Reagan & Conservatives -- Revisonist History 101

[Dad2three]

Panic of 1796–97

The Panic of 1796–1797 was a series of downturns in Atlantic credit markets that led to broader commercial downturns in both Britain and the United States. In the U.S., problems first emerged when a land speculation bubble burst in 1796. The crisis deepened when the Bank of England suspended specie payments on February 25, 1797 under the Bank Restriction Act of 1797. The Bank's directors feared insolvency when English account holders, who were nervous about a possible French invasion, began withdrawing their deposits.

By 1800, the crisis had resulted in the collapse of many prominent merchant firms in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, and the imprisonment of many American debtors. The latter included the famed financier of the revolution Robert Morris and his partner James Greenleaf who had invested in backcountry land.

Panic of 1796?97 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So the, there was no such panic in the American economy, it was the managed economies of the European monarchies that suffered the downturn,,,




You're too easy.

"In combination with the unfolding collapse of the U.S. real estate market, the Bank of England's action had disflationary repercussions in the financial and commercial markets of the coastal United States and the Caribbean at the start of the 19th century...By 1800, the crisis had resulted in the collapse of many prominent merchant firms in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, and the imprisonment of many American debtors"


GROW A BRAIN BUBBA


Libertarians believe in myths and fairy tales

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Same could be said about Capitalism. Capitalism failed twice in America- once in 1929 and again in 2008.

Everything fails eventually.

Now, here's the problem I see with Communism. If you don't give someone an incentive, they have no reason to try. That's why Communisim is bad.

The problem with Capitalism is that it doesn't differentiate between positive methods of incentive and negative ones. You get much richer cheating granny out of her retirement account than you do inventing a product that might make Granny's life a little better.

I'm all for a system that incentivizes the good and penalizes the bad.

Bill Gates - invents a product that makes all of our lives better. Good.

Mitt Romney- Loots struggling companies for their assets, leaves other people holding the bag. Bad.

So which one did you guys run for President in 2012?

1928 the Fed Straggles the US Economy nearly to death by withdrawing 1/3 of the money supply

2008 the Federal government entities Freddie and Fannie were the binary black holes at the epicenter of the mortgage meltdown, demanding they be fed all the subprime paper they could devour.

MORE right wing garbage, I'm shocked, shocked I tell you


The Money Supply and Consumer Price Index (CPI)
Before and During the Great Depression Years

http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/depmon.htm


1/3rdc huh? lol

US Money Supply M2 (USCB) 1925-1939 - US Stuck on Stupid




Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up


The boom and bust was global. Proponents of the Big Lie ignore the worldwide nature of the housing boom and bust.

run-up in global home prices occurred.” It is highly unlikely that a simultaneous boom and bust everywhere else in the world was caused by one set of factors (ultra-low rates, securitized AAA-rated subprime, derivatives) but had a different set of causes in the United States. Indeed, this might be the biggest obstacle to pushing the false narrative.

Nonbank mortgage underwriting exploded from 2001 to 2007, along with the private label securitization market, which eclipsed Fannie and Freddie during the boom.


•Private lenders not subject to congressional regulations collapsed lending standards. Taking up that extra share were nonbanks selling mortgages elsewhere, not to the GSEs.


Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up | The Big Picture




No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)

1. Private markets caused the shady mortgage boom

2. The government’s affordability mission didn’t cause the crisis


4. Conservatives sang a different tune before the crash: Conservative think tanks spent the 2000s saying the exact opposite of what they are saying now


MY FAV

Bill Black went through what AEI said about the GSEs during the 2000s and it is the same thing — that they were blocking subprime loans from being made. In the words of Peter Wallison in 2004: “In recent years, study after study has shown that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are failing to do even as much as banks and S&Ls in providing financing for affordable housing, including minority and low income housing.”


Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture




Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets

Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis | Economics | McClatchy DC



I'M SHOCKED YOU DIDN'T BLAME BARNEY OR CLINTON

Thanks for showing how the Fed reduced the money supply by 1/3 from 1928-1932

On 2008 you're as wrong as Krugman

 

[JoeB131]

We know, Communism rocks. So what if it's failed every time and every place it's been tried. Next time it'll work!

