WHAT CAUSED THE CRISIS? There’s plenty of blame to go around.
Three contributing factors caused the failure of Wall Street banks.
#1 “Shady” accounting practices that were overlooked by lawmakers.
#2 Government mandated sub-prime lending.
#3 The use of credit default swaps to insure or hedge against default.
Let’s take a closer look at each of these contributors.
#1 “Shady” accounting practices that were overlooked by lawmakers.
The regulatory agency, OFHEO, which provided oversight for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, reported illegal accounting activities to Congress. They found that the GSEs (Government Sponsored Entities) improperly applied accounting rules and improperly managed earnings, making themselves look stronger fiscally than they were. Fannie Mae’s Chairman and CEO Frank Raines (now Obama’s financial advisor) was asked in the congressional hearings why it’s OK for his company to have so much less capital set aside than regular banks. Raines responded, “Because there aren’t any banks that only have multi-family and single-family loans. These assets are so risk-less that capital needed to hold them should be under 2%.” Obviously, the risk was far greater than he let on.
Video: Watch Congress turn a blind eye and deny there is any risk:
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=184743
#2 Government mandated sub-prime lending.
This is one of the ways the US Government has rigged our economy in favor of debt. When you see “subprime” read “unqualified” or “high risk.” Subprime mortgages are simply risky mortgages given to low-income borrowers with poor credit. Gee, who would have thought that could fail?
The Community Reinvestment Act kick-started the growth of subprime lending in 1977 but it wasn’t really very successful until 1995 when the changes ordered by President Clinton took effect. Among other things, these changes mandated increased access to mortgage credit for inner-city and distressed, rural communities.
There are consequences any time the government monkeys with the market. The government’s role is solely to make sure the market remains fair and un-manipulated.
#3 The use of credit default swaps to insure or hedge against default.
Credit default swaps (CDS) are highly complex financial instruments; a type of derivative for the financial sector. In simple terms they allow investors to speculate on the future value of loans without taking any financial responsibility for them.
As an analogy, let’s say your neighbor offers to replace your insurance company by stating he might buy your car if it becomes damaged. He’s not planning to set aside any money to pay for your car and he isn’t obligated to buy it but you are obligated to sell it to them if he chooses to exercise he option. You would probably laugh at him for suggesting such a ridiculous scam. The same principle was swallowed hook, line and sinker by Wall Street. They embraced the idea and a new industry was born.
CDS were seen as easy money with little risk during the real estate boom. Unlike banks and insurance companies, the CDS market isn't regulated; anyone could get involved, whether they had the resources to cover the losses from a default or not. So everyone got involved, even the Wall Street banks. Lately, investors have become jittery, making the CDS hard to sell. AIG reported the biggest loss in their history largely due to an $11 billion writedown on its own CDS holdings.
Warren Buffett described derivatives like CDS as “financial weapons of mass destruction." In an annual report to shareholders in 2002, he said, "Unless derivatives contracts [such as credit default swaps] are collateralized or guaranteed, their ultimate value also depends on the creditworthiness of the counterparties to them. In the meantime, though, before a contract is settled, the counterparties record profits and losses--often huge in amount--in their current earnings statements without so much as a penny changing hands. The range of derivatives contracts is limited only by the imagination of man (or sometimes, so it seems, madmen)."
Derivatives also provide a dangerous and perverse incentive for creative accounting; either from sincere optimism or blatant fraud (remember Enron?).
What didn’t cause the Crisis:
Wild rumors of other culprits abound, so let’s list a few of the things that didn’t cause the crisis.
So how should we fix it?
In short, we can’t really “fix it.” The purpose of the bailout, which would only put a band-aid on the problem, is to discourage wide-spread panic in the stock market. No one knows how bad the long-term consequences will be from such massive manipulation of the market. In principle, I’m against bailouts.
Having said that, I think we should follow through with this one. Why? Because, for the last several years, we said we would. It’s that simple. No matter how foolish a promise, we have to stand by our word.
Of course, any language promising to continue the risky subprime loans has to be removed from the final bailout. We must stop treating home ownership like it’s a constitutional right! The American Dream is for us to earn our property and prosperity, not to have it given to us.
Additional notes:
For a comparison of the original Paulson bailout, Barney Franks proposals and the final proposal defeated on 9/29, visit:
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/Comparison_of_original_
Paulson_bailout_to_compromise_proposal.html
Here’s a great video that further details the issue.
Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis? (with links to information in video)
http://themountainsage.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/video-burning-down-the-house-what-caused-our-economic-crisis/
_________________________
Dan Young is a citizen-turned-online-journalist who is fed up with the media's blatant bias, the Democrats' double-speak, and the Republicans' fiscal recklessness.
