Comments


  • Mike, here's a quote from Hoover:

    “[W]e might have done nothing,” Hoover said. “That would have been utter ruin. Instead we met the situation with proposals to private business and to Congress of the most gigantic program of economic defense and counterattack ever evolved in the history of the Republic.”

    Does that sound like he did nothing? Do you remember the depression of 1920?

    October 21, 2009 at 6:14 p.m.

  • Yorktown77

    Thanks for the nice words…. I do enjoy your response; we don't always have to agree because that would be boring…

    I'm reluctant to answer questions about a government single-payer health care plan because that is not what is being suggested…. The Senate Finance Reform bill that will have to be merged with the House bill does not even have a robust public plan option in it…. Are you asking for a comparison between a single payer private plan, that we have now, and a government single-payer?

    October 21, 2009 at 3:50 p.m.

  • All very good points and a great blog, thanks.

    We cannot change history, but I would like not to create another fiscal storm. I only hope we can become a better informed nation, at least the people that vote so we can make wiser choices.

    It would greatly help if we moved tax day to October before November.

    I am interested in your opinion on the single payer government health plan.

    October 21, 2009 at 3:12 p.m.

  • Yorktown77

    I never had any illusions of changing your mind but just putting out a different perspective.:-)

    Last night PBS showed a Frontline Special called “Warning" that followed this derivative scandal from its start in 1993 when Procter and Gamble became a victim. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were just vehicles for this scheme; it could have been washing machines, automobiles, etc… At the height of the Internet bubble, 13 banks with five lobbyists for every congressman put the muscle on Larry Summers to silent Brooksky Born, the head of Commodities Futures Trading Commission, to keep her from sounding the alarm on the derivative scam. President Clinton had a secret group called the "Presidents Working Group” with members like Alan Greenspan, then Secretary of Treasury Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, and then SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt. This group got together to try to put pressure On Ms Born, to change her mind, without success; then about four congressional sessions later, the group convinced Congress that it was not in their best interest to introduce reform forbidding the over -the –counter derivative schemes…. No one wanted to stop the roaring 90s…. Ron Suskin wrote a good book describing the rationale that was used at that time called “The Price of Loyalty”…. This week-end I will buy Andrew Ross Sorkin's new book called “Too big to Fail”, which is all about this financial crisis…BTW Mr. Frank & Dodd were never mentioned nor was the idea that having a certain mindset was a criminal act.

    You can continue to believe it's about Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd and crooked politicians but what Wall Street did was perfectly legal, although risky and beyond good fiscal rationale, but there continues to be a fine line on the amount of regulation that needs to be imposed on the financial markets..IMO

    i.e. I may think it's a good idea to have a business checking account requiring two signatures..You may think it is an inconvenience..Just because I ran off with the funds was not your fault...If that makes sense.

    October 21, 2009 at 11:03 a.m.

  • Jimmy Dollar

    President Hoover listened to Treasure Secretary Mellon, who had a mind set of “just leave alone, and the private sector will make the proper corrections."..That laissez-faire attitude caused him to ignore legislative relief. He thought it would make the people dependent on government. By the time he got around to supporting legislative solutions; it was too late…. At least that is what I read and remember.

    October 21, 2009 at 10:09 a.m.

  • counttx
    Morning Meeting with Dylan Rattigan is a good source… This morning he had TARP Inspector General Neil Sarosky saying that we will lose at least $50 billion from the TARP funds that were dispensed; possibly more if CIT goes into bankruptcy.
    We gave:
    Citigroup… ……. $387 billion… they had paid back $0

    AIG……………..$187 billion… they have paid back…. $71 billion.

    Bank of America... $100 billion… they have payback $0

    J.P. Morgan……… $69.7 billion...they have paid back 25 billion

    Goldman Sachs …..$53.6 billion. they have paid back $10 billion

    Yet, we have no equity in these firms….. They're still be living off derivatives because Congress has yet to act on any significance reforms…BTW what they are doing is not illegal.

    October 21, 2009 at 9:53 a.m.