Fucking tool

Same could be said about Capitalism. Capitalism failed twice in America- once in 1929 and again in 2008.

Everything fails eventually.

Now, here's the problem I see with Communism. If you don't give someone an incentive, they have no reason to try. That's why Communisim is bad.

The problem with Capitalism is that it doesn't differentiate between positive methods of incentive and negative ones. You get much richer cheating granny out of her retirement account than you do inventing a product that might make Granny's life a little better.

I'm all for a system that incentivizes the good and penalizes the bad.

Bill Gates - invents a product that makes all of our lives better. Good.

Mitt Romney- Loots struggling companies for their assets, leaves other people holding the bag. Bad.

So which one did you guys run for President in 2012?

There you go again...blaming capitalism, when the fault clearly lays with the very thing you love...big government.

When one blames something that is not at fault, while ignoring the true culprit and then believing the true culprit is not only blameless, but can actually be the solution, that makes one a sucker.

Okay, so you are a retard with no reading comprehension skills and didn't follow a thing I said.

Okay. Got it.

"Government Bad". Except when they send a check to your double wide.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Let 'capitalism' work as libertarians wish? lol

If your handlers will put Ritalin in your banana to calm you down and reduce your shit flinging for a moment, I will attempt to converse with you.



These were the result of what? What was the result of them?

Again you fling shit and think it has some bearing on the conversation. I know, your goal is to distract through your antics, not to make a cogent point.

Still, you bring up bank panics from the 19th century as if they are some sort of impeachment to market driven systems. Naturally you fail to explain why your trainers had you post them.

Let's actually look at the bullshit you post, shall we?

First, there was no actual "panic" of 1796, your trainers decided to "pad" things - leftists lie, since facts are the enemy of the left.

Panic of 1819

The Second Bank of the United States issued huge amounts of paper currency to stimulate the economy - some fucktarded fool got the notion that deficit spending would stimulate economic growth and create revenue returns in excess of government expenditures.

Now you are monkey, you lack the wits of a man, thus you cannot grasp facts or reality - but FAR from the "Libertarians" supporting this idiocy, they spoke against it.

{As early as 1814, Thomas Jefferson warned, "We are to be ruined by paper, as we were formerly by the old Continental paper." Two years later, he asserted that "we are under a bank bubble" that would soon burst.}

Panic of 1819: The First Major U.S. Depression - The Globalist

Ooops, not quite the tale you're trying to fabricate, is it?




I assume you think this makes some sort of point?

Keynes wrote "The End of Laissez Faire" in 1926. He was correct then, and his insight remains more valid than any economics that conservative Libertarians propound ad infinitum and ad nauseum. Laissez Faire is nothing more than a childish Christmas wish of no substance; just hope and myth, and smoke and mirrors. Fails every time we try even the tiniest bit.

ROFL

Yes, because the regulated banks of 1926 were so "Laissez Faire."

You should at least attempt to learn what words mean before you bandy them about, monkey boi

Got it, you'll stick to right wing myths, distortions and lies

Laizze affaire? WHERE ? WHEN?

Now YES, the NATIONAL BANK the US created in 1913 hasn't slowed down the libertarians crashing the economy totally, but yes, it's slowed it down. Weird how when the 'market forces' are left to their own, as 1826, 1929 AND 2008 crash shows, the markets do HORRIBLE for the majority of people

MYTHS AND FAIRY TALES IS ALL YOU HAVE

Weird you can't point to ONE successful state/nation to EVER use libertarian economic policy successfully!

Jefferson the guy who wanted to 'share the wealth' and have the rich carry the tax burden, was libertarian? lol

Uncensored is a disinfo agent.He should change his user name to CENSORED because he beats the drums of the governments version of events all the time no matter how absurd they are.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Same could be said about Capitalism. Capitalism failed twice in America- once in 1929 and again in 2008.

Everything fails eventually.

Now, here's the problem I see with Communism. If you don't give someone an incentive, they have no reason to try. That's why Communisim is bad.

