Reagan's Top Economist Says GOP Misled the U.S. and Tanked the Economy

[tydas]

http://www.prwatch.org/node/9366

If you were asking what the GOP did when they had control of all three houses in 2000's here is a good synopsis

"He points to a list of misguided Republican actions that have led the country to economic disaster: Richard M. Nixon's gold policies that contributed to the country living beyond its means, the runaway growth of public debt resulting "not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace ... of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts," the neocon's sky-high inflation of the military budget, the "warfare state," the removal of traditional restrictions on leverage and speculation by the financial sector which led to a "vast, unproductive expansion of our financial sector," and the steady sending of jobs and production offshore...."

 

[ElFenix]

repost

again

and again

 

[superccs]

Yeah but the information is correct.

 

[Matt1970]

Yeah but the information is correct.

Only if you believe in fairy tales and unicorns.

 

[techs]

Only if you believe in fairy tales and unicorns.

Or actual facts.

 

[Matt1970]

Or actual facts.

Yep, the GOP forced people into buying overvalued houses they couldn't afford.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yep, the GOP forced people into buying overvalued houses they couldn't afford.

The term you're looking for is "suckered".

They should have known better than to trust GWB & cronies about the "Ownership Society", a cornerstone of his 2004 campaign, should have realized that lenders weren't lenders at all any more, but rather fast buck artists on quick commissions, that what they believed in was all lies. The bank won't loan you more than you can afford to pay? Of course they will, because it's not their money, but the money in your 401K, your pension plan, and the endowments for charities & educational institutions, who got suckered too.

The fact that the very well educated GWB came off as a country bumbler actually inspired trust- why, a guy like that wasn't smart enough to be a big part of the greatest looting spree in the history of finance, was he? Couldn't Be!

At this point, it's very important to blame the victims, make them feel that it was their own fault, shame them into silence for being stupid enough to be a sacrifice for Team Republican without actually saying that...

 

[DucatiMonster696]

It interesting how this story has become so distorted from its original commentary the more people reference it in the 3rd person.

People who use this as evidence to prop up a "GOP did it" argument fail to realize that Daivd Stockman also equally condemned Democrats for supporting Keynesian based economic policies that he outlines as leading us to this point of economic Armageddon.

For example he states that our moving away from gold standard and onto a totally fiat based monetary system encouraged and allowed for massive government spending and debts over the years which came at the expense of the subsequent devaluation of our currency.

Furthermore these monetary polices have additionally lead to a rise and increase of inflation in the economy eating away at any incentive to scale back spending or to save for a rainy. He also states that these actions have prompted both parties to continue the spending orgy and reckless monetary polices which have created the mess we have today.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

The term you're looking for is "suckered".

They should have known better than to trust GWB & cronies about the "Ownership Society", a cornerstone of his 2004 campaign, should have realized that lenders weren't lenders at all any more, but rather fast buck artists on quick commissions, that what they believed in was all lies. The bank won't loan you more than you can afford to pay? Of course they will, because it's not their money, but the money in your 401K, your pension plan, and the endowments for charities & educational institutions, who got suckered too.

The fact that the very well educated GWB came off as a country bumbler actually inspired trust- why, a guy like that wasn't smart enough to be a big part of the greatest looting spree in the history of finance, was he? Couldn't Be!

At this point, it's very important to blame the victims, make them feel that it was their own fault, shame them into silence for being stupid enough to be a sacrifice for Team Republican without actually saying that...

I love how you keep pushing this one kernel of "evidence" that Bush was behind the entire housing debacle when the truth is housing had reached a bubble state some 30 odd years ago and initiatives for a increase of home-ownership was basically a bi-partisan issue. Especially when it came to supporting and advocating easier access for home loans to be issued to the low income applicants which democrats roundly supported via weakening of lending standards of Fannie-Mae and Freddie Mac and other federal initiatives.

 

[Jhhnn]

I love how you keep pushing this one kernel of "evidence" that Bush was behind the entire housing debacle when the truth is housing had reached a bubble state some 30 odd years ago and initiatives for a increase of home-ownership was basically a bi-partisan issue. Especially when it came to supporting and advocating easier access for home loans to be issued to the low income applicants which democrats roundly supported via weakening of lending standards of Fannie-Mae and Freddie Mac and other federal initiatives.

Nice string of faith based assertions in denial of the facts.

Facts like this-

2003, 2004, 2005 & 2006 were a period when Repubs controlled the White House & Congress, weren't they?

 

[nehalem256]

Nice string of faith based assertions in denial of the facts.

Facts like this-

2003, 2004, 2005 & 2006 were a period when Repubs controlled the White House & Congress, weren't they?

Looks to me that the boom started in around 1997 and by 2001 when Bush became President housing prices were already at or above the peaks of the 1970s and 1980s booms.

So are you really going to blame Bush for something that began 4 years before he became President?

 

[Exterous]

Looks to me that the boom started in around 1997 and by 2001 when Bush became President housing prices were already at or above the peaks of the 1970s and 1980s booms.

So are you really going to blame Bush for something that began 4 years before he became President?

I've heard rumors we can't hold presidents responsible for acts that happen during their first 3 years either. Those are, apparently, still effects from the last president

 

[QuantumPion]

Nice string of faith based assertions in denial of the facts.

Facts like this-

Just the timing that Bush was president when the bubble really exploded makes him responsible? I guess that means Obama is responsible for our current $1.5 trillion deficit, 14% unemployment, and 0% job growth depression too.

