Political Roundtable Cosmic String of Cataclysm - Part V

[Zonkerbl]

Background checks beyond what we already do are a little silly. Limits on clip size don't really limit an assailant's ability to fire off a lot of bullets.

$13,000 tax per gun sold makes more sense. Use the money raised to buy back handguns and destroy them. Have all arms seized in the commission of a felony destroyed.

[dobrojim]

background checks that don't happen due to truck sized loopholes aren't really background
checks.

Limits on clipsize ABSOLUTELY do limit an assailants ability to continue to fire off rounds.

[nate33]

Just as polluters impose costs on other people against their will, owning a gun imposes costs on other people against their will. Your obsession with guns increases the violence and mayhem in the U.S., which affects me. I think it's only right that purchasers of guns bear the full costs that their decision imposes on society. If guns result in 30,000 deaths per year, gun purchasers should pay for that. Borrowing the EPA's "statistical value of a life" of $7.5 million, gun purchasers impose a cost of 30,000*$7.5 million = $225 billion on the rest of us each year, entirely against our will. There were 16.8 million applications for guns in 2012 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... ny-guns-us), so $225 billion/16.8 million = $13,000 of costs per gun purchased. I think it's only fair to pay a $13,000 tax on every gun purchased.

Not that I agree with this pigovian tax, but in your example, why should new gun applicants bear the cost for the death toll caused by all the existing guns on the market? Also, with taxes this high, it would surely create a tremendous black market, which would only direct the guns toward the more criminally-minded while keeping them out of the hands of the well-intentioned law-abiding citizens.

One other thought, when you blame all these deaths on guns, are you also factoring how many of them would take place in the absence of guns. I'll cede that the elimination of guns would result in fewer total suicides, but there would surely be an increase in suicides by other means, like poison and sleeping pills. You have to factor that into your pigovian formula as well.

[popper]

Jim's Post - My overall point remains, if you're against ANY/ALL reasonable attempts at reform
because you can shoot some hole in it proving that it won't work perfectly, it is
incumbent on you to come up with something better. Or become irrelevant
to the conversation. The only real question is how quickly this happens.[/quote]

Popper - Valid point. I wouldn't want to become anymore irrelevant than I already am (which is completely). I agree with most that private gun sales that don't now require a background check should do so in the future (I would trust the NRA to negotiate the details on my behalf). I also support institutionalizing those individuals that are deemed a threat to society.

Help - How do I box and respond to the last quote when I get the message about 3 embedded quotes?

[dobrojim]

Just as polluters impose costs on other people against their will, owning a gun imposes costs on other people against their will. Your obsession with guns increases the violence and mayhem in the U.S., which affects me. I think it's only right that purchasers of guns bear the full costs that their decision imposes on society. If guns result in 30,000 deaths per year, gun purchasers should pay for that. Borrowing the EPA's "statistical value of a life" of $7.5 million, gun purchasers impose a cost of 30,000*$7.5 million = $225 billion on the rest of us each year, entirely against our will. There were 16.8 million applications for guns in 2012 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... ny-guns-us), so $225 billion/16.8 million = $13,000 of costs per gun purchased. I think it's only fair to pay a $13,000 tax on every gun purchased.

Not that I agree with this pigovian tax, but in your example, why should new gun applicants bear the cost for the death toll caused by all the existing guns on the market? Also, with taxes this high, it would surely create a tremendous black market, which would only direct the guns toward the more criminally-minded while keeping them out of the hands of the well-intentioned law-abiding citizens.

One other thought, when you blame all these deaths on guns, are you also factoring how many of them would take place in the absence of guns. I'll cede that the elimination of guns would result in fewer total suicides, but there would surely be an increase in suicides by other means, like poison and sleeping pills. You have to factor that into your pigovian formula as well.

I think the elimination of guns, were it actually possible, would indeed result in
a great number fewer people getting killed by murder or suicide. Guns are a uniquely
well designed means by which these things happen. Just because eliminating guns
would not eliminate murder and suicide is not a good reason to try to at least
minimize and rationalize the means of gun procurement.

