You certainly pat yourself on the back alot. Good Christian value, vanity.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I find great delight observing conservatives who wave the flag of Christianity and yet completely lack any understanding of the teachings of Jesus. I’m not pointing my finger at anyone here, just at my observations in life in general.

There’s a lot of people on this planet that need to take a long hard look in the mirror.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The more that government is centralized and the less it is limited, the greater the connection between the banks and the government--so the more that regulations become favorable for the central banks. It was government regulation that led to the housing bubble, and government stimulus that created the following stock bubble that is now experiencing a correction which is not finished and may get worse and create a new financial "crisis." And that will lead to more regulation to save the ability of government to borrow money by saving the big banks.

And so will continue the growth of that symbiotic relation between our expanding government and the banking system. The real defense against that is a free market in which poor or corrupt banking policies actually lead to failure instead of government protection and greater wealth for the bankers.

If our government regulations protected a free market rather than supporting its cash cow, that would be, as you put it, the "only defense."

this can't be correct...democrat politicians would never work in conjunction with evil businesses to rig the system in their favor...they are only concerned for the "little guy" and therefore all of the regulation that they propose and support and pass must naturally fix all that is wrong with the world....can't possibly be the reason for or contribute to any such failures...more government=freedom and fairness for all...ideally...we move to one, government run banking system(after healthcare gets done)...then there will be no more greed and pillaging and profit by those running things

Perhaps the road to serfdom is paved with good intentions?
How will the end of work play into that?

And decentralization can lead to localized corruption as well. See it all the time in communities.

Pretty much exactly the opposite. The bubble was mainly caused by a lack of regulatory control that allowed for cheap and reckless loans, further exacerbated by additional lack of regulation that encouraged corrupt banking practices to obfuscate the risk.

"The bubble was mainly caused by a lack of regulatory control that allowed for cheap and reckless loans,"

You are correct there. But I wonder what would have happened, if the Bush administration had put a stop to that. if the feds passed laws saying banks had to follow more traditional mortgage underwriting, then people would have said Bush was trying to keep poor people from buying houses. But I think you nailed the causes. The Clinton administration, with the GOP congress I think, removed the regulations which prevented traditional banks from getting too involved in these fishy investments.

It was government regulation that encouraged and coerced the cheap and reckless loans.

The traditional banks were directed and encouraged by a regulation that substantially led to these fishy investments--The Community Reinvestment Act.

While you say Traditional Banks, traditional banks no longer exist. The bank that i used to be able to call and say i need this, they would say, for what and put the money in my account, I would stop and sign the paper has been bought and sold 3 times in the past 20 years.
All we have now is corporations funding other corporations, there are no banks that care about the community or their clients.

That's complete nonsense, it was deregulation that allowed lending and securities to become one in the same.

It was government regulation that led to people who could not afford to pay for a home loan to get one. That led to bad mortgage notes which were bundled in with good ones and then sold to unknowing suckers. Without the plethora of bad notes, that corrupt bundling would not have occurred or been far less destructive.

Your position isn't supported by the facts. CRA loans actually have had a much lower default rate historically. I think this was discussed years ago on this very site.

The smaller banks were not bailed out. Banking became, as did many other corporations, more centralized into fewer large ones. Many small "traditional" small, single owner businesses, like neighborhood corner drug stores, have become scarce or no longer exist. They have been replaced by franchises which are under the umbrella of large, centralized corporations. The regulatory state promotes corporatism over smaller business entities. The big business/big government complex grows.

I see your reference is a financial gossip blogger who was fired from businessinsider shortly after the piece was authored.

Touche indeed :laugha:

I see you didn't refute a thing he said. There are plenty of other sources that say the same things. I chose Business Insider because it is a left leaning publication. Maybe that's why they fired him.

BI isn't left leaning as much as just catering to a younger demographic. Don't need to refute anything he's said, it's all in the archives in this forum.

