The USA was founded as a grand experiment of new ideas about government at the time. So far, it's holding true.
The economic system can be tweaked to adopt to the demands of society. The US economic paradigm is a mixture of economic policies. In its pure form, capitalism still exists in the stock market. IMO, the greatest danger to the US government is the national debt. This debt is a burden to the entire government and economy. Both major parties have opposing views as to how the national debt can be reduced. The longer they squabble, the longer the problem will persist. If we're not careful, the accident could happen sooner than later. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@...> wrote: > > Geez John, where the hell have you been? We've been mentioning for > years on FFL and discussing a lot of books, articles, documentaries and > biopics that explain the problem. One couldn't write a better scifi > scenario if they tried. > > I got interested in economics back in the late 70s. I read everything > from Galbraith, Ravi Batra to Milton Friedman. I especially enjoyed the > "economic novels" of the late Paul Erdman who made the economic crisis > of the time understandable. They even made a movie of one book, "Silver > Bears" with Michael Cain. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erdman > > At least the Reagan administration sent some of the the S&L crooks to > prison. Obama is too endeared to Wall Street for that I'm afraid. > We're really screwed. Best thing is a massive collapse that must wipe > out the very rich and age old banking institutions. IOW a complete reboot. > > On 11/29/2011 12:37 PM, John wrote: > > Judy, > > > > Good research on your part. It appears that the financial crisis was due > > to a combination of factors which contributed to an "accident" waiting to > > happen. And, unfortunately it did. > > > > Now, the big "accident" waiting to happen is the enormous national debt > > that is costing Americans millions of dollars per minute. I don't believe > > any of the politicians in Washington DC know how to solve this problem. > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"<jstein@> wrote: > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John"<jr_esq@> wrote: > >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu<noozguru@> wrote: > >> <snip> > >>>> The bankers showed how dumb they actually are with their > >>>> derivatives and hedge funds. It was like a bunch of kids > >>>> playing with matches and oops burned the house down. And > >>>> they should pay the full price for it. The public should > >>>> not bail them out. Catch them at every excuse to sell the > >>>> public we should help them out and sound a resounding NO! > >>> The bankers believed that their actions relating to the housing > >>> mortgage debacle were legal and that they would be supported by > >>> the federal government. Apparently there was a federal law that > >>> was passed to lower the requirements for some borrowers so that > >>> they can buy new homes. > >> Please, inform yourself. Start with this: > >> > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_policies_and_the_subprime_mortgage_crisis > >> > >> http://tinyurl.com/7t9e5uz > >> > >> The Wikipedia article has lots of references, including to > >> other Wikipedia articles on the 2008 financial crisis. It's > >> much more complicated than you dream. Bhairitu is > >> essentially correct that it was the securitization of risk > >> in mortgage lending with derivatives and such that was the > >> primary contributor to the crisis. Just for one thing, the > >> vast majority of the subprime loans were not made by FDIC- > >> insured banks. For another, most of the loans that went bad > >> were not made to low-income borrowers. And for still > >> another, commercial loans were just as problematic as home > >> loans. > >> > > > > >
