Blaming government for fiscal crisis is scapegoating
I do not blame President Bush or his party for the Great Recession that occurred on his watch. Yes, there were things he should have done that might have prevented the situation from getting as bad as it did, and there were things he did do that made the situation somewhat worse than it needed to be. When crunch time came in the latter half of 2008, when things really started to fall apart in dramatic fashion, he and his Cabinet responded competently if not perfectly, even if they had to repeatedly strongarm fellow Republicans in Congress to do the smart and necessary thing.
But ladies and gentlemen, we were headed for a fall regardless of what government did, and the fault was our own, as a people and as a culture. We as Americans started believing our own press releases, as the saying goes, and we stopped doing the things that got us where we were. I blame Bush for a lot of things — I still believe he will go down as one of the worst presidents in our history — but I cannot honestly blame him for that.
What inspires that bit of a rant? Take a look at this graph, borrowed from Barry Ritholz’ Big Picture blog.
from http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/
Ritholz uses the chart to suggest that former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan got a little too free and easy with the credit, allowing the real-estate bubble and credit crisis to develop. There’s some truth to that — when the financial history of this mess is written, it will not be kind to “The Maestro.”
But really, look at that chart and ask yourself whether that could be sustained. And again, while Greenspan and the Fed could have moderated some of that spending spree, this was bigger than one man or one agency. (Also note how large that gap between consumer spending and cash income remains even now.)
It’s also interesting to compare the above chart to a similar illustration below charting the rise of our national debt over the same time frame. Notice any similarities?
I’d suggest that the two phenomenon — one consumer spending, one federal debt — share a common source, a belief that as Americans the rules of financial gravity didn’t apply to us. Yeah, that’s what we were being told by many of our leaders, but we as a people chose to believe them because it sure sounded good, didn’t it?
I’d further argue that anybody who thinks we’re going back to our recent heydays is deluding himself, because as these charts demonstrate, those heydays were as false as Bernie Madoff’s financial statements.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
399 comments Add your comment
Bruno
February 24th, 2010
12:39 pm
“and I didn’t say it could. I said as fair AS POSSIBLE.”
Out of curiosity, Doggone, how are you defining “fair”? Do you mean “fair” in the sense that everyone has an equal standard of living, regardless of their contribution to society? Or do you mean “fair” in the sense of equal opportunity?
md
February 24th, 2010
12:39 pm
“The problem is you left something out of your original list:
Assistance with EDUCATION = independence”
May want to read a little deeper. My post clearly states a need for a safety net (assistance) and education. Words have meanings.
stands for decibels
February 24th, 2010
12:39 pm
The share of taxes paid by the wealthy has steadily risen the past 40 years while the share paid by the poor has steadily fallen.
You keep saying this, but then you keep relying on info about plain old income taxes, while ignoring that over 40% of fed. revenues appear to come from social insurance taxes, i.e. FICA medicaid, if those charts we’ve been referring to are to be believed.
Why leave this out? Last I checked anyone drawing a paycheck was subject to a pretty hefty percentage of their income to pay for this. Poor folks as well as middle/middle-upper class (of course it cuts off just about 100k).
So why not factor this in as well? is it because it doesn’t fit so well with your narrative that the rich folk are getting soaked?
Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
12:42 pm
“Jenifer:
My point was going to a “Christian” school, or being a member of a “Christian” church, or being a member of the original twlelve disciples (Judas) does NOT make one a Christian.
It’s what’s in the heart that counts …………….”
Oh! You had a point! Okay.
Bruno
February 24th, 2010
12:46 pm
“So why not factor this in as well? is it because it doesn’t fit so well with your narrative that the rich folk are getting soaked?”
sfd–If you reread my comment, I referred to the data that Jay provided yesterday, which, in fact, does include ALL federal taxes paid. I was not referring to the link you provided on Sunday, the one you claimed that no one would read or understand. Why don’t you look at Jay’s column again and get back to me.
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2010/02/23/who-pays-what-in-taxes-and-how-its-changed/
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
12:49 pm
“Or do you mean “fair” in the sense of equal opportunity?”
This is part of it, but it also encompasses eliminating to the extent possible, the inequalities that are based on prejudice. Something along the lines of (as an example) the CRA…which forbids regulated banks from “red lining” potential borrowers based solely on where they live.
And it also encompasses giving extra help to those in need of it. We are not all equal in ability, nor in opportunity…but some are better than others at leveraging the abilities and opportunities they have. Just because some are not so good at that is not a valid reason for throwing them in a ditch.
And yes, my sense of fairness tells me that there will be people that we have to “support in idleness” but I find that preferable to watching them die on the streets for lack of some simple support.
El Jefe
February 24th, 2010
12:51 pm
stands for decibels,
All those other taxes are “flat taxes” – only the income tax is progressive.
Even here in Georgia, there are only two income tax rates, and most are paying a flat 6%.
Citizen of the World
February 24th, 2010
12:52 pm
Why is my comment awaiting moderation? I don’t get why this happens sometimes for no apparent reason.
Bruno
February 24th, 2010
12:53 pm
sfd–Regarding your comment regarding the TOTAL taxes paid vs. just income tax, here’s my response from last night to Jay:
“income taxes, payroll taxes, gasoline taxes, excise taxes, capital gains and corporate taxes, estate taxes, etc. That seems the fairest way to measure things.”
