Do people realize what ZERO PERCENT prime loans under Bush did to our country?
The government got to guarantee TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS of loans, using the taxpayers money as backup, and got ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BACK IN RETURN!
That was inflationary! That increased the deficit and debt! And then the public got handed a 700 BILLION DOLLAR BILL when Bush bailed out the banks! That’s after getting NO MONEY for any of the loans for nearly 8 years.
This was the dumbest thing ever done by a sitting President. It was Bush and Greenspans idea together, and even Greenspan now says it was a mistake!
An economy built on cheap credit is just a HOUSE OF CARDS! This could be seen a mile -off. Why didn’t they?
The Prime Lending rate needs to be returned to something reasonable NOW, and the tax code needs to be returned to what it was in 1999, when the budget was balanced or nearly so.
OR WE WON’T HAVE ANY COUNTRY LEFT TO WHINE ABOUT!
Socrates, thanks, but you left out the fact that the Glass/Steagal repeal act was written and presented to the President under threat of veto override by Republicans (Gramm/Leach/Bliley).
No, I’m not so simple to think that this whole thing was one person or one party’s fault - I’m responding to the FLOOD of misinformation presented by Conservative media outlets.
Clinton lowered the interest rate, but was nowhere near dumb enough to set it to ZERO like Bush was (and to the one guy - if it was 0.01 percent I think you’re splitting hairs aren’t you?)
Related posts:
Future one question (using your own logic):
If eating tacos doesnt make you a Mexican, then why are loans signed by someone Bush never met that Bush didnt hold a gun to their head forcing them to sign and underwritten by a company Bush never heard of, then why is it…Bushs fault?
EDIT: Future, what no answer? Sucks to get burned by your own bs huh ; )
Nothing you said here is true.
You’re a moron.
Most people do not realize that. Bush is and always will be their hero. He can do no wrong. Fools.
No because that is false. You fail.
Yes, and did you realize that the bank bailouts took the paltry 10% reserve requirement for banks and said that if the Fed approves it the reserve rate for a bank can be down to 1%?
Meaning, instead of a bank being able to give out loans of $1,000,000 when it only has $100,000 on deposit, it can give out loans (and collect interest) on $1,000,000 of loans when it only has $10,000 on deposit.
And why not? If they go under, we’ll only bail them out, right?
And what about that independent TARP inspector finding the Fed has injected or guaranteed in obligations up to $23 TRILLION just this last year? Out of thin air? My understanding is that what Obama has done, based on that news, is to ask the Justice Department to take away the TARP inspector’s independence and have him report to the Treasury Secretary, one of the people he is supposed to be inspecting.
Wake up.
This is not a party thing, and we DO have to speak up or have no country left to whine about.
Wow…I think you need to go back over to the “Pain & Pain Management thread were the people are medicated enough not to see that you’re delusional!
I saw the fall of the “house of cards” coming ,way back in 2005. I got all my financial ducks in a row. Refinanced my mortgage to 15yr,4.5%,and got a home equity loan to pay all outstanding debts. The total mortgage and loan payments are way lower than it would cost to rent this house. My mortgage is not ‘underwater’, and I have 10,000 in cash in the home safe.
Maybe I would make a good Treasury Sec.!
So, even though a Majority of Congress, including Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barney Frank at the helm, voted for this, it’s entirely Bush’s fault. Am I correct? I also wasn’t aware that anybody in washington forced people to get into these loans inwhich they knew they wouldn’t be able to pay when the rates went up.
Gotta love it when people who know nothing about economy want to make partisan claims relying on what they think is factual information.
The Prime Rate has not been at 0% since WWII, at least. It is also not controlled by the feds. Federal Government controls the “Federal Funds Rate”, which is one of the guidelines for the prime rate. That rate actually went up during the beginning of Bush’s term from 6.0% to 6.5%, before being lowered to 5.25% in 2006, and finally lowered to the current 0-1.0% in December, 2008.
Seriously, if you want to criticize the economy, you have to understand how it works first.
If you go back and research you’ll find that all of this was started by Billy Boy Clinton Capo Of Mena.
Both parties cooperated. For example, the Glass/Steagall act was repealed under Clinton. The predatory lending that caused the housing bubble would have otherwise been illegal.
Also, 700 billion is just a number that was told to the public. It has no basis in reality. I believe over 10 trillion in TARP funds have been pledged so far, several trillion of which have already been dispersed with no oversight (the Fed refuses to tell Congress who received them).
I’m not defending the criminals in the Bush admin any more than I would defend the criminals in the Clinton or Obama admins. I’m just saying it takes a whole lot longer than 8 years to engineer a financial collapse.
Ask Alan Greenspan.
Please do not perpetuate the illusion that the two parties are different. This is not about what Bush did, it’s about what the people who installed him did (and are still doing).
This is not about the 2 parties anymore. They are both controlled by the same interests. Obama fought right alongside Bush for that banker Bailout Bill, remember?
Your beef is with the private Federal Reserve.