 

[nehalem256]

Just the timing that Bush was president when the bubble really exploded makes him responsible? I guess that means Obama is responsible for our current $1.5 trillion deficit, 14% unemployment, and 0% job growth depression too.

It was already the biggest bubble in housing before Bush became President. Bush is being blamed for things that happened before he was President. That George W. Bush certainly is an amazing guy

 

[Jhhnn]

Looks to me that the boom started in around 1997 and by 2001 when Bush became President housing prices were already at or above the peaks of the 1970s and 1980s booms.

So are you really going to blame Bush for something that began 4 years before he became President?

Just the timing that Bush was president when the bubble really exploded makes him responsible? I guess that means Obama is responsible for our current $1.5 trillion deficit, 14% unemployment, and 0% job growth depression too.

It was already the biggest bubble in housing before Bush became President. Bush is being blamed for things that happened before he was President. That George W. Bush certainly is an amazing guy

Deliberately obtuse, which has become the argumentative position in defense of the Bush Admin. Remember this?

http://dorkmonger.blogspot.com/2008/11/cutting-red-tape.html

 

[nehalem256]

Deliberately obtuse, which has become the argumentative position in defense of the Bush Admin. Remember this?

http://dorkmonger.blogspot.com/2008/11/cutting-red-tape.html

from your link

I wish I could say it was photoshopped, but this outrageous picture of regulators destroying regulations was taken at a 2003 press event

So your argument is that cutting regulations in 2003 cause a housing boom to begin 6 years prior?

*Note it appears that in 2003 prices were already at the 140 level which would put them 15% above the 70s and 80s booms.

 

[silverpig]

from your link


So your argument is that cutting regulations in 2003 cause a housing boom to begin 6 years prior?

*Note it appears that in 2003 prices were already at the 140 level which would put them 15% above the 70s and 80s booms.

140 < 200.

You could go to 140 and then back to 100, or you can go to 140 and then all the way up to 200.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

The term you're looking for is "suckered".

They should have known better than to trust GWB & cronies about the "Ownership Society", a cornerstone of his 2004 campaign, should have realized that lenders weren't lenders at all any more, but rather fast buck artists on quick commissions, that what they believed in was all lies. The bank won't loan you more than you can afford to pay? Of course they will, because it's not their money, but the money in your 401K, your pension plan, and the endowments for charities & educational institutions, who got suckered too.

The fact that the very well educated GWB came off as a country bumbler actually inspired trust- why, a guy like that wasn't smart enough to be a big part of the greatest looting spree in the history of finance, was he? Couldn't Be!

At this point, it's very important to blame the victims, make them feel that it was their own fault, shame them into silence for being stupid enough to be a sacrifice for Team Republican without actually saying that...

Get off your high horse. The Democrats hold just as much blame as the GOP. Who's idea was it to inflate the housing market after the Dot-Com crash?

Who is pushing more funding for student loans, the next bubble that is going to burst?

 

[Jhhnn]

from your link


So your argument is that cutting regulations in 2003 cause a housing boom to begin 6 years prior?

*Note it appears that in 2003 prices were already at the 140 level which would put them 15% above the 70s and 80s booms.

So, uhh, being deliberately obtuse seems to be your forte, huh?

Here's GWB from May of 2002 and again in October 2002-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkAtUq0OJ68

Housing was going through one of its cyclical upswings when Bush took office, no doubt, but instead of putting on the brakes, he kicked in the afterburner...

 

[Jhhnn]

Get off your high horse. The Democrats hold just as much blame as the GOP. Who's idea was it to inflate the housing market after the Dot-Com crash?

George W Bush, that's who. See above.

Who is pushing more funding for student loans, the next bubble that is going to burst?[/QUOTE]

Feel the need to duh-vert often?

 

[Sonikku]

The recession began with Obama. Spare us all your liberal lies.

 

[nehalem256]

140 < 200.

You could go to 140 and then back to 100, or you can go to 140 and then all the way up to 200.

And did you see the Democrats trying to do anything about it either?

But hey lets just blame Bush for everything. Including trends that began 4 years before he was president

 

[shortylickens]

Yep, the GOP forced people into buying overvalued houses they couldn't afford.

They also pissed away trillions of dollars on military hardware that dont work for shit.
And slashed personnel by 20% and fucked up all the medical/dental benefits.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Nice string of faith based assertions in denial of the facts.

Facts like this-

2003, 2004, 2005 & 2006 were a period when Repubs controlled the White House & Congress, weren't they?

LOL - You didn't really look at the graph all to well did you?

That graph demonstrates that the housing boom started a lot further out then you are claiming. In fact one can see how the housing boom got its start after WW2 and continued growing substantially into the 50's and 60's. From the 1970's and 1980's it boomed and leveled off to post WW2 housing boom levels and around the late 90's it took off again to reach its final bubble peak in 2006.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

So, uhh, being deliberately obtuse seems to be your forte, huh?

Here's GWB from May of 2002 and again in October 2002-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkAtUq0OJ68

Housing was going through one of its cyclical upswings when Bush took office, no doubt, but instead of putting on the brakes, he kicked in the afterburner...

This is weak. Now should I go drag up some clips of democrats making statements where they deny the issues facing Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPSDnGMzIdo&feature=player_detailpage#t=23s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyqYY72PeRM

Edit: I understand however that your motive is to basically distract from the fact that David Stockman placed an equal amount of blame on the Democrats along side Republicans in his original article which described how both parties used Keynesian economics policies to prop up our debts, followed by how both parties followed monetary polices which have also had inflationary results and thus help to lead us to our current dire straits.