And the recovery much quicker. That can just be ignored? That's convenient.
And why is employment at risk?
Not ignoring anything; that would be your neck of the woods. In the early 20th century, U.S. population, immigration (both legal and illegal), etc... were growing at rates that are not comparable to today's economy. The fact that you even attempted to compare such distinct time periods of the U.S. economy is truly telling.
Companies were protecting their valuations and cash flows. Is there a reason why you are continuously responding with questions (some of which are entirely loaded) rather than engaging in proper dialog?
So the laws of economics change because of a growing population?
I'm just saying, you're the one who's trying to ignore any historical lessons from the time.
When did i say that? You have a poor habit of putting words in people's mouths. Population growth must necessarily feed economic growth.
It is ridiculous to compare the early 20th century economy to that of our own. It is akin to comparing the U.S. to Greece.
And that happened all of sudden why exactly?
Sales began to fall, credit began to constrict. That causes corporations to begin getting defensive in regards to their cash flows and stock prices.
And why did spending fall?
So there is nothing that can be learned by studying it?
If he was on MARS you had your head up URANUS....
The sub-prime debacle started in the early 90s as Clinton and Liberal Democrats forced lending by regulatory control given to them under CRA and HUD.
You didnt mention the NY Times article in 2003 that showed Bush trying to reign in the GSEs but unsuccessfully with a Democrat Congress.
I swear to be a liberal you have to be purposely ignorant and corrupt.
The housing bubble was mandated by the Democrats.
And bought and paid for by the GOP and GW Bush. You are so deluded that you think the Dems had control of Congress in 2003? You need serious help. Republicans had full control of Congress AND the Whitehouse during the entire subprime housing bubble, how else would the banks have gotten away with it? Congressional Republicans wrote the bills that enabled the scam and GW Bush kickstarted the bubble with his $440 BILLION "investment" in the banks subprime garbage. Fannie and Freddie were just another investor for the banks to swindle. GW Bush himself turned bankers shill and boasted that he got Fannie to commit to 440 Billion $ to buy the new subprimes in his 2002 "Minority Housing Initiative Program." He even evoked 911 and promised that the plan would "turn incredible evil into incredible good," I swear, I'm not making that up. Heres the bit about Fannie in 2002
And so, therefore, I've called -- yesterday, I called upon the private sector to help us and help the home buyers. We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers. And I'm proud to report that Fannie Mae has heard the call and, as I understand, it's about $440 billion over a period of time. They've used their influence to create that much capital available for the type of home buyer we're talking about here. It's in their charter; it now needs to be implemented. Freddie Mac is interested in helping. I appreciate both of those agencies providing the underpinnings of good capital.
HUD Archives: President George W. Bush Speaks to HUD Employees on National Homeownership Month (6/18/02)
Can you believe he actually said "It's in their charter, it NOW needs to be implemented"? If you know why?, it all will make sense. Anyway there's plenty more, but I fear your brain might explode.
There were two months that had over 800K jobs lost when Bush was president. (Nov 2008 and Jan 2009) From BLS:It wasn't "800K jobs per month". Stop pushing lies.
With all recessions there is an initial high loss of jobs as toxic investments are flushed out of the market and corrections are made. There wasn't 800K lost month after month after month. Stop lying.
| Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National) | |
| 1-Month Net Change | |
| Series Id: | CES0000000001 |
| Seasonally Adjusted | |
| Super Sector: | Total nonfarm |
| Industry: | Total nonfarm |
| NAICS Code: | - |
| Data Type: | ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS |
| Years: | 2001 to 2012 |
| Year | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Annual |
| 2001 | -15 | 63 | -28 | -282 | -44 | -128 | -125 | -155 | -243 | -331 | -295 | -178 | -1761 |
| 2002 | -129 | -146 | -24 | -84 | -9 | 47 | -100 | -11 | -55 | 121 | 8 | -163 | -545 |
| 2003 | 95 | -159 | -213 | -49 | -9 | 0 | 25 | -45 | 109 | 197 | 14 | 119 | 84 |
| 2004 | 162 | 44 | 337 | 249 | 310 | 81 | 46 | 122 | 161 | 348 | 63 | 134 | 2057 |
| 2005 | 137 | 240 | 141 | 360 | 170 | 243 | 374 | 193 | 66 | 80 | 334 | 160 | 2498 |
| 2006 | 283 | 316 | 283 | 181 | 14 | 76 | 209 | 183 | 157 | -9 | 204 | 171 | 2068 |
| 2007 | 236 | 93 | 190 | 72 | 139 | 75 | -40 | -18 | 73 | 79 | 112 | 89 | 1100 |
| 2008 | 41 | -84 | -95 | -208 | -190 | -198 | -210 | -274 | -432 | -489 | -803 | -661 | -3603 |
| 2009 | -818 | -724 | -799 | -692 | -361 | -482 | -339 | -231 | -199 | -202 | -42 | -171 | -5060 |
| 2010 | -40 | -35 | 189 | 239 | 516 | -167 | -58 | -51 | -27 | 220 | 121 | 120 | 1027 |
| 2011 | 110 | 220 | 246 | 251 | 54 | 84 | 96 | 85 | 202 | 112 | 157 | 223 | 1840 |
| 2012 | 275 | 259 | 143 | 68 | 87 | 45 | 181 | 192 | 132 | 137 | 161 | 155 | 1835 |
Credit began to constrict.
And that just came out of the sky one day?
If you have a point, then make it. These lame responses in the form of questions are getting you nowhere.
I'm pointing out your lack of an adequate explanation.
And bought and paid for by the GOP and GW Bush. You are so deluded that you think the Dems had control of Congress in 2003? You need serious help. Republicans had full control of Congress AND the Whitehouse during the entire subprime housing bubble, how else would the banks have gotten away with it? Congressional Republicans wrote the bills that enabled the scam and GW Bush kickstarted the bubble with his $440 BILLION "investment" in the banks subprime garbage. Fannie and Freddie were just another investor for the banks to swindle. GW Bush himself turned bankers shill and boasted that he got Fannie to commit to 440 Billion $ to buy the new subprimes in his 2002 "Minority Housing Initiative Program." He even evoked 911 and promised that the plan would "turn incredible evil into incredible good," I swear, I'm not making that up. Heres the bit about Fannie in 2002
And so, therefore, I've called -- yesterday, I called upon the private sector to help us and help the home buyers. We need more capital in the private markets for first-time, low-income buyers. And I'm proud to report that Fannie Mae has heard the call and, as I understand, it's about $440 billion over a period of time. They've used their influence to create that much capital available for the type of home buyer we're talking about here. It's in their charter; it now needs to be implemented. Freddie Mac is interested in helping. I appreciate both of those agencies providing the underpinnings of good capital.
HUD Archives: President George W. Bush Speaks to HUD Employees on National Homeownership Month (6/18/02)
Can you believe he actually said "It's in their charter, it NOW needs to be implemented"? If you know why?, it all will make sense. Anyway there's plenty more, but I fear your brain might explode.
What Congressional Republicans ? In a Democrat Congress ?
You've proven nothing except how pathetic and desperate the Democrat agenda has become.
What sort of loser organisation blames Everything on the prior president 4 years into their disaster ?
If you think convincing fools and idiots is a winning strategy then good luck with that.
Those who know better realize that tje sub-prime debacle was mandated by Democrats and then blamed on banks and it STARTED 10 years prior to GW Bush's inaugeration.
You libs are such hypocrites.
What Congressional Republicans ? In a Democrat Congress ?
You've proven nothing except how pathetic and desperate the Democrat agenda has become.
What sort of loser organisation blames Everything on the prior president 4 years into their disaster ?
If you think convincing fools and idiots is a winning strategy then good luck with that.
Those who know better realize that tje sub-prime debacle was mandated by Democrats and then blamed on banks and it STARTED 10 years prior to GW Bush's inaugeration.
You libs are such hypocrites.
You are the one blaming Clinton for somethng that happeened entirely on GW Bush's and a GOP Congressional majority's watch.
GW Bush sold Fannie Mae $440 Billion of the banks subprime garbage and you blame the Democrats? Too funny.
No Democrat could have pulled that off and you know it..
I figured you would say retirees.
More kids are going to college than ever before.
And you missed this.
Democrats + CRA = 100% responsible
It's beyond refute. The CRA was the root cause of the problem that created a market that never would have existed otherwise.
You display your lack of knowledge on your sleeve. CRA loans were less likely to default than non-CRA loans of similar risk. Try again.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?