Name one thing Obama did that helped america

This is the Tarp schedule if you want to study it. Clearly these are loans,and not gifts. Good Lord you Baggers demand proof, you get simple proof, you still don't get it I'll bury you with it.
 
Billy Batts said:
That is not true. Glass-Steagall was a firewall between two different markets, depository institutions (Banks) and financial intermediaries (Investment Banks, Brokerages, Hedge Funds, etc.). A key tenet of a depository institution is that savers trust that their deposits will be there when they need it.

Depository Banks kept a ratio of cash on hand to meet this need and they loaned out the rest. However, the underbelly of the capitalist system is that during the business cycle, there comes a time when business cycles downward. Less demand results in excess capacity which drives greater liabilities for firms, job losses and eventually panic. Animal spirits are freed up causing depositors to want more of their cash back from the depository institutions.

The removal of the firewall between depository institutions and speculating financial intermediaries worsened with bank write downs of bad bets and hence the financial crisis. The depository institutions made bets (or speculated) with customers’ deposits in complex securitization markets. They were precluded from this behavior under Glass-Steagall. Capital cushions which they normally kept under Glass-Steagall were no longer adequate to meet post Glass-Steagall losses.

Dodd-Frank, did just the opposite of the Glass-Steagall Act. It allowed the abusive Wall Street banks to hold even greater amounts of insured deposits and to become ever more creative in how they abused those deposits. Make no mistake it has the full suport of our next President Hillary Clinton.
Click to expand...

Refreshing to see someone who knows what they're talking about.
 
domer76 said:
Refreshing to see someone who knows what they're talking about.
Click to expand...

Yea after you get burned you want to find out, what went wrong. Papers are still being written on the Great Depression. In short Bush, and Obama did the right thing. And Paul Volcker was a student of the Great depression. If they did not act quickly and the way they did things would have escalated. Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh Tea party horse shit is not going to turn the trick. You listen to them it was Fanny Mae,and Fredie Mac, that caused the great Recession. Hogwash have none of it.
 
Last edited:
ZappasGuitar said:
He lowered the unemployment rate from 10+ to under 5.
Click to expand...

No one believes the rate is anywhere close to 5%. Obama is lying again. If the economy is so strong why does obama insist short term interest rates stay at nearly 0%.

We've had 0% interest rates for 8 years now and it has destroyed our pensions.
 
Althea said:
Post 33 clarifies anything that you're struggling with. Banks paid back notes with interest. They couldn't wait to, as they didn't like the restrictions attached to the bailout.

You don't lose money on shares of a company unless you sell them at a loss.
Click to expand...

and do you deny that the US lost money?.....
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
No one believes the rate is anywhere close to 5%. Obama is lying again. If the economy is so strong why does obama insist short term interest rates stay at nearly 0%.

We've had 0% interest rates for 8 years now and it has destroyed our pensions.
Click to expand...

If the unemployment rate is as high as you claim; why would you want to raise interest rates, and slow demand even further? How would a hike raise you pension?
 
Billy Batts said:
If the unemployment rate is as high as you claim; why would you want to raise interest rates, and slow demand even further? How would a hike raise you pension?
Click to expand...


Even if the unemployment rate is 4.9%, there are still 15+ million more on food stamps at that percentage under the black President than Bush had and people like you call Bush an idiot. How sad it must be to know that the person you call an idiot did a better job in that area than the one you think does such a good job.
 
CFM said:
Let's take Obama's hat one by one:

1) Record year of middle class income growth claimed yet the left is constantly talking about stagnant wages and the middle class declining. Which one is it?

2) Record 78 months of job growth. I thought Congress was the one that passed things to create jobs and Congress is controlled by Republicans.

3) 4.9% unemployment rate. Bush and other Presidents had that same rate.

4) Record low uninsured rate. How many of those damn freeloaders could only afford it because someone valuable to society was forced to fund the subsidy for them?

5) Low gas prices. I remember paying way lower when Bush was President.

6) 53% approval rating. With all the handouts coming to the freeloaders, who isn't going to approve of having something handed to them when they're too sorry to provide it to themselves.

You forgot record numbers of people on food stamps. In fact, it's 15+ plus million more than under Bush at the same unemployment rate. Can't the black guy do as good of a job at the same level? Guess not.
Click to expand...

...which probably explains why you'll never hear Hitlery proclaim that she needs to keep and continue this Administrations policies. She's all but run away from them. LOL
 
Althea said:
Both Reagan and Bush increased public sector hiring in order to stave off unemployment. Would you suggest Obama do the same? What else do you do for the millions who lost jobs after the Bush era housing bubble burst....let them starve?
Click to expand...

Quantitative easing that does NOTHING to create jobs other than more wealth on Wall Street, and spending TRILLIONS of PUBLIC money to add to Government rolls or fund green energy projects do, and did, NOTHING to enhance job or income growth.

Never in my entire life, or those before us, have we seen such a LONG period of stagnant wage growth, extreme low labor participation rates and extremely low mortgage rates. The policies of this administration have devastated the black community and the white middle class.
 
Billy Batts said:
That is not true. Glass-Steagall was a firewall between two different markets, depository institutions (Banks) and financial intermediaries (Investment Banks, Brokerages, Hedge Funds, etc.). A key tenet of a depository institution is that savers trust that their deposits will be there when they need it.

Depository Banks kept a ratio of cash on hand to meet this need and they loaned out the rest. However, the underbelly of the capitalist system is that during the business cycle, there comes a time when business cycles downward. Less demand results in excess capacity which drives greater liabilities for firms, job losses and eventually panic. Animal spirits are freed up causing depositors to want more of their cash back from the depository institutions.

