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.
Let's do some math:
Obama has been President for 3.5 years (as of July 20; we'll round up). 428 / 3.5 = 122/year. Funny... Reagan topped that by a lot every year during his second term!
1985 - 180 bank failures
1986 - 204 bank failures
1987 - 262 bank failures
1988 - 470 bank failures
C'mon, President Obama! You're really going to find some way to make a lot more banks fail before you can touch the bank-failing gold standard set by the Gipper!
Once again... These banks were engaging in high risk pseudo gambling tactics long before Obummer took the helm. I would love to blame him for even more. But I simply can't blame him for this. The banks were at the table and being asked to reveal their cards under Oblama's watch. The cards were not winners obviously. Blame deregulation if you want to blame anything.
Once again... These banks were engaging in high risk pseudo gambling tactics long before Obummer took the helm. I would love to blame him for even more. But I simply can't blame him for this. The banks were at the table and being asked to reveal their cards under Oblama's watch. The cards were not winners obviously. Blame deregulation if you want to blame anything.
Yep, the banks suck. And the failure numbers should be much higher, as well as criminal charges against many of them. That is the true failure of this administration. The failure to pursue prosecution.
Yep, the banks suck. And the failure numbers should be much higher, as well as criminal charges against many of them. That is the true failure of this administration. The failure to pursue prosecution.
The banks and Wall Street only did what CONGRESS forced them to do.
Does ANYONE actually think banks WANTED to lend money to people who had no hope of ever paying it back?
You can ONLY blame Congress and specifically Democrats for pushing that down the lender's throats.
Bush was absolutely for the same things. The blame belongs all around. Bush and Dodd are gone...........
Apparently, you missed the part where Bush specifically warned what would happen if Frank and Dodd and Freddie and Fannie weren't reined in. I don't know how you could have missed it, but it seems a lot of non-thinkers did.
The banks and Wall Street only did what CONGRESS forced them to do.
Does ANYONE actually think banks WANTED to lend money to people who had no hope of ever paying it back?
You can ONLY blame Congress and specifically Democrats for pushing that down the lender's throats.
This I will agree with 100% as well. In a way, the whole derivatives trade was the bank's preparation for the aftermath of congresses unrealistic policy/rules. Certainly they will provide the mortgages to those who shouldn't qualify, if that is what the democrats force them to do. Of course, the banks found a way to at least break even on such catastrophic policy making.
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.
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.
