Skip to main content

A shot in the Fannie Mae!

Image
By scooby
Contributed anonymously:
Same old crooks calling the shots no matter who gets in office. Who ever is running this country and, by the way it's not the president, has their head buried up their a** so deep they'll never see day light or they have an agenda that appalling to me.

The history of a financial disaster

Comments

Anonymous said…
I work in the financial markets, and there are so many inaccuracies in that little "fact sheet" that just starting at the top and working my way down would take pages to correct. I think the most fitting starting point is, which party controlled a majority of the House and Senate and occupied the White House from 2000-2006? I say that only to invite you to actually think about what you're asserting. The truth is that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats engineered this by themselves. Mostly this was a breakdown due to corruption in the bond rating agencies and mortgage lenders. Read up on "moral hazard" before you post so much politically charged [and factually incorrect] propaganda next time.
10/14/2008 10:47 AM
Anonymous said…
Why don't you enlighten us with your knowledge. I'm sure it will be all biased to the left wing democrats but what the heck lets see the facts. Even with that I am still voting for McCain.The pojt is this. the house and senate are all democrast and thwey voted us into poverty by bailing out their friends with a $810B bailout and had a 1/ 2M dollar party the night before to grease the wheels.
10/14/2008 6:11 PM
Anonymous said…
I can simplify it even further for you. Everywhere you see "Republicans tried to propose legislation to regulate ____, but the Democrats blocked it", you are reading a lie. Bush and McCain have both been on the "markets must be free from regulation" train right up until it derailed in an $810B bailout. And if you want to get excited about the $810B, you should also get excited about the $5 TRILLION increase in our national debt under Bush. That's more than double where we were at the start of his presidency. And again, before you blame the last 2 years of a Democratic House and Senate, look to the prior 6 years where the Republicans owned the White House, House, and Senate. The reason the Democrats took both houses two years ago was due to a backlash against Republican mismanagement the prior six years. And the Democrats have done no better than the Republicans since taking over. Pelosi grandstands while real work needs to get done.

Reader, you misunderstand me. I'm not defending either party. Both are partly culpable here, but more importantly people don't understand what underlying pieces of the market allowed us to get here: primarily a failure of the bond rating agencies to accurately rate the risk of CDO paper, which has nothing to do with either party. It's a rehash of the academic arguments about risk management that were the same ones that led the massive Long Term Capital Management hedge fund to collapse years ago during the dot-com bust.

I'll happily capitulate if you can give the URL for even one House or Senate vote showing that 1) the Republicans sponsored a bill proposing additional market oversight, and 2) it was defeated by a Democratic majority. You'll find that the so-called facts in that diatribe are vague because they're not true.
10/15/2008 6:30 AM
Anonymous said…
October 14, 2008 6:11 PM
You have enlightened us with your ignorance. John McCain voted for the bailout. But go ahead and vote for John, somebody has to do it.
10/15/2008 6:50 AM
Anonymous said…
Nah. The point is this. I don't vote socialist. I once saw a bumper sticker that said, " Vote Republican or Embrace Socialism". I've voted that way ever since and so will everyone else if they'd just sit back and realize that handouts to the people who do not work, at the working people's expense is all democrats are about.
10/15/2008 5:54 PM
Anonymous said…
Back in 2004, the SEC decided to remove regulations that limited the amount of leverage the investment banks could take with their money. This was the key event that let them take on crazy 40:1 type leverage at places like Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns. De-regulation was what supplied the rocket fuel to enable all those toxic securitized loans (ie, sub-prime, Alt-A, credit cards, etc). With leveraged bets allowed at these crazy levels, it was only a matter of time before bad things began to happened as the leveraged bets started to unwind.

The Executive Branch is in charge of the SEC. That would be Bush. This unwise change in leveraging requirements let the investment house CEOs get very, very rich by doing very, very foolish things with leverage. Once they made their money, they could leave it to others to clean up the mess.

Now that we are heading into a depression over all this highly leveraged foolishness, I guess we should vote in Dems (as usually) to clean up the mess left by the ill-advised GOP's de-regulation.
10/15/2008 11:54 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

LLNL un-diversity

By scooby
Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
79 comments
Read more