Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (414937)	9/7/2008 1:15:58 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576882

"I was really trying to figure out exactly what you think the Bush administration should have done." Maybe not start their "Ownership Society" programs, where the regulators, lenders and Fed were all supposed to take everyone's WORD that they had a job, were credit worthy and could meet the conditions of the flaky mortgages that were being pimped by shyster lenders, then being re-sold to Fannie and Freddie? How about that? Clean up a homeless guy and he could get a mortgage. Dogs got mortgages! en.wikipedia.org

To: i-node who wrote (414937)	9/7/2008 4:28:18 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576882

I see Bentway answered the question as well as I could have. Bush has abdicated government responsibility to the citizens of this country. As a result, government is the last resort for slime business practices. Did you want the US government to be the largest mortgage holder, mortgage lender in the world? That's what your ideology got you. And me you asshole. Happy?

To: i-node who wrote (414937)	9/7/2008 5:43:43 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1576882

I understand you want government more involved. When I asked for specifics, I was really trying to figure out exactly what you think the Bush administration should have done. Regulate the various industries involved. By 2006, it had become common knowledge that these industries were violating the various rules and regulations governing their industry. There was no reaction by the Bush administration who by that time, had a reputation for a laissez-faire approach to industry. When you say they should have "regulated" these companies, what does that mean? Read this article.....even the FBI knew something was wrong as early as 2004 before the worst of the bad lending. They and the regulators did nothing: "Most observers have declared the mess a gross failure of regulation. To be sure, in the run-up to the crisis, market-oriented federal regulators bragged about their hands-off treatment of banks and other savings institutions and their executives. But it wasn't just regulators who were looking the other way. The FBI and its parent agency, the Justice Department, are supposed to act as the cops on the beat for potentially illegal activities by bankers and others. But they were focused on national security and other priorities, and paid scant attention to white-collar crimes that may have contributed to the lending and securities debacle." ****** "But the tepid response** also reflects a broad realignment of law-enforcement priorities at the Justice Department in which mortgage fraud and other white-collar crimes have been subordinated to other Bush administration priorities." latimes.com