Try all of the above...What Created The 2008 Financial Meltdown?
Greedy Wall Street Investment Bankers /Deregulation of the financial industry
Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and the CRA
Poor people buying houses they can’t afford.
Other
What Created The 2008 Financial Meltdown?
Greedy Wall Street Investment Bankers /Deregulation of the financial industry
Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and the CRA
Poor people buying houses they can’t afford.
Other
Please how the second and third options has any bearing on the issue. The poor created this mess. Really?Try all of the above...
Well certainly the first and third, and depending how it was implemented, also the second. But I suspect that the second one resulted in at least some loans to people who didn't deserve them based on their credit.
Well, not just poor people borrowing too much. Everyone who borrowed for frivolous things that they couldn't afford is partially responsible, at least in part. What portion is the debatable part. As for the second, well encouraging home ownership isn't ALWAYS a good policy. The bigger issue is the government pushing home ownership in the first place. Look at these statistics:Please how the second and third options has any bearing on the issue. The poor created this mess. Really?
Please how the second and third options has any bearing on the issue. The poor created this mess. Really?
.........Yes.A person making $2,000 a month has no business taking out a loan with a $1,000 a month note, which is what happened in many cases. At some point, the people who took out loans they knew they couldn't afford must take at least a little responsibility for their actions.
Can you back these ridiculous claims up with any evidence? Why would a lender lend money to someone who can't pay them back?A person making $2,000 a month has no business taking out a loan with a $1,000 a month note, which is what happened in many cases. At some point, the people who took out loans they knew they couldn't afford must take at least a little responsibility for their actions.
Glass-Steagall gets crucified in this because too many people want to shirk responsibility involved in this. The true crime existed when regulations allowed for high-risk ventures to essentially be compensated when they would fail. If a business tried to bust coffers with derivatives and risky money market tools, the government would just recoup losses. That never should have come to be.
This reminds me of 2007 when we were talking about the great depression and my teacher predicted this whole crisis lmao.If the GS Act had still been in place, banks could flat out not have used people's mortgages and pensions to speculate with. It is why it was enacted in the first place following the same practices that brought about the great stock market crash in 1929.
We have at least one person taking the second option and I suspect many more will emerge. I put that option there because there are phony stories out there that tries makes this case.The second option makes no sense, as Dodd-Frank was signed into law two years after the meltdown. Who honestly blames the financial meltdown on Dodd-Frank?
Can you back these ridiculous claims up with any evidence? Why would a lender lend money to someone who can't pay them back?
This reminds me of 2007 when we were talking about the great depression and my teacher predicted this whole crisis lmao.
Catawba said:If the GS Act had still been in place, banks could flat out not have used people's mortgages and pensions to speculate with. It is why it was enacted in the first place following the same practices that brought about the great stock market crash in 1929.
The second option makes no sense, as Dodd-Frank was signed into law two years after the meltdown. Who honestly blames the financial meltdown on Dodd-Frank?
Can you back these ridiculous claims up with any evidence? Why would a lender lend money to someone who can't pay them back?
Translation: Since some people...scratch that...since most people are stupid, we have to give overwhelming power to government to act as daddy, slapping people's hands and shouting "no!" when they do something ridiculous?
Ah hell, that's just great. Our problem isn't stupidity - it's that we subsidize it. Making an example of these fools would be a powerful learning tool for the next crop of economically ignorant folk who have dollar-green dreams and lack the education to realize them. If it wasn't for people like that, Las Vegas would be a watering hole and pass-through truck stop.
We need to tell these homeless people to put out signs saying "Will work for food because I took out a loan I knew I couldn't pay back".
If the GS Act had still been in place, banks could flat out not have used people's mortgages and pensions to speculate with. It is why it was enacted in the first place following the same practices that brought about the great stock market crash in 1929.
Translation: Since some people...scratch that...since most people are stupid, we have to give overwhelming power to government to act as daddy, slapping people's hands and shouting "no!" when they do something ridiculous?
Ah hell, that's just great. Our problem isn't stupidity - it's that we subsidize it. Making an example of these fools would be a powerful learning tool for the next crop of economically ignorant folk who have dollar-green dreams and lack the education to realize them. If it wasn't for people like that, Las Vegas would be a watering hole and pass-through truck stop.
We need to tell these homeless people to put out signs saying "Will work for food because I took out a loan I knew I couldn't pay back".
What overwhelming power? What were the evil consequences of the Glass-Steagall Act that you or others experienced? Did we have any major financial meltdowns brought about by wild speculation with American's life savings during the decades it was in effect?
I think it is interesting also that the protesters understand this and have put the reinstatement of the Glass Steagall Act at the top of their list of demands.
And alot of poor people couldn't half-million-dollar+ homes and that's not fair. It's the reason Glass-Steagal was repealed.
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?