Did Bill Clinton cause the banking crisis?

[Svnla]

http://articles.moneycentral.m...he-banking-crisis.aspx

I am not going to be like the extreme left and right in here and yell..."of course it is caused by only that party and not my party".........so sad, read it and weep.

 

[dphantom]

More than enough blame to go around. Good article.

 

[1prophet]

When your advisers are so ingrained in the same businesses you are supposed to regulate what do you think will happen?

Robert Edward Rubin (born August 29, 1938) served as the 70th United States Secretary of the Treasury during both the first and second Clinton administrations. Before his government service, he spent 26 years at Goldman Sachs. His most prominent post-government role was as Director and Senior Counselor of Citigroup, where he performed ongoing advisory and representational roles for the firm[1]. From November to December 2007, he served temporarily as Chairman of Citigroup.[2][3] On January 9, 2009 Citigroup announced his resignation, after having been criticized for his performance.[4] He received more than $126 million in cash and stock during his eight years at Citigroup.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Good article, but this thread is not going to go well. The current trend is to blame Bush entirely for the current economic meltdown, despite all of the evidence that there were many, many hands involved with this situation and that the problems stretch back years, maybe even decades.

 

[lupi]

Did read the specifics in linked here, but in the not so distant past there were other articles listed here that described several events/legislation from Bills time that had a direct roll in getting the boulder in motion. As expected the resident progressive lobby went the an article against anyone but Bush is wrong and you're a retard defense route.

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Good article, but this thread is not going to go well. The current trend is to blame Bush entirely for the current economic meltdown, despite all of the evidence that there were many, many hands involved with this situation and that the problems stretch back years, maybe even decades.

Bush gets a lot of the blame because the shit hit the fan on his watch. If he and his advisers and his Republican Congress had been paying attention, maybe they could have softened the blow or prevented the problem all together. But they didn't because too many of their buddies where getting really, really richer.

Clinton deserves some of the blame for passing a bill allowing Credit Default Swaps, but that could have been quickly turned around if anyone noticed or cared what was happening.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Good article, but this thread is not going to go well. The current trend is to blame Bush entirely for the current economic meltdown, despite all of the evidence that there were many, many hands involved with this situation and that the problems stretch back years, maybe even decades.

Balanced reasoning and facts don't phase the partisan hacks here one bit. At some point, you may get one or two to actually realize that maybe...just maybe...Dems had a hand in this financial crisis...but then they will quickly rationalize the guilt saying Republicans were 'mostly' to blame. You know...the old "your shit stinks worse than my shit" argument. It would be funny...if it wasn't so sad...to see so many intelligent people here who have abandoned their objectivity for a world of polarized stereotypes and empty ideologies.

 

[Moonbeam]

"Clinton didn't do it all alone. He had a lot of help from Congress. He was under pressure from a legislature controlled by laissez-faire Republicans who were hellbent on pushing Ronald Reagan's ideology of deregulation and free markets. The repeal of Glass-Steagall passed 90-8 in the Senate and 362-57 in the House."

Not to mention millions from Wall Street lobbyists.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
"Clinton didn't do it all alone. He had a lot of help from Congress. He was under pressure from a legislature controlled by laissez-faire Republicans who were hellbent on pushing Ronald Reagan's ideology of deregulation and free markets. The repeal of Glass-Steagall passed 90-8 in the Senate and 362-57 in the House."

Not to mention millions from Wall Street lobbyists.

And the apologists rise....

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
"Clinton didn't do it all alone. He had a lot of help from Congress. He was under pressure from a legislature controlled by laissez-faire Republicans who were hellbent on pushing Ronald Reagan's ideology of deregulation and free markets. The repeal of Glass-Steagall passed 90-8 in the Senate and 362-57 in the House."

Not to mention millions from Wall Street lobbyists.

Case in point.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Good article, but this thread is not going to go well. The current trend is to blame Bush entirely for the current economic meltdown, despite all of the evidence that there were many, many hands involved with this situation and that the problems stretch back years, maybe even decades.