The removal of the firewall between depository institutions and speculating financial intermediaries worsened with bank write downs of bad bets and hence the financial crisis. The depository institutions made bets (or speculated) with customers’ deposits in complex securitization markets. They were precluded from this behavior under Glass-Steagall. Capital cushions which they normally kept under Glass-Steagall were no longer adequate to meet post Glass-Steagall losses.

Dodd-Frank, did just the opposite of the Glass-Steagall Act. It allowed the abusive Wall Street banks to hold even greater amounts of insured deposits and to become ever more creative in how they abused those deposits. Make no mistake it has the full suport of our next President Hillary Clinton.
Click to expand...

Please link me up with these "depositors" who lost money they placed in the banks care. Government regulation CAUSED the mortgage. Forcing banks to carry loans from low income borrowers in the interest of "fairness" helped build that house of cards. To blame banks and ignore the acts of Congress is ignorant. The Glass Steagall Act would have done NOTHING to prevent institutions from finding ways to package these loans and sell them on the market.

Former Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, have said the focus on Glass-Steagall is misguided. They argue other factors were more important in causing the 2008 crisis, such as bad mortgage underwriting, poor work by the ratings agencies and a securitization market gone crazy. All of that would have happened no matter the size of the big banks.

In fact, some of the financial institutions that fared the worst, such as Bear Stearns, AIG, Lehman Brothers and Washington Mutual, weren't part of large bank holding companies at all.

"I have often posed the following question to critics who claim that repealing Glass-Steagall was a major cause of the financial crisis: What bad practices would have been prevented if Glass-Steagall was still on the books?" wrote former Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Alan Blinder. "I've yet to hear a good answer."

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...lass-steagall-cause-the-2008-financial-crisis
 
Billy Batts said:
If the unemployment rate is as high as you claim; why would you want to raise interest rates, and slow demand even further? How would a hike raise you pension?
Click to expand...

If the economy is doing as great as Obamaphiles say it is, why keep interest rates at ZERO for EIGHT F'ing years????

Good lord; leftists are the most mathematically challenged, economically ignorant, low information voting twits on the planet.
 
Billy Batts said:
They were not precluded because Glass-Steagall was repealed in the 90's to assist CityGroup to merge with Trans America. This is why the recession was a bi-partisan screw up, not just Bush. Glass-Steagall did exactly what it was intended to do: it provided safer and more effective use of the assets of banks” by barring Wall Street investment banks from accepting deposits or being affiliated with banks accepting deposits". It prevented the “undue diversion of funds into speculative operations” by banning banks holding deposits from underwriting securities.

Glass-Steagall was good law and did the job for 66 years. Much of the lessons learned from the depression are slowly being repealed or watered down. You would think Law makers would have seen the problem,and just have Glass-Steagall re-codified, but instead they just crafted Dodd- Frank. Dodd-Frank, looked at the exact same type of market crash, the abuse of depositors’ funds, and the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression, and did the opposite. It allowed the abusive Wall Street banks to hold even greater amounts of insured deposits and to become ever more creative in how they abused those deposits.
Click to expand...
We are basically in the same camp, but I'm leaning toward the examination of all causes of the perfect storm we saw when the bubble collapsed.

Back when Congress was capable of compromise, Gramm/Leach/Bliley smply didn't have the votes to pass. At the time, it seemed like a good compromise if these banks that were chomping at the bit to return to the risky investment game were 'forced' to increase CRA lending. (another favorite diversion of the Right wing idiots).

In theory, it increases home ownership and cuts back even further on prejudiced banking practices. CRA paper got rave reviews for performance in the early 00's from BOA.

Where I expand blame, is the introduction of AIG writing insurance on garbage, the ratings agencies giving AAA ratings to same, real estate appraisers who were all too happy to create an inflated market, and finally...Wall St for coming up with new and exciting 'products' to trade, that were virtually worthless.

Of course, lack of regulation of the above takes the lion's share of the above, which is what I believe D/F attempted to do after the horse was out of the barn.

That aside, there were so many players writing horrid paper, I don't think G/S would have done enough to stop the toxic atmosphere that ultimately led to the crash.

In essence, isn't one of the biggest issues the lack of actual insurance from AIG et. al? Were investors duped into thinking that their risk was insured?

That doesn't negate the insider scams perpetrated by the likes of Goldman, etc.



edit to add...

IMO, the biggest issue I have is the fact that the terms of the bogus paper were unprecedented. I got my first mortgage under Reagan, and back then no bank would loan more than 75% of appraised value.

After Reagan killed the Savings and Loan industry, the way appraisals were done changed drastically. It got stricter.

Before the most recent crash, lenders were pushing borrowers to accept 125% of appraised value....(fictional value, at that)

In essence, this paper was guaranteed to fail the moment it was written.
 
Last edited:
CFM said:
Even if the unemployment rate is 4.9%, there are still 15+ million more on food stamps at that percentage under the black President than Bush had and people like you call Bush an idiot. How sad it must be to know that the person you call an idiot did a better job in that area than the one you think does such a good job.
Click to expand...
Unemployment has always been calculated in the same fashion. As such, it's never been accurate. It's meant to use for comparison. Nobody decided to change the way they compute unemployment numbers after Obama took office.
It's like wind chill factor vs. actual temperature. The former is not a claim of accuracy, just a way to let you know how cold it will feel.

The fact that the only jobs available in this corporate run country don't pay enough to feed a family, has more to do with corporate greed, and less to do with any policy put forth by this administration.

The majority of people who get a pittance for food, are employed.
 
I suggest everyone watch this short video to understand what happened with the mortgage meltdown and understand how Glass Steagall would have done NOTHING to prevent the catastrophic events of 2008.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top