The problem with Capitalism is that it doesn't differentiate between positive methods of incentive and negative ones. You get much richer cheating granny out of her retirement account than you do inventing a product that might make Granny's life a little better.

I'm all for a system that incentivizes the good and penalizes the bad.

Bill Gates - invents a product that makes all of our lives better. Good.

Mitt Romney- Loots struggling companies for their assets, leaves other people holding the bag. Bad.

So which one did you guys run for President in 2012?

There you go again...blaming capitalism, when the fault clearly lays with the very thing you love...big government.

When one blames something that is not at fault, while ignoring the true culprit and then believing the true culprit is not only blameless, but can actually be the solution, that makes one a sucker.

Okay, so you are a retard with no reading comprehension skills and didn't follow a thing I said.

Okay. Got it.

"Government Bad". Except when they send a check to your double wide.

that describes Crusader Retard and the reagan apologists to a tee.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Reagan & Conservatives -- Revisonist History 101

1988: Reagan Abandoned, Mocked by Hardline Conservatives​

This is why the GOP lost in 2008 and 2012: They are living in a past that never existed, just like Reagan did. Reagan raised taxes, grew government, backed socialist programs, and more. When a political party lives on myth, sooner or later it all just collapses into a warm pile of shit



So it was Reagan's becoming more liberal towards the Soviets, that brought about Reagan's deals with the Soviets, that led to a warming of the cold war and the end of the Soviets' hostility distrust of the west and the USA

Reagan sucked

Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts

We’d been discussing taxes on the air and the fact that Denmark has an average 52 percent income-tax rate. I asked him why people didn’t revolt at such high taxes, and he smiled and pointed out to me that the average Dane is very well paid, with a minimum wage that equals roughly $18 per hour. Moreover, what Danes get for their taxes (that we don’t) is a free college education and free health care, not to mention four weeks of paid vacation each year and notoriety as the happiest nation on earth, according to a major study done by the University of Leicester in the United Kingdom.2

But it was once we were off the air that he made the comment that I found so enlightening.

“You Americans are such suckers,” he said. “You think that the rules for taxes that apply to rich people also apply to working people, but they don’t. When working peoples’ taxes go up, their pay goes up. When their taxes go down, their pay goes down. It may take a year or two or three to all even out, but it always works this way—look at any country in Europe. And that rule on taxes is the opposite of how it works for rich people!”

My Danish guest was right. So before we get into the larger consequences of tax increases or tax cuts for the nation’s economic health, let’s parse this business about what tax increases or cuts mean for the rich and for the not-so-rich.

Yeah and guess what? your hero Obomination just like every single president since reagan has,has followed his footsteps. every single president since reagan has been more evil and corrupt than the previous one.

our country was actually a half way decent country with actual freedoms back when carter was in office-the last fairly good president we had who served the people instead of the bankers and the establishment, but it hasnt been ever since Reagan took office since every single president since him has esculated what he got started.

and thats because whether you realise it or not,its a ONE PARTY SYSTEM designed to look like two parties so the american sheople think they have a choice in who gets elected.The proof is in the pudding.our last GREAT president,who actually served the people instead of the bankers,paid for that mistake on nov 22nd 1963.

The president is just a puppet following their orders given to him by the bankers and military industrial complex-whom Eisenhower warned the american people to be aware of in his farewell address speech.He wasnt being their willing puppet and wasnt doing what they told him to do and he paid the price for it on that date.

Since then,Carter has been the only decent president we have had who also served the people instead of the bankers.perfect example of another presidnet who tried to do the right thing and as a result,another perfect example of another good president who did not get to serve in office very long because of that.

Here is the proof in the pudding that everything that I have said is true.You might actually take the time-"two hours out of your schedule," to watch it.

Nobody has ever been able to debunk it.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw]The Obama Deception HQ Full length version - YouTube[/ame]

Dad you never answered my question here which is have you seen this two hour video THE OBAMA DECEPTION? you should watch it because there is one part in there that refers to JFK and explains in detail with proof contrary to what the reaganut worshippers believe,that JFK was our last GREAT president we had.