Bush gets a lot of the blame because the shit hit the fan on his watch. If he and his advisers and his Republican Congress had been paying attention, maybe they could have softened the blow or prevented the problem all together. But they didn't because too many of their buddies where getting really, really richer.

Clinton deserves some of the blame for passing a bill allowing Credit Default Swaps, but that could have been quickly turned around if anyone noticed or cared what was happening.

Right on cue :thumbsup:

 

[Genx87]

Trying to pin this on one person is futile imo. There were many players on both sides of the aisle within govt and many lobbyists\corps on the outside of govt.

We experimented and it went south. Close the hole and learn from our mistakes.

 

[soccerballtux]

Repeal of the Glass-Steagall act (this was Clinton) + uber low interest rates (fault for this was Greenspan) + government lending programs (FM&FM) lead to where we are now.

 

[mugs]

People can blame Clinton or Carter or Reagan or whoever else they want. It doesn't change the fact that Bush's administration was in a position to at least reduce the impact of the problem.

1. A lot of the absurd mortgages were written during Bush's term
2. Everyone knew the housing prices were unsustainable, and very bad things would happen when the bubble burst
3. What did Bush do about it?

You can say that other presidents created the conditions that allowed the problem to occur. But Bush watched it occur and didn't do anything about it.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: mugs
People can blame Clinton or Carter or Reagan or whoever else they want. It doesn't change the fact that Bush's administration was in a position to at least reduce the impact of the problem.

1. A lot of the absurd mortgages were written during Bush's term
2. Everyone knew the housing prices were unsustainable, and very bad things would happen when the bubble burst
3. What did Bush do about it?

You can say that other presidents created the conditions that allowed the problem to occur. But Bush watched it occur and didn't do anything about it.

Should be a lesson to all. Govt rarely acts proactively. Bush would have committed more political suicide than he already did if he reformed a system that was currently fueling America's credit appetite. He would had got rejection from Republicans and Democrats and then lambasted by everybody for messing with a working system.

Hindsight is 20/20. No politician has that kind of foresight.

 

[theeedude]

Clinton was definitely too cozy with Republicans on deregulation taxation side.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: mugs
People can blame Clinton or Carter or Reagan or whoever else they want. It doesn't change the fact that Bush's administration was in a position to at least reduce the impact of the problem.

1. A lot of the absurd mortgages were written during Bush's term
2. Everyone knew the housing prices were unsustainable, and very bad things would happen when the bubble burst
3. What did Bush do about it?

You can say that other presidents created the conditions that allowed the problem to occur. But Bush watched it occur and didn't do anything about it.

Should be a lesson to all. Govt rarely acts proactively. Bush would have committed more political suicide than he already did if he reformed a system that was currently fueling America's credit appetite. He would had got rejection from Republicans and Democrats and then lambasted by everybody for messing with a working system.

Hindsight is 20/20. No politician has that kind of foresight.

My personal take is that deregulation, the philosophy that we get out of business' way is a bad idea.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Repeal of the Glass-Steagall act (this was Clinton) + uber low interest rates (fault for this was Greenspan) + government lending programs (FM&FM) lead to where we are now.

Considering that more than 60% of all mortgages were either Alt-A or subprime non-conforming, F&F didn't cause the problem. Low interest rates didn't cause the problem either, look at the Fed Funds rate vs mortgage rates, there isn't a 1:1 relationship. Long-term rates are set by the market, not by the Fed.

The biggest problem is a lack of regulation in origination or mortgages through eventual disposition of same. 100% leverage from the borrower, to the broker (who never took a position) to the seller/securitizer, to the investor (CDOs), caused the vast majority of the problem. 100% leverage squeezed risk premiums and allowed *nobody* to take the bottom-end risk.

Who caused this lack of regulation and allowance for over-leveraging? Paulson lobbied in 2004 for the i-banks to be allowed to uber-leverage. In 2001 FAS140 was put in place, allowing for off-bs securitizations in a large mass-production effort.

