Who is to Blame? (Revisited)

[Occams Realtor]

I am reposting this because Wicked Heart was pretty brilliant in his/her reasoning for why we are in this mess. After seeing senators berate Bernanke and Paulson, I think they should also look in the mirror.

[quote=Wickedheart]Basically none of this could have happened without the repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act which separated Commercial Banks from investment banking. So here’s my list:

1) Citibank who has spent the last 30 years trying to repeal the Glass-Steagal Act. In 1998 Citi was trying to merger with Travellers which was illegal under the Glass-Steagall Act. The merger was approved in 1998. Which was by the way illegal since the repeal of Glass-Steagal didn’t happen until Nov of 1999.

2) Senator Phil Gramm (R), the guy who just recently called americans a bunch of whiners. Actually Phil should be numero uno, considering his role in this mess.

3)Senators Leach and Biley (R)
The Gramm-Leach-Biley Act

All of the above were responsible for the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act.

4)The Republican Congress in power at the time

5)President Bill Clinton who threatened to veto the bill until it was rewritten so minorities and farmers could get screwed too.

6) Clintons Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin who resigned just days before the Gramm-Leach-Biley act and went to work for Citigroup for $40 mil. By the way he still works for Citigroup today.

7)President Bush

8)Alan Greenspan

9) lobbyists

10) the Fed[/quote]

[underdose]

11) Millions of American citizens who, in the wake of the tech-bomb bubble, did not wise up but dove head first into a housing bubble. Many of them borrowed money out of their primary residence to use as down payment on a second house, making them 100% leveraged on the second house. Many of them committed fraud on their low-doc loan apps.

We can’t blame the government completely (although I also agree with the list above). At some point the citizens have to responsible for their own actions.

[underdose]

11) Millions of American citizens who, in the wake of the tech-bomb bubble, did not wise up but dove head first into a housing bubble. Many of them borrowed money out of their primary residence to use as down payment on a second house, making them 100% leveraged on the second house. Many of them committed fraud on their low-doc loan apps.

We can’t blame the government completely (although I also agree with the list above). At some point the citizens have to responsible for their own actions.

[underdose]

11) Millions of American citizens who, in the wake of the tech-bomb bubble, did not wise up but dove head first into a housing bubble. Many of them borrowed money out of their primary residence to use as down payment on a second house, making them 100% leveraged on the second house. Many of them committed fraud on their low-doc loan apps.

We can’t blame the government completely (although I also agree with the list above). At some point the citizens have to responsible for their own actions.

[underdose]

11) Millions of American citizens who, in the wake of the tech-bomb bubble, did not wise up but dove head first into a housing bubble. Many of them borrowed money out of their primary residence to use as down payment on a second house, making them 100% leveraged on the second house. Many of them committed fraud on their low-doc loan apps.

We can’t blame the government completely (although I also agree with the list above). At some point the citizens have to responsible for their own actions.

[underdose]

11) Millions of American citizens who, in the wake of the tech-bomb bubble, did not wise up but dove head first into a housing bubble. Many of them borrowed money out of their primary residence to use as down payment on a second house, making them 100% leveraged on the second house. Many of them committed fraud on their low-doc loan apps.

We can’t blame the government completely (although I also agree with the list above). At some point the citizens have to responsible for their own actions.

[seattle-relo]

I think that you are right in adding number 11. However, this might be very liberal of me to say, but I believe that for some of those borrowers (I can’t say to what percentage) the fact that they sucked money out of their homes was more a symptom of the decline in the middle class. Not all were greedy and buying fancy SUV’s and plasma tv’s(a lot of people did, but not everyone) For many their “home equity” was a needed third income to make up for the underlying decline in salary via increase living and healthcare expenses.

[seattle-relo]

I think that you are right in adding number 11. However, this might be very liberal of me to say, but I believe that for some of those borrowers (I can’t say to what percentage) the fact that they sucked money out of their homes was more a symptom of the decline in the middle class. Not all were greedy and buying fancy SUV’s and plasma tv’s(a lot of people did, but not everyone) For many their “home equity” was a needed third income to make up for the underlying decline in salary via increase living and healthcare expenses.

[seattle-relo]

I think that you are right in adding number 11. However, this might be very liberal of me to say, but I believe that for some of those borrowers (I can’t say to what percentage) the fact that they sucked money out of their homes was more a symptom of the decline in the middle class. Not all were greedy and buying fancy SUV’s and plasma tv’s(a lot of people did, but not everyone) For many their “home equity” was a needed third income to make up for the underlying decline in salary via increase living and healthcare expenses.

[seattle-relo]

I think that you are right in adding number 11. However, this might be very liberal of me to say, but I believe that for some of those borrowers (I can’t say to what percentage) the fact that they sucked money out of their homes was more a symptom of the decline in the middle class. Not all were greedy and buying fancy SUV’s and plasma tv’s(a lot of people did, but not everyone) For many their “home equity” was a needed third income to make up for the underlying decline in salary via increase living and healthcare expenses.

[seattle-relo]

I think that you are right in adding number 11. However, this might be very liberal of me to say, but I believe that for some of those borrowers (I can’t say to what percentage) the fact that they sucked money out of their homes was more a symptom of the decline in the middle class. Not all were greedy and buying fancy SUV’s and plasma tv’s(a lot of people did, but not everyone) For many their “home equity” was a needed third income to make up for the underlying decline in salary via increase living and healthcare expenses.

[Anonymous]

The decline of middle class is a result of globalization.
On the other hand, the political need to avoid recession caused the loose flow of money and bubbles.
The quality of life for regular people will keep declining.

[Anonymous]

The decline of middle class is a result of globalization.
On the other hand, the political need to avoid recession caused the loose flow of money and bubbles.
The quality of life for regular people will keep declining.

[Anonymous]

The decline of middle class is a result of globalization.
On the other hand, the political need to avoid recession caused the loose flow of money and bubbles.
The quality of life for regular people will keep declining.

[Anonymous]

The decline of middle class is a result of globalization.
On the other hand, the political need to avoid recession caused the loose flow of money and bubbles.
The quality of life for regular people will keep declining.

[Author]

Posts