JFK was our last GREAT president we had but carter was our last GOOD president we had.we were actually taking positive steps under carters leadership when he was in office on getting back to being a free country again and having civil libertys as well honored.

That all changed with Reagan and with every president since him,they all turned it up a notch what he got started.he was the original grandfather of all these presidents since him taking us down that path towards a facist dictatership.Like I said before,thats just another example of how when a good president that comes along,he doesnt get to serve in office very long.

 

[Dad2three]

1928 the Fed Straggles the US Economy nearly to death by withdrawing 1/3 of the money supply

2008 the Federal government entities Freddie and Fannie were the binary black holes at the epicenter of the mortgage meltdown, demanding they be fed all the subprime paper they could devour.

MORE right wing garbage, I'm shocked, shocked I tell you


The Money Supply and Consumer Price Index (CPI)
Before and During the Great Depression Years

http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/depmon.htm


1/3rdc huh? lol

US Money Supply M2 (USCB) 1925-1939 - US Stuck on Stupid




Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up


The boom and bust was global. Proponents of the Big Lie ignore the worldwide nature of the housing boom and bust.

run-up in global home prices occurred.” It is highly unlikely that a simultaneous boom and bust everywhere else in the world was caused by one set of factors (ultra-low rates, securitized AAA-rated subprime, derivatives) but had a different set of causes in the United States. Indeed, this might be the biggest obstacle to pushing the false narrative.

Nonbank mortgage underwriting exploded from 2001 to 2007, along with the private label securitization market, which eclipsed Fannie and Freddie during the boom.


•Private lenders not subject to congressional regulations collapsed lending standards. Taking up that extra share were nonbanks selling mortgages elsewhere, not to the GSEs.


Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up | The Big Picture




No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)

1. Private markets caused the shady mortgage boom

2. The government’s affordability mission didn’t cause the crisis


4. Conservatives sang a different tune before the crash: Conservative think tanks spent the 2000s saying the exact opposite of what they are saying now


MY FAV

Bill Black went through what AEI said about the GSEs during the 2000s and it is the same thing — that they were blocking subprime loans from being made. In the words of Peter Wallison in 2004: “In recent years, study after study has shown that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are failing to do even as much as banks and S&Ls in providing financing for affordable housing, including minority and low income housing.”


Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture




Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets

Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis | Economics | McClatchy DC



I'M SHOCKED YOU DIDN'T BLAME BARNEY OR CLINTON

Thanks for showing how the Fed reduced the money supply by 1/3 from 1928-1932

On 2008 you're as wrong as Krugman

So reducing it in 1928-1932 cased the stock market to crash in 1929? lol


WINGNUT!

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST 2000-2008, ONE BUSH IGNORED AND CHEERED ON THE BANKSTERS!

 

[gipper]

Same could be said about Capitalism. Capitalism failed twice in America- once in 1929 and again in 2008.

Everything fails eventually.

Now, here's the problem I see with Communism. If you don't give someone an incentive, they have no reason to try. That's why Communisim is bad.

The problem with Capitalism is that it doesn't differentiate between positive methods of incentive and negative ones. You get much richer cheating granny out of her retirement account than you do inventing a product that might make Granny's life a little better.

I'm all for a system that incentivizes the good and penalizes the bad.

Bill Gates - invents a product that makes all of our lives better. Good.

Mitt Romney- Loots struggling companies for their assets, leaves other people holding the bag. Bad.

So which one did you guys run for President in 2012?

There you go again...blaming capitalism, when the fault clearly lays with the very thing you love...big government.

When one blames something that is not at fault, while ignoring the true culprit and then believing the true culprit is not only blameless, but can actually be the solution, that makes one a sucker.

If only we could go back to small government again; a time when most Americans were simple farmers and land was dirt cheap. It was that damn industrial revolution that changed America, it even changed where people lived and taught them to depend on a job in an industrial city.
We have an economic depression today and people, go hungry. I say bring back the farm and we won't need big government, it's that simple. Of course we have to make land dirt-cheap again, and maybe change our goal to forty acres and a mule, not computers and air planes?