[Zonkerbl]

Just as polluters impose costs on other people against their will, owning a gun imposes costs on other people against their will. Your obsession with guns increases the violence and mayhem in the U.S., which affects me. I think it's only right that purchasers of guns bear the full costs that their decision imposes on society. If guns result in 30,000 deaths per year, gun purchasers should pay for that. Borrowing the EPA's "statistical value of a life" of $7.5 million, gun purchasers impose a cost of 30,000*$7.5 million = $225 billion on the rest of us each year, entirely against our will. There were 16.8 million applications for guns in 2012 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog ... ny-guns-us), so $225 billion/16.8 million = $13,000 of costs per gun purchased. I think it's only fair to pay a $13,000 tax on every gun purchased.

Not that I agree with this pigovian tax, but in your example, why should new gun applicants bear the cost for the death toll caused by all the existing guns on the market? Also, with taxes this high, it would surely create a tremendous black market, which would only direct the guns toward the more criminally-minded while keeping them out of the hands of the well-intentioned law-abiding citizens.

One other thought, when you blame all these deaths on guns, are you also factoring how many of them would take place in the absence of guns. I'll cede that the elimination of guns would result in fewer total suicides, but there would surely be an increase in suicides by other means, like poison and sleeping pills. You have to factor that into your pigovian formula as well.

I know, the number is full of holes. Good attention getter though, isn't it?

What happens each year? X number of people die, and y number of guns get purchased. That's why I link them directly.

Totally willing to discuss ways to calculate the true number of deaths directly attributable to guns that should be built into a pigouvian tax. x out the number of deaths that occur in, say, Switzerland (the next highest gun owning country in the wiki database)? That would reduce the number of deaths by about 38%, so instead of 30,000 deaths you have to pay for, about 20,000.

As long as you accept the general idea. $13,000 is probably too high. $1,000 or so seems about right, intuitively. Don't handguns cost about $500? $1,000 should be fine to start with.

They have 200% taxes on gasoline in Europe and you don't have black market gasoline being sold on street corners ... And we have pretty high taxes on cigarettes, and yet don't have a cigarette mafia with speakeasy cigarette joints. I think there's a certain amount of tax that can be absorbed by a wealthy country like us without having to worry about black marketeering. Trick is not to outlaw them altogether (equivalent to a tax rate of infinity percent), that's why marijuana is such a problem (and alcohol during prohibition).

[dobrojim]

Jim's Post - My overall point remains, if you're against ANY/ALL reasonable attempts at reform
because you can shoot some hole in it proving that it won't work perfectly, it is
incumbent on you to come up with something better. Or become irrelevant
to the conversation. The only real question is how quickly this happens.

Popper - Valid point. I wouldn't want to become anymore irrelevant than I already am (which is completely). I agree with most that private gun sales that don't now require a background check should do so in the future (I would trust the NRA to negotiate the details on my behalf). I also support institutionalizing those individuals that are deemed a threat to society.

Help - How do I box and respond to the last quote when I get the message about 3 embedded quotes?

you gotta edit out one of the quotes (presumably the first or most inner quote).

I share your feelings of irrelevancy

I question your faith that the NRA is an organization that has your interests
as a responsible gun owner as its top priority. They biggest contributors and
therefore their prime clients are those who make and sell guns. They don't
care squat about the rest of anyone except to the extent that they need
to make themselves sound like they give a rat's posterior. The NRA is for
whatever provides the best opportunity for makers and sellers to make
the most money.

[popper]

Jim's Post - My overall point remains, if you're against ANY/ALL reasonable attempts at reform
because you can shoot some hole in it proving that it won't work perfectly, it is
incumbent on you to come up with something better. Or become irrelevant
to the conversation. The only real question is how quickly this happens.

Popper - Valid point. I wouldn't want to become anymore irrelevant than I already am (which is completely). I agree with most that private gun sales that don't now require a background check should do so in the future (I would trust the NRA to negotiate the details on my behalf). I also support institutionalizing those individuals that are deemed a threat to society.

Help - How do I box and respond to the last quote when I get the message about 3 embedded quotes?

you gotta edit out one of the quotes (presumably the first or most inner quote).

