WE NEED YOUR HELP!
Please donate to keep ReaderRant online to serve political discussion and its members. (Blue Ridge Photography pays the bills for RR).
In socialist studies they taught us the Lascaiz faire policies of the Hoover era were largely responsible...in other words a lack of government interference was to be blamed. Was this a leftist lie from the start? A myth?
I reckon you weren't paying attention during the lecture.
You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete. R. Buckminster Fuller
I think it is important to point out that the article is the product of a libertarian political think tank. I have also cited to FEE, occasionally (usually to avoid complaints about biased sources), so there is some merit to their analyses - in addition to bias. In this case, that bias is apparent. It is a broad consensus of economists that Smoot-Hawley was bad policy and very badly timed. But it was not the cause of the depression. Bank policies didn't help, but again, were not the cause of the depression. It wasn't government intervention at all, but speculation and cyclical business realities. Greed and corruption, mostly.
What was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 if not government intervention? As the article states the effects of the tariff and government regulations on banks which created banks to have bad policies caused the Great Depression. To a certain extent banks must engage in speculation. If they didn't they wouldn't make any loans.
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity. I'm a conservative because I question authority. Conservative Revolutionary
I think it is important to point out that the article is the product of a libertarian political think tank. I have also cited to FEE, occasionally (usually to avoid complaints about biased sources), so there is some merit to their analyses - in addition to bias. In this case, that bias is apparent. It is a broad consensus of economists that Smoot-Hawley was bad policy and very badly timed. But it was not the cause of the depression. Bank policies didn't help, but again, were not the cause of the depression. It wasn't government intervention at all, but speculation and cyclical business realities. Greed and corruption, mostly.
What was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 if not government intervention? As the article states the effects of the tariff and government regulations on banks which created banks to have bad policies caused the Great Depression. To a certain extent banks must engage in speculation. If they didn't they wouldn't make any loans.
You're going to have to inflate a very huge tariff balloon to swallow up the sum total bank and business losses, and bunk speculation, and I am pretty sure you can't inflate the balloon that big, any more than the banks were able to front the excuse of Clinton era mortgage laws for the mortgage meltdown.
One thing's for sure, if you ask banks, there's no way they would ever take responsibility for any mistakes. You kidding me? And don't ask the regulators either. Bank regulators on Wall Street will never admit to anything either
Warren couldn't even get a single financial regulator to admit to doing anything at all about crooked bankers, even when those bankers were caught red-handed.
Senator Elizabeth Warren asks financial regulators why they have not criminally prosecuted senior executives at Wall Street banks that have broken the law, at a Senate Banking Committee hearing on September 9, 2014.
So where's all this "regulation" all you libertarians are so spooked about? The last decade has been a continual meltdown in the regulatory sphere, with a conservative majority Congress rolling back consumer protections, often immediately after they are enacted, with crooks essentially walking free or with a slap on the wrist and a small fine, banks and other large multinational corporations being recapitalized with as much as sixteen trillion by the Fed in the wake of the financial crisis, one which the banks clearly helped cause.
Sorry, but when it comes to excusing responsibility, both for the recent meltdown and the Great Depression, Republicans refuse to take any whatsoever.
"The Best of the Leon Russell Festivals" DVD deepfreezefilms.com
I think it is important to point out that the article is the product of a libertarian political think tank. I have also cited to FEE, occasionally (usually to avoid complaints about biased sources), so there is some merit to their analyses - in addition to bias. In this case, that bias is apparent. It is a broad consensus of economists that Smoot-Hawley was bad policy and very badly timed. But it was not the cause of the depression. Bank policies didn't help, but again, were not the cause of the depression. It wasn't government intervention at all, but speculation and cyclical business realities. Greed and corruption, mostly.
What was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 if not government intervention? As the article states the effects of the tariff and government regulations on banks which created banks to have bad policies caused the Great Depression. To a certain extent banks must engage in speculation. If they didn't they wouldn't make any loans.
You're going to have to inflate a very huge tariff balloon to swallow up the sum total bank and business losses, and bunk speculation, and I am pretty sure you can't inflate the balloon that big, any more than the banks were able to front the excuse of Clinton era mortgage laws for the mortgage meltdown.
One thing's for sure, if you ask banks, there's no way they would ever take responsibility for any mistakes. You kidding me? And don't ask the regulators either. Bank regulators on Wall Street will never admit to anything either
Warren couldn't even get a single financial regulator to admit to doing anything at all about crooked bankers, even when those bankers were caught red-handed.
Senator Elizabeth Warren asks financial regulators why they have not criminally prosecuted senior executives at Wall Street banks that have broken the law, at a Senate Banking Committee hearing on September 9, 2014.
So where's all this "regulation" all you libertarians are so spooked about? The last decade has been a continual meltdown in the regulatory sphere, with a conservative majority Congress rolling back consumer protections, often immediately after they are enacted, with crooks essentially walking free or with a slap on the wrist and a small fine, banks and other large multinational corporations being recapitalized with as much as sixteen trillion by the Fed in the wake of the financial crisis, one which the banks clearly helped cause.
