• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

OFFICIAL Elizabeth Warren is awesome thread

The Clinton machine is the most overrated force in politics. Sure, Bill and Hillary are decent politicians but are not now and have never been invincible. The great Clintons...in three national elections have NEVER had more people vote for them than vote against them.
 
Bob-which specific Bush policies put the financial crisis on steroids?
 
Some were policies of omission, rather than policies of commission....such as leaving the shadow banking sector unregulated, continuing to incentivize home ownership. Running large deficits to fund wars & pass a massive federal prescription drug bill while simultaneously giving massive tax cuts....which went primarily to the wealthy...was also a factor.

The largest single factor was probably the collapse of the housing & mortgage markets...which were greatly fueled by those first two errors of "omission" during the Bush presidency. (The Fed under Alan Greenspan must also bear a great deal of blame by continuing to keep interest rates artificially low during Bush's re-election campaign in 2003-04 to prop up the economy until after Bush could squeak thru a close re-election campaign. To me, this was entirely politically motivated, because Greenspan had ample evidence by then that the housing markets were getting dangerously overheated....and Greenspan's delay in raising interest rates was like throwing gas on a fire.)

The American Enterprise Institute had this very good article on the subject:

http://www.aei.org/publication/gove...-up-to-the-financial-crisis-a-forensic-study/
\

Are you saying that Bush did not act to change the policies of Clinton and those before him? If that is the case, then the greater portion of the blame should lie on the presidents that came before Bush.
 
I said in an earlier post that both parties were culpable. The difference in the situations was that by the Bush presidency the problems from earlier actions...the actual results from which may not have been as easily predicted before they became so widespread...were more readily evident, and no corrective action was taken.

I can work with that.
 
Libertarians are generally highly critical of regulatory agencies that have been captured by the people they regulate. A lot of libertarians would agree that having a super wealthy investment banker moving into a government agency that supposedly regulates the man's former partners, colleagues, friends and clients is a situation rife with potential conflicts and an example of bad government.
 
Libertarians are generally highly critical of regulatory agencies that have been captured by the people they regulate. A lot of libertarians would agree that having a super wealthy investment banker moving into a government agency that supposedly regulates the man's former partners, colleagues, friends and clients is a situation rife with potential conflicts and an example of bad government.

Or straight up corruption
 
Libertarians are generally highly critical of regulatory agencies that have been captured by the people they regulate. A lot of libertarians would agree that having a super wealthy investment banker moving into a government agency that supposedly regulates the man's former partners, colleagues, friends and clients is a situation rife with potential conflicts and an example of bad government.

Wouldn't a libertarian be against this regulatory agency in general?
 
The Clinton machine is the most overrated force in politics. Sure, Bill and Hillary are decent politicians but are not now and have never been invincible. The great Clintons...in three national elections have NEVER had more people vote for them than vote against them.

That's why Hill is hiring people that ran the Obama machine. And Warren is not running
 
Hillary is the problem with the Hillary machine. Obama helped the Obama machine work.
 
As much as I want a Sanders or Warren candidate to pull the mainstream Dems back to the left, I worry about where the funding comes from if Wall St is gonna keep rolling back funding.

Elizabeth Warren: The People's Champion

 

Warren may be the only candidate capable of turning the US economy into an afterthought in one term.

Her "you didn't build that" is economically illiterate as she does not realize that the infrastructure follows business and not the other way around. You could build an incredible infrastructure in Paraguay and it would be wasted money. If you have a free market, it will start working with dirt roads and as the tax base improves the roads get paved and the schools built and the government offices built. Her ludicrous philosophy assumes that business owes their existence to government benevolence instead of the other way around.
 
Somewhat related question. When was the height of the free market in the US? Because historically, I'm fairly sure that the time where we had the greatest expansion of the middle class in the world coincided with heavy government regulation. But maybe I am wrong.
 
Back
Top