Again, Jay, to respond to your “total taxes” paid, I’ll have to do more research as to what % of the total take is from each category and what % of each category is paid by the wealthy vs. the poor. The income tax portion is settled in the link I provided. As for excise, capital gains, corporate, and estate taxes, common sense would say that the wealthy pay most if not all of those taxes since poor people typically don’t do a lot of importing, own a lot of stocks, own corporations, or have large estates upon their death. As for FICA, that is a little trickier because technically it’s not supposed to be a tax which is merged with the general fund. It is akin to a personal retirement account with disability insurance and medical benefits thrown in. I don’t have a problem with all wage earners contributing to the FICA system, since the low-end earners always draw out more than they pay in.
jefferson
February 24th, 2010
12:53 pm
If you don’t worry about money, you probably cry about taxes. If you worry about money, taxes are usally not thought about. Generally.
Those who say money isn’t everything, have enough. When you don’t have enough it is EVERYTHING.
Happiness is being happy with what you have, not always wanting more.
You can’t get ahead until you get even.
Bruno
February 24th, 2010
12:58 pm
In looking at Jay’s list of the “total taxes”, it appears that he only two taxes paid by the poor on any type of equal basis to the rich would be FICA and the gasoline tax. In case any of you forgot, it is the conservatives who want a lower gasoline tax, it is the liberals who think it should be even higher based on previous blog comments. As for FICA, employees only pay half of their contribution to begin with. The employer is forced to pick up the other half.
Bruno
February 24th, 2010
1:01 pm
““Jay and others here like to claim that everyone’s contribution to society is equal, implying that we all should earn the same income.”
“What absolute, fabricated baloney.”
Jay, I just found your criticism of my comment today on yesterday’s blog. Here’s your original comment which supports my contention:
“With his or her labor and willingness to risk life and limb, the officer makes it safe for other people to go about their business of working and spending and living.
Go to a country without an effective police force and see how many jobs there are.
And that’s true across the board. Everybody produces jobs. When I buy a car, I produce jobs. When you buy a newspaper ad, you produce jobs. The notion that only rich investors produce jobs is economic nonsense. They play A role, other people play other roles, and TOGETHER the economy grows.”
@@
February 24th, 2010
1:03 pm
Doggone:
Don’t mean to intrude here but…
And yes, my sense of fairness tells me that there will be people that we have to “support in idleness” but I find that preferable to watching them die on the streets for lack of some simple support.
Let me share my knowledge of an older gentlemen, black, tall and lanky….homeowner in a post WWII subdivision off Metropolitan Avenue where friends of mine reside. The old gentleman does yard work in the neighborhood. Beautiful work at a flat fee, depending on the size of the yard. Several homeowners in the community partake of his expertise. The guy refuses to use gas powered anything (gas engine lawnmower, the exception). He says there’s nothing like the old tried and true hand tools. This is a man who takes great pride in his work.
Anyhoo…everybody but the guy’s extended family loves him. His extended family includes brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces (some addicts, others deadbeats) who are constantly mooching off the old fella — taking his hard-earned money. He complains about them, but at the same time won’t stop enabling their behavior.
He deserves better than them. Does he care more for them, or they for him? Who will they turn to when he’s dead and gone, or flat broke ’cause he can’t keep up with their needs?
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
1:05 pm
@@ – sorry, but I don’t see how your story in any way relates to the quote from me that you included.
Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
1:07 pm
This is one of my favorite Bible verses:
Deuteronomy 15:11
For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.
stands for decibels
February 24th, 2010
1:08 pm
In case any of you forgot, it is the conservatives who want a lower gasoline tax, it is the liberals who think it should be even higher based on previous blog comments.
I realize you have conditioned that statement a bit, but for the record, I think most liberals recognize that poor folks would be hit pretty hard, at least short-term, if gas taxes were to increase significantly.
(were these taxes used to fund better mass transit, and encourage better, more fuel efficient vehicles that’d come into the used-car sales pipeline down the road, ultimately it might work out ok for the lower end, but let’s not kid ourselves.)
As for FICA, employees only pay half of their contribution to begin with. The employer is forced to pick up the other half.
That’s one way of looking at it. The other way is that FICA costs employees a lot more than they recognize, since they only see the 7.125 (?) percent that’s withheld, but not the matching amount that they don’t make because their employer has to pay it separately.
Matilda
February 24th, 2010
1:09 pm
Lordhavemercy, she’s got her crystal ball out again. Too creepy for me! I’m outsies.
Normal
February 24th, 2010
1:11 pm
Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
1:07 pm
But, but, but jenifer…that’s Old Testiment and from the Torah too, so it can’t be the Christian thing to do….
Soothsayer
February 24th, 2010
1:11 pm
It’s like we’re Easter island residents just before the last slide to oblivion, and we’re blowing our last wad of borrowed money on building a few more stone statues, in the hopes that the “magic” thus created will restore the prosperity we’ve squandered.
How about refurbishing the national rail lines? How about that “national smart grid” electrical infrastructure everybody agrees is absolutely necessary? How about insulating all government buildings and putting solar arrays on each one in areas with high annual sunlight? At least those projects would still be paying real benefits in energy savings and generation 10 years hence.
Making scattershot malinvestments via “wish list” projects dreamed up at the bubble top simply continues the malinvestments of the past decade: trillions squandered on malls nobody needs, office towers nobody needs, granite-counter McMansions nobody needs (19 million vacant dwellings in the U.S., 5 million foreclosures in the pipeline), foreign wars nobody needs, $300 million per plane weapons programs no nation can afford, prescription drug plans to reward the pharmaceutical cartel, etc. etc.– gargantuan “investments” with increasingly marginal returns paid for with borrowed money: $1.6 trillion a year at last count, and that’s just Federal borrowing; it doesn’t include the trillions being squandered by the Federal Reserve to prop up the housing market.
