FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


$2000+ per person for the bailout





handfleisch
I'm just thinking about the $2000+ per person it will cost for the bailout of the Bush economic crisis.

How much money per person for the Bush Wars? I think another $2000 per person.

What will the US get? nothing. Just loss. A wrecked economy. A worse world.

How did the USA come to this? Clinton finished his term with a budget surplus. There were 8 years of peace and prosperity.
liljp617
I'm a die hard liberal.....


Please stop with the Clinton bullshit. The collapse of the economy started long before Bush or Clinton. The causes of our current situation had quite little to do with Bush or Clinton. Clinton benefited from the actions of Presidents who came before him.

Stop.
handfleisch
Excuse me, but I am aware of the various aspects of the current economic crisis. And I was no big Clinton fan. But it's just a fact that he balanced the budget, whereas the first Bush presided over the S&L scandal, and now this Bush has presided over massive budget deficits and this Wall St-subprime-bailout crisis/scam .
liljp617
The budget was balanced due to the actions of earlier Presidents. It had little to do with his actions. The economy was set up to collapse as he left office. It had little to do with this Bush.
jmi256
I agree with liljp617. The underlying issues affecting the economy were in full swing before Bush took office (i.e. easy access to credit, borrower mentality, etc).

I also don't think Clinton "started" it either. It's more of a reflection of our culture.
Libby
Bush definitely put all this in fast forward with all his deregulation. And Clinton didn't start it, but he didn't help it either. This crisis has been a long time in the making, and every president since at least Reagan has been at fault.

And maybe it's a reflection of "our culture", but our culture isn't just some all-powerful thing out there -- it's CREATED all the time by the actions of both the corporations who are invested in it and the ordinary people who participate in it. There's no reason our culture has to be this way. I mean, I guess we all know that but sometimes it seems like people use it as an excuse -- "it's our culture's fault!" (not saying you are doing that) Well, we all ARE our culture. Do something about it.
handfleisch
Can anyone show me a single reputable economist that says Clinton caused today's economic crisis? I don't think so.

Bush deregulation and the incredible deficit increase, especially from the occupation of Iraq, has led to this crisis. Clinton balanced the budget after the previous incredible deficit of the Reagan-Bush1 years.
jmi256
Libby wrote:
Bush definitely put all this in fast forward with all his deregulation. And Clinton didn't start it, but he didn't help it either. This crisis has been a long time in the making, and every president since at least Reagan has been at fault.

And maybe it's a reflection of "our culture", but our culture isn't just some all-powerful thing out there -- it's CREATED all the time by the actions of both the corporations who are invested in it and the ordinary people who participate in it. There's no reason our culture has to be this way. I mean, I guess we all know that but sometimes it seems like people use it as an excuse -- "it's our culture's fault!" (not saying you are doing that) Well, we all ARE our culture. Do something about it.


I wasn't making excuses, but rather making a statement. No sh*t culture is created by those within it (what did you really think the alternative was?), but my point is that it is what it is.

As far as Clinton not helping it, the underlying issue is that credit was too easily extended to those least able to pay it back. During the Clinton years he did everything he could to increase home ownership for low income and bad credit individuals. While perhaps a good leftist idea in itself, these people have low incomes and bad credit for reasons (lack of education, medical bills, laziness, etc.), not because they don't own the home they live in.

Everyone wants to blame deregulation, without even understanding what that means. Exactly what regulation did Bush get rid of? Did he get rid of the "Don't Sell Mortgages to Deadbeats" clause?
gandalfthegrey
You all should have voted for Ron Paul in the primaries. He is the only potential candidate to come along in sometime that is fiscally conservative and that would stop the growing national debt and yearly budgetary deficits.

Hopefully Barack Obama will address the growing debt and the budget deficit, otherwise our economic system is F***ed. It's only a matter of time.
ocalhoun
gandalfthegrey wrote:


Hopefully Barack Obama will address the growing debt and the budget deficit, otherwise our economic system is F***ed. It's only a matter of time.