Newsweek writer Jonathan Alter tells us that the media must do "its job" and take out Sarah Palin.
Here's an excerpt from his article:
"I'd imagine that Palin will dodge press conferences in favor of interviews with people like Sean Hannity, Larry King and Ellen DeGeneres. Then, when the media complain that she is being kept away, the McCain campaign will cite the half dozen or so interviews she has granted as proof that the campaign press is just bellyaching. Brief press 'avails' on the plane will be useless, unless reporters ask open-ended queries designed to elicit proof of real knowledge. That should get Palin through the next three weeks. By the end of the month, the McCain camp can say she has to go to ground to prepare for [her] debate, where expectations will be so low for Palin that she will likely emerge intact.
"It will be up to the press and public to raise enough of a stink about this, that Palin is forced to submit to real interviews with real questions that show whether her real-life experience is any preparation for assuming high office. In that sense, the Palin nomination is as much of a test of us as it is of her."
Dan Young is a citizen-turned-journalist who is fed up with the media's blatant bias, the Democrats' double-standard, and the Republicans' fiscal recklessness.
Country First or Self First?
McCain's & Obama's Priorities Differ
by Dan Young
McCain put his country first when he said he’d rather loose an election than a war.
Obama put himself first when he decided to run for the highest office in the land after only a few months as senator.
McCain put his country first when he broke with his party on water boarding and comprehensive immigration reform.
Obama put himself first when he avoided taking a stand by voting “present” nearly 130 times.
McCain put his country first when he fought to curtail earmarks.
Obama put himself first when he broke his promise to not accepted public funds for his campaign.
McCain put his country first when he refused to be released before other prisoners of war.
Obama put himself first when he launched his political career in the living room of known terrorist William Ayers.
McCain put his country first when he fought against congressional corruption.
Obama put himself first when he let Tony Rezko raise funds for him and help him buy his house.
McCain put his country first when he reached across the isle and led the gang of 14.
Obama put himself first when he blamed lack of heartland support on bitter people clinging to their guns and Bibles.
McCain put his country first when he denounced the use of Obama’s middle name in a disparaging way.
Obama put himself first when he let Bill Clinton be labeled a racist.
McCain put his country first when he didn’t give up on his presidential bid.
Obama put himself first when he didn’t give the Clintons any credit.
Dan Young is a citizen-turned-online-journalist after becomming fed up with the media's blatant bias, the Democrats' double-standard, and the Republicans' reckless abandonment of fiscal responsibility.
POT CALLS THE KETTLE "INEXPERIENCED"
by Dan Young, www.oneempowered.com
When asked by Anderson Cooper what his response is to republicans who say Governor Palin has more executive experience than he does, Obama said:
"Well, uh, you know, uh, my understanding is - is that, uh, Gov. Palin’s, uh, town, Wassilly, uh, has I think 50 employees, uh. We've got 2500, uh, in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe 12 million dollars a year, uh. Ya know, we have a budget of about three times that, uh, just for the month, uh. So I think that, uh, our ability to manage large systems, uh, and to, execute, uh, I think has been made clear over the last couple of years, uh, and certainly in terms of, uh, the legislation that I’ve passed just dealing with this issue post-katrina, uh, of how we handle emergency management. The fact that, uh, many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place, uh, as we speak, I think indicates the degree to which, uh, we can provide, uh, the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect."
Minimizing Governor Palin’s Experience
Overlooking, for the moment, the fact that he called Wasilla "Wasilly" and said "Uh" no less than 20 times in 57 seconds, Obama’s answer focused solely on Governor Palin’s mayoral experience and completely ignored her current role of running a state with a GDP of over 44 billion dollars. He also didn’t mention any of Palin’s other political accomplishments as a reformer and governor. Just a few examples:
Watch: Newt Gingrich responds to "the experience question:"
Is Alaska an Insignificant State?
It’s not clear if pronouncing Wasilla as “WaSILLY” was intentionally condescending or just a Freudian slip. What Obama did make clear was that he believes the population and budget of the small town is insignificant, ignoring that Governor Palin’s career entails much more than being a past mayor. Many media pundits have made the same arguments about Alaska’s insignificance as a state. In total Gross Domestic Product, Alaska ranks 48th and 47th in terms of population (ahead of North Dakota, Vermont, the District of Columbia, and Wyoming. In GDP per capita, however, it’s a different story. In 2006, Alaska ranked sixth among states with a GDP per capita of $43,748, compared to the national average of $37,714. Delaware led the nation with the highest per capita GDP of $59,288.
Dan Young is a citizen-turned-online-journalist after becoming fed up with the media's blatant campaigning, the Democrats' double-standard, and the Republicans' reckless abandonment of fiscal responsibility.