Sadly, the only thing left in 10 years will be the debt we’ve collectively taken on to fund marginal “make work” projects of fleeting or zero value.
stands for decibels
February 24th, 2010
1:13 pm
oops, sorry, Bruno, I didn’t see your link to Jay’s column, which does provide a CBO report on tax liability by quintile.
here’s the report for those who missed it:
http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/tax_liability_shares.pdf
Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
1:13 pm
“Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
1:07 pm
But, but, but jenifer…that’s Old Testiment and from the Torah too, so it can’t be the Christian thing to do….”
Yeah, I know. Many “Christians” write their own Bible.
@@
February 24th, 2010
1:14 pm
Doggone:
Thru his family’s selfishness, they’re destroying his ability to provide for them. He’s their provider, they the leeches. Have they no shame?
I would argue that they never will as long as people like you act as enablers.
And yes, my sense of fairness tells me that there will be people that we have to “support in idleness” but I find that preferable to watching them die on the streets for lack of some simple support.
People should be free to fail. It’s the only way they’ll learn. If they don’t, they die. Nobody’s fault but their own.
Harsh realities, but something people need to face “head-on”.
mm
February 24th, 2010
1:19 pm
I blame the republicans for running up a 7 trillion dollar debt. Obama added another 1.3 trillion. But the wingnuts blame Obama for the total 8.3
Mick
February 24th, 2010
1:21 pm
**Thru his family’s selfishness**
He also has the power of choice and he choose to enable.
Jay
February 24th, 2010
1:23 pm
Bruno, honestly?
Do you honestly believe that the statement you quoted implies that everybody should be paid equally, which was your original claim?
Do you really want your sincerity, judgment and honesty to be gauged by that claim? Come on. You know better.
Bruno
February 24th, 2010
1:25 pm
“I realize you have conditioned that statement a bit, but for the record, I think most liberals recognize that poor folks would be hit pretty hard, at least short-term, if gas taxes were to increase significantly.”
Don’t have time to go back and look, sfd, but I think Jay wrote a column supporting a higher gas tax at some point in order to discourage consumption. I may be wrong about that. At any rate, you are the first “liberal” who sees the connection between the tax burden of the poor and our bloated gasoline taxes.
“That’s one way of looking at it. The other way is that FICA costs employees a lot more than they recognize, since they only see the 7.125 (?) percent that’s withheld, but not the matching amount that they don’t make because their employer has to pay it separately.”
I appreciate the civil exchange this morning, sfd, despite our gut-level differences of opinion. I think the conversations here are far more productive without all the name calling and demonizations that seem part and parcel of many of every post on this blog.
Speaking of taxes, I’m off to meet my CPA. I got a bad feeling it’s going to be ugly this year.
RealityKing
February 24th, 2010
1:27 pm
Funny how Jays charts all point to the same time period.., the beginning of Progressive Liberalism.
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
1:27 pm
“I would argue that they never will as long as people like you act as enablers”
But in the case you illustrated, it ISN’T “people like me” who are the enablers. It is HIM.
“People should be free to fail. It’s the only way they’ll learn. If they don’t, they die. Nobody’s fault but their own”
Should we take it, then, that you would be willing to stand in the street and watch them do it?
RealityKing
February 24th, 2010
1:28 pm
There in lays the blame.
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
1:30 pm
RK…”There in lays the blame”
It would be helpful if you’d tie your comment back to what it refers to.
Bruno
February 24th, 2010
1:31 pm
“Do you honestly believe that the statement you quoted implies that everybody should be paid equally, which was your original claim? Do you really want your sincerity, judgment and honesty to be gauged by that claim? Come on. You know better.”
As a stand-alone quote, Jay, you might have some argument, since pay scales aren’t mentioned directly. When compounded with many other blog comments regarding the “worthiness” of people’s time, yes, I would say that a substantial percentage of the bloggers here would be happier in a system where everyone earned the same pay scale.
For the record, Jay, I’m being about as sincere as I can be in my posts.
Later guys, the tax man calleth.
JackLeg
February 24th, 2010
1:31 pm
USinUK, boy do you need a history lesson. Yes the government MADE banks lessen standards for mortgage loans. Jimmy Carter;
The Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.[1][2][3] Congress passed the Act in 1977 to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining.[4][5] The Act requires the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound operation (Section 802.). To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions (Section 804.).[6]
@@
February 24th, 2010
1:33 pm
Mick:
That’s because he “thinks” it’s the right thing to do….that it’s in their best interest. It’s NOT!
Believe me, I can follow his thinking. I used to think just like him. There came a point when I had to say “No more!” to my sister. She died — couldn’t get her head on straight.
This is the kind of story that gives me hope. Moving beyond her circumstances, she prevails.
Oddly enough, it was other people’s wealth that motivated her. That and her grandma, who deserves credit for setting down boundaries.
@@
February 24th, 2010
1:36 pm
Doggone:
Should we take it, then, that you would be willing to stand in the street and watch them do it?
See the comment to Mick about my sister.
Gale
February 24th, 2010
1:38 pm
CRA forced banks to lend to people regardless of where they lived, so long as the bank serviced that area. CRA did not force the banks to make loans to people with no documented proof of income and ability to repay a loan. That was where the system failed.