Sorry, but when it comes to excusing responsibility, both for the recent meltdown and the Great Depression, Republicans refuse to take any whatsoever.
Did you see in my comment where I said how the the Tariff Act of 1930 was one of the reasons we had the Great Depression? The Tariff Act of 1930, AKA as the Smoot-Hawley Act, was written by two Republicans! As a Republican I am putting the blame for a big cause of the Great Depression on TWO REPUBLICANS! Do you even bother to read what I write?
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity. I'm a conservative because I question authority. Conservative Revolutionary
Money is an illusion, a social fiction, a construction, my friends. Right now it’s constructed to serve the ultra-rich — but not the planet, democracy, civilization, and the rest of us. The reality of what we call an “economy” is just this. We are borrowing from Mother Earth. Sometimes, that’s called an “ecological debt.” And that notion must be now hardwired into our financial system. One of our great challenges this century is to build a global economy which doesn’t just destroy the planet because it’s free — which is what capitalism does, literally disappears the earth from it’s accounting — but nourishes and cares for it.
You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete. R. Buckminster Fuller
What was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 if not government intervention? As the article states the effects of the tariff and government regulations on banks which created banks to have bad policies caused the Great Depression. To a certain extent banks must engage in speculation. If they didn't they wouldn't make any loans.
A couple of opinion interjections:
1) Yes, Smoot-Hawley was government intervention after the fact, as was were the creation of the FDIC, NCUA, and the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008. Not all government intervention is a bad thing.
2) The assertion that "government regulations on banks which [caused] banks to have bad policies" - well, that is such an counterintuitive assertion that it will require more explanation. Let me put a bookmark in here, I'll label it "bunk" for the meantime... (not yours, theirs). It's like the canard that "Clinton caused the Great Recession," which is demonstrably false. Banks make bad decisions. Usually, like other bad financial decisions, it is based upon greed and/or corruption. The GD was no exception.
What was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 if not government intervention? As the article states the effects of the tariff and government regulations on banks which created banks to have bad policies caused the Great Depression. To a certain extent banks must engage in speculation. If they didn't they wouldn't make any loans.
A couple of opinion interjections:
1) Yes, Smoot-Hawley was government intervention after the fact, as was were the creation of the FDIC, NCUA, and the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008. Not all government intervention is a bad thing.
The Smoot-Hawley Act was not government intervention after the fact. As the bill went through Congress it had a negative effect on our economy. And no not all government intervention is bad. But when our elected officials abdicate their responsibility in order to ensure their reelection and create large unaccountable bureaucracies government interventions are usually bad.
Originally Posted by NW Ponderer
2) The assertion that "government regulations on banks which [caused] banks to have bad policies" - well, that is such an counterintuitive assertion that it will require more explanation. Let me put a bookmark in here, I'll label it "bunk" for the meantime... (not yours, theirs). It's like the canard that "Clinton caused the Great Recession," which is demonstrably false. Banks make bad decisions. Usually, like other bad financial decisions, it is based upon greed and/or corruption. The GD was no exception.
OH, so all government regulations do not and never have caused those who regulated to create bad policies? The government regulations banning branch banking were a contributing factor in causing the Great Depression. Who is talking about "bunk" now? It isn't me.
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity. I'm a conservative because I question authority. Conservative Revolutionary
Jill Morrison, executive director of the Powder River Basin Resource Council, an environmental group in Wyoming, says every state that has oil and gas is struggling with the cleanup task "because the industry has not been held accountable by the regulators and by the government to pay the cost of doing business."
Morrison also worries another bust could put Wyoming's orphan well program budget over the edge.
"We're going to quickly be in the tens of millions of dollars responsible for plugging and reclaiming oil and gas wells if we don't require upfront bonding," she said.
That means making companies pay the full cost of plugging wells even before they start drilling. But the industry pushes back on the idea.
It’s a good thing that socialized action (government intervention) is willing to step into the breach left by Capitalism’s irresponsible failures.
You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete. R. Buckminster Fuller
It appears thar socialism is always cleaning up after capitalism. Like mother and teenage son - one provides for the general welfare of the family and the other is a self-absorbed testosterone machine.
You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete. R. Buckminster Fuller
My friend, you cling to Smoot-Hawley like a drowning man to a reed when the real issue is the sinking boat. Capitalism and greed created the Great Depression, not government intervention. Period. Full stop. It wasn't even introduced until six months after the crash of 1929. Did it make matters worse? You betcha. But it didn't cause the Depression. Nor did banking regulation cause banks to be run irresponsibly. Lack of regulation allowed that. As it consistently does. See, savings and loan crisis; Great Recession.
Quote
During a period of strong global growth, growing capital flows, and prolonged stability earlier this decade, market participants sought higher yields without an adequate appreciation of the risks and failed to exercise proper due diligence. At the same time, weak underwriting standards, unsound risk management practices, increasingly complex and opaque financial products, and consequent excessive leverage combined to create vulnerabilities in the system. Policy-makers, regulators and supervisors, in some advanced countries, did not adequately appreciate and address the risks building up in financial markets, keep pace with financial innovation, or take into account the systemic ramifications of domestic regulatory actions.
Capitalists always want to blame others for their failures.
