What did GWB do to cause the great recession? DJIA crash? Financial meltdown?

[auditor0007]

I am so sick of hearing the libs blaming all of this on W
OK Libs lets hear it
what did GWB do to cause any of it?

After the stock bubble of the late 90's, Bush made massive tax cuts to stimulate the economy. He was not alone in pushing for these tax cuts. With them, credit was made much too easy to come by, which in turn led to the housing bubble and finally its bust leading us to where we are today. While those tax cuts and easy credit made it look like the economy was doing okay, it was all a ruse as the vast majority of the growth was coming from the housing market which became so over-inflated that it led us to where we are now.

As with any President, it takes all of Congress to get us into and out of messes. More often than not, government gets us into messes rather than getting us out. Presidents like Reagan and Clinton are given credit for our economy when it was growing robustly. The thing is, it's very likely that the economy would have been growing that fast with or without them and their policies. A lot of it is just about timing of economic cycles. What politicians do may have some effect, but we have always seen peaks and valleys in our economy.

Today, a lot of people enjoy blaming Obama for the mess we are in. Truthfully though, he had very little to do with it. As for the extra spending for TARP and the stimulus package, it's really difficult to say if it helped or hurt. I tend to think it helped from things being worse than they are, but I could be wrong.

What I do know is that the Bush tax cuts have hurt us tremendously on the revenue side of government. This cannot be denied. Our massive deficits are due, in great part, to having lowered tax rates to their lowest in over 60 years. The other part of Bush's tax cuts that made little sense at all was their timing. He pushed them through at a time that he was increasing military spending dramatically. Granted, in the beginning, the thought of going to war costing us $3 trillion or more was never considered. The talk initially was that the cost would be in the low hundreds of billions.

I didn't have an issue with us going to war as much as I did and do with not funding the wars. This is where Bush must accept some responsibility. Had he funded the wars with increased taxes, people would've bitched and moaned, and the economy may have been much slower to rebound, but we would not be saddled with the huge deficits we now have, and we would likely never would have created the huge housing bubble that has put us where we are now.

 

[Truthmatters]

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Organizational structure
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission headquarters in Washington, D.C.The SEC consists of five Commissioners appointed by the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the United States Senate.


we had an entire republican government when these people were appointed

 

[Truthmatters]

There you have it the Bush admin planned this mess.


I dont think they realised it would result in a mess.

I think they were merely stupid enough to think Deregulation was good for the US.

They were dead wrong.

deregulation Crashed the economy in just a hand full of years.

 

[JRK]

Yes he did do it personally.

Who allowed the SEC to run like this.

Lets remember where the Buck stops in this country.

Bush ran the country.

He was the Boss of the people at the SEC.

He knew what they were doing.

He allowed them to do it.

Thats the same as saying that every murder that has taken place sense Obama took office is Obama's fault
All your proving is you cannot legislate morality
It is against the law to apply for a loan using false information
It is against the law to loan money knowing that person is using false information to ontan it
at the root, this problem had plenty of legislation to prevent it

 

[JRK]

I am so sick of hearing the libs blaming all of this on W
OK Libs lets hear it
what did GWB do to cause any of it?

After the stock bubble of the late 90's, Bush made massive tax cuts to stimulate the economy. He was not alone in pushing for these tax cuts. With them, credit was made much too easy to come by, which in turn led to the housing bubble and finally its bust leading us to where we are today. While those tax cuts and easy credit made it look like the economy was doing okay, it was all a ruse as the vast majority of the growth was coming from the housing market which became so over-inflated that it led us to where we are now.

As with any President, it takes all of Congress to get us into and out of messes. More often than not, government gets us into messes rather than getting us out. Presidents like Reagan and Clinton are given credit for our economy when it was growing robustly. The thing is, it's very likely that the economy would have been growing that fast with or without them and their policies. A lot of it is just about timing of economic cycles. What politicians do may have some effect, but we have always seen peaks and valleys in our economy.

Today, a lot of people enjoy blaming Obama for the mess we are in. Truthfully though, he had very little to do with it. As for the extra spending for TARP and the stimulus package, it's really difficult to say if it helped or hurt. I tend to think it helped from things being worse than they are, but I could be wrong.

What I do know is that the Bush tax cuts have hurt us tremendously on the revenue side of government. This cannot be denied. Our massive deficits are due, in great part, to having lowered tax rates to their lowest in over 60 years. The other part of Bush's tax cuts that made little sense at all was their timing. He pushed them through at a time that he was increasing military spending dramatically. Granted, in the beginning, the thought of going to war costing us $3 trillion or more was never considered. The talk initially was that the cost would be in the low hundreds of billions.

