|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 17, 2009 16:16:25 GMT -5
I see you read nothing about who the top recipients of AIG campaign contributions were. I expected that.
The way to go would have been to allow AIG to fail. What has propping it up done but cost taxpayers billions of dollars?
So, you are trusting a Bush appointee? My God I am going to have a heart attack. Well, Bernake has been wrong on much of the advice he has given. And he is wrong about FDR as well. Bush would not have been my choice if the President were truly in charge of the economy. But, since you are just too dense to understand who is I will tell you. Congress.
Oh gee, it was a Democrat majority in both 2007 and 2008, how interesting. I know, I know, Bush was President and Congressional Democrats are not smart enough to determine what is best for their constituency without the help of the President. I guess if you spend all your time on vacation and only show up for work three out of five days that is what happens.
Besides, Mr. Bernanke, I will show him the respect by not addressing him familiar as you do, Mr. Bernanke is not doing such a good job by many accounts. Nothing he has done has had a positive effect on our economy. Nothing.
And personally I don't give a rats ass if you believe me about the Great Depression. The evidence says different and more people are coming to the same conclusion every day.
As far as handling the financial crisis, that is easy. Let failing companies do just that, fail. It is wrong to put my tax dollars to work correcting the mistakes of people who have not done one thing to make my life any better. Stop interfering in the loan process on a government level.
I have posted information from far smarter people then myself. They offer many alternatives. Just because you lack the level of comprehension required to understand what they are saying is not my fault. And it does not mean that I, a lowly constituent, have not provided a solution or two. It means you have not spent the time reading them.
|
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 17, 2009 16:38:18 GMT -5
Here saunterelle read for yourself how the Community Reinvestment Act is what is most responsible for our economic downturn. You might learn something. And gee, it actually offers alternatives to lunacy put forth by such stalwart Democrats as Barney Frank, your favorite ranking member and Chair of the House Financial Services Committee. Speaking of Frank, lets review a quote of his from September 2003 about both Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. "These two entities...are not facing any kind of financial crisis.... The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing," said Frank in response to the Bush administration proposal for transferring oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from Congress and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to a new agency that would be created within the Treasury Department. The proposal reflected the administration's belief that Congress "neither has the tools, nor the stature" for adequate oversight. In the end, Bush was correct and Congress proved it by allowing both agencies to fail under the leadership of Barney Frank ranking member and Chair of the House Financial Services Committee. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 17, 2009 16:39:30 GMT -5
moondog, the bailout of AIG began in September 2008, when Bush was President. Are you trying to imply that AIG did not need to be bailed out?? If that is the case, you are contradicting Ben Bernanke, a Bush appointee and leading expert on Great Depression economics. Ben shoots holes in every one of the theories you believe, especially the one about FDR not getting us out of the Great Depression. Face it, you are wrong and you have never given us an alternative to how to handle the current economic crisis. So, I'll ask you again, what is your alternative? Oh, and you forgot to mention that this bailout was signed by Bush at the urging of both McCain and that stinking BO that is ruining my country. |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Mar 17, 2009 17:24:34 GMT -5
Hopefully they were sensible enough to support Obama.
This is one area where you're dead wrong. Our economy would have crumbled and would not recover for a decade. We saw a small preview of that when Lehman Brothers was allowed to crumble.
Last I checked, the President has veto power.
Are you talking about Bush?
Fine, you're entitled to your opinion. You can believe your beloved history professor and I'll listen to the 4th most powerful person in the world, Ben Bernanke. Bernanke is among the 50 most published economists in the world. His specialty is in the economic and political causes of the Great Depression, on which he has written extensively. Recently, Economist Brad DeLong, who had previously advocated his own theory for the Great Depression, notes that the current financial crisis has increased the plausibility of Bernanke's theory. When will you come around moondog?
That kind of attitude sounds good but it won't help to fix the severe economic crisis we currently find ourselves in. It would only make things worse.
The urging? Is that how Bush made decisions?
|
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 17, 2009 18:11:11 GMT -5
Well now, I suppose it was Obama that signed the second stimulus, after urging, nay demanding that Bush sign the first. So STFU, Democrats are just as much, if not more, to blame then Bush. Just because you are too stupid to realize the truth does not make your assertions correct.
If Ben Bernanke is so smart why did his advice take us down this road? Also, you are wrong, he is currently the most powerful man in the World. But you wouldn't know that because you don't know shit about economics. You see, Congress nor the President can change interest rates, only Bernanke can, along with his board. And money is king.
Talk all you want about FDR. You have provided no information to back up your claims, I have. Including all the sources other then Burton Folsom. And I have actually read more about it then you ever will.
As to vacations and time off, I am talking about Congress. Bet you didn't know that they rarely, if ever, work a full work week. All that talk about Bush vacations is nothing compared to how Congress operates. We are lucky if they put in a three day week, and that is counting the five minutes they use for role call and then adjourn right after.
And as to Presidential veto, that is one part of the process you libidiot. You are showing you know zero about our government again. Not to mention that Bush only vetoed 12 bills while in office, just a dozen. Only Chester A. Arthur vetoed that few bills in the entire history of this country.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Mar 17, 2009 18:18:24 GMT -5
No shit. He had a Republican congress and senate for 6 of his 8 years. How do you think we got into this mess?