To believe government, which consists of liars, frauds, and criminals can regulate and control the American economy and banking system...when history clearly reveals they CAN'T, is pure foolishness.

The problem is government intervention. The American government has been intervening in the economy since the development of the railroads...and what a boondoggle that was like all things done by government.

Free market capitalism is merely allowing the people to freely exchange goods and services without government corruption, favoritism, and control. Simple and it works well.

Anyone who blames Capitalism for our economic problems, clearly is uninformed and likely duped by the progressive establishment.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

MORE right wing garbage, I'm shocked, shocked I tell you


The Money Supply and Consumer Price Index (CPI)
Before and During the Great Depression Years

http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/depmon.htm


1/3rdc huh? lol

US Money Supply M2 (USCB) 1925-1939 - US Stuck on Stupid




Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up


The boom and bust was global. Proponents of the Big Lie ignore the worldwide nature of the housing boom and bust.

run-up in global home prices occurred.” It is highly unlikely that a simultaneous boom and bust everywhere else in the world was caused by one set of factors (ultra-low rates, securitized AAA-rated subprime, derivatives) but had a different set of causes in the United States. Indeed, this might be the biggest obstacle to pushing the false narrative.

Nonbank mortgage underwriting exploded from 2001 to 2007, along with the private label securitization market, which eclipsed Fannie and Freddie during the boom.


•Private lenders not subject to congressional regulations collapsed lending standards. Taking up that extra share were nonbanks selling mortgages elsewhere, not to the GSEs.


Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up | The Big Picture




No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)

1. Private markets caused the shady mortgage boom

2. The government’s affordability mission didn’t cause the crisis


4. Conservatives sang a different tune before the crash: Conservative think tanks spent the 2000s saying the exact opposite of what they are saying now


MY FAV

Bill Black went through what AEI said about the GSEs during the 2000s and it is the same thing — that they were blocking subprime loans from being made. In the words of Peter Wallison in 2004: “In recent years, study after study has shown that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are failing to do even as much as banks and S&Ls in providing financing for affordable housing, including minority and low income housing.”


Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture




Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets

Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis | Economics | McClatchy DC



I'M SHOCKED YOU DIDN'T BLAME BARNEY OR CLINTON

Thanks for showing how the Fed reduced the money supply by 1/3 from 1928-1932

On 2008 you're as wrong as Krugman

So reducing it in 1928-1932 cased the stock market to crash in 1929? lol


WINGNUT!

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST 2000-2008, ONE BUSH IGNORED AND CHEERED ON THE BANKSTERS!

Sucking 1/3 of the money supply out of the system caused the Great Depression.

Did you think that the stock market was the one and only factor?

Stop reading Krugman

 

[Uncensored2008]

Uncensored is a disinfo agent.He should change his user name to CENSORED because he beats the drums of the governments version of events all the time no matter how absurd they are.

ROFL

The feral baboon is promoting a totalitarian system, stupid. Are you too stupid to grasp that the left seeks Soviet style authoritarianism under a dictator who is unconstrained by the Constitution?

Look, you're insane, I get it, but are you stupid as well?

 

[Uncensored2008]

So reducing it in 1928-1932 cased the stock market to crash in 1929? lol


WINGNUT!

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST 2000-2008, ONE BUSH IGNORED AND CHEERED ON THE BANKSTERS!

Is that what BOOOOOSSSSHHHH did, Comrade Monkey?



Gee, it looks more like Bush tried to stop it, and your fellow Communist, Barney Frank led the campaign to keep it going.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So reducing it in 1928-1932 cased the stock market to crash in 1929? lol


WINGNUT!

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST 2000-2008, ONE BUSH IGNORED AND CHEERED ON THE BANKSTERS!

Is that what BOOOOOSSSSHHHH did, Comrade Monkey?



Gee, it looks more like Bush tried to stop it, and your fellow Communist, Barney Frank led the campaign to keep it going.

Progressives are pathological liars and economic sociopaths

 

[regent]

There you go again...blaming capitalism, when the fault clearly lays with the very thing you love...big government.