I didn't have an issue with us going to war as much as I did and do with not funding the wars. This is where Bush must accept some responsibility. Had he funded the wars with increased taxes, people would've bitched and moaned, and the economy may have been much slower to rebound, but we would not be saddled with the huge deficits we now have, and we would likely never would have created the huge housing bubble that has put us where we are now.

your information is not accurate
the wars costing us 3 trillion?
this is called a link

Little-known fact: Obama's failed stimulus program cost more than the Iraq war | Examiner Staff Writer | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

Expect to hear a lot about how much the Iraq war cost in the days ahead from Democrats worried about voter wrath against their unprecedented spending excesses.

The meme is simple: The economy is in a shambles because of Bush's economic policies and his war in Iraq. As American Thinker's Randall Hoven points out, that's the message being peddled by lefties as diverse as former Clinton political strategist James Carville, economist Joseph Stiglitz, and The Nation's Washington editor, Christopher Hayes.

The key point in the mantra is an alleged $3 trillion cost for the war. Well, it was expensive to be sure, in both blood and treasure, but, as Hoven notes, the CBO puts the total cost at $709 billion. To put that figure in the proper context of overall spending since the war began in 2003, Hoven provides this handy CBO chart showing the portion of the annual deficit attributable to the conflict:

Noe as far as tax policy being a failure?
you do not pay taxes, that we know right away
and if what you say is true about tax policy why is it we were within 162 billion of breaking even in 2007?

You liberals kill me with this world you live in
your killing our country repeating these lies
STOP IT

 

[JRK]

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Organizational structure
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission headquarters in Washington, D.C.The SEC consists of five Commissioners appointed by the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the United States Senate.


we had an entire republican government when these people were appointed

My god man
what does any of this have to do with GWB?
You keep trying to claim that de regulation would have prevented a person lying on there credit app and a person approving that same loan
YOU CANNOT REGULATE MORALITY

 

[Truthmatters]

You have no integrity if you can not figure that out.

Bush Apointed the SEC heads.

They acted the way he wanted themn to act.

That is why he picked these people.

The people he picked to head the SEC then held up all the protections in the GLBact.

The lending community then proceded to crashthe worlds economy with their newe found freedoms to do ANYTHING they wanted to make a fast buck.


Why are you pretending to be so stupid you cant see whats right in front of your face?

 

[Douger]

I am so sick of hearing the libs blaming all of this on W
OK Libs lets hear it
what did GWB do to cause any of it?

He found people stupid enough to vote for him. TWICE !

 

[Truthmatters]

Well he also kept legal American voters from voting to win both elections

 

[JRK]

I am so sick of hearing the libs blaming all of this on W
OK Libs lets hear it
what did GWB do to cause any of it?

He found people stupid enough to vote for him. TWICE !

Look just because you do not like the guy gives you no right to call those of us who do stupid. Voting for Obama is your right
My hope is thru education you will not vote for him the next time
GWB and I both could care less what you people think of him, our concern is the person your voting for now.

 

[JRK]

You have no integrity if you can not figure that out.

Bush Apointed the SEC heads.

They acted the way he wanted themn to act.

That is why he picked these people.

The people he picked to head the SEC then held up all the protections in the GLBact.

The lending community then proceded to crashthe worlds economy with their newe found freedoms to do ANYTHING they wanted to make a fast buck.


Why are you pretending to be so stupid you cant see whats right in front of your face?

You keep talking about those who where over the SEC like they did something wrong
It is about time you tell us what it is they did wrong

 

[Truthmatters]

I have told you numberous times.

They held up the protective measures written into the GLB act for YEARS.

They allowed the industry to have all the parts of the law they liked and protected them from all the parts of the law that protected us.


Why do you keep pretending you cant understand what you are told?

 

[Too Tall]

So Bill Clinton's bill was GWB fault/
Rolling up those securities, now explain to me again what GWB did to cause that?
FYI
I do not blame Clinton either

It wasn't Bill Clinton's bill..it was authored by 2 Republicans, passed Congress and signed by Bill Clinton. True..it was a huge mistake..but it could have been rectified by the Bush administration. And they had good reason to do so..after the Arthur Anderson debacle.

President George W. Bush had enough of a warning with the meltdowns of Enron, Worldcom and a host of others to know that regulation was way to lax. He chose to ignore it and worked tiressly to get rid of "Mark to Market" and water down Sarbanes-Oxley.

