Is this the end of capitalism?

[Slapper]

Discuss (if you may).

[MB_722]

No.

[w8tlftr]

Nope.

[The Coach]

Obama will try.

[gcb]

Probably the end of unregulated cowboy capitalism 

[MB_722]

Obama will try.

this should be your new avatar

[OzmO]

this should be your new avatar

lol

[stormshadow]

Probably the end of unregulated cowboy capitalism 

I find it funny that Capitalism is blamed for the failure of Keynesian Economics.

[shootfighter1]

Freddie and Fanny were not pure capitalistic lending institutions.  The gov's interference in lending was part of the whole failure.  Banks will protect their own $ if the gov wouldn't tell them who they have to lend to.

When Obama is elected, we will see some changes...there will be more socialist type governmental policies.  Right or wrong, Obama believes government solutions are the way to solve most national issues.

[Decker]

This happened once before/When I walked through your door/No Reply

Look at the history of our country.  Look at how de or un-regulated business practices end up.  Unaccountable greed made this mess.  Government intervention did not make this mess.

When unsecured credit is used to offer new and exciting real estate investments for 401k plans and speculative investors, and the brokers involved make more money if the underlying investment is left unexamined, and everyone's making fistfulls of dollars, well then gee golly, where does the governmental interference allegedly causing this mess come into the picture?

It doesn't.  This happened before with the S & L scandal--same principle and same result:  remove oversight and accountability and let the tax payer bail out the bigwigs.  B/c if they fail, we all hurt.

That's what gov. is for--to bail out irresponsible business gambles.

Here's a report that lays out the causes of this mess:
http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr318.pdf

The study identifies five causes of the subprime meltdown:
-Convoluted loan products that consumers didn’t understand.
-Credit ratings that didn’t do a good job highlighting the risks contained in subprime-backed securities.
-Lack of incentives for institutional investors to do their own research (they just relied on the credit ratings).
-Predatory lending and borrowing (which I think means fraud perpetrated by borrowers).
-Significant errors in the models used by credit rating agencies to assess subprime-backed securities.

[stormshadow]

This happened once before/When I walked through your door/No Reply

Look at the history of our country.  Look at how de or un-regulated business practices end up.  Unaccountable greed made this mess.  Government intervention did not make this mess.

When unsecured credit is used to offer new and exciting real estate investments for 401k plans and speculative investors, and the brokers involved make more money if the underlying investment is left unexamined, and everyone's making fistfulls of dollars, well then gee golly, where does the governmental interference allegedly causing this mess come into the picture?

It doesn't.  This happened before with the S & L scandal--same principle and same result:  remove oversight and accountability and let the tax payer bail out the bigwigs.  B/c if they fail, we all hurt.

That's what gov. is for--to bail out irresponsible business gambles.

Here's a report that lays out the causes of this mess:
http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr318.pdf

The study identifies five causes of the subprime meltdown:
-Convoluted loan products that consumers didn’t understand.
-Credit ratings that didn’t do a good job highlighting the risks contained in subprime-backed securities.
-Lack of incentives for institutional investors to do their own research (they just relied on the credit ratings).
-Predatory lending and borrowing (which I think means fraud perpetrated by borrowers).
-Significant errors in the models used by credit rating agencies to assess subprime-backed securities.

You honestly believe that there can be enough regulation to oversee and prevent malinvestment coming from 1% interest rates?  Even right now at 2%, with inflation it is FREE MONEY for those with access to it.

I want to see you defend Keynesian Economics and the "managed" economy.  Regulation is the scapegoat.  Increasing the money supply at 15% per year?  Yeah, that is some real fundamental, economic growth right there.

[Decker]

You honestly believe that there can be enough regulation to oversee and prevent malinvestment coming from 1% interest rates?  Even right now at 2%, with inflation it is FREE MONEY for those with access to it.

I want to see you defend Keynesian Economics and the "managed" economy.  Regulation is the scapegoat.  Increasing the money supply at 15% per year?  Yeah, that is some real fundamental, economic growth right there.

We have regulation that was pre-empted by Bush to make homeownership exaggerated on his watch.  That's a fact.  There are legal guidelines to permissible interest rates used for mortgages.  I don't know what you're talking about.  The subprime problem is related to unsecured credit and predatory loan practices.

A managed economy only works when responsible competent people are at the helm and not 'free market pirates.'

The free market left to its own designs, unregulated, is the law of the jungle and the result is monopoly.  Going back to some gilded time of unregulated capitalism with a dollar supported by a gold standard is for starry-eyed dreamers.

The reason we haven't had a depression since 1929 is due to the Gov.'s adoption of Keynesian economics.  Go back and look at how Black Monday was handled by our gov. when the free market excesses caught up with reality.