| akuma587 said:
And if you honestly think that if the Republicans were in power that they would sit back and let the market sort itself out on its own, you are fooling yourself and do not understand the political process in this country. They may have tried to solve the problem in a different way (via tax cuts most likely), but deficits would have been just as high, and potentially higher by foregoing so much tax revenue. |
From a few posts up:
"Congress runs the economy, not the President. 8 years bla bla bla is just party bullshit. Dems have been running the economy for 3 years, and done nothing worth a shit yet (just like the republicans before them)."
| akuma587 said: You also place to much blame on a cause simply because the word government is attached to it. Its really easy for something to have been a cause of a problem. Hell, if it wasn't for the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution none of this would have ever happened. But the important thing is determining the LEAST REMOTE cause for a phenomenon, such as the wholesale securitization of the mortgage market and lenders making loans that they actually knew were bad because they could resell them. If you want to blame the Fed for not regulating those, its totally fair, but its simply intellectual dishonesty to claim that the banks weren't the culpable parties here. |
The governments job is to protect it's people. A banks job it so maximize profits. I blame the government for not doing it's job. Not the banks for doing theirs.
In a perfect world, there would be no sub prime lending, and regulation would exist so banks could not make money by taking advantage of people. The government program not only didn't protect the people from this kind of lending, it rewarded banks for doing it.
