Quote:It's nice to have slogans. It's not helpful in a debate, but it's good to have a mantra that helps you get by.


Marxism is, at the end of the day, the government controlling the means of production.


If you don't want to have an adult conversation, and you just want to regurgitate the propaganda you've swallowed, just say so.


I'm all for understanding the truth. I long gave up this my team v your team mentality. It's done me well.


So it's easy for me to see the benefits and draw backs of each side.


So it does intrigue me when I hear analysis that seems to be completely partisan and not based on all the facts.

For instance, blaming the recession of 2008-2009 on the government is just not the entire truth. It makes for a great talking point for your team, but it does nothing to get to the truth.


To ignore the banks and their huge roll in this is just proving you are not here to have a discussion on finding what the truth is, but only to fight for your team. And that's fine, but a bit boring.

 

Regarding the part in bold.  I can agree with you in that government isn't solely responsible for the 2008-2009 recession, however they did play a role in it.  One has to back up and look at what the cause of the recession was.  Primarily it was government policy not only backing (Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac), but encouraging sub-prime mortgages.  Also involved was The Fed (not a government agency by the way) reducing interest rates.  This was done to reduce the damaged caused by the 2000-2001 dot-com bubble as well as a response to 9/11.

 

Suddenly you have "easy credit" available in order for people to not only make large purchases (cars, technology, etc.) but also homes and real estate.  Lenders (not necessarily banks) took advantage of this because they could loan money to people with less-than-desirable credit, then turn around and "sell" the loan to an investment bank.  So the lender can make a loan with little-to-no risk, and profit from it.  Banks in turn would package these loans up and trade them on the stock market, kind of like bonds.

 

The problem was, home prices started to spike artificially since there was more demand as a direct result of government policy and lenders/banks basically passing the "hot potato" mortgages on to investors.  The lenders were loaning to people that had no business buying a home, then getting rid of the loan.  Buyers in turn were taking more risk thinking that they could purchase more home than they could afford and believing that it would rise in value and would build equity (think "home flippers").  They also were quick to take an ARM (Adjustable Rate Mortgage) or an "interest only" loan for the first say 3-5 years of the mortgage.  When some of these risky loans started to come into the point where the interest rate actually kicked in, they suddenly found that they couldn't afford the payment and you saw the foreclosure rate start to skyrocket.  That in turn brought real estate values down.  Suddenly investors and investment banks were stuck with bad loans and lost tons of money.  The asset (home) was not worth what the debt was.

 

The bottom line is, that crisis started and ended because of government.

---