I think it helps to look at it this way---
----You take an engineer working on a dam. That engineer oversees a major breach that begins a flood of epic proportion, so the next crew comes along to replace that engineer and before the damage can be repaired the epic event turns biblical. Finally few repairs are in place and the time comes to decide the fate of the second engineer. Do you try to understand the first engineer has caused the trouble(joblessness) and blame him for the damage or do we blame the engineer that moved in to save the day as it were?
Gd-moring Mallory
I'm not sure I follow your analogy. I think it's incomplete.
Did the first engineer actually cause the breach? That's potentially loaded question. Not entirely. The job loss arena was built long before he took the wheel. An assault on unionization began in the early eighties along with deep domestic cuts and massive military spending. First it's important to note that even under Carter we had employment growth in spite of the oil crisis Nixon caused ,that Carter took most of the heat for. I personally think we should have went right from Nixon to Ford and skipped Carter all together. Ford-- a true conservative with the greater concern for the nation rather than corporations---leading into Reagan So, once we bailed out the bankers after Donald Regan took over the deregulation of S&L's that eventually led to a 124BILLION bailout to the 100's od the S&Ls that failed,. Thousands of S&L execs-went to jail, unlike today---- to the tune of 3.5 TRILLION in losses, Keating 5 is the highest profile example. 100's of 1000s lost their jobs. Then GHWB came along to pick up an even deeper trend of deregulation with even more S&L's going under with another round of over 2 BILLION in bailouts. Then we got dirty Bill. Now I'd say no one can say we didn't have growth under dirty Bill, but when he pushed and signed NAFTA into law, well it was off to the races for job loss and more deregulation but not until the end of his terms---then GW came along and drove a tank through barriers of job protection in this country with 6 more free trade deals---- and there is the biggest source of the damage to that -DAM- How long did he observe it before doing anything? His entire two terms. He had plenty of power to do something--- the regulators were in place, they just didn't care. Greenspan was hired by Keating and there we are, an endless row of bankers and economics's wizards hired by bankers aided by legislators and lobyists that became do nothing regulators, that continued to become even more prolific de-regulators A Did he actually do anything to correct the problem? NO. In fact he did worse by puting Goldman Sach's CEO Hank Paulson who in 2004 helped lobby the SEC to relax leverage limits on investment banking. A CRAZY thing to do by the way---JUSY CRAZY unless you are planning to make MILLIONS out of it in the short term. So in 2006 he appointed Paulson as head of the FED. The next two years we were set up for the worst financial disaster in our history along with guys like Greenspan, Bernake, and legislators like Gramm and Bliley. Lets look back a bit. Once Glass Steigle was law, we had forty plus years of steady growth and relative stability with the regulations needed to prevent another depression, that is until the day the TOP man and all his underlings decided it was time to rape this nation and do it so big we'd be reeling in the dark not knowing what happened and beset by a monsterous hoard of thieves, a powerless clueless people. Nothing could have prepared the people for what these uncaring greedy hoard of crooks and lying thieves, unless these presidents had done their jobs in the first place. And too--- lets be clear, curse them all for taking the lead of a country they knew would suffer under such ridiculous ideals and if they didn't expect such disaster from these appointees then they were and are too damn stupid to be the leaders of the free world in the first place.
Did the second engineer have any assistance from the first? In what way? As far as fixing the problems NO of course not. Hut he did have a crack team of wall street bankers to choose from and BOY did he choose em. In fact the second engineer chose mare ex-Wall Street execs than his predecessors. Even if he did, I don't thing you can blame the second one for anything because he actually did the fix it. No ma am---nothing has been fixed yet. We have just spent our way into the next downfall and added three more free trade deals to the glory of corperica. The first has some blame for either causing the problem or inaction or both. Yes he does to be certain. But as so many have said here, we have a man now that has done very little in the overall picture to change things, and as we all know it's foolish to try and spend our way to prosperity. I give Bush the blame he deserves as well as Clinton, GHWB and Reagan(My personal hero by the way) but sooner or later we have to ask the man ib charge if he's ever going to see that in order to change this course we had been decimated by, you cannot put the same pukes in charge of our future now, when they are the ones who did it in the first place. Obama did just that and expect better results? It just isn't possible to fix this mess by allowing the very same hoard of thieves to have control of the mess they caused with the full cooperation of the oval office. It has happened again just yesterday and it's probably the tip of the iceberg again. For any president to do that is JUST NUUUUUUUUUTS!!
If I had the chance to ask Romney what he plans to do about all the deregulation, lobbyists, PACS and Super PACS, bankers in high positions or any position in government, and free trade---- I would. If he says fire the bankers, repeal the free trade tax-less rules for exiting corps jobs, veto any bill that deregulates finance and taxless borders, ban lobbyists from congress, keep any legislator from becoming a lobbyist, install stringent campaign finance reform, make all donations to any candidate public by killing these PACS and Super PACS, Put leverage limits back to logical %'s, heavily regulate derivatives/CDO's and ban default Stock Swaps. Put the strength the SEC use to have back in place, and jail anyone who violates ANY of those rules we once had. Oh yes, impeach any president that even looks like he or SHE might want to start a new round of deregulation both within and at our borders. Set a flat tax and ban the IRS. That there-----would be the guy to put in office. Obama already has no such plans.