Soothsayer
February 24th, 2010
1:41 pm
“Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.”
–Winston Churchill
Kamchak
February 24th, 2010
1:42 pm
Yes the government MADE banks lessen standards for mortgage loans.
Operative word here is BANKS.
Fannie and Freddie, however, didn’t pressure lenders to sell them more loans; they struggled to keep pace with their private sector competitors. In fact, their regulator, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, imposed new restrictions in 2006 that led to Fannie and Freddie losing even more market share in the booming subprime market.
What’s more, only commercial banks and thrifts must follow CRA rules. The investment banks don’t, nor did the now-bankrupt non-bank lenders such as New Century Financial Corp. and Ameriquest that underwrote most of the subprime loans.
These private non-bank lenders enjoyed a regulatory gap, allowing them to be regulated by 50 different state banking supervisors instead of the federal government. And mortgage brokers, who also weren’t subject to federal regulation or the CRA, originated most of the subprime loans.
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
1:42 pm
“See the comment to Mick about my sister.”
Did you watch her die? Did you do anything to get her help that she needed? Or were you callous enough to just let her get on with dieing?
And yes, I DO understand that some people can’t be, or won’t be, helped. But the assistance should be available, whether they choose to use it or not.
Rockerbabe
February 24th, 2010
1:46 pm
Par for course; you and the repugs still refuse to take any responsibility for the mess we are in today. Dubya came into office with a projected surplus of over 150 billion dollars! That was quickly lost on 2 unnecessary and immoral wars and tax cuts for the wealthy and ultra wealthy. All of you repugs/conservatives are nothing more than a bunch of frat boys with daddy’s credit cards; you spend and spend as if there is no tomorrow; but alas, daddy has decided not to pay off your spending, so everyone else gets hurt – that $ucks! and you know it.
Now you want to make President Obama responsible for all of Duyba’s sins; I don’t think so. The man didn’t get any of the fun of the spending but he sure as hell as all the pain of trying to pay it back.
Irresponsible that’s the GOP’s real character. Shame on you for not holding the responsible parties responsible. You are not better than they.
Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
1:51 pm
Hello Kamchak, 1:42,
Please do not post facts.
@@
February 24th, 2010
1:57 pm
Doggone:
Did you watch her die? Did you do anything to get her help that she needed? Or were you callous enough to just let her get on with dieing?
No!
I did! Bailed her out of jail several times. Finally decided that a stint in prison would wake her up. When she got out, I gave her a place to live, providing her with all of life’s necessities. Encouraged her to attend Narcotics Anonymous. Helped her get a job. Eventually set her up in a small duplex not far from where I live.
She was a smart person…was great at whatever job she ever had. With each job, she came to believe she was inexpendable and would begin sluffing off on her responsibilities.
At her last place of employment, she quickly moved up the ladder. She was on probation…an overseer if you will. The minute her probation ended, she went right back to her previous way of thinking. Sluffing off, doing drugs, drinking, laying out of work. She was warned, it had no impact. She was fired.
I told her to find another job, and that I would make her COBRA payments. With her prison record, and subsequent firing, nobody would hire her. She wanted to move back in with us. No way…I had a teenage daughter that I wasn’t willing to subject to her destructive lifestyle.
Off to Memphis she went. She died there.
Do you think I should have or could have done more?
NowReally
February 24th, 2010
1:58 pm
md
February 24th, 2010
12:37 pm
Bruno,
Here is what set Jay off yesterday, a simple question. No commentary, no conclusions, just a question:
“Should a student that studies 24/7, sacrifices and does no partying and makes straight A’s have to share those A’s with a student that partys 24/7, does very little studying and makes D’s and F’s????”
Your assumption is that people who followed all the perceived rules of life, actually benefited from the process. There are many people who fall into the working class that have college educations. Not all occupations “Pay-Well”. Having a college education doesn’t always put you into the affluent category. Then there are those that fall unto hard times and have to rely on government programs, such as unemployment, food stamps and even welfare. It only takes one minor setback to put you in the lesser category.
Then there are those who made D’s and F’s in school who are actually successful, my landscaper and beautician didn’t work hard in school. However, they both bring in more money than I do and I have a college education and a corporate job.
So, I don’t believe in your theory of “Making the Grade”, as a means to success. Sometimes you have to have a calling in life and my landscaper and beautician had a very promising calling.
I can also name a few more instances of successful people who didn’t necessarily make the GRADE.
jconservative
February 24th, 2010
1:59 pm
Facts. Facts. Facts.
The nat”l debt in Jan 1961 was $650. billion. 20 years later, Jan 1981, it was $934 billion. That is a $284. billion increase in 20 years, $14.2 billion per year on average.
Then in Jan 1981 the taxpayers realized they controlled the Treasury. So they took “Tax Cuts” as a way to get money out of the Treasury and into their pockets. But they DID NOT cut government spending to make up for the loss of income the government would have from all the Tax Cuts. They Increased Spending, getting more Free Services out of the government. So the Nat’l Debt went up $11.466 Trillion in just 29 years. An average of $395 Billion per year.
The people had their cake and ate it too! It was wonderful! It is still wonderful! We continue to get Tax Cuts! We continue to Increase Spending! It’s wonderful!
Is This a Great Country or What??
As President Reagan said: “I am not worried about the deficit. It is big enough to take care of itself.”
As Vice President Cheney said: “Reagan proved that deficits do not matter”.
WHAT – ME WORRY?
