Time to stop crony capitalism

[Missouri_Mike]

The Heritage Foundation doesn't give a shit about you or any other poor people. What they want to stop are CERTAIN government funds which go to their political rivals' districts. You are being lied to.

So you like supporting the business world with tax dollars. How is it exactly you think this is a good thing?

Where do you even get that from anything that I wrote? The Heritage Foundation is not going to help you. They are not looking out for your interests or the American people. They do not work for you. They do not answer to you. They are not accountable to you. They are using you.

You don't seem to be willing to even begin cutting down subsidies. I would agree I would like to see all subsidies end on the same date. Done and done, let them sink or swim.

The problem is we not only failed to reign in the subsidies we added a whole new industry to those on the tax payers dime. The insurance companies because of obiecare are now in line to collect their portion of the 6 Billion dollars in handouts. So we have pretty much made the situation even worse. How is that looking out for our interest?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

the market left to itself would eat itself into destruction.See banking crisis of 2008.
Too much government meddling can also stale out the system by propping up enterprises that should have crashed and burned.

The market was never left to itself and that's why it crashed. They had to operate under government rules and regulations that forced them to make bad loans. I'm good with letting failures burn, let's do that. Let's not allow the government to make those fail points law and cause the problem.

I think we're on the same page here, now will you vote for people that will make this happen?

um the bankers where trading on something that was not regulated at all.
So no you are wrong.

They were trading in loans that Fannie and Freddie were guaranteeing. The government made the rules how loans would be made and then backed it up with guarantees the banks would be able to unload those loans. And with government money they did exactly that. Why do you think there has been no prosecution of bankers? Because the trial would expose the government as the primary offender in all of this. It's what happens when government gets involved and politics take over for capitalism.

 

[Clementine]

Most articles by so-called reporters are nothing but opinion. I find this one valid because it points out some stupid things our government is actually doing (and you can look it up) that are hurting the average person.

you find it valid because it confirms your bias.
These other articles by so called reporters have opinions in them because you need a conspiracy in order to have a point.Blogs are not legit sources.

I agree with the opinion that crony capitalism needs to stop. It's something that continues and you can easily check the things mentioned, if you are able to google things.

The bias is simply against ALL politicians who are wasting tax payers money by putting it where it doesn't belong. I would think that is one thing that both sides would agree on.

 

[Clementine]

The market was never left to itself and that's why it crashed. They had to operate under government rules and regulations that forced them to make bad loans. I'm good with letting failures burn, let's do that. Let's not allow the government to make those fail points law and cause the problem.

I think we're on the same page here, now will you vote for people that will make this happen?

um the bankers where trading on something that was not regulated at all.
So no you are wrong.

They were trading in loans that Fannie and Freddie were guaranteeing. The government made the rules how loans would be made and then backed it up with guarantees the banks would be able to unload those loans. And with government money they did exactly that. Why do you think there has been no prosecution of bankers? Because the trial would expose the government as the primary offender in all of this. It's what happens when government gets involved and politics take over for capitalism.

The banks were bundling and selling the toxic subprime loans. They would never have made those loans unless the Clinton administration forced the issue when they put Carter's Community Reinvestment Act on steroids. Anyone else remember Reno pounding on the podium while demanding the banks start loaning to everyone? Prior to that, the banks redlined certain neighborhoods and refused to grant mortgage loans to people who couldn't pay them back. After the administration came down on them, they not only starting making loans to anyone, but many got no-docs loans, meaning they didn't have to jump through the hoops to fill out all the paperwork, make a down payment or even get a credit check.

Fannie and Freddie backed up all the loans, knowing damn well they weren't worth the paper they were printed on. The loans were bundled and sold as if they had value. Fannie and Freddie were the worst offenders, which is why they were the first to start showing the symptoms of impending disaster. Warnings went on for years and it was Republicans who made numerous attempts to investigate F and F. The Dems literally shouted them down and accused them of wanting to deny poor people and minorities the right to own a home. They said the banks were fine and didn't need fixing. They balked at the suggestion of more oversight.

