What we learned from The Great Recession

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • LA Ute
    Receiver of Memory
    • Nov 2008
    • 19512

    #1

    What we learned from The Great Recession

    I liked this set of thoughts from Ben Stein:
    Anyway, when I woke up, I lay in bed a long, long time trying to figure out what we learned from The Great Recession.

    First, we learned that prudence in finance is never out of date. Prudence in the way we manage our finances as a nation and as families is simply never a bad idea. That means not overspending, not undersaving.

    Second, we learned—again—that man is a greedy animal. If left to his own devices, he will steal. Man is also a hypocritical animal. If left to his own devices, he will steal and he will lie about it.

    What we really had in the period 2002–2006 was a time of colossal fraud about corporate earnings and values. If the true liabilities of banks and insurers had been known, if a truly appropriate reserve had been taken at financial entities for the likelihood of default, we would have had far lower stock prices and less for them to fall.

    If the truth had been told to potential borrowers and lenders about the likelihood of defaults, we would have had far less risky borrowing and lending. This would have led to a far more modest housing boom and a far smaller bust.

    Third, it’s very risky to create financial instruments that have the power to destroy the whole world. Warren E. Buffett called derivatives “financial instruments of mass destruction” and I think he’s given a good description.

    But we also had a booby-trapped system in which if one small part, sub-prime mortgages, were detonated, they would set off a chain reaction that would blow up all matter.

    It was only very timely work by Mr. Bernanke that saved us.

    Finally, we learned the limits of selfishness. Laissez-faire is great. Individual initiative and ambition are great. But there has to be some force controlling them and countervailing them. We have cut back so much on regulation and on private securities law enforcement that the financiers basically were on the playground without supervision—with nuclear weapons. Not good.

    Well, just a few thoughts. Of course, as always, the real stars are in Ramadi and Tikrit and Mosul and Baghdad and Fallujah and the Panjshir Valley and Kabul—and more real stars are taking care of their families and their wounds at Walter Reed and Bethesda and all over the world. There is a lot to be said for the ordinary people whose work is caring and not making money.

    This all sounded good to my small-town "regular Republican" heart.
    “There is a great deal of difference in believing something still, and believing it again.”
    ― W.H. Auden


    "God made the angels to show His splendour - as He made animals for innocence and plants for their simplicity. But men and women He made to serve Him wittily, in the tangle of their minds."
    -- Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons


    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery
  • JohnnyLingo
    La Naranja
    • Nov 2008
    • 3976

    #2
    It was only very timely work by Mr. Bernanke that saved us.
    Considering neither Stein nor Bernanke had any idea whatsoever what was coming, I'm loath to give them credit for anything.

    Also, Bernanke's policies helped get us to where we are today. He's far from the genius some think he is.

    [/grump]

    Comment

    • byu71
      Senior Member
      • Nov 2008
      • 22070

      #3
      Originally posted by JohnnyLingo View Post
      Considering neither Stein nor Bernanke had any idea whatsoever what was coming, I'm loath to give them credit for anything.

      Also, Bernanke's policies helped get us to where we are today. He's far from the genius some think he is.

      [/grump]
      Given where we could have been and where we are, he did OK.

      We have learned we all have been operating FAT. Corporations are coming in beating earnings estimates. Why, a lot has to do with being able to cut a lot more fat out of the system than they suspected.

      Of course the government needs to do what it can to put that fat back in somewhere else or we won't be able to go bankrupt at some time in the future.

      Comment

      • JohnnyLingo
        La Naranja
        • Nov 2008
        • 3976

        #4
        Given where we could have been and where we are, he did OK.
        Can you direct me to somewhere that explains how Bernanke's actions mean unemployment is at 9.5% today instead of substantially higher? I hear this argument a lot, but I've yet to find anywhere that simply shows how this happened.

        Comment

        • KillerDog
          a.k.a. K-dog
          • Feb 2009
          • 4196

          #5
          Originally posted by JohnnyLingo View Post
          Can you direct me to somewhere that explains how Bernanke's actions mean unemployment is at 9.5% today instead of substantially higher? I hear this argument a lot, but I've yet to find anywhere that simply shows how this happened.
          I'm not sure anyone can "prove" such a thing. That said, I believe there is great logic behind the idea that major contractions in the money supply can result in depressions if the shocks are large enough and no expansion of the money supply is attempted. Bernanke saw the contraction and expanded the money supply. When he ran out of traditional expansion, he added new ways to expand the money supply. He may unltimately overheat the economy but there is little doubt that the unemployment and other recessionary hallmarks were curbed by Bernanke's expansion of the money supply.

          Comment

          • byu71
            Senior Member
            • Nov 2008
            • 22070

            #6
            Originally posted by JohnnyLingo View Post
            Can you direct me to somewhere that explains how Bernanke's actions mean unemployment is at 9.5% today instead of substantially higher? I hear this argument a lot, but I've yet to find anywhere that simply shows how this happened.
            Well, if you can prove to me a running play that gains 10 yards wasn't that great because if they had called a pass play they would have gained 30.

            I do know the panic that was going on in the financial markets and that panic has subsided. I can't tell you if another action had been taken things would have been better or worse and neither can you.

            Comment

            • SoonerCoug
              Joycelyn Elders Supporter
              • Nov 2008
              • 4680

              #7
              Originally posted by JohnnyLingo View Post
              Can you direct me to somewhere that explains how Bernanke's actions mean unemployment is at 9.5% today instead of substantially higher? I hear this argument a lot, but I've yet to find anywhere that simply shows how this happened.
              One of the biggest problems in this country is that ignoramuses like you don't realize what this is all about. Our entire economy was about 3 hours away from total collapse when they intervened.

