(Astonishing. I guess Reich doesn't believe that the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 or the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 -- both signed into law by his former boss named Clinton! -- had a hand in this crisis. After all, FSMA removed the last vestiges of the Depression era Glass-Steagall Act requiring a firewall between the services offered by banks, brokerage firms, and insurance companies. This massive deregulation of the financial services industry in November 1999 is very much what led to the current crisis. The following year CFMA deregulated lending derivatives such as credit default swaps which are at the heart of the problems facing the world's troubled financial institutions. )(From Noel Shepherd thread about Reich)

   Combined with the CRA of 1977 the above is the legislation that cleared the way for the real estate bubble and the stock bubble that is in the process of crashing right now. IMO we are witnessing the greatest scam, con, and fraud in the history of the world. I beleive the members of the house and senate(as well as Clinton), who pushed and passed the bills in 1999 and 2000, as well as the members of the financial, banking, and regulatory agencies new what the final result would be, and knew before it crashed they would make fortunes and then the taxpayers would be forced to pick up the tab. I beleive this was/is nothing more than a giant pyrimid scheme that makes Madoff look like a second rate con man. But i don't see anyone even mentioning prosecuting any of the people responsible. On the one hand i don't fault anyone for investing in good faith in our financial system, on the other hand after you realize you've been robbed, scammed, and conned, and you don't have the guts to stand up and do something about it, then to bad, you've gotten what you deserve. 

   kilrod

Remember, only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier

Listen as in take his advice.

Yes I constantly call people such as yourself an economic illiterate because you are.

I never said the SECC caused it but it certainly did not prevent it and is absolutely worthless. The Federal Reserve caused the financial crisis.

Yes, Greenspan Did It (Stefan Karlsson, Economist)

Since a Ph.D. Professor of Economics is making the case for me, why not let him explain you confusion about the cause of bank panics which is always due to inflationary fractional reserve banking or government intervention. Oh wait he wrote a book on this too:

A History of Money and Banking in the United States: The Colonial Era to World War II (PDF) (510 pgs) (Murray N. Rothbard, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Economics)

The Panic of 1873

"Orthodox economic historians have long complained about the "great depression" that is supposed to have struck the United States in the panic of 1873 and lasted for an unprecedented six years, until 1879. Much of this stagnation is supposed to have been caused by a monetary contraction leading to the resumption of specie payments in 1879. Yet what sort of "depression" is it which saw an extraordinarily large expansion of industry, of railroads, of physical output, of net national product, or real per capita income? As Friedman and Schwartz admit, the decade from 1869 to 1879 saw a 3-percent-perannum increase in money national product, an outstanding real national product growth of 6.8 percent per year in this period, and a phenomenal rise of 4.5 percent per year in real product per capita. Even the alleged "monetary contraction" never took place, the money supply increasing by 2.7 percent per year in this period. From 1873 through 1878, before another spurt of monetary expansion, the total supply of bank money rose from $1.964 billion to $2.221 billion—a rise of 13.1 percent or 2.6 percent per year. In short, a modest but definite rise, and scarcely a contraction. It should be clear, then, that the "great depression" of the 1870s is merely a myth—a myth brought about by misinterpretation the fact that prices in general fell sharply during the entire period. Indeed they fell from the end of the Civil War until 1879. Friedman and Schwartz estimated that prices in general fell from 1869 to 1879 by 3.8 percent per annum. Unfortunately, most historians and economists are conditioned to believe that steadily and sharply falling prices must result in depression: hence their amazement at the obvious prosperity and economic growth during this era. For they have overlooked the fact that in the natural course of events, when government and the banking system do not increase the money supply very rapidly, freemarket capitalism will result in an increase of production and economic growth so great as to swamp the increase of money supply. Prices will fall, and the consequences will be not depression or stagnation, but prosperity (since costs are falling, too) economic growth, and the spread of the increased living standard to all the consumers."

The Panic of 1893

"The financial panics throughout the late nineteenth century were a result of the arbitrary credit creation powers of the banking system. While not as harmful as today’s inflation mechanism, it was still a storm in an otherwise fairly healthy economic climate. The Republican Party intensified its longtime flirtation with inflation by passing the Sherman Silver Purchase Act of 1890,

In the same year, the Republicans passed the high McKinley Tariff Act of 1890, which reaffirmed their commitment to high tariffs and soft money.

By the end of 1893, the panic was over as foreign confidence rose with the Cleveland administration’s successful repeal of the Sherman Silver Purchase Act in November of that year."

The Panic of 1907

"While the Treasury had stimulated inflation during 1905–1907, there was nothing it could do to prevent suspensions of payment, or to alleviate "the competitive hoarding of currency" after the panic, that is, the attempt to demand cash in return for increasingly shaky bank notes and deposits."

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is Not Pollution

what have the "people" done?  

I voted for Obama and I watch Fox News.  So there.  You know, both parties suck pretty bad actually.  It's just funny to me that the people on Fox News will never admit a Republican did anything bad, UNLESS said Republican sides with a Democrat on an issue.  Then it's all over.

this strange attitude that people who voted for obama are underinformed, ignorant of the 'truth' (as you see it) etc...is so bizarre.  the fact is, a majority of americans dont agree with the philosophies of the right at this moment in time.  that will surely switch over time, as it always does, and you can return to puffing your chest out and strutting around the coop telling everyone how right you were.  i know many democrats and many republicans, ( i own a bar and we accept both) and all seem to be rather aware of politics and what goes on in the world.  the difference is one of personal philosophy, and interpretation of what they read, see and hear.  if your only argument is that you are right and anyone who disagrees with you is obviously too ignorant (or a commie socialiast libtard who is actively trying to destroy the America that You Love So Much) to even argue with, well, then that is your loss.  

The first two minutes of the show states the intent of the show.   Watch it yourself.

"Contempt prior to investigation is ignorance."

John Stewart's entire act is that he is some giant arbiter of virtue who puts all the evil people in their place. Well, he didn't find Cramer and CNBC evil until they went after Obama and now this basic truth is gaining traction as seen in the following:

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/03/13/white-house-spokesman-on-stewart-vs-cramer-i-enjoyed-it-thoroughly/

Go to youtube and search for Daily Show and Tony Blair.

It's the clearest example I have ever seen of how stupid Stewart really is compared to how smart he thinks he is.

He tried going toe-to-toe with Tony Blair on foreign policy, the Iraq War and international relations armed with Democrat Talking points.

One by one, Blair politely shoots them down with Stewart making a comment, then looking at the audience like "I've got him on this one" then Blair comes back with a comment proving the Stewart didn't know what he was talking about.

Blair also showed incredible class sticking up for Bush and refuting allot of the media and Democrat talking points on Bush's supposed negative personal qualities. 

Ha ha shrubbster -- my big secret is out.

Obama Amends The Constitution
Check out the poster @ Hollycrud checker-outers