Oh . . . in the archives . . .al-l-l-righty then! I like your debate style. And, yeah, Business insider is left leaning. It's in the google archives.

more reason to not vote for Democrats and their liberal policy, and more reason to vote for more liberties and freedoms and free market

The people saying they're promoting your liberties and freedom are robbing you...just saying.

That's in the archives, right?

They all lie, let's ban liars

That's why I liked Obama, he was probably one of the most honest presidents in a while.

no....you just lapped up his BS

Honest guy, family man with a great wife and great kids, went to church...there's a lot to respect.

Honest guy=family man with a great wife and great kids, went to church

hard to figure who he worships more..Well Intentioned Hillary or Honest Obe

"Historically" is not the point. In a moment of spare time, I delved into the archives to see if the President's new economic advisor had an opinion about the CRA's effect on the great recession. Larry Kudlow, (very respected, not fired from his job) said this little tidbit:

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/28/are-...-villains.html

Oh, and I decided to check "the archives" to confirm your post about Carney being fired "shortly after the piece was authored." Turns out that it was not shortly after the piece was authored, but 9 months later and had nothing to do with "the piece."

His firing was a surprise move and was motivated not by his article on the effect of the CRA on the housing crises of 2008, but "The general consensus seems to be that Carney is out because he, Blodget, and publisher Julie Hansen could not agree on how to cover and present stories. Blodget pushed for clicks through sensational headlines and features, like galleries, while Carney preferred focusing on breaking stories and in-depth reporting." Sounds like Carney was the more reputable reporter on the magazine, and those firing him were the sleazy ones--http://www.adweek.com/digital/john-carney-fired-from-business-insider/

And Carney did well professionally after leaving BI. As of 2013, "John Carney is a senior editor at CNBC.com, covering Wall Street, hedge funds, financial regulation and other business news. Prior to joining CNBC.com, John was the editor of Clusterstock.com and DealBreaker.com." So he is not a gossip hack, but is a credible financial analyst.

So you tried to twist the story to make it sound like Carney was some incompetent gossip columnist who lost his job because he wrote a fallacious, fake news, story.

Seems like you're the faker. A rather sleazy trick to make the article by Carney that I posted to be stupid and not worth refuting. That you didn't have to refute anything he said--probably because you couldn't. I've read the leftist attempt by the Center For American Progress to acquit the CRA of any fault in the 2008 financial crisis, and Carney, in the article that you could not refute, rebutted that sort of whitewashing of the CRA, point by point.

That was some church he went to, boy. You could just feel the love and tolerance oozing out of Rev Wright's sermons.

Obama seems devoted to his family, gotta give him that...Great wife? You say so...

Perhaps you should do a comparison between Reverend Wright and Donald Trump, but you probably have not read any of his sermons.

I have said a thousand times I don't like Trump's lack of morals. Trump is a sleazy jerk. Wright is a forming at the mouth, howling at he moon, lunatic and bigot.

No one claims that Trump is their spiritual advisor. Rev Wright is a deranged bigot, and not surprisingly, Obama claimed he was his spiritual advisor.

In the span of a career 9 months is pretty short and fired is fired.

You structured you rhetoric to imply that Carney's firing was due to the article on the CRA. 9 months is a long time to fire someone over writing a fallacious article. And the reason for the firing was not even due to the article.

Actually, your post was fallacious, misleading, and a sleazy trick.

"The government gives them [African Americans] the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

• After September 11, 2001, he said: "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back into our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."

• "It just came to me within the past few weeks, y'all, why so many folks are hating on Barack Obama. He doesn't fit the model. He ain't white, he ain't rich, and he ain't privileged. Hillary fits the mold. Europeans fit the mold, Giuliani fits the mold. Rich white men fit the mold. Hillary never had a cab whiz past her and not pick her up because her skin was the wrong colour. Hillary never had to worry about being pulled over in her car as a black man driving in the wrong… I am sick of Negroes who just do not get it. Hillary was not a black boy raised in a single parent home, Barack was. Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain't never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had her people defined as non-persons."

Sounds like the comments of an ignorant, demented, racist.