When one blames something that is not at fault, while ignoring the true culprit and then believing the true culprit is not only blameless, but can actually be the solution, that makes one a sucker.

If only we could go back to small government again; a time when most Americans were simple farmers and land was dirt cheap. It was that damn industrial revolution that changed America, it even changed where people lived and taught them to depend on a job in an industrial city.
We have an economic depression today and people, go hungry. I say bring back the farm and we won't need big government, it's that simple. Of course we have to make land dirt-cheap again, and maybe change our goal to forty acres and a mule, not computers and air planes?

To believe government, which consists of liars, frauds, and criminals can regulate and control the American economy and banking system...when history clearly reveals they CAN'T, is pure foolishness.

The problem is government intervention. The American government has been intervening in the economy since the development of the railroads...and what a boondoggle that was like all things done by government.

Free market capitalism is merely allowing the people to freely exchange goods and services without government corruption, favoritism, and control. Simple and it works well.

Anyone who blames Capitalism for our economic problems, clearly is uninformed and likely duped by the progressive establishment.

The government under George Washington was involved in the economy as soon as the ink dried on the Constitution. The problem with capitalism is the difficulty of keeping it capitalistic. As soon as government corrects one distortion to capitalism the capitalists find another way to distort it.

 

[Dad2three]

There you go again...blaming capitalism, when the fault clearly lays with the very thing you love...big government.

When one blames something that is not at fault, while ignoring the true culprit and then believing the true culprit is not only blameless, but can actually be the solution, that makes one a sucker.

If only we could go back to small government again; a time when most Americans were simple farmers and land was dirt cheap. It was that damn industrial revolution that changed America, it even changed where people lived and taught them to depend on a job in an industrial city.
We have an economic depression today and people, go hungry. I say bring back the farm and we won't need big government, it's that simple. Of course we have to make land dirt-cheap again, and maybe change our goal to forty acres and a mule, not computers and air planes?

To believe government, which consists of liars, frauds, and criminals can regulate and control the American economy and banking system...when history clearly reveals they CAN'T, is pure foolishness.

The problem is government intervention. The American government has been intervening in the economy since the development of the railroads...and what a boondoggle that was like all things done by government.

Free market capitalism is merely allowing the people to freely exchange goods and services without government corruption, favoritism, and control. Simple and it works well.

Anyone who blames Capitalism for our economic problems, clearly is uninformed and likely duped by the progressive establishment.

More CRAP from wingnuts who don't have a clue. Name the place that uses your libertarian crap? EVER? lol

(Re-)Introducing: The American School of Economics

When the United States became independent from Britain it also rebelled against the British System of economics, characterized by Adam Smith, in favor of the American School based on protectionism and infrastructure and prospered under this system for almost 200 years to become the wealthiest nation in the world. Unrestrained free trade resurfaced in the early 1900s culminating in the Great Depression and again in the 1970s culminating in the current Economic Meltdown.

Closely related to mercantilism, it can be seen as contrary to classical economics. It consisted of these three core policies:

protecting industry through selective high tariffs (especially 1861–1932) and through subsidies (especially 1932–70)

government investments in infrastructure creating targeted internal improvements (especially in transportation)

a national bank with policies that promote the growth of productive enterprises rather than speculation

Frank Bourgin's 1989 study of the Constitutional Convention shows that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders


American School of Economics


American School (economics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Conservative Ideas Can't Escape Blame for the Financial Crisis


The onset of the recent financial crisis in late 2007 created an intellectual crisis for conservatives, who had been touting for decades the benefits of a hands-off approach to financial market regulation. As the crisis quickly spiraled out of control, it quickly became apparent that the massive credit bubble of the mid-2000s, followed by the inevitable bust that culminated with the financial markets freeze in the fall of 2008, occurred predominantly among those parts of the financial system that were least regulated, or where regulations existed but were largely unenforced.

Predictably, many conservatives sought to blame the bogeymen they always blamed.

Politics Most Blatant | Center for American Progress




Alan Greenspan:

"I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organisations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms," said Greenspan.