@@
February 24th, 2010
1:59 pm
…and Doggone. At no time did I feel that YOU should have taken responsibility for her.
stands for decibels
February 24th, 2010
2:01 pm
Speaking of taxes, I’m off to meet my CPA.
good luck with that.
I’ve got a date with a popular Windows-based tax prep program this weekend and the usual pile o’ year-end statements. Can’t hardly wait.
Kamchak
February 24th, 2010
2:03 pm
Good afternoon Jenifer.
The CRA, Fannie and Freddie are the shiny baubles that so distract some people.
Private lending institutions not subject to the CRA made more than 84% of the sub-prime loans. Fannie and Freddie went from holding a high of 48% of loans sold into the secondary market down to 24%.
But still it’s all the fault of the CRA, Fannie and Freddie.
AF
February 24th, 2010
2:04 pm
Very good post, Mr. Bookman.
It wasn’t really Pubs or Dems. But, look at many of the posts here and we can’t seem to get out of the blame game or out of the carefully cut lines of the two party system that desperately needs a different view point.
I saw a thought provoking post on another web site and another subject: attitudes of people in Canada and the US about health care. The person said: The difference is that Canada is a society and the United States is a market place.
We are having a hard time in the US figuring out what kind of society we want to have. Do we want public schools or vouchers? Do we want guns in parks, public places, even on college campuses? Is it okay or not to torture and is that even the right question if our very existence is at risk? Can we legislate into non-existence gay people and abortions or should those be private decisions that the government stays out of?
Is there a role for government in providing any public goods, like water, sewer, roads, police and fire protection? Or, should all this be privatized. If it is, do we have a society any more or is that the ultimate example of a market place with no society? After all, we won’t have to agree about anything – we can just let the market decide.
@@
February 24th, 2010
2:05 pm
AND…
the government couldn’t have done anymore for her than did I or her last employer. The only interest they would have had in her was to use her as a statistic to garner votes.
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
2:06 pm
“Do you think I should have or could have done more?”
Probably not, but I was not really addressing personal responsibility…but SOCIAL responsibility. What if, she had not been your sister…but had no family at all? Or what if her problems had been beyond the ability of her family and friends to assist? There are always going to be people who need help, some for a long time, and as a member of what is supposed to be a careing and giving SOCIETY, *I* am not will to allow anyone to die on the streets for LACK of services.
As long as the services are there, and available, we cannot FORCE anyone to take advantage of them…but no one should have to die of want, because the services don’t exist.
Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
2:08 pm
“Good afternoon Jenifer.
The CRA, Fannie and Freddie are the shiny baubles that so distract some people.
Private lending institutions not subject to the CRA made more than 84% of the sub-prime loans. Fannie and Freddie went from holding a high of 48% of loans sold into the secondary market down to 24%.
But still it’s all the fault of the CRA, Fannie and Freddie.”
I know. What I don’t know is whether it’s ignorance or stubbornness with a lot of folks. Probably both.
Olbermann's Cold Sore
February 24th, 2010
2:10 pm
Harry Reid said that job-loss cause men to be abusive. So I guess we can expect Hairy Reid to start beating his wife, oh, around November.
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
2:13 pm
“So I guess we can expect…”
so now you’ve taken to arguing from the general to the specific.
@@
February 24th, 2010
2:14 pm
Doggone:
And the more we make excuses for people, the less money there will be for those who have the will to prevail beyond their circumstances.
I read an article some time back about some country in the Netherlands, where their socialized health care system provides drugs for their citizens (most unemployed due to their addiction, and living on government assistance).
It’s government assisted suicide in my opinion. Not something I’d wanna promote.
Looks like you do.
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
2:18 pm
“And the more we make excuses for people”
But I have not done that. As I’ve said before, I think anyone who gets any form of public assistance should have to work for it, as long as they are physically capable of doing so. They should be in an education system, working as an apprentice, doing volunteer work, even picking up trash…SOMETHING…to earn their assistance.
“Looks like you do”
I’d like to see you back that up with ANYTHING I’ve ever said regarding providing drug addicts with drugs. Here’s a time save for you:
the answer
February 24th, 2010
2:18 pm
The answer seems simple. Okay, definitely not simple, but a good place to start. The problems we face as a nation transcend political parties. Each side of the ‘aisle’ has their fingerprints on this mess. It seems to me that a good place to start is to fumigate the entire building. i.e. VOTE AGAINST EVERY INCUMBENT. Yes, some good people would be ousted along with the chaff, but it’s a price worth paying in the long run. Everyone seeme to think that ‘their guy’ is doing a good job, because they have a new road or traffic light, or school building. That’s understandable, but until we send the message that we are, in fact, tired of the generations of incompetence, the incompetence will continue. Show the ladies and gentlemen in Washington, (and Atlanta, for that matter) what we in the workplace already know: Poor performance gets you fired. Vote against every incumbent..they are ALL culpable.
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
2:19 pm
sorry.
Here’s a time saver for you: YOU CAN’T DO IT. I would say provide them with help to cure their addiction, if necessary…but I see no need to continue to feed it.
Dusty
February 24th, 2010
2:22 pm
Well, I have just come in. Decided to read the blog. Read Bookiman’s first line “I do not blame Pres. Bush or his party for the great recession that occured on his watch.” Stopped reading right there. Too tired of Bookman’s Bush bashing to read any more. I knew there was more to come.
It was just as Bookman himself said on the last blog subject. “What absolute fabricated baloney..”
