The Buck Stops There – small dead animals

If we are going to talk about “the policies that created this mess in the first place,” let’s at least get the facts straight and the names right.

17 Replies to “The Buck Stops There”

Sowell is obviously a extremist, spreading fear and bigotry.

Sowell writes from the heart, to the point. We need a Thomas Sowell to rectify the false perceptions that Iggy has been flaunting on topics such as the purchase of the F-35 (Liberal deal) and Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan. (Liberal deal.)

Kate;
Very timely post. Just got finished reading David Frum at the Nat Post who claims it was Wall St. that was to blame and unfairly laid it at the feet of government. “The visible public anger we see and hear has been skillfully redirected toward government, and especially to the president who inherited the mess.” How I would love to see Sowell mop the floor with Frum in a debate.

Add to the mix, it was Bill Clinton’s policy directive forcing the banks to allow low income applicants of minorities to purchase mortgages so they would have the opportunity to be homeowners just like every other American who worked hard and saved up money for a down-payment and prove their financial stability to meet the standards of the “(fiat) money lenders”.

Sowell writes a column about once a week. Kate, you might consider posting articles linking to these columns as a regular feature. E.g., “Your Weekly Sowell”.
Even on those rare occasions where I disagree with him, he’s always worth the read. Sowell is one of the clearest thinkers in America.

The Community Reconstruction Act that Glacierman refers to was the brain-child of Jimmy Carter.
No, I’m not surprised either.

Ben, you are correct, and Slick Willie brought it on with a the Big Hammer!

RACIST!!!….err…umm…never mind…

Well, have you seen Sowell’s hair? These days it’s overwhelmingly white…

You guys just don’t get it. It was all Tricky Dick Nixon’s fault!
Just ask William Ayers.

Ben and glacierman — both correct. The program started under Carter, but in fairness, was a fairly modest program at its inception.
It was the Clinton administration which doubled down on the program (tripled, quadrupled even), allowing a housing bubble to expand through through until 2008. Between the end of the Clinton years, and 2008, housing values were generally rising (especially so after 2002), so the bubble was largely missed or ignored, since rising values negated serious policy consequences.
Finally during the mid-aughts, the Bush administration, sensing financial problems the housing bubble could create, tried to implement some more regulatory oversight of Fanny and Freddie. This effort was killed by the Dems. I will grant, however, that Bush and the GOP did not push hard enough. Nevertheless, it was the Dems (e.g. Bawney Fwank, et. al.) who were whistling past the graveyard at the time, ignoring the warnings that were plainly in front of them.
But, facts will not stand in the way of the race- and class-baiting narrative spun by the petulant Man Child, and his cronies in Congress.

Sowell nails it. Read his book the Housing Boom and Bust, for the complete, revolting story.

Agree with small c conservative. I have not read all of Sowell’s book yet. It is excellent so far, lining out the who where and when. Government intervention sure makes a mess.
Was it here that I saw the video compilation linked that had Barney Frank et al saying that the system was fine back in 2003 or so?

It’s amazing that so many moonbats ignore who actually destroyed the World Economy.
The entire planet would be so better off without Pelosi, Ried, Franks, Waters et al and the Liberal moonbats that sniff their farts!
UGH!

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Earmarks and other forms of runaway spending all really got out of hand during GWB’s two terms. GW let it get out of hand by not vetoing any legislation passed by congress until very late in his second term. He declined to reign in the GOP majority for two main reasons:
1. His dad was and is a huge influence on him and as a former congressman with lots of friends and allegiances in congress – many of whom were pivotal in Jrs nomination battle and POTUS campaigns – GW didn’t want to be on bad terms with congress.
This ‘be nice’ flaw was fatal to his dad’s second term attempt and it may be the most damning characteristic of GW’s presidency.
2. GW and Rove were desparate to keep as many of the GOP and centre-right dems on-side in support of the Iraq conflict. Thus, they turned a blind-eye to the ever-increasing spending and other policies – attacking FM/FM would have angered the Dems and may have pulled some of the pro-iraq dems away, so the FM/FM warnings from the WH were relatively mild.
In this aspect of the iraq struggle, the cost may have been far, far more than the simple costs of the war but the near-collapse of the western financial system, the election of america’s first emasculating socialist POTUS and the pretext for a monstrous democratic slush fund disguised as a stimulus package.
In hindsight the cost may have been more than the reward – especially if the DEMs who benefitted manage to squander what what achieved in Iraq.

Everybody here has it nailed and appreciates Thomas Sowell. He is one of the best authorities on economics. When he writes or speaks, many of conservative leanings and influence listen.
As for the ‘Wall St. Banking Collapse’ of 2008, I have always been convinced it was manufactured deliberately to get Obama elected. I am not sure he would not have been elected in any event, so weak was McCain and his campaign. I think that the Palin addition to his campaign spooked them and they had to come up with something.
For argument, I submit that the original ‘TARP’ monies are still sitting in a slush fund , three quarters unused to this day. Waiting in the wings for whatever funding the Obama admin want or need considering the political landscape.
To quote Glenn Beck: ” I’m just sayin’ ”
As far as the economy in the states and world wide, especially in Canada, it is all a manipulation to move things in ways that suit those who stand to profit. Not necessarily for the good of the countries involved but for the benefit of the unseen hands that perpetuate the impression of either good or bad.
Case in point: Bank of Canada set to raise rates tomorrow, so the ‘experts’ predict. Why exactly?
They want movement in a certain direction.
Don’t we all feel like pawns in a game YET?