Wrong! I provided many articles and opinions from experts including Bernanke and Milton Friedman who directly contradict your history professor's opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 17, 2009 18:44:05 GMT -5
No shit. He had a Republican congress and senate for 6 of his 8 years. How do you think we got into this mess? Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd running blockers for Fannie and Freddy. While Schumer prevented a fair tax rate on hedge fund managers. Yep, even these gentlemen benefited from campaign contributions from one Bernard Madoff. Were Republicans also involved, you bet. But none of them were ranking members by virtue of time in office. That was Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank. Oh, and Charles Schumer. Wrong! I provided many articles and opinions from experts including Bernanke and Milton Friedman who directly contradict your history professor's opinion. Sorry, but the sources of the History Professor are better documented. Not to mention he has the backing of one of the biggest names in economics, Walter Williams. Oh, and of course our dearly departed friend and businessman, William F. Buckley, Jr., who was far more successful then Bernanke. Say what you like, Bernanke is why we are here today. He is proving himself inept in my opinion. The research and review of the material is far more comprehensive then anything ever published by Bernanke. Of course the funniest thing about your assertions is that the Wall Street Journal totally disagrees with you. Now, how is that for an endorsement of my opinion. Even the Wall Street Journal claims that the economy was saved by the War and not FDR. |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Mar 17, 2009 19:33:29 GMT -5
Your opinion is wrong.
You're nuts. The history professor's research doesn't come close to Bernanke's expertise regarding Great Depression economics. Bernanke is among the 50 most published economists in the world. Let's have more people chime in and show you just how wrong you are on this issue.
Of course. The WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch, owner of Faux News. We all know where his politics lie.
|
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 18, 2009 11:35:40 GMT -5
Sorry, but the sources of the History Professor are better documented. Not to mention he has the backing of one of the biggest names in economics, Walter Williams. Oh, and of course our dearly departed friend and businessman, William F. Buckley, Jr., who was far more successful then Bernanke. Say what you like, Bernanke is why we are here today. He is proving himself inept in my opinion. Your opinion is wrong. Opinions are never wrong, they are just opinions. And, Burton Folsom Jr. is published way more then Bernanke. Say what ever you like, I disagree with Bernanke and so do many people who are just as intelligent as he is. He is not the foremost authority on the subject, like it or not. The research and review of the material is far more comprehensive then anything ever published by Bernanke. You're nuts. The history professor's research doesn't come close to Bernanke's expertise regarding Great Depression economics. Bernanke is among the 50 most published economists in the world. Let's have more people chime in and show you just how wrong you are on this issue. You ignorance is obvious. Bernanke never spent near the time documenting the effects of the Great Depression. Did you ever hear Bernanke talk about the effects of the Political Machine created by FDR? No, because he only looks at the bottom line. Do you think Bernanke believes prices should be fixed? FDR did, which is exactly why we still have the most idiotic Farm Subsidy program in existence. Do you think Bernanke would advocate putting people in jail for charging a nickle less then their competitors who have better location, but you get the business because you provide a service for less money? FDR advocate jailing people for such things, that is what you are saying Bernanke supports or calls successful? If Bernanke advocates that, then does he agree with stacking the Supreme Court? FDR did. FDR hated big business and believed in an undistributed profits tax. Does Bernanke? I doubt it. Lucky for big business Harry S Truman was the President after the war. Does Bernanke agree that having a political office be the defacto Democrat Headquarters is good for America? FDR did. Do you think Bernanke would agree with chastising a constituent for wanting strawberries and complaining that the price was too high due to Washington policies? FDR did that. Do you think Bernank would want to hold back the economic advancement of several States? FDR did that when he created the Tennessee Vally Water District. The people in Georgia were on the same economic level with the area, but advanced much quicker because the people in the States that contained the Tennessee Vally Water District did not leave the farms for the more prosperous jobs that were being created in the country. They lag behind to this very day. It goes on and on. Things you and Bernanke have no clue about, buried in the public records accessed by Burton Folsom Jr. and documented far better the Bernanke's work. I can pick you apart all day on the subject, do you know why? Because you have no documentation, just the name Bernanke. Hell, I would be willing to bet that neither you nor Bernanke knew that Harry S Truman did not even like FDR. Truman ended the Depression after the war, not FDR before it. Of course the funniest thing about your assertions is that the Wall Street Journal totally disagrees with you. Now, how is that for an endorsement of my opinion. Even the Wall Street Journal claims that the economy was saved by the War and not FDR. Of course. The WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch, owner of Faux News. We all know where his politics lie. Same old crap, attack the owner of a very prestigious business publication. How will you stand up to terrorism if you can not even face Fox News or the Wall Street Journal? Jamie Galzov is 100% correct about people like you. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Mar 18, 2009 14:51:54 GMT -5
Others with the same or similar opinions or writings to the History Professor:
Thomas Sowell
Amity Shales
Gene Smiley
Jim Powell
John T Flynn
|
|
