Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What "certain constituency" ? Fannie and Freddie bought run of the mill, middle class, 30-year loans.
Yes, but this practice went on for decades without any serious problems. It's bad, but it's not the proximate cause of the financial crisis. Things didn't go bad over $180 billion.
Yes, we do. You didn't address any of the laws and practices we have that enable these financial firms to create asset bubbles. Fannie and Freddie absorb risk for the banks, and they provide liquidity, but they don't drive monetary policy.
It's $180 billion and counting. Monetary policy is driven by the Fed which is financing Obama's four-year spending spree and borrowing binge by artificially holding interest rates low, thereby masking the true cost of Obama's borrowing. This has come at the expense of savers, particularly retirees, who can't generate any income on their savings. Unfortunately retirees are not made aware of the corrupt bargain between Obama and the Fed that is financing Obama's spending at their expense.
Monetary policy is driven by the Fed which is financing Obama's four-year spending spree and borrowing binge by artificially holding interest rates low, thereby masking the true cost of Obama's borrowing.
Which (A) has not a damn thing to do with GSE's or regulation, and (B) doesn't answer my question.
Quote:
This has come at the expense of savers, particularly retirees, who can't generate any income on their savings. Unfortunately retirees are not made aware of the corrupt bargain between Obama and the Fed that is financing Obama's spending at their expense.
You have that backwards. The point of low interest rates is not to help finance the government's operations.. the point of low interest rates is to keep property values (the typical retirees' bread and butter assets) from collapsing. Low interest rates actually make it more difficult for the federal government to spend, because it reduces the demand for gov't bonds.
As I said, the American Right Wing is about... deregulate corporations, regulate people. In those Scandinavian countries, such ideologies are either neutered or beaten down. Trust me, the USA will adapt eventually.
Clearly, you agree that regulations aren't a problem, but corporate influence in regulations and their enforcement is.
The Chicago mafia and various political cronies have long used city regulations to enrich themselves and hurt competition.
-Boat Taxis? Rivals heavily inspected and harrassed or worse.
-Regulation of 10% of city contracts to go to minority companies....and the guys owning the construction companies and so forth that helped push for this created subsidiary companies in their wives names...voila thanks for the business guys.
-Liquor licenses not given out or taken away.
-Grocery etc. monopolies kept Walmart out of the city for decades leaving them a captive audience that they could gouge.
I'm not for unregulating some things but I do not share your blind faith in regulation.
Oh P.S. Ex Gov. Christie used his influence to keep less capital that regulators would usually require in his collapsed investment group. Isn't that nice?
Which (A) has not a damn thing to do with GSE's or regulation, and (B) doesn't answer my question.
You have that backwards. The point of low interest rates is not to help finance the government's operations.. the point of low interest rates is to keep property values (the typical retirees' bread and butter assets) from collapsing. Low interest rates actually make it more difficult for the federal government to spend, because it reduces the demand for gov't bonds.
Low interest rates also keep the dollars exchange value from imploding more than it is from our massive money printing exercise and helps the gov to hide the true extent of inflation which is eating our retirees alive while we tell them "what inflation?".
Politicians don't get elected for cutting things from people. They give people what they want which they pay for indirectly in reduced currency value. Then when we notice things like gas or food costing a lot more the politican will then blame the gas and food companies. The circle is complete.
Low interest rates also keep the dollars exchange value from imploding more than it is from our massive money printing exercise
and helps the gov to hide the true extent of inflation which is eating our retirees alive while we tell them "what inflation?".
on either point, how do you figure?
AFAIK , low interest rates encourage the "implosion of the exchange value of the dollar". If we raised interest rates the dollar would strengthen even more.
and i don't see what interest rates have to do with "hiding the true extent of inflation." I know we do that, but we seem to do that through CPI, like excluding energy and using some screwed up OER calculation.
Play of money and power. Only helped more by supporters of Citizens United decision.
I agree with you. I just find it ironic coming from the guy that is arguing with me that the Fisker 500million loan guarantee to make 100k sports cars is really a green initative that will be good for the US and not a disguised corporate lobbying reward.
Big difference...People need freedom, or Corporations need freedom. BIG difference. You're mixing people and corporations as if they're one and the same. Countries as if they're one and the same. The big difference is there is the U.S., and the rest of the world. The US wants to protect it citizens, promote business and freedom. The rest of the world....wants to BE the U.S.
You're mixing countries as if they're one and the same. How ironic.
The rest of the world does not want to be the U.S. That's laughable. Especially considering the economic situation in the US today.
I agree with you. I just find it ironic coming from the guy that is arguing with me that the Fisker 500million loan guarantee to make 100k sports cars is really a green initative that will be good for the US and not a disguised corporate lobbying reward.
There is a point to having such thing as guaranteed loans. The problem however, is partisan, and of hatred towards anything "green". If you hate the idea, how about discuss and ask for dismiss it on its own merits?
If it exists, it exists for a reason. I'm not opposed to it. You're. Its a loan, for goodness sake, although, as I said earlier, I'm against "guarantees", be it loans or tax breaks.
There is a point to having such thing as guaranteed loans. The problem however, is partisan, and of hatred towards anything "green". If you hate the idea, how about discuss and ask for dismiss it on its own merits?
If it exists, it exists for a reason. I'm not opposed to it. You're. Its a loan, for goodness sake, although, as I said earlier, I'm against "guarantees", be it loans or tax breaks.
But you see, I'm a supporter of green initiatives and this one stinks.....and it means that some other green initiative didn't get a loan guarantee. But no, we need a loan guarantee for a company to make 100k hybrid sportscars using existing tech.
Oh, it's very partisan which is why you are defending it to the hilt....no matter what....but you don't see that. You just see some foaming repubs upset over it and that's good enough for you.
But see, those guys are going to be mad about every single thing Obama does. But hey, it's ok because Obama and his administration are always right, they never do anything to help their corporate donors and a democrat would never ever put pork in a bill. So you can safely fight the good fight....always right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.