Sorry, folks, if I missed some of your fine thoughts. I will check the new subject with hope in my heart for a bit of non-discriminatory journalism from Bookman and you.
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
2:23 pm
“I do not blame Pres. Bush ”
It takes a REALLY weird view to read this as “Bush bashing”
Jimmy Carter
February 24th, 2010
2:28 pm
Oops, the hypocritical libs are caught red handed. Are you really surprised?
VIDEO FLASHBACK: Obama & Dems in 2005: 51 Vote ‘Nuclear Option’ Is ‘Arrogant’ Power Grab Against the Founder’s Intent… … MORE…
http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-dems-in-2005-51-vote-nuclear-option-is-arrogant-power-grab-against-the-founders-intent/
Scooter
February 24th, 2010
2:30 pm
the answer
February 24th, 2010
2:18 pm
Great idea! And good luck with making it happen.
md
February 24th, 2010
2:35 pm
Nowreally,
“Your assumption is that people who followed all the perceived rules of life, actually benefited from the process.”
Can you show where I make any assumptions please.
I posted a question – nothing more, nothing less – it seems it is you (along with the others including Jay) that are making assumptions.
Read it again if you must, there are no conclusions or assumptions – just a question.
Funny thing though, not a single soul has yet to answer the question.
Doggone/GA
February 24th, 2010
2:39 pm
“Funny thing though, not a single soul has yet to answer the question”
that’s because it was posed as a false comparison to a totally unrelated economic question.
Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
2:44 pm
The Gang That Can’t Think Straight: 6 GOP Senators Vote For Jobs Bill After Joining Filibuster Two Days Earlier
These turds are doing the pretzel in order to pander to as many of their various “bases” as possible. They threaten filibuster to please the teabaqqers, then vote for the bill to please the (nearly extinct) moderate sector of the republicant party. They (probably correctly) believe that neither faction will pay attention to the hypocrisy.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/24/sens-flip-jobs-bill/
Scooter
February 24th, 2010
2:45 pm
Oops, the hypocritical libs are caught red handed. Are you really surprised?
No, I’m not. It’s just a vicious circle.IMO
Mick
February 24th, 2010
2:50 pm
md
**Funny thing though, not a single soul has yet to answer the question**
Probably because it is not a very good question that doesn’t require an answer.
Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
2:52 pm
Stimulus Hypocrite Gov. Bob McDonnell Now Wants The Federal Government To Give Virginia More Money
Suck at the teat of the federal government, you hypocritical, greedy bast@rds.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/24/mcdonnell-stimulus/
Scooter
February 24th, 2010
2:58 pm
md, good luck with getting a lib to answer your question. You will only get drivel(see above).
md
February 24th, 2010
3:00 pm
“that’s because it was posed as a false comparison to a totally unrelated economic question”
Great, more assumptions.
Gordon
February 24th, 2010
3:01 pm
Jenifer,
There is nothing the least bit hypocritical about voting against the stimulus and then accepting stimulus money. Once the stimulus passed, the money is going to be spent whether they get their fair share or not. Each govenor or congressman, even if they don’t think any money should have been spent in any district or state, has the right to get what they can for their district or state. I thought the $400 check I got in the middle of the year a couple of years ago was a bad idea and just a political stunt, but that didn’t stop me from spending the money. Whether you supported it or not, I’ll bet it didn’t stop you either.
The government will save me right?
February 24th, 2010
3:03 pm
wow, I actually agree with Jay here…scary. Now if you can only get dems and replublicans to agree on what “causes” the deficit and actually do something about it. Dems want to add programs and take your money to do so, republicans are kings of pork too and usually only get fiscally conservative when it suits their arguments against dems. Unfortunately most Americans are too busy racking up debt on plasma TV’s to even know that carrying that much debt can’t be sustained (and have growth).
The American culture isn’t one that acknowledges fiscal responsibility personally or for our government (on the whole- there are always exceptions).
Jenifer
February 24th, 2010
3:03 pm
“There is nothing the least bit hypocritical about voting against the stimulus and then accepting stimulus money.”
Another sign!
Kamchak
February 24th, 2010
3:04 pm
Great, more assumptions.
Nope. A statement of opinion.
Jimmy Carter
February 24th, 2010
3:04 pm
Democrat leaders commenting in 2005 on the nuclear option:
“…will change the character of the Senate forever”….Barack Obama
“…that’s just not what the founders intended”….Barack Obama
W said “change the rules, do it the way I want it done”…Hilary Clinton
“…you have to restrain yourself Mr. President.”….Hilary Clinton
“We are on the precipice of a crisis, a Constitutional crisis”….Chuck Shumer
“the checks and balances which have been at the core of this Republic are about to be evaporated by the nuclear option”….Chuck Shumer
“the nuclear option, if successful, will turn the Senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of Senators…” Diane Feinstein
“This nuclear option is an ultimate example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab…” Joe Biden
“..arrogance of power of this republican administration…” Harry Reid
“I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don’t make the kind of naked power grab you are doing.” Joe Biden
“…what were the framers thinking about 218 years ago. They understood. Mr. President, there is a tyranny of the majority” Chris Dodd
AND MUCH MUCH MORE.
