A tax change made under Clinton and you think it was feckless incompetent liberals rather than canny, effective neoliberals?
I’d say it’s more likely that it was cheered on by the corporate executives who paid for it.
I mean, I know you love to blame liberals for everything, but a stopped clock is only right twice a day.
If we’re buying the Planet Money explanation and graph, then the problem started more than 20 years ago, not 8 years ago.
It was largely a result of not allowing those banks to suffer the consequences of their mismanagement.
I will try and see if there were any true liberals who opposed that tax code change. Offhand, do you know of some??
The tax code change was put in place by those CEOs, not the peons who work for them.
Eight years, huh? Wonder what made that number seem like the right one to you.
In fact, the reason for the insanity can be tied to policies and choices that came to a head (and crashed, spectacularly) during Bush II’s time in office but had been building since Ronnie’s time.
Seriously, why would you say something so obviously wrong?
The only job is the numbers. Figuring out how to meet the quota and do what you should really be doing is the preserve of conscientious people who refuse to learn their lesson.
I don’t excuse Dubya in the least. In fact, I would have voted for Obama if he had voted against TARP.
If Bush had said in the summer of 2006 “Financial institutions who purchase mortgage backed securities take all the risk on themselves. While I am President, the term “bailout” will be used only in reference to jumping out of airplanes” we would have been so much better off…
Seems normal to me but I understand a “bonus” as something extra and sometimes even I work hard it doesn’t happen.
I’ll agree with you there, but…that was never in danger of happening.
I got banned from a couple of conservative fora back in 2008 for insisting that the Bush administration owned the crisis due to its failure to make it clear that risky investments were just that, and the only Democrats at fault were those who voted for TARP.
Note however that the TARP vote was:
House - Democrats 172 for, 63 against. Republicans 108 for, 91 against.
Senate - Democrats 41 for, 11 against. Republicans 34 for, 14 against.
Also note that since Obama’s inauguration, there has not been a single securities fraud prosecution connected with the mortgage meltdown. In particular, the ratings agencies were crooked as corkscrews and richly deserved to be wearing orange.
Also also note that under Dodd-Frank the banking industry has gotten even more concentrated, has not lost its “too big to fail” status, and still holds trillions of dollars worth of overvalued real estate paper. (This problem is really never going to be solved until we allow all assets to reach their market clearing prices).
So while Bush (not Republicans in general) owns the start of the problem, Obama clearly owns the failure to do one damn thing to correct it.
ITA with you there.
Especially with all the support he’s gotten from the legislative branch and the lobbyists who compensate them, you’d think he could have achieved something by now on the financial sector issues. Must be a personal failing, huh?
I’m guessing the /sarc tag was left off your post, but…
the number of Republican votes Obama needs to prosecute bank fraud is exactly 0.00
check this out
A quote, if “thehill.com” is too rightwing for your sensibilities:
The bill, backed by Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), would eliminate Title II, the “orderly liquidation authority” provision of the Dodd-Frank Act, which provides a process through which financial corporations that are close to failing can quickly liquidate assets. In its place, the legislation would create a special bankruptcy chapter, known as Chapter 14.Under Chapter 14, the failed bank would go bankrupt, leaving its owners and unsecured creditors on the hook.
Yes, agree. That’s usually how it works, that it is a distribution of a portion of extra earnings. Not a proxy for overtime or reward for effort. I guess the point is that bonus is a capricious, complex and often poor “motivator”.
There’s a fundamental difference between the bonus type if the main post and what us regular shmoes may or may not get. I don’t see it as a motivational thing just as “ooh nice!” If we get it. At my level it’s not about motivation. However for sales staff it’s different (see Glenn Gary Glenn Ross steak knives scene)
There is a big missing link in all this. The owners of the business.
If they sit around on yachts toasting eachother’s successful bumfluff removal, or whatever other minute detail of life they’ve managed to pull off, rather than focusing on the performance of their company - then kind of tough - live with it.
There’s collateral damage with publicly listed companies - sure - the other shareholders - but they should really be working for a way to influence management.
If you hand someone the keys and say “run this”, and disappear over a horizon, then don’t expect anything except greedy grabbing to happen.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