I agree. On point, the reason Bush is blamed and should be blamed is shit hit the fan on his watch.
The near financial collapse, the attack on the WTC on Sept. 11, 2001 and too many days cutting brush in between these events explain why Bush, Jr. is to blame.

Bush should have been on the golf course while Americans were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[Too Tall]

hmm...since we KNOW that fannie and freddie caused all this shit, and we KNOW that Bush tried to fix fannie and freddie and was stopped by DEMS, there is pretty much indisputable proof this crap is all the fault of the DEMOFUCKINGCRATS

what you have just done is to ignore reality and spew partisan bullshit that no economist worht his snuff will claim.

You are a partisan hack

You are the partisan hack.

In 2003, the Bush Administration sought to create a new agency, replacing the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, to oversee Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In 1992 in the wake of the Savings and Loan crisis, and over concern similar lending problems would develop, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight was created as part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. While Senate and House leaders voiced their intention to bring about the needed legislation, no reform bills materialized. A Senate reform bill introduced by Senator John Corzine (D-NJ) (S.1656) never made it out of the 21-member (10D/11R) Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee. At the time members of the 108th congress expressed faith in the solvency of Fannie and Freddie. Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA), for example, described them as "not facing any kind of financial crisis."

In 2005, the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act, sponsored by Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and co-sponsored by Senators Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), John McCain (R-AZ) and John Sununu (R-NH), would have increased government oversight of loans given by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Like the 2003 bill, it also died in the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, this time in the 109th Congress. A full and accurate record of the congressional attempts to regulate the housing GSEs is given in the Congressional record prepared in 2005.

From Wiki, but if you don't like it, I can source it elsewhere.

 

[Truthmatters]

Tell me how those entities were responsible for writing the subprimes that were above and beyond what the gov program required?

Tell me how those entities were responsible for rolling those very subprimes into securities that had never before contained such dogshit?


Now explain in detail what that SEC annoucment I provided you means.


You cant.

All you can do is post bullshit from someone elses brain.

You are a partisan hack because you have NO information yourself and merely buy into what someone else tells you without any idea what it really menas.

 

[auditor0007]

I am so sick of hearing the libs blaming all of this on W
OK Libs lets hear it
what did GWB do to cause any of it?

After the stock bubble of the late 90's, Bush made massive tax cuts to stimulate the economy. He was not alone in pushing for these tax cuts. With them, credit was made much too easy to come by, which in turn led to the housing bubble and finally its bust leading us to where we are today. While those tax cuts and easy credit made it look like the economy was doing okay, it was all a ruse as the vast majority of the growth was coming from the housing market which became so over-inflated that it led us to where we are now.

As with any President, it takes all of Congress to get us into and out of messes. More often than not, government gets us into messes rather than getting us out. Presidents like Reagan and Clinton are given credit for our economy when it was growing robustly. The thing is, it's very likely that the economy would have been growing that fast with or without them and their policies. A lot of it is just about timing of economic cycles. What politicians do may have some effect, but we have always seen peaks and valleys in our economy.

Today, a lot of people enjoy blaming Obama for the mess we are in. Truthfully though, he had very little to do with it. As for the extra spending for TARP and the stimulus package, it's really difficult to say if it helped or hurt. I tend to think it helped from things being worse than they are, but I could be wrong.

What I do know is that the Bush tax cuts have hurt us tremendously on the revenue side of government. This cannot be denied. Our massive deficits are due, in great part, to having lowered tax rates to their lowest in over 60 years. The other part of Bush's tax cuts that made little sense at all was their timing. He pushed them through at a time that he was increasing military spending dramatically. Granted, in the beginning, the thought of going to war costing us $3 trillion or more was never considered. The talk initially was that the cost would be in the low hundreds of billions.

I didn't have an issue with us going to war as much as I did and do with not funding the wars. This is where Bush must accept some responsibility. Had he funded the wars with increased taxes, people would've bitched and moaned, and the economy may have been much slower to rebound, but we would not be saddled with the huge deficits we now have, and we would likely never would have created the huge housing bubble that has put us where we are now.

your information is not accurate
the wars costing us 3 trillion?
this is called a link

Little-known fact: Obama's failed stimulus program cost more than the Iraq war | Examiner Staff Writer | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

Expect to hear a lot about how much the Iraq war cost in the days ahead from Democrats worried about voter wrath against their unprecedented spending excesses.

The meme is simple: The economy is in a shambles because of Bush's economic policies and his war in Iraq. As American Thinker's Randall Hoven points out, that's the message being peddled by lefties as diverse as former Clinton political strategist James Carville, economist Joseph Stiglitz, and The Nation's Washington editor, Christopher Hayes.