Yeah, that pretty much sums up the libs.
http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-dems-in-2005-51-vote-nuclear-option-is-arrogant-power-grab-against-the-founders-intent/
jj
February 24th, 2010
3:05 pm
For once I will agree with JB. Yes, both parties put in a lot of bad policies that lead up to using your home as an ATM, and virtually free credit. But let’s go way back to LBJ, the great society, where no one is responsible for anything they do, and the Govt. will take care of you. If the Govt would stop supporting everyone that fails do to BAD decision making we will be a hell of a lot better off. When people start to take RESPONSIBILITY for their own actions we will be on the road to recovery. I will give you a personal example from a Delta flight I was on last night. A middle aged woman had a bag way too big for the overheads. She stood in the isle and said she wasn’t moving until someone else, NOT HER, picked up her bag and put it in the overhead, and clearly stated everyone else could just wait in the isle. She filled the bag so heavy she couldnt lift it and it was now someone elses problem. Sound familiar? Any bets on how many Govt handout programs she is on? If you can’t afford it don’t buy it!!!
Bud Wiser
February 24th, 2010
3:08 pm
USinUK
February 24th, 2010
12:18 pm
Bud – “But, how could weather be a factor?”
as much as you reeeeeeeelly, reeeeeeeelly want to blame the Dems for this, the fact is NOBODY wants to go out in the cold and snow to shop.
for anything.
Maybe I should return the 28′ travel trailer I just purchased today then?
Quit being the ‘party of excuses’. People will do what they want when they want.
Jay
February 24th, 2010
3:09 pm
Why Jimmy, you played right into my next post upstairs…..
md
February 24th, 2010
3:10 pm
Mick,
“Probably because it is not a very good question that doesn’t require an answer.”
Nothing here requires an answer, or a response, but plenty were given.
And a simple yes or no would also suffice. That isn’t what happened.
The way I see it, those responding do so with their own perceptions and assumptions and then point the finger elsewhere.
md
February 24th, 2010
3:19 pm
Sorry Kam, wrong again:
“that’s because it was posed”
Ony I would know why “it was posed”, Dog would have to say “I believe it was posed” for your claim to be valid.
Kamchak
February 24th, 2010
3:21 pm
And a simple yes or no would also suffice.
Nope. As Doggone/GA pointed out that’s because it was posed as a false comparison to a totally unrelated economic question. To correctly unpack that comparison would have taken more than the question was worth.
Kamchak
February 24th, 2010
3:24 pm
Ony[sic] I would know why “it was posed”
“Why” don’t enter into it. Doggone/GA identified it for “what” it was.
Dave R.
February 24th, 2010
3:34 pm
Actually, Jay is wrong as usual.
Government is ultimately the problem, because they are always stepping in and bailing out the people who are too darned stupid to act responsibly with their finances. There is barely any penalty for failure anymore, and as long as the government continues to provide a safety net for irresponsible behavior, the government will continue to be the problem.
Jack
February 24th, 2010
3:39 pm
If bankers & creditors wouldn’t sell to consumers unable to repay loans, we wouldn’t have had this fiscal mess. And if liberals in Congress had not insisted that everyone was entitled to home-ownership, we wouldn’t have had this fiscal mess.
Swede Atlanta
February 24th, 2010
3:40 pm
I see alot of posters claiming it was the government that forced lenders to extend mortgages to people who couldn’t afford them. While I believe programs that encouraged lending and eliminate red-lining may have increased irresponsible lending to some extent, I don’t think you can blame all of the mortgage mess on that.
There are two other phenomenon at play here. During the apex of the housing boom in the 2003 – 2007 period, people used their mortgages as cash cows. They took out home equity loans to buy fancy cars, expensive vacations, big screen TVs, etc. Many of these loans were otherwise fairly conventional. But people got caught up in the “me, me, me” syndrome.
Secondly non-secured debt in the form of credit cards, lines of credit, etc. exploded during the same period. No government agency was forcing Amex, Visa, etc. to cram more credit down people’s throats. I used to get at least 2 solicitations a week and I have good credit. I know a couple of people with very poor credit who were receiving 2 or more per week.
It is a mentality of immediate satisfaction that has devastated the economy. Rather than waiting until you have saved 20% for a downpayment and then purchasing only what you can afford, people were putting nothing down and buying McMansions. Rather than waiting until they had the money for that nice car, or at least a good downpayment, they were going out on no money down deals and driving luxury cars.
Until we get back to a savings mentality both among individual Americans and in government by balancing the budget through a combination of spending cuts and revenue increases (taxes, fees, etc.) we will never get this economy back on stable ground.
Gordon
February 24th, 2010
3:41 pm
Jenifer @3:03,
I went on to explain my position at 3:01, something you didn’t do. You just pasted a link and when it was challenged came up with a childish retort. Another sign indeed.
Paulo977
February 24th, 2010
3:41 pm
Mick….” history will record that the previous administration was incompetent,arrogantand supremely ignorant of world history and culture ”
Right on target …unfortunately the Amercans ,as a whole , are the same !! OMG we have committed the most horible crimes against humanity in foreign nations under the ‘guise’ of bringing freedom to them that it just appals all those who care about justice and truth . Why is it that several Democratic presidents have struggled to maintain themselves in office? Is it because there are more of us who value sheer power of force and coercion than those who do not?
JackLeg
February 24th, 2010
3:44 pm
Jennifer, you must really get an education. I order to be FDIC insured you had to play by the CRA rules, guess what, to be a bank you need FDIC insurance. Here is another good one, why don’t we have health insurance competition across state lines? Could it be because the government said you can’t? It is amazing the way our government makes a problem then they want to fix it. It is like taking poison to cure a cold, it WILL get rid of the cold guaranteed.