Not likely. I think his solution to everything will be to spend more. Big government at its finest.
Afaceinthematrix
Ummmm... not exactly. Clinton had a budget surplus on paper, but it really had nothing to do with him.

Also, 8 years of peace? Hardly. Maybe you can argue that if you completely forget that Africa exists on this planet.
OpposableThumbs
jmi256 wrote:

Everyone wants to blame deregulation, without even understanding what that means. Exactly what regulation did Bush get rid of? Did he get rid of the "Don't Sell Mortgages to Deadbeats" clause?

I can't remember which rules got deregulated or relaxed. Just as important, Bush decided that his administration would not enforce the rules on the books. Other nice republican tactics are to underfund and/or understaff watchdog agencies. If that's not enough, they subvert the purpose of the regulatory agency by putting some guy in charge whose brief is to do the opposite of the agency's job. My favorite example of this is the head of the EPA under Reagan. Anne Gorsuch's job was to dismantle the EPA. For the present financial crisis, look to the mismanagement at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Here is an article on the subject by that radical, leftist, communist publication BusinessWeek:

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/sep2008/db20080918_764469.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_top+story

Is the present financial crisis a long time coming? Yes. Are Republicans favoring absolutely unregulated free trade much more culpable? You betcha. Are Reagan and the Bushes more to blame than Clinton. Yep. Will the US probably elect Jeb Bush president down the road. Count on it.
deanhills
People have been fiddling with the credit numbers for at least decades, as early as the eighties. Nothing made sense. The system was sidestepped. Probably needs to be completely overhauled from the bottom up, as spending more without anything radical and substantial to solve the credit bubble will be like plastering over deep cracks in a crumbling wall. For a Government to make a decision to go into so much extra debt to bale out existing debt, will have to be completely savvy and responsible, and hopefully Obama and his pool of economists will be able to pull this off. Think the analogy was given of having to do this to someone who is in trauma, to stabilize the economy, and then after that some drastic cuts can be made which the economy can deal with. Just wish there could be more specifics about what that will be, as well as how a Government can all of a sudden become a owner of banks. Successfully. Think that is going to be an interesting experience to witness.
Nick2008
I wouldn't necessarily say George Bush started the collapse, but he sure did ignore a lot of red flags that a steep tumble was coming. You remember at the beginning of the tumble, Henry Paulson, Secretary of the Treasury, said that our economy was falling... but we would only have a few bumps on the road? Two weeks later financial corporations and banks were pleading for money. I think a big problem for Obama is the expectations people are waiting for. The president can't do much, the senators, house of representatives, supreme court, his cabinet, etc must all work together to make a plan. I am not an idiot to expect Obama to make this country shine and sparkle in 1 or 2 years. It's a dark alley that needs to be taken into light, slowly. I'd rather have a slow and steady route to balance, rather then a steep climb to balance and then find out we left something behind... and we collapse again. The amount of problems we face today can not be fixed in 1 or 2 years.
deanhills
Nick2008 wrote:
I am not an idiot to expect Obama to make this country shine and sparkle in 1 or 2 years.


Right. Obama also repeated this in all of his speeches that had undertakings in them. It is not going to be easy. Sacrifices will have to be made. Yes, he has quite a tall order in front of him including expectations, but those positive expectations are great, in that that is what will keep the country from falling apart along credit bubble lines. Remember, the only collateral for the trillion dollar debt to bail everyone out is the positive faith of Americans to support that debt. Quite ironic though isn't it? The Government taking over banks that overextended themselves, and the Government a million times more in debt than they are, its only collateral being the support of its people. Central to that are positive expectations along "yes we can" lines!
ocalhoun
deanhills wrote:
Quite ironic though isn't it? The Government taking over banks that overextended themselves, and the Government a million times more in debt than they are, its only collateral being the support of its people.

Sounds like a fragile and dangerous condition, given how fickle 'the people' can be...
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
given how fickle 'the people' can be...


Absolutely!
Related topics
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.