Ok, I am sick of everyone saying that Bush put us into the position we are today (economically). Its ridiculous to think that his policy alone was responsible for the issues we face today.
For those of you looking to refute the Bush-bashers, there was an interesting article today from David Weidner of MarketWatch discussing the blunders from the Cllinton-era that proved 'toxic'. Here are the highlights:
1) 1997- Change to the amount a homeowner had to pay in taxes on the sale of their home(increased limit to $500k before taxes were owed). This made buying and selling a home pretty much a no-brainer in terms of tax efficiency and changed the marketplace from one of supply and demand to that of increased speculation
2) 1998 Bailout of Long-Term Capital Management's Hedge Fund being led by the New York Federal Reserve Bank of $3.6 Billion. After this, the administration didn't change or review the laws to increase the oversight on hedge fund managers and their investment tactics
3) The biggie, according to the article, was the repeal of the Glass-Seagull Act of 1933 which morphed into the Gramm-Leach-Biley Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999. This effectively tore down the barrier between commercial banks (savers) and brokerage houses (investors) (See Citigroup merger with Travelers). This Act is perhaps the biggest issue that regulators are now facing to try and re-work so as to keep speculation out of lending.
Just thought you might like a little history lesson...
Grace & Peace
Speaking of history lessons, please remind the class which political party had the majority in both chambers during both #1 and #3 of your example. Then let's take a look at the actual vote and see exactly who supported those measures.
ReplyDeleteAlso, a question for the teacher: is it Congress who passes laws or the Chief Exectutive? In example #2, are you suggesting that the Chief Executive could have stopped the NY Fed's actions, or could have--of his own volition--written laws to contain hedge funds?
But isn't this all just head-shrink? What we're really talking about here is regulation (or lack thereof). There's been a deregulatory environment in the U.S. for decades. Are conservatives (and self-described libertarians) now proponents of more regulation, as these 'examples' seem to suggest?
Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't mention how bombastic example #1 is. Haven't we heard that lowering capital gains taxes were going to save us all? Wasn't this the GOP wet dream since the early 80's ? And how we have it and 'conservatives' are saying lower taxes led to our downfall? (I understand if you want to edit or 'modify' this, because of some of the terms.) I'm not asking for much--just maybe some consistancy.
Incidentally, Clinton no more produced 23 million new jobs (#1 new job in the Clinton era was food-service-worker at a whopping $400/week) than Bush deserves condemnation for what is happening now. In fact, I give him a lot of credit for action that flew in the face of the so-called free market. "I am sick of being Herbert Hoover," he was noted to have remarked.