Algonquin J. Calhoun
February 24th, 2010
3:58 pm
Bush is responsible for inventing a war that drained our economy and he’s to blame for the culture of theft that existed for the eight years he stunk up the White House. He was, and is, a moron who should be brought to justice for his crimes against humanity. One of the worst presidents? He’s the absolute worst!
Algonquin J. Calhoun
February 24th, 2010
4:04 pm
There is barely any penalty for failure anymore, and as long as the government continues to provide a safety net for irresponsible behavior, the government will continue to be the problem.
The government of Bush and his accomplices allowed the catastrophic thievery on Wall Street and on main Street and then bailed out their crooked, rich friends. The penalty for criminality was being bailed out by tax payer money. Citi and AIG were the recipients of huge amounts of money on weekends when nobody could do a damn thing about it. Doled out by Bush. Don’t try blaming the average American chump. This was a Republinazi debacle!
Swede Atlanta
February 24th, 2010
4:04 pm
JackLeg
And which government is it that says health insurance companies cannot compete across state lines? The state governments!!!! Each state wants to regulate health insurance just as it does auto, homeowners, etc.
Georgia law reqires that any insurance company that wants to underwrite a policy for someone in Georgia must be licensed by the state of Georgia. You cannot, as a Georgian, go out and get a policy issued in Tennessee. Hellfire and brimstone would be brought to bear on that insurance company.
The plan with the federal exchange would be to set national standards for coverage and allow individuals to buy insurance anywhere across the country. That was included in the House bill. The Senate bill if I recall correctly limited to state exchanges or maybe regional exchanges.
If we were to allow for buying across state lines I would prefer a set of national standards. Otherwise insurance companies will run to the state with the lowest standards or influence elections in states where the insurance commissioner is directly elected. Some form of national standards under HHS would provide some insulation from the influence of the powerful lobbyinsts.
Algonquin J. Calhoun
February 24th, 2010
4:09 pm
Throw the Progressives into the trash compactor and hit the green button. Problem solved
Why don’t you try that bitch? You could be ground down to the nothingness you really are if you do!
md
February 24th, 2010
4:11 pm
“Why” don’t enter into it. Doggone/GA identified it for “what” it was.”
What you 2 think you know = what I meant
Got it.
Number1ninja
February 24th, 2010
4:17 pm
Geez, the 80’s called, they want their cliches back.
Kamchak
February 24th, 2010
4:24 pm
What you 2 think you know = what I meant
Got it.
First it was “why I asked” now it’s “what I meant.”
You’re changing parameters.
Pogo
February 24th, 2010
4:56 pm
Jay, I am astounded that YOU said that we were ALL at fault because quite frankly, WE ARE (metaphorically speaking, of course)! My wife and I have lived within our means, have not over-spent and have not bought anything we couldn’t afford and we have saved and invested 25% of our income for the last 27 years. We are not rich. We are not greedy. We are middle class and we are comfortable and we try to help those that need it because we can. The thing is, we know what is best for us because it is OUR money that we are spending. We know our bounds. You cannot absolve the government from any of the blame for “the mess” we find ourselves in. Yes, government provides us with some vital services we must have as a “civilized” society but it also one of the worst squanderers of large amounts of taxpayers funds because it, unlike most private business, is not built to be responsible with money. It has no motivation to do otherwise because spending other peoples money is easy and they are insulated from the pain that their mis-management results in. I think it boils down to this; government employees and our elected government officials know that it is not their money that they are spending therefore they really don’t care how prudently it is spent and quite frankly they have become numb to unbelievably large numbers. Billions and Trillions mean nothing to these people. The American government has become arrogant and detached from its constituents. The American public has become complacent, lazy and they want everything but want to sacrifice nothing. This is a formula for sociological disaster, which I think is where we are headed. Is this synical? Perhaps. But is it not also true? Absolutely.
Damnit, I think I just depressed myself!
Mike
February 24th, 2010
5:00 pm
Jay…here is one issue that you and I (a conservative Republican) can agree on. The American people are largely an ignorant bunch. How else can one explain sending incumbents back to congress year after year after year. Having said that…when you’re digging yourself a hole…STOP DIGGING!!! Why your buddies in the socialist party continue to dig totally baffles me. America is screwed and it’s too late now.
fromminustoplus
February 24th, 2010
5:52 pm
Jay you sound like a foolish person. You act as if all of this falls on the shoulder of President Obama…when in fact Clinton and Bush should be held accountable for what we are experiencing. How can any economy survive when more money is going out of the country than coming in? It cannot be done. And besides the voters are really the ones to blame, because we should have impeached both Presidents the moment we realized that we had been bamboozled.
ken R
February 24th, 2010
7:18 pm
Jay, while I don’t particularly like Greenspan I clearly remember him saying that there would be a burst in the housing bubble a couple of years before it happened, so why are you blaming him?
Rember figures don’t lie, but liars make the figures.
Bush inherited office in a recession and left in one, what’s new. I don’t have a great love for Bush but I have an even lesser love for Obama, maybe if Obama stopped lying ( new Acorn tape ) he would be credible.
Jeff
February 24th, 2010
7:42 pm
I’m curious. If women influence 80% of all spending just as they brag about, then aren’t they really the ones who are to blame for 80% of the debt and financial mess we’re in?
JackLeg
February 25th, 2010
8:35 am
Swede Atlanta, thank you for the education, but it is still government, state local, federal, it is government. If what you say is true then I agree we need federal regulation, not take over…