WCowherd
- Thread starter Duck_walk
- Start date
Wall Street funds every legit candidate. The clintons are no different except that Hillary would be a competent president.
But all of the banks had enough assets to cover their debts. They just didn't have it readily available.
That's true. However, had there been capital requirements, AIG and Lehman could have avoided bankruptcy.
Edit: sort of true. AIG had enough assets, but could not recover them in time to pay their debts.
Last edited:
That's not true. Banks have never had a liquidity requirement. 20% would be a reasonable requirement.
Correct. I didn't express myself properly.
Did our government pretty much encourage lenders to loan to some folks who shouldn't have qualified? Yes.
Did banks and others package those loans into risky investment instruments? Yes.
Did the whole thing blow up in our faces? Yes
Did it rock the stock market? Hell yes.
Did it shake confidence in our economy and government? Well hell yes.
Did it leave millions under water on their homes? Yes.
Did it paralyze many into not being able to move? Yes
How the hell you can say DE-regulation's effect on the 2008 recession was over-rated is beyond me.
Last edited:
I'm not saying the laissez-faire attitude with which both the banks and the government handled the housing market isn't at least partially to blame. Your OP, though, mentions the glass-steagall act as a contributing factor in the recession. In my opinion, it had very little to do with the recession. That's my point.