The key point in the mantra is an alleged $3 trillion cost for the war. Well, it was expensive to be sure, in both blood and treasure, but, as Hoven notes, the CBO puts the total cost at $709 billion. To put that figure in the proper context of overall spending since the war began in 2003, Hoven provides this handy CBO chart showing the portion of the annual deficit attributable to the conflict:

Noe as far as tax policy being a failure?
you do not pay taxes, that we know right away
and if what you say is true about tax policy why is it we were within 162 billion of breaking even in 2007?

You liberals kill me with this world you live in
your killing our country repeating these lies
STOP IT

You are not counting long term costs and liabilities. Here are a few links for you. Strictly using costs to date is like saying it only costs $2000 to have a baby. While that may be all it costs in the terms of your share of the hospital bill, you are going to be paying a hell of a lot more over then next 18 to 25 years.

Iraq and Afghanistan Wars Exceeding $3 Trillion Estimate by 25% - The Daily Beast

The Cost of Bin Laden: $3 Trillion Over 15 Years - Tim Fernholz & Jim Tankersley - Business - The Atlantic

The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond

The three trillion dollar war | Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes - Times Online

Nobel laureate estimates wars' cost at more than $3 trillion | McClatchy

 

[Truthmatters]

Press Release: Agencies Adopt Final Rules to Implement the Bank 'Broker' Provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act; 2007-198; Sept. 24, 2007


Joint Release
Securities and Exchange Commission
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
2007-198

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Agencies Adopt Final Rules to Implement the Bank 'Broker' Provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
Washington, D.C., Sept. 24, 2007 - The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) on Monday announced the adoption of final joint rules to implement the "broker" exceptions for banks under Section 3(a)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These exceptions were adopted as part of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (GLB Act). The SEC and the Board approved the final rules at separate open meetings held on September 19, 2007, and September 24, 2007, respectively.

The Board and SEC issued proposed rules for comment in December 2006. The final rules are similar to the proposed rules in overall scope and approach. In response to comments, the agencies also have modified the rules in several important respects to make the rules more workable and less burdensome. These changes are discussed in detail in the attached notice, which will be published in the Federal Register shortly.

People have to have the facts to make a decent decision.

No more ignoring the facts for partisan bullshit.

 

[BlindBoo]

How about a list of all the so called 'libs' that are "blaming all of this on W"?

As far as I can tell most reasonable folks here say it was a combination of both parties, not all of one and none of the other bull shit, that is the partisan push.

 

[Truthmatters]

Then pray tell why did the Bush admin hold up the protections written into the GLBact?

 

[Wry Catcher]

It wasn't Bill Clinton's bill..it was authored by 2 Republicans, passed Congress and signed by Bill Clinton. True..it was a huge mistake..but it could have been rectified by the Bush administration. And they had good reason to do so..after the Arthur Anderson debacle.

President George W. Bush had enough of a warning with the meltdowns of Enron, Worldcom and a host of others to know that regulation was way to lax. He chose to ignore it and worked tiressly to get rid of "Mark to Market" and water down Sarbanes-Oxley.

I agree. On point, the reason Bush is blamed and should be blamed is shit hit the fan on his watch.
The near financial collapse, the attack on the WTC on Sept. 11, 2001 and too many days cutting brush in between these events explain why Bush, Jr. is to blame.

what did GWB do to cause these events?
Why should we blame him? why do we?
9-11 was 19 insanly motivated Saudis with legal tickets and box cutters. in 2001 I could carry my pocket knife on a plane

The financial collapse?
what did GWB do to cause that?

It's what he didn't do. Cole was attacked by Terrorists in October, 2000. President Bush knew or should have known it was only a matter of time until our shores would suffer an attack of some kind. While he may not have been able to put in motion a way to prevent the destruction of the Twin Towers, he surely should have had a contingency plan should an attack occur.

Knowing Clinton was tested within weeks of his first term (first WTC attack) and having knowledge of other terror attacks around the world (Cole, African Embassy's) and at home (Oklahoma City) one would presume defending our nation would have been job one.
It seems job 1 for GWB was to cut taxes and cut brush, play some golf and fish; make sure everyone wore a coat and tie and was above all loyal to him.

As for the near collapse in 2008 Bush knew and spoke of his concerns as it was becoming clear shit was soon to fly; yet, he did not use the power of the office to reign in the absurd and dangerous trading practices of Wall Street. Had he sent out the troops to all the Sunday News Shows warning of building economic crisis - as he did in the build up to the Iraq invasion - maybe we would have been able to limit the damage when the shit flew in October 2008