Democrats and the Economy

[double dribble]

The problem with most democrats view of the economy is that they think it is a zero sum game. In other words, they think the economy is a big pie and if someone has a big piece of the pie, then there is only a little slice left for everyone else. That is why you get comments from libs saying that all that is left for the poor is crumbs.
So they think it is only fair for someone who has a bigger slice, to share some of that slice with everyone else. I might go along with that if in fact the economy were a zero sum game / big pie. But the economy is NOT a big pie, in fact, it is an endless supply of pies. And anyone who wants more pie can simply work for it.
As someone mentioned in another post, the movie "Pursuit of Happiness" demonstrated it very clearly.

[InWuWeTrust]

it doesn't matter who is elected, they could both be dumber than a box of rocks, and the stock market / economy will still recover. Its called a cycle, and we go thru them every few years. so...really, it doesn't matter.

[C0|dB|00ded]

I'm not seeing much of a difference between Democrats and Republicans anymore. Republicans like to spend as much as the Democrats do, the difference is the Republicans let the next administration figure out how to pay for it...

I sure wish there was a third choice...


T


...8)

[ABC]

Republicans have become the party of big government and the Democrats the party of bigger government.

[double dribble]

I agree, the republicans have spent way too much, however, there is a big difference between them and democRATS. The republicans believe in less taxes for everyone. The democRATS want to tax us to death and then tax what we leave for our kids after we die.

[C0|dB|00ded]

The Democrats are realistic about how they are going to pay for their big government, they tax, tax, tax. The Republicans are the "party of lower taxes" but with their big spending they are not being realistic, so literally they are the party of increasing taxes as well, they just don't know it yet... -or don't think the American people know it. Keep toeing the party line and remain lost in the fog.


T


...8)

[Aargh]

I really like (not) the government bailout of AIG. $85 Bill is moving from taxpayers to AIG stockholders.

Now the government is talking about another $700 Bill or so to bail out the rest of the business groups that made bad choices and created the mortgage disaster.

If the government was to drop maybe $800 bill to bail out the people living in the houses that are worth half of what they spent for them, that would be Communist.

Bailing out the average citizen is not allowed. That's Communist. Bail out the fat cats by taxing everyone is sort of a reverse Robin Hood. There's no option for raising $800 Bill (or so) other than to take money from everyone to finance the redistribution of wealth to stockholders of big business.

[Ixiah]

Now the government is talking about another $700 Bill or so to bail out the rest of the business groups that made bad choices and created the mortgage disaster.

Bob Brinker (Moneytalk) was saying that 700 billion is a 'ballpark' figure. The true cost could be nearly a trillion dollars. I've indicated before I don't mind too much if they need to save a few key firms for economic stability but this is going too far.

Capitalism without bankruptcy is like religion without hell -- Dan Mitchell

[wu_shizzle]

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

[Wuzee]

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aSKSoiNbnQY0

(Kevin Hassett, director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He is an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own.)

[wu_shizzle]

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aSKSoiNbnQY0

(Kevin Hassett, director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He is an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own.)

So what part of his article do you disagree with?

Or is it just cheap and easy to link him to McCain and disregard what he has to say?

[Wuzee]

I believe what this independent economists says ...

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/07/did-fannie-and.html

To sum up at the end: Fannie and Freddie played a role but they aren’t the big story in this crisis. As with the S&L crisis of the 1980s, this crisis is primarily caused by deregulation (and the greed and excess that invariably accompanies it).

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac probably wouldn't have been in any trouble had the existing Federal laws and supporting regulations governing operations elsewhere in the financial markets been in place. Instead, they were gutted and new oversight over other financial instruments was avoided at all costs.

[ABC]

Different points of view by different folks.

There are plenty of smart people who say dereg didn't cause this.

For those that say deregulation caused the current meltdown, please list the areas we need more regulation and how that would have prevented this.

There's a great editoria in today's Wall Street Journal, entitled "The Mortgage Fable." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122204078161261183.html

From the piece:

1. - The Federal Reserve. The original sin of this crisis was easy money.

2. - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Created by government, and able to borrow at rates lower than fully private corporations because of the implied backing from taxpayers, these firms turbocharged the credit mania. They channeled far more liquidity into the market than would have been the case otherwise, especially from the Chinese, who thought (rightly) that they were investing in mortgage securities that were as safe as Treasurys but with a higher yield.

These are the firms that bought the increasingly questionable mortgages originated by Angelo Mozilo's Countrywide and others. Even as the bubble was popping, they dived into pools of subprime and Alt-A ("liar") loans to meet Congressional demand to finance "affordable" housing. And they were both the cause and beneficiary of the great interest-group army that lobbied for ever more housing subsidies.

Fan and Fred's patrons on Capitol Hill didn't care about the risks inherent in their combined trillion-dollar-plus mortgage portfolios, so long as they helped meet political goals on housing. Even after taxpayers have had to pick up a bailout tab that may grow as large as $200 billion, House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank still won't back a reduction in their mortgage portfolios.

3. - A credit-rating oligopoly. Thanks to federal and state regulation, a small handful of credit rating agencies pass judgment on the risk for all debt securities in our markets. Many of these judgments turned out to be wrong, and this goes to the root of the credit crisis: Assets officially deemed rock-solid by the government's favored risk experts have lately been recognized as nothing of the kind.

4. - Banking regulators. In the Beltway fable, bank supervision all but vanished in recent years. But the great irony is that the banks that made some of the worst mortgage investments are the most highly regulated.

5. - The Community Reinvestment Act. This 1977 law compels banks to make loans to poor borrowers who often cannot repay them. Banks that failed to make enough of these loans were often held hostage by activists when they next sought some regulatory approval.

[Ixiah]

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aSKSoiNbnQY0

O'Riley had a little old lady caller tonight on his radio show that mentioned essentially this same thing. He was pretty harsh and called it 'right wing propaganda'.

[Wuzee]

Different points of view by different folks.

There are plenty of smart people who say dereg didn't cause this.

For those that say deregulation caused the current meltdown, please list the areas we need more regulation and how that would have prevented this.

There's a great editoria in today's Wall Street Journal, entitled "The Mortgage Fable." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122204078161261183.html

From the piece:

1. - The Federal Reserve. The original sin of this crisis was easy money.

2. - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Created by government, and able to borrow at rates lower than fully private corporations because of the implied backing from taxpayers, these firms turbocharged the credit mania. They channeled far more liquidity into the market than would have been the case otherwise, especially from the Chinese, who thought (rightly) that they were investing in mortgage securities that were as safe as Treasurys but with a higher yield.

These are the firms that bought the increasingly questionable mortgages originated by Angelo Mozilo's Countrywide and others. Even as the bubble was popping, they dived into pools of subprime and Alt-A ("liar") loans to meet Congressional demand to finance "affordable" housing. And they were both the cause and beneficiary of the great interest-group army that lobbied for ever more housing subsidies.

Fan and Fred's patrons on Capitol Hill didn't care about the risks inherent in their combined trillion-dollar-plus mortgage portfolios, so long as they helped meet political goals on housing. Even after taxpayers have had to pick up a bailout tab that may grow as large as $200 billion, House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank still won't back a reduction in their mortgage portfolios.

3. - A credit-rating oligopoly. Thanks to federal and state regulation, a small handful of credit rating agencies pass judgment on the risk for all debt securities in our markets. Many of these judgments turned out to be wrong, and this goes to the root of the credit crisis: Assets officially deemed rock-solid by the government's favored risk experts have lately been recognized as nothing of the kind.

4. - Banking regulators. In the Beltway fable, bank supervision all but vanished in recent years. But the great irony is that the banks that made some of the worst mortgage investments are the most highly regulated.

5. - The Community Reinvestment Act. This 1977 law compels banks to make loans to poor borrowers who often cannot repay them. Banks that failed to make enough of these loans were often held hostage by activists when they next sought some regulatory approval.

Fantasy is an excellent vehicle for this assessment.