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: Mongo2116 who wrote (1192313)	1/10/2020 3:32:45 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573943

Under Clinton, yes, but not under Obama. The economy under Obama was moribund and low growth, but he inherited one hell of a challenge. I just wish he did not decide to sweep it under the rug and let the Fed paper over all the problems with QEs. Obama should have insisted that bankers go to jail and that the TBTF banks be broken down enough that they would no longer be "systemically important banks that risk financial stability". But he went wimpy on the banks and here we are with all the same problems and the banks and derivatives and debt ballooned to multiple times the size of the pre-2009 crisis era. As to socialism, I hope we don't turn more that way, but the Millennials are 70% in favor of Socialism and Bernie is the candidate who is the most popular right now and is raising the most money right now. So it sure as hell looks to me that among Democrats, Socialism is mainstream, not fringe. Older Boomer Democrats may not be so fond of Socialism, but younger Democrats can't get enough of it.