Greenspan - I was wrong about the economy. Sort of | Business | The Guardian

 

[Dad2three]

Thanks for showing how the Fed reduced the money supply by 1/3 from 1928-1932

On 2008 you're as wrong as Krugman

So reducing it in 1928-1932 cased the stock market to crash in 1929? lol


WINGNUT!

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST 2000-2008, ONE BUSH IGNORED AND CHEERED ON THE BANKSTERS!

Sucking 1/3 of the money supply out of the system caused the Great Depression.

Did you think that the stock market was the one and only factor?

Stop reading Krugman

LOOK AT THIS CHART BUBBA

NOW WHEN DID THE DEPRESSION START? LOL



It was not just one factor, but instead a combination of domestic and worldwide conditions that led to the Great Depression.

1. Stock Market Crash of 1929

2. Bank Failures

Throughout the 1930s over 9,000 banks failed. Bank deposits were uninsured and thus as banks failed people simply lost their savings. Surviving banks, unsure of the economic situation and concerned for their own survival, stopped being as willing to create new loans. This exacerbated the situation leading to less and less expenditures.

3. Reduction in Purchasing Across the Board

Great Depression - Top Five Causes of the Great Depression



Essentially what happened in the 1920's was that there was an oversupply of goods.

 

[Dad2three]

So reducing it in 1928-1932 cased the stock market to crash in 1929? lol


WINGNUT!

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST 2000-2008, ONE BUSH IGNORED AND CHEERED ON THE BANKSTERS!

Is that what BOOOOOSSSSHHHH did, Comrade Monkey?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM]Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown - YouTube[/ame]

Gee, it looks more like Bush tried to stop it, and your fellow Communist, Barney Frank led the campaign to keep it going.

Barney Frank? Minority member of the GOP MAJORITY HOUSE (LIKE TODAY)? What super powers did he have again?


Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

2004 Republican Convention:

Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.
...

Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

(APPLAUSE)

Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home."



Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”

Q Why would Bush’s regulators let banks lower their lending standards?

A. Federal regulators at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the Office of Thrift Supervision work for Bush and he was pushing his “Ownership Society” programs that was a major and successful part of his re election campaign in 2004. And Bush’s regulators not only let banks do this, they attacked state regulators trying to do their jobs. Bush’s documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional 440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING
But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.


June 17, 2004


(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.

Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004

 

[Dad2three]

So reducing it in 1928-1932 cased the stock market to crash in 1929? lol


WINGNUT!

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST 2000-2008, ONE BUSH IGNORED AND CHEERED ON THE BANKSTERS!

Is that what BOOOOOSSSSHHHH did, Comrade Monkey?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM]Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown - YouTube[/ame]

Gee, it looks more like Bush tried to stop it, and your fellow Communist, Barney Frank led the campaign to keep it going.

BUSH TRIED TO STOP IT? Let me guess, he went to the GOP CONGRESS 17 TIMES? LOL'


The critics have forgotten that the House passed a GSE reform bill in 2005 that could well have prevented the current crisis, says Mr Oxley (R) , now vice-chairman of Nasdaq.”

“What did we get from the White House? We got a one-finger salute.”


Oxley was Chairman of the House Financial Services committee and sponsor of the only reform bill to pass any chamber of the republican controlled congress



One president controlled the regulators that not only let banks stop checking income but cheered them on. And as president Bush could enact the very policies that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble and he did. And his party controlled congress.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So reducing it in 1928-1932 cased the stock market to crash in 1929? lol


WINGNUT!

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST 2000-2008, ONE BUSH IGNORED AND CHEERED ON THE BANKSTERS!

Sucking 1/3 of the money supply out of the system caused the Great Depression.

Did you think that the stock market was the one and only factor?

Stop reading Krugman

LOOK AT THIS CHART BUBBA

NOW WHEN DID THE DEPRESSION START? LOL



It was not just one factor, but instead a combination of domestic and worldwide conditions that led to the Great Depression.