I share your feelings of irrelevancy

I question your faith that the NRA is an organization that has your interests
as a responsible gun owner as its top priority. They biggest contributors and
therefore their prime clients are those who make and sell guns. They don't
care squat about the rest of anyone except to the extent that they need
to make themselves sound like they give a rat's posterior. The NRA is for
whatever provides the best opportunity for makers and sellers to make
the most money.

We could say the same about the NEA or any number of other organizations. People that are members of the NRA pay dues voluntarily. I have several friends that have been members for years and they are more than satisfied with the representation that the NRA provides. A neighbor is a top executive at the NRA and has told me repeatedly that the NRA would like to negotiate common sense policies that reduce gun violence but the opposition continues to try to leverage any dialogue for political advantage.

The sequester is a perfect example with the furlough of the ATC's and resultant flight delays. There was no need for the disruptions but Obama was trying to leverage for a political advantage.

Thanks for the tip on embedded quotes Jim, I now feel empowered and relevant again.

[hands11]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ON2XWvyePH8[/youtube]

Funny stuff.

[Induveca]

The gun issue, when speaking of the tragedies at schools etc is misplaced. The real issue is the horrid financial situation in the US, and the role those guns could eventually play if things don't improve in DC.

When excessive austerity measures are implemented and people have trouble feeding their kids.....I doubt they'll be pawned for cash for those unhappy with DC leadership.

Continuing to ignore the gargantuan debt works for a time, but eventually austerity will hit the US much like it has Greece/Spain/Italy etc.

I shudder to think what many Americans will do without their credit cards, leased automobiles while cutting back due to higher taxes and severely cut public services.

That's why the Obama administration, to me at least, is right behind Bush #2 in sheer ineptness. After 16 years of two of the worst presidents in US history is it really any surprise the US now sits in political deadlock in horrible financial shape?

All this talk of coming out of the recession is nonsense, the recession has never ended. The US is in the midst of a financial collapse, merely being held back by excessive credit.

In the end, that foolish response, weakened credit ratings and historically poor leadership has me moving my funds into multiple currencies and hard assets.

Extremely, extremely frightening point in US and European history. "Service economy" mentality has taken away manufacturing, Internet ordering is cannibalizing retail....which is slowly killing traditional jobs for young adults/malls.

This of course makes for an interesting situation for China, who control the components for the vast majority of apparel and electronic brands....and finance a huge chunk of US debt.

Historic debt, poor leadership, huge tax increases, jobs/credit disappearing......that's when guns become an issue. Poorer citizens revolting becomes a real concern with those variables. Greece had no guns, the US has millions.

[sfam]

The gun issue, when speaking of the tragedies at schools etc is misplaced. The real issue is the horrid financial situation in the US, and the role those guns could eventually play if things don't improve in DC.

When excessive austerity measures are implemented and people have trouble feeding their kids.....I doubt they'll be pawned for cash for those unhappy with DC leadership.

Continuing to ignore the gargantuan debt works for a time, but eventually austerity will hit the US much like it has Greece/Spain/Italy etc.

I shudder to think what many Americans will do without their credit cards, leased automobiles while cutting back due to higher taxes and severely cut public services.

That's why the Obama administration, to me at least, is right behind Bush #2 in sheer ineptness. After 16 years of two of the worst presidents in US history is it really any surprise the US now sits in political deadlock in horrible financial shape?

All this talk of coming out of the recession is nonsense, the recession has never ended. The US is in the midst of a financial collapse, merely being held back by excessive credit.

In the end, that foolish response, weakened credit ratings and historically poor leadership has me moving my funds into multiple currencies and hard assets.

Extremely, extremely frightening point in US and European history. "Service economy" mentality has taken away manufacturing, Internet ordering is cannibalizing retail....which is slowly killing traditional jobs for young adults/malls.

This of course makes for an interesting situation for China, who control the components for the vast majority of apparel and electronic brands....and finance a huge chunk of US debt.

Historic debt, poor leadership, huge tax increases, jobs/credit disappearing......that's when guns become an issue. Poorer citizens revolting becomes a real concern with those variables. Greece had no guns, the US has millions.