It was insane. The Dems especially were using F and F as their personal slush fund. Obama was one of the biggest recipients of money from the failing banks. Franklin Raines earned himself a multi-million dollar umbrella as he made a hasty exit from the sinking ship.

It's utterly amazing that they turned around and blamed Bush after the Bush administration tried and tried to stop those banking practices. The Dems own it, pure and simple. They blocked oversight and new regulations that may have averted the disaster. The banks all played by the rules set down by the Clinton administration and you are 100% correct when you say there was no prosecution because it would have proved who the real culprits were.

 

[Clementine]

More on the hearings that could have averted the disaster if both sides had come together. This was in 2004, though there were earlier hearings, nearly a dozen, that sought to stop the dangerous practices, but the effort was blocked time and time again.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXfAPyHpPZk]Democrats Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac - YouTube[/ame]


It's crystal clear which side wanted more regulations and oversight and which side wanted to keep playing fast and loose with the banks.

Highlights of this eight-minute video:

Maxine Waters: Through nearly a dozen hearings, we were frankly trying to fix something that wasn’t broke. Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Franklin Raines. [Raines would barely avoid prosecution for fraud.]

Gregory Meeks: … I’m just pissed off at OFHEO [the regulators trying to warn Congress of insolvency at the GSEs], because if it wasn’t for you, I don’t think we’d be here in the first place. … There’s been nothing that indicated that’s wrong with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac has come up on its own … The question that then comes up is the competence that your agency has with reference to deciding and regulating these GSEs.

Lacy Clay: This hearing is about the political lynching of Franklin Raines.

Barney Frank: I don’t see anything in this report that raises safety and soundness problems.

Take a good look through this video in 2004, and ask yourself who on this panel wanted more regulatory oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and which members spent their time attacking the regulators. When Barack Obama talks at debates about how the past eight years of regulatory laissez-faire created the problem, he may want to review the transcripts of these hearings and note that Democrats repeatedly undermined regulators and called them everything from incompetent to bigoted in their rush to keep the status quo at Fannie and Freddie.

The Democrats attacking the regulator here didn’t do so out of some deep conviction against government regulation. They wanted to keep the gravy train rolling on questionable mortgages in order to endear themselves to the working class, and didn’t mind smearing the OFHEO regulator as a racist in order to succeed. The Republicans who wanted more oversight didn’t demand it as socialists looking for a government takeover of the financial sector, either, but because they saw the impending disaster looming for Fannie Mae.
Democrats distorted the market through the CRA and through Fannie and Freddie’s massive securitizing of bad debt, and then blocked regulators from doing their jobs. That’s the real story of this collapse.

Video: Democrats insist ?nothing wrong? at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac in 2004 « Hot Air

 

[Plasmaball]

The market was never left to itself and that's why it crashed. They had to operate under government rules and regulations that forced them to make bad loans. I'm good with letting failures burn, let's do that. Let's not allow the government to make those fail points law and cause the problem.

I think we're on the same page here, now will you vote for people that will make this happen?

um the bankers where trading on something that was not regulated at all.
So no you are wrong.

They were trading in loans that Fannie and Freddie were guaranteeing. The government made the rules how loans would be made and then backed it up with guarantees the banks would be able to unload those loans. And with government money they did exactly that. Why do you think there has been no prosecution of bankers? Because the trial would expose the government as the primary offender in all of this. It's what happens when government gets involved and politics take over for capitalism.

Sigh...I'm not going to bother. You think it's governments fault when it's clearly not. Agree to disagree because I'm not wasting my time with you.

 

[gipper]

The Federal government subsidizing private industries does need elimination because it is ALWAYS full of fraud and corruption. And why? Because politicians control the subsidy and politicians are liars and cheats.

The government subsidy is primarily designed to benefit the connected and the politicians who promote them.