 

[Robor]

So in answer to the question in the OP, it's a big fat no?

Edit: By that I mean he was part of the problem but not *the* problem.

 

[Svnla]

Originally posted by: Robor
So in answer to the question in the OP, it's a big fat no?

Edit: By that I mean he was part of the problem but not *the* problem.

"Topic Summary: Not Fox, but MSN says he had part in it..and of course..others helped him too"

and from the article "Clinton didn't do it all alone. He had a lot of help from Congress. He was under pressure from a legislature controlled by laissez-faire Republicans"

and "The repeal of Glass-Steagall passed 90-8 in the Senate and 362-57 in the House."

and "Then, Clinton's Republican successor closed the deal. President George W. Bush took the ball into the end zone, making buying a home easier than spelling "FNMA" or "FICO" and removing the last vestiges of capital requirements at U.S. brokerage firms."


There are plenty of blame to spread all around.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Svnla

Originally posted by: Robor
So in answer to the question in the OP, it's a big fat no?

Edit: By that I mean he was part of the problem but not *the* problem.

"Topic Summary: Not Fox, but MSN says he had part in it..and of course..others helped him too"

and from the article "Clinton didn't do it all alone. He had a lot of help from Congress. He was under pressure from a legislature controlled by laissez-faire Republicans"

and "The repeal of Glass-Steagall passed 90-8 in the Senate and 362-57 in the House."

and "Then, Clinton's Republican successor closed the deal. President George W. Bush took the ball into the end zone, making buying a home easier than spelling "FNMA" or "FICO" and removing the last vestiges of capital requirements at U.S. brokerage firms."

I should have said the 'Topic Title'. My bad there.

I agree BTW - you can't pin this on any single president or party.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Both parties share in the blame. However, it's the Republican party that promotes itself as fiscally responsible while casting libruls as spendthrifts, and it's the party that claims regulating business is a bad thing.

So, as with sanctity-of-marriage adulterers the Republican party seems more misguided and hypocritical for the same behavior.

 

[Xellos2099]

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Good article, but this thread is not going to go well. The current trend is to blame Bush entirely for the current economic meltdown, despite all of the evidence that there were many, many hands involved with this situation and that the problems stretch back years, maybe even decades.

Bush gets a lot of the blame because the shit hit the fan on his watch. If he and his advisers and his Republican Congress had been paying attention, maybe they could have softened the blow or prevented the problem all together. But they didn't because too many of their buddies where getting really, really richer.

Clinton deserves some of the blame for passing a bill allowing Credit Default Swaps, but that could have been quickly turned around if anyone noticed or cared what was happening.

Has everyone forget Frank's famous speech to Bush when Bush complain about it?

 

[spittledip]

Originally posted by: Xellos2099

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Good article, but this thread is not going to go well. The current trend is to blame Bush entirely for the current economic meltdown, despite all of the evidence that there were many, many hands involved with this situation and that the problems stretch back years, maybe even decades.

Bush gets a lot of the blame because the shit hit the fan on his watch. If he and his advisers and his Republican Congress had been paying attention, maybe they could have softened the blow or prevented the problem all together. But they didn't because too many of their buddies where getting really, really richer.

Clinton deserves some of the blame for passing a bill allowing Credit Default Swaps, but that could have been quickly turned around if anyone noticed or cared what was happening.

Has everyone forget Frank's famous speech to Bush when Bush complain about it?

Yes, please remind us.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Repeal of the Glass-Steagall act (this was Clinton) + uber low interest rates (fault for this was Greenspan) + government lending programs (FM&FM) lead to where we are now.

fm&fm had little to do with this


point is the regulation on financial companies steadily declined after reagan started to 'reform' things, continued under clinton and bush; by the time bush was in his second term, regulation was hilariously weak. This was paralleled in Europe by similar trends in england and a coupel others, and made worse by policies in other countries (china, japan, germany, and misc middle east counties) that caused a saving bubble there.