Interesting times.

Obama “Deregulation Caused This Crisis” - An Ignorant Claim Or Political Spin?
Posted on September 22, 2008 by mcauleysworld
Obama continues to blame the current financial crisis on “deregulation”. Either Obama knows that claim to be false or he is ignorant of how this crisis evolved:

The path to our current cirisis started with these steps;

http://mcauleysworld.wordpress.com/2...olitical-spin/

Economic disaster averted during the Long Term Capital Management fiasco may have scared commercial banks sufficiently to demand honest fiscal practices from the hedge funds. Bank of America, JP Morgan, and Citigroup were three suspected at risk if hedge funds default. These three currently appear to be the most stable.

Almost one year ago, riskiest equities were identified. Take a gander at eight pages of posts in Sub-prime Bail Out in the first week of November 2007. Listed as problems were companies even in the last (109th) post. What is ongoing today was an obvious and serious problem almost one year ago.

Or again in March 2008 Housing Crisis in Australia .

In Sept 2006, a "Family Income" chart demonstrated one symptom that predicted today's financial meltdown: Has the Bush Doctrine failed?

What is next likely to be harmed by credit market seizures? Hedge funds must be under pressure since the funds are unlikely to have hedged for losses this large and are very dependent on access to credit.

Crash of Wachovia and Washington Mutual occurred so quick without warning. Therefore others are probably as unstable. Furthermore, foreigners are not marching in mass numbers to buy up so many 'discounted' American firms. That implies equity markets must fall further.

Too much accounting has been in the tradition of Enron and Arthur Andersen. Anyone can only assume that other unstable WaMus and Wachovias are out there. Commerce Bank has also been on my suspect list. Major regional banks may next be in line for collapse.

How serious is the problem? If credit markets seize only because the government does not provide $700billion, then capital losses are probably even worse.

What happens next? World financial markets are suddenly surprised by how much America must buy from the world. Therefore America must sell debt at even higher costs to America. Where does the US government get $700billion? If none from Americans, then where? We have yet to see shock when America sells an additional $700billion debt onto world financial markets that will then demand even higher interest rates on a riskier American economy. After all, who wants to buy debt in dollars that will only fall in value?

Why the bailout? Because the only remaining American institution with sufficient credibility to borrow that much from foreigners is the US government.

Who kept saying, "The fundamentals of our economy are sound"? Even the spread sheets are now exposing how 'sound' this economy has been.

There is no Commerce Bank. It's just a brand name now. It was bought by Canadian TD Bank last year.

Oh yes, and today might be a really good time for E-Trade to stop running that stupid "I'm a baby and you just saw me buy stock" ad.

If people don't panic and the stock values decline and you continue to invest at the same rate you should make a killing when the market recovers, which it will.

But babies should not be subject to this level of risk! They should be in funds.

No way, babies can tolerate the highest risk, because they have decades to recover.

I had an epiphany when I heard the bail out failed.

Instead of fear I had disticnt feeling of relief. That sinking feeling wasn't fear of failure. It was the fear of the governments failure to manage our money.

I like the house Republicans insurance idea. I like the idea of more oversight. I like the idea that the mucky mucks at the top will feel what broke is. :) I like that feeling.

So I am wondering if my epiphany is that I am really a die-hard republican (old school )dressed up in Democratic rags.

All the democrats were for years when it was time for some foresighted leadership. This administration certainly didn't make things better,not by a long shot, but to lay this at the foot of this idiot is unfair and untrue. This whole mess started when Clinton was in office and the lenders had quotas to reach on "affordable" housing.

You misunderstand, tw is the good conservative on this one. The shit sandwich has to be eaten. Congress did the right thing.

Well pass me a friggin beer then - I need something to wash it down!

All I know is I just got an email from Bank of America increasing my credit limit.

I heard rumors about Wachovia months ago and pulled my client's money out. I don't think it was exactly without warning....

But I do agree, there are other banking institutions in trouble. And things will get worse, before they get better.

Stormie

Shrewd move, Stormie, but you do realise it was YOU that started the run on Wachovia that brought it down. I hope you're proud of yourself.
;) ;) ;)