Ending the practice will likely never happen as long as we have a big uncontrolled government.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Another "2008" will have to happen first. The next crash will not result in the government giving the criminals $trillions more AGAIN.
So this time the crash will be real. And finally, hopefully, people will wake up and demand change.
We have lost our way of life. We are no longer a Democratic Republic. We are an oligarchy.
This has been true for a long time, but especially since the mid 80's. And you bet, Barrack Obama is a corporatist/elitist. The worst kind. That means he pulls from the middle and gives to the top and bottom.
The top gets everything they want, and the bottom gets plenty of free sh*t. And we suck on it.

 

[editec]

I expect that the left will just bash Bush because crony capitalism has gone on for decades. Fact is that it's time to end it and that means sending a message to the current occupant in the White House and congress. Obama has been kinder to the wealthy than he has to middle class.

That belief is predicated on the notion that America has a thriving, competitive and free enterprise economy in which the best ideas and hardest workers win the day, while those who are less successful always have a fair chance to try again.

The free enterprise system is not perfect, but it is fair. Unfortunately today, Americans increasingly believe our system is rigged. And in President Obama’s America, they have good reason.

From the stimulus to cash-for-clunkers, from the bailouts to cap-and-trade, from Dodd-Frank to Obamacare, every name-brand initiative of the president’s term has distorted public policy to privilege well-connected insiders and elites at the expense of taxpayers and consumers.

The Export-Import Bank is another taxpayer-funded example of distorted public policy that further erodes Americans’ confidence in our markets and our system.

In short, Ex-Im Bank exists to dole out taxpayer-backed loan guarantees to help American exporters. Most of the benefits go to large corporations that are perfectly capable of securing private financing anywhere in the world. That is to say, Congress allows Ex-Im Bank to risk taxpayer money unnecessarily to subsidize well-connected private companies.

How Conservatives Can Fight Obama's Crony Economy
How Conservatives Can Fight Obama's Crony Economy

One has to put on blinders to imagine that OBAMA isn't working for the same MASTERS as Bush II was.

You folks who are truly conservatives or truly liberals do NOT have a party or organization that truly supports you or your causes.

And if you invent one the MASTERS will quickly find a way to either gain control over that movement or crush it out of existence.

 

[Clementine]

Tax payers are on the hook for over 5 trillion because we are backing mortgage loans again. Don't expect Dems to complain since they will be enjoying the money from F and F until the next crash. These are the same practices that caused this in the first place. Who will they blame the next time?

Nearly all new residential mortgages are currently being guaranteed by Fannie [Mae] or Freddie [Mac] because these companies buy mortgages from banks and then sell investments backed by the mortgages. And because the Federal government guarantees these investments, taxpayers foot the bill when people default on their mortgages.

Getting Your Neighbor's Mortgage Off Your Lawn
Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac | Getting Your Neighbor's Mortgage Off Your Lawn

 

[hangover]

Go to first new post Time to stop crony capitalism

...and nepotism. Women all over the U.S. are going Brazilian to protest Bush III.

 

[Clementine]

um the bankers where trading on something that was not regulated at all.
So no you are wrong.

They were trading in loans that Fannie and Freddie were guaranteeing. The government made the rules how loans would be made and then backed it up with guarantees the banks would be able to unload those loans. And with government money they did exactly that. Why do you think there has been no prosecution of bankers? Because the trial would expose the government as the primary offender in all of this. It's what happens when government gets involved and politics take over for capitalism.

Sigh...I'm not going to bother. You think it's governments fault when it's clearly not. Agree to disagree because I'm not wasting my time with you.

For years, banks did business the way they were told. Of course, they didn't mind. They were told to make the risky loans and government backed them up. It was a good deal for the banks and politicians, but a horrible deal for the rest of us. There is a reason why the banks weren't investigated and charged. Sure, there was some bad mouthing of them to appease the people who got burned, but no action. That tells you that politicians were covering their own asses.

And signs were there of impending disaster and politicians fought to keep it going without oversight. They didn't want better regulation. I think some planned to benefit from the money till the inevitable crash. They used the crash to their advantage and I think they wanted it to happen.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXfAPyHpPZk]Democrats Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac - YouTube[/ame]