and Saudi Arabia. So, it is pretty clear what they are doing.

Every crisis that we have ever had can be traced to overexpansion of credit by banks utilizing fractional reserve banking. That is the root of all of the bank runs, that is the root of all of the bubble bursts, that is the root of everything. Except, now we have a centralized inflation/credit expansion factory called the Federal Reserve.

Like I said, this is not new knowledge. This knowledge goes back thousands of years. But, I have made my focus the United States panics. And, every history that you read on these crisis you find the same exact trends. I am just now cracking open "The Panic of 1819" by Murray N. Rothbard. Sure, he is an Austrian. But, even the Statists, Keynesians and Monetarists cite this as the bee's knees for accounts and histories of that particular panic. And, wouldn't you know it, the parallels are amazing.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759

10ths,
Any suggested readings on this topic?

<from the Austrain School>

Panic of 1819, Murray Rothbard

Human Action, Ludwig von Mises

Socialism, Ludwig von Mises

Money, Bank Credit, and Economic Cycles, Jesus Huerta de Soto

Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek

Prices and Production, F.A Hayek

Principles of Economics, Carl Menger (you may be able to find this in a translated version, the one I have is in German)

<from the Keynesian School>

The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, John Maynard Keynes

The Inflation of Currency as a Method of Taxation, John Maynard Keynes

Currencies and Crisis, Paul Krugman

Fuzzy Math: The Essential Guide to the Bush Tax Plan, Paul Krugman

The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008, Paul Krugman

<the Marxist School>

Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. I. The Process of Capitalist Production, Karl Marx

<The Chicago School>

Capitalism and Freedom, Milton Friedman

On the Mechanics of Economic Development, Robert Lucas, Jr

Railroads and American Economic Growth: Essays in Econometric History, Robert Fogel

There are obviously many more. But, I would like to stress the large difference between the Austrian School and the others. Economists know very little about history, and historians know very little about economics. The Austrian School is extremely proficient in both. The aim of most schools of economic thought is to come up with formulas in order to project or predict future events if certain stimulus are introduced, whereas the Austrian prefer to use deductive reasoning gathered from history. They both use statistical data, it is just that the other schools use this data in order to control future events. The Austrian School uses this data to see what is happening on the human level through human action. So, the Austrian School relinquishes all control of the economy to the people.

Many of the things listed above are found in book form, others can be read online or on your Kindle. Some, you may have to get a book with a series of essays contained within them. But, all of the books above are good reads if you are looking to get an understanding of economics and money. I support the Austrian School, so I obviously do not agree with most of the information from the other school (with some exceptions granted to small parts of the Chicago School). But, I think that true knowledge comes from knowing all of the info out there first and then choosing the one that suits you last.

The study of economics can be quite boring, that is why it is called the "dismal science". But, the same cannot be said of Austrian Theory. It is quite enjoyable to read for many reason. But, the reasons that I think make it enjoyable are that it just makes sense and that it has a strong base in history. I cannot say the same for the Keynesian School; I have thrown more than a few Krugman books clear across the room in anger. Keynesian Theory has it's roots in Mercantilism, so I guess that pretty much explains that.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 10tenths,