Obama Had Horrible Financial Policies

[video=youtube_share;3R6O-AdvzTM]http://youtu.be/3R6O-AdvzTM[/video]​

In response to 2008 financial crisis, the Obama administration made the explicit decision to support criminal banks at the expense of homeowners and antitrust laws weren't enforced on large corporations across the board. Inequality increased significantly on Obama's beat. "Nearly 95% of all new jobs during Obama era were part-time, or contract," Investing.com, December 21, 2016

 

if not loans( fully paid back) to some banks we would have had huge depression so this was obviously good thing. Also, nothing criminal about banks really since govt had assured them house prices would keep going up. Do you understand?

 

No I don't and that's not the point of the article. I hate when people comment before reading:

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, Lawmakers Call For Reinstatement of Glass-Steagall

[video=youtube_share;5aIvo-exDGE]http://youtu.be/5aIvo-exDGE[/video]​

In 1999, President Clinton repealed Glass-Steagall at the urging his treasury secretary, Robert Rubin, thus freeing financial institutions "to innovate in the new economy," in Clinton's words - and also "to self-destruct, taking down with them the general economy and international confidence in the US banking system," financial analyst Nomi Prins adds.

Rubin then left the treasury department and became a director of Citigroup, which benefited from his efforts by expanding and becoming a "financial supermarket" as they called it.

In 2010, President Obama appointed Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, both Clinton treasury secretaries, as his top economic advisers. During the Clinton years, Summers worked to prevent Congress from regulating derivatives and other exotic instruments. As economist Dean Baker pointed out, Obama selecting Rubin and Summers to deal with the financial crisis was "a bit like turning to Osama Bin Laden for aid in the war on terrorism."

In December 2014, Obama himself helped whip House votes in favor of the "cromnibus" spending bill, which included a provision that gutted the already weak 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Law.

 

You don't need to have a successful economic policy when the fawning media treats you like a god. Now that Obama's out perhaps the media will start discussing economic policy again.

 

why not just switch to Republican capitalism since it is self-regulating and self correcting?

 

When Obama took office in January of 2009, the Dow Jones was at around 7,060 points.

On Election Day 2016 it was at 18,332.

that's a jump of 159%.

that's pretty darn good.

Unemployment is also at 5%, which is pretty good.

this does not happen after 8 years of bad financial policies.

 

bottom line is that wages were lower when Barry left office. No president can match that failure except FDR who was closest to Barry in libcommunism. Do you understand?

 

I understand that the Dow Jones and Unemployment numbers speak for themselves.

we were approaching the abyss on January 21, 2009 and today we are doing okee dokee

 

So, we went from a near depression with both sides saying how bad it could get, to a much stronger economy, unemployment improved, stock market improved, job numbers increasing, and that's what you consider bad?

LOL Again, reality doesn't bode well with most all right wing positions

 

You're the one defending corporatist economic policies. You're confused.

 

I have been critical of Bush-Obama for a great many things dealing with the economy, but the financial system HAD to be saved and there was no other way to do it. We were on the path to an even greater depression and that was stopped. I give them both credit for that. There was a price to be paid in all that. QE was stretched out far too long and the consumer bail out programs on housing were far too generous and largely done for show without a lot of rhyme or reason as to who was qualifying for these debt relief programs.

 

Corporatist is liberal like obamacare where govt and business are one. Republican capitalists believe in total separation. Now do you understand?

 

I don't think Obama has a clue how the economy works. He was so focused on bandaiding the short term problems of the day, he lost sight of the unintended consequences of his actions. For example, his "auto bailout" violated a century of precedent on how bankruptcies are handled. By moving his supporters (UAW) to the front of the line, and giving the shaft to the bond holders (which were guaranteed to be first to be paid by law)
The drive for the fed to control so many aspects of the economy put inefficient practices into place killing our competitive position, and putting a huge burden on small business. He is the first president to have more business failures than starts.

 

Careful, you'll be Labeled as a deflection-ist, & a troll.

 

Perhaps you didn't see this. All of the following is deregulation on the part of 2 consecutive Democratic presidents, including the one you're defending.

 

I don't need to see it but you need to understand that capitalism is separation of business and govt while liberalism fascism socialism and communism are combining them. Clear now??

 

And yet, Trump has been said to want to have private industry help finance some of his proposed infrastructure (and other?) projects...

http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/m...uld-include-public-and-private-capital-218986

 

so??????Did anyone on earth ever claim that Trump was a good representative of Republican capitalism?

 

I may have misread your post. Apologies.

 

was their something about Dodd Frank that you liked? Why not tell us what it was?

 

That is exactly the problem - not the solution. Ever heard of "too big to fail"? Look it up, read about the very negative ramifications of such a policy.

 

what is the problem???? liberals love bailouts anyway.....of failed individuals who get lifetime welfare and never pay back a penny!! Individuals are to big to fail but not banks??

 

Now THAT is really Funny! : Roflol:

I KNOW you cannot be serious, since the "self-regulating and self correcting" malarky damn near got us into a depression in 2008.

 

any reason to think it was Republican capitalism rather than Democratic socialism that damn near got us into a depression in 2008? I didn't think so.

 

The govt bailing out banks and promising to never let a big bank fail removes the consequences of a banks actions. It removes the banks "moral hazard" - the risks of the banks decisions are shifted from the bank to others, the bank does not pay the price for failure. The govt shifted the hazard from the banks (including Fannie and Freddie) to the taxpayer long before 2008, and that contributed significantly to the collapse.

And since the govt has kept the "too big to fail" policy, the danger is still very real. And don't think that Dodd Frank did anything to decrease the risk of another collapse.

It used to be that a company owner - banks, mortgage lenders, investment company, corporation - paid the price for failure. When your house and savings and retirement are on the line, you tend to think very carefully about your business decisions. If you made a bad decision, not only the company and investors and employees paid a price, so did the owners.