  • Mike & counttx

    The people we elect to be responsible act irresponsible, bottom line. You can blame the lobbyist of Wall Street, Trial Lawyers, Banks, Medical Businesses, and etc for tempting, bribing, and semi-extortion. But in the end our elected officials make decisions that affect everyone in this country. Those decisions affected by greed and power have damaged & weakened this country.
    Barney Frank did have very much to do with the mortgage crisis. Hell his boyfriend was put in a high level position to oversee the relaxation of the mortgage credit standards. Plus his partner signed off on the cooked-books to receive the bonuses. No jail time but he did have to pay back about half of what he stole. Barney Frank & his friends helped push the first dominoes that started this mess, directly or in-directly. Everyone does not deserve a house but only an equal opportunity to acquire one within their reasonable means.
    Wall Street will always be greedy, and always has been. Alan Greenspan's ego also indirectly contributed to this mess with the artificial low interest rates but sooner than later the crisis was coming home to roost. We were all led to believe by the experts both financial and in Washington that Greenspan was the man. He had his finger on the pulse which later we find out it was a ticking time bomb. Lack of government oversight and relaxing the mortgage credit standards had tremendous effect. If not why did this not happen earlier? Did Wall Street just get greedy in the 21st century?
    You have your opinion and are well informed, but from what I have read, listened to, and seen I will stick to my opinion. The root cause was not Wall Street but politicians working hard at increasing their voting base.
    This will happen again and will be repeated sooner than later. We have not addressed the beginning of the problem or those responsible due to politics. If the problem is not addressed how can we prevent re-occurrences? We can not. This is the Washington problem. Until we voters get smarter we will continue to elect dummies.

    October 21, 2009 at 9:37 a.m.

  • I see Chris Matthews is still pushing the "Hoover did nothing" myth. When was this an intelligent country? Probably before the media was pumping out endless government propaganda.

    October 21, 2009 at 8:14 a.m.

  • I have to say I highly recommend watching Morning Meeting with Dylan Ratigan (9am, I record it) on MSNBC who does the best job of explaining the financial mess and how regulation is needed. Wall Street does not operate better than Washington, they lobby and "bribe" Washington to loosen control of the financial reigns to let Wall Street run rough shod over the American taxpayor. Yes, Wall Street is a success, a success at buying lax regulations.

    October 20, 2009 at 9:51 p.m.

  • Yorktown77

    That line about Washington bullying people in the giving loans to poor people is just the right wing talking point started by Rush Limbaugh, to put the blame on minorities but McClatchy Newspapers had an interesting article this past Sunday, about how the investment rating firms like Moody rating Firm were in on the fix. They gave these junk mortgages a triple-A rating and moved them onto the next sucker until they ran out of suckers. Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank didn’t have anything to do with the world wide mortgage derivatives scandal…. You might also check how Goldman Sachs made out like a bandit… You see we bailed out AIG, who in turn paid back Goldman Sachs…. I think Henry Paulson, Larry Summers, and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner all came from Goldman Sachs….I might add Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan’s mea culpa before Congress for his role in keeping interest rates artificially low in favor of Wall Street during the world wide mortgage derivatives scandal…. It will all come out but I bet except for the lack of government oversight, those in government had very little to do with the crisis…. It was all about Wall Street greed.

    The word soup lines was not to be taken literally but without unemployment payments, Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare made it easier for those less fortunate to cope during a financial crisis.

    It is really not about an ideal ideology but more about Republicans and Democrats pulling together to make Medicare and Social Security solvent on a bipartisan basis…Those programs are here to say….
    It has happened before.

    October 20, 2009 at 3:54 p.m.

  • Washington wants to make Wall Street the evil doer to cast the light away from them and they are doing a good job, real good job. Wall Street will always be imperfect, but they shine like a diamond in a goat's behind compared to Washington. We had enough agencies to police & monitor Wall Street but they were asleep. Wall Street is a success story compared to Washington. Compare Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae to the Hedge funds if you will. There were no Hedge funds bailed out with Tarp or Stimulus money the last time I checked. Some hedge funds did dissolve as they should but overall they did okay. The major & medium financial institutions that Washington bullied into giving people loans that did not deserve, played a bigger role in this train wreck than Wall Street. I still do not hear the Democrat voting base that voted for CHANGE asking for Dodd & Franks head over this mortgage crisis.

    Let me correct my use of words in what you called me on or how did he say that "re-calibrate my statement". I would like to change conservative to conservitive minded (no party affiliation, okay) if I may do so. Conservitive minded people don't believe what the this current administration is selling, it stinks. We have the Social Security mess, the Medicare/Medicad mess, I do not want a HealthCare mess until we fixed the previous two. They screwed up everything else why would this be any different? I would like CHANGE for the better, but Washington needs to fix Washington before it tries to fix New York's Wall Street & Yorktown. The problem is inside the Washington beltway, not in Dewitt County
    Soup lines...I don't think so myself but I live in a small town but I do travel around the world and I have seen poor, real poor. Compared to the rest of the world's poor I have not seen poor in the US. In the US our poorest people are the fattest people and everyone abroad make jokes about it.