              Kanjorski: "Here's the facts: On Thursday at about 11:00 in the morning the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw down of money market accounts to the tune of 550 billion dollars in a matter of an hour or two. The treasury opened up its window to help. They pumped 105 billion dollars into the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation--close down the money accounts, and announce a guarantee of 250,000 dollars per account so there wouldn't be further panic. If they had not done that, their estimation was that by 2:00 that afternoon, 5.5 trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the US, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and the entire world economy would have collapsed. Now we talked at that time about what would happen if that happened. It would have been the end of our economic and political system as we know it."

              [YOUTUBE]_NMu1mFao3w[/YOUTUBE]
              That which may be asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence. -C. Hitchens

              http://twitter.com/SoonerCoug

              Comment

              • Color Me Badd Fan
                Senior Member
                • Jan 2009
                • 12519

                #8
                Originally posted by LA Ute View Post
                I liked this set of thoughts from Ben Stein:
                Anyway, when I woke up, I lay in bed a long, long time trying to figure out what we learned from The Great Recession.

                First, we learned that prudence in finance is never out of date. Prudence in the way we manage our finances as a nation and as families is simply never a bad idea. That means not overspending, not undersaving.

                Second, we learned—again—that man is a greedy animal. If left to his own devices, he will steal. Man is also a hypocritical animal. If left to his own devices, he will steal and he will lie about it.

                What we really had in the period 2002–2006 was a time of colossal fraud about corporate earnings and values. If the true liabilities of banks and insurers had been known, if a truly appropriate reserve had been taken at financial entities for the likelihood of default, we would have had far lower stock prices and less for them to fall.

                If the truth had been told to potential borrowers and lenders about the likelihood of defaults, we would have had far less risky borrowing and lending. This would have led to a far more modest housing boom and a far smaller bust.

                Third, it’s very risky to create financial instruments that have the power to destroy the whole world. Warren E. Buffett called derivatives “financial instruments of mass destruction” and I think he’s given a good description.

                But we also had a booby-trapped system in which if one small part, sub-prime mortgages, were detonated, they would set off a chain reaction that would blow up all matter.

                It was only very timely work by Mr. Bernanke that saved us.

                Finally, we learned the limits of selfishness. Laissez-faire is great. Individual initiative and ambition are great. But there has to be some force controlling them and countervailing them. We have cut back so much on regulation and on private securities law enforcement that the financiers basically were on the playground without supervision—with nuclear weapons. Not good.

                Well, just a few thoughts. Of course, as always, the real stars are in Ramadi and Tikrit and Mosul and Baghdad and Fallujah and the Panjshir Valley and Kabul—and more real stars are taking care of their families and their wounds at Walter Reed and Bethesda and all over the world. There is a lot to be said for the ordinary people whose work is caring and not making money.

                This all sounded good to my small-town "regular Republican" heart.
                Why the hell didn't Stein mention the CRA? According to Rush, Hannity and CB, the government forced the banks to make all of these toxic loans. Stein sure has fallen away from his Nixon administration roots!
                Part of it is based on academic grounds. Among major conferences, the Pac-10 is the best academically, largely because of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. “Colorado is on a par with Oregon,” he said. “Utah isn’t even in the picture.”

                Comment

                • il Padrino Ute
                  Junior Member
                  • Nov 2008
                  • 19161

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Color Me Badd Fan View Post
                  Why the hell didn't Stein mention the CRA? According to Rush, Hannity and CB, the government forced the banks to make all of these toxic loans. Stein sure has fallen away from his Nixon administration roots!
                  Some things don't need to be said.
                  "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill


                  "I only know what I hear on the news." - Dear Leader

                  Comment

                  • LA Ute
                    Receiver of Memory
                    • Nov 2008
                    • 19512

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Color Me Badd Fan View Post
                    Why the hell didn't Stein mention the CRA? According to Rush, Hannity and CB, the government forced the banks to make all of these toxic loans. Stein sure has fallen away from his Nixon administration roots!
                    Yep, that was a huge part of it. The whole mess has a bunch of authors, and easy home mortgage credit was huge. I think Stein alludes to that when he says,
                    If the truth had been told to potential borrowers and lenders about the likelihood of defaults, we would have had far less risky borrowing and lending. This would have led to a far more modest housing boom and a far smaller bust.
                    “There is a great deal of difference in believing something still, and believing it again.”
                    ― W.H. Auden


                    "God made the angels to show His splendour - as He made animals for innocence and plants for their simplicity. But men and women He made to serve Him wittily, in the tangle of their minds."
                    -- Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons


                    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
                    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

                    Comment

                    • JohnnyLingo
                      La Naranja
                      • Nov 2008
                      • 3976

                      #11
                      Originally posted by KillerDog View Post
                      I'm not sure anyone can "prove" such a thing. That said, I believe there is great logic behind the idea that major contractions in the money supply can result in depressions if the shocks are large enough and no expansion of the money supply is attempted. Bernanke saw the contraction and expanded the money supply. When he ran out of traditional expansion, he added new ways to expand the money supply. He may unltimately overheat the economy but there is little doubt that the unemployment and other recessionary hallmarks were curbed by Bernanke's expansion of the money supply.
                      Fair enough. I'm not convinced we know the whole story, or that anyone fully understands what happened, but this makes sense.

                      Comment

                      Working...