1. Stock Market Crash of 1929

2. Bank Failures

Throughout the 1930s over 9,000 banks failed. Bank deposits were uninsured and thus as banks failed people simply lost their savings. Surviving banks, unsure of the economic situation and concerned for their own survival, stopped being as willing to create new loans. This exacerbated the situation leading to less and less expenditures.

3. Reduction in Purchasing Across the Board

Great Depression - Top Five Causes of the Great Depression



Essentially what happened in the 1920's was that there was an oversupply of goods.

There was no "over supply of good" We had 2 transformational technologies sweeping the nation in the 1920's: electricity and mass production. Moreover we had a President, the greatest of the 20th Century who was disciplined enough to keep the fuck out of the way: Calvin Coolidge.

You posted a chart that backs my statement that the Fed strangled the US Economy nearly to death by withdrawing 1/3 of the money supply. Thanks

 

[Dad2three]

So reducing it in 1928-1932 cased the stock market to crash in 1929? lol


WINGNUT!

WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST 2000-2008, ONE BUSH IGNORED AND CHEERED ON THE BANKSTERS!

Is that what BOOOOOSSSSHHHH did, Comrade Monkey?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM]Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown - YouTube[/ame]

Gee, it looks more like Bush tried to stop it, and your fellow Communist, Barney Frank led the campaign to keep it going.

Progressives are pathological liars and economic sociopaths

Weird, an out of context vid from 2004 talking about the GSE's ACCOUNTING scandals of 2003-2004 means what again?


BUSH TRIED TO STOP IT? LOL



June 17, 2004

Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan

Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004



Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again.



From Bush's President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”



No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)


1. Private markets caused the shady mortgage boom

2. The government’s affordability mission didn’t cause the crisis

4. Conservatives sang a different tune before the crash: Conservative think tanks spent the 2000s saying the exact opposite of what they are saying now


MY FAV

AEI's Peter Wallison in 2004: “In recent years, study after study has shown that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are failing to do even as much as banks and S&Ls in providing financing for affordable housing, including minority and low income housing.”





Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture


The Myth of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Barney Frank, the Housing Bubble and the Recession


Start with the most basic fact of all: virtually none of the $1.5 trillion of cratering subprime mortgages were backed by Fannie or Freddie


The Myth of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Barney Frank, the Housing Bubble and the Recession | The Long Goodbye




Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis | Economics | McClatchy DC

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Is that what BOOOOOSSSSHHHH did, Comrade Monkey?

Timeline shows Bush, McCain warning Dems of financial and housing crisis; meltdown - YouTube

Gee, it looks more like Bush tried to stop it, and your fellow Communist, Barney Frank led the campaign to keep it going.

Progressives are pathological liars and economic sociopaths

Weird, an out of context vid from 2004 talking about the GSE's ACCOUNTING scandals of 2003-2004 means what again?


BUSH TRIED TO STOP IT? LOL



June 17, 2004

Builders to fight Bush's low-income plan

Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday


Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004



Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again.



From Bush's President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”



No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)


1. Private markets caused the shady mortgage boom

2. The government’s affordability mission didn’t cause the crisis

4. Conservatives sang a different tune before the crash: Conservative think tanks spent the 2000s saying the exact opposite of what they are saying now


MY FAV

AEI's Peter Wallison in 2004: “In recent years, study after study has shown that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are failing to do even as much as banks and S&Ls in providing financing for affordable housing, including minority and low income housing.”





Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture


The Myth of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Barney Frank, the Housing Bubble and the Recession


Start with the most basic fact of all: virtually none of the $1.5 trillion of cratering subprime mortgages were backed by Fannie or Freddie


The Myth of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Barney Frank, the Housing Bubble and the Recession | The Long Goodbye




Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis


Private sector loans, not Fannie or Freddie, triggered crisis | Economics | McClatchy DC

LOL!!!

OMFG You bolded one of the stupidest things I've ever heard!



Start with the most basic fact of all: virtually none of the $1.5 trillion of cratering subprime mortgages were backed by Fannie or Freddie

Say what?????????????????

What do you think "No Income, No Asset" loans were?

http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/research/papers/ecaf_2077.pdf