    October 20, 2009 at 3:16 p.m.

  • 1980s before the 24/7 cable and talk radio shows.
    I do remember an old line was used to describe a politicians campaign promise... The newspapers would describe it as a "a chicken in every pot" populist campaign....Today we have instant replay of a campaign pledge two years ago.

    October 20, 2009 at 1:39 p.m.

  • Yorktown77
    As I stated on Speechfree’s blog, I don't think that the administration should go after Fox news, because one of the biggest political show men of all time, Roger Ailes, is getting all this free publicity and airtime, drowning out the other networks. Rupert Murdoch will probably give Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly a big bonus, with instructions to keep it up.

    I disagree, conservatives and liberals alike, pull up to the government trough. Liberals might want some social programs (votes) but conservatives want to grease the palms of the defense contractors (donors). The government can make sure the tax cuts are geared to the middle class because the rich will survive and we will always have a safety net for the poor. I also disagree with your characterization of the FDR & LBJ programs…. I can envision the soup lines, if we did not have Social Security and Medicare in place last September 15, 2008. .. Congressman Weiner (D-NY) proposed an amendment to repeal Medicare; yet no Democrat or Republican voted for it. The older generation loves Medicare and Social Security, so any candidate running to abolish those programs will never win.

    Just as soon as this economy shows signs of recovery (perhaps, early second-quarter) the administration knows it needs to start fiscal restraint. Larry Summers and the Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner have already said so. Unfortunately the deficit will be with us for a long time, and interest payments will be devastating, along with defense spending and entitlements.

    I kinda agree with your last paragraph but I think the one getting away with murder is Wall Street and their cronies.

    October 20, 2009 at 1:20 p.m.

  • Yorktown, I agreed with everything you said, except this...

    ..."Conservitives realize this but it seems liberals want to give them a blank check and blind trust."...

    That is simply not true. Conservatives always want to spend money on "their" pet projects too, so they are no different. How can anyone forget the mismanagement of Bush and Reagan years? The tax cuts at a time of illegal wars that bankrupted America? People sure have a short memory.
    take that out, and your post is spot on.

    October 20, 2009 at 1:02 p.m.

  • Mike you make some excellent points. Anyone can twist and spin the numbers to describe what they want people to believe. I have watched all news channels do it. But no one does the smoke and mirrors dance better that silver tongue Obama & his posse. I am troubled at the bitterness toward FOX News. Why does it bother so many people if they only have 2-3M viewers. There is no news anymore, no where, only view points. Is FOX any more slanted than any of the others? What bothers all the haters is the side they are on! We can always turn the channel or watch something else.
    Beck, Hannity, O'Rielly, Maddow, Olbermann, Matthews, Lauer, to name a few are not going to infect my families finances, but Obama & Washington are. Generational theft started long before Obama got into office, including in 2003 with the Medicare Prescription plan with Bush. Plus many other Presidents over the years starting with FDR. His 4-terms are not seen in the same glowing light now as they have been over the years. Neither is JFK's or LBJ's tenure in office. Washington should not spend what it does not have or more importantly will not have, ever!

    Maybe we can all find some common ground with this thought. We send more than enough money to Washington already, agree? They just need to figure out how they want to spend it more efficiently and quit asking us for more from you, me, or our future generations. The more we send the more they waste. Conservitives realize this but it seems liberals want to give them a blank check and blind trust. Is there anything that Washington does well that is good for the average working family? Democrats controlled Congress for how many of the last 50-years? The graph is nice but how about the interest payments on the deficit? Thats the scary part.

    So back to the cable news view points and radio talk show host. I like it when they call out people on issues, their statements, and empty promises. If the host are wrong does it cost me or you anything? No. But if they are right it is probably in our best interest that it is put on our radar screen for us to think about and continue our postings. I think all the news channels want a fight and Washington wants it more. That way we all pick sides and bicker who is better or worse while there ratings go up. All the while Washington continues with the "shell game" down on the corner of 1st & Bankrupt where the taxpayers always lose.

    October 20, 2009 at 12:43 p.m.