This post is a stretch well too far. A recession means the economy is shrinking. Ours isn't. We had the worst downturn since the 30s - this was before Obama came in office. And austerity isn't the solution, its often the cause of continued problems (but we've discussed this). But the issue with guns is citizens revolting???

No, just no.

The issue with guns is crazies and criminals killing people in really large numbers and in really horrific ways for reasons that have nothing to do with the economy. That's the issue with guns, and its real. And Congress really needs to address it.

I've been to many fragile states over the last two to three years. Places where significant portions of "citizens" revolting with guns is a real fear (along with the accompanying fear of a military take-over), and sometimes an ongoing reality. Our country bares absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to these places. This is a very strange right wing fantasy many are propogating, not a future reality facing our country.

[Induveca]

The gun issue, when speaking of the tragedies at schools etc is misplaced. The real issue is the horrid financial situation in the US, and the role those guns could eventually play if things don't improve in DC.

When excessive austerity measures are implemented and people have trouble feeding their kids.....I doubt they'll be pawned for cash for those unhappy with DC leadership.

Continuing to ignore the gargantuan debt works for a time, but eventually austerity will hit the US much like it has Greece/Spain/Italy etc.

I shudder to think what many Americans will do without their credit cards, leased automobiles while cutting back due to higher taxes and severely cut public services.

That's why the Obama administration, to me at least, is right behind Bush #2 in sheer ineptness. After 16 years of two of the worst presidents in US history is it really any surprise the US now sits in political deadlock in horrible financial shape?

All this talk of coming out of the recession is nonsense, the recession has never ended. The US is in the midst of a financial collapse, merely being held back by excessive credit.

In the end, that foolish response, weakened credit ratings and historically poor leadership has me moving my funds into multiple currencies and hard assets.

Extremely, extremely frightening point in US and European history. "Service economy" mentality has taken away manufacturing, Internet ordering is cannibalizing retail....which is slowly killing traditional jobs for young adults/malls.

This of course makes for an interesting situation for China, who control the components for the vast majority of apparel and electronic brands....and finance a huge chunk of US debt.

Historic debt, poor leadership, huge tax increases, jobs/credit disappearing......that's when guns become an issue. Poorer citizens revolting becomes a real concern with those variables. Greece had no guns, the US has millions.

This post is a stretch well too far. A recession means the economy is shrinking. Ours isn't. We had the worst downturn since the 30s - this was before Obama came in office. And austerity isn't the solution, its often the cause of continued problems (but we've discussed this). But the issue with guns is citizens revolting???

No, just no.

The issue with guns is crazies and criminals killing people in really large numbers and in really horrific ways for reasons that have nothing to do with the economy. That's the issue with guns, and its real. And Congress really needs to address it.

I've been to many fragile states over the last two to three years. Places where significant portions of "citizens" revolting with guns is a real fear (along with the accompanying fear of a military take-over), and sometimes an ongoing reality. Our country bares absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to these places. This is a very strange right wing fantasy many are propogating, not a future reality facing our country.

My point was all seem to focus on gun control, yet ignore the financial collapse of America.

The unemployment stats of 18-25 year olds is astounding...and a similar run up took down Greece and is killing Spain/Italy. The numbers below we're from 2012, it's gotten much worse this year.

In my time in the States most ignored the stock bubble in the late 90s, due to greed/piling on. Most ignored the housing bubble in the early-mid 2000s for the same reason.

This is a different bubble, one far more dangerous. No true growth can be created without taking care of the financial foundation of the country. Instead of dealing with the problem, politicians have chosen to ignore it and point fingers which continuing to enrich themselves.......a very 3rd world move. The MO of the "fragile states" you mention above. Also the MO of the 5+ fragile states I've spent over 2 years each throughout my life.

When tragedies are consistently used for political positioning and allow the government to distract from major financial crises, it's the sign of a failing state and increasingly ignorant/poorly educated constituents....playing them for fools.

After Bush/Obama this game will have been played at 3rd world levels in the US for 16 years. Not sure how to turn that ship around, the US is approaching a generation of government ineptitude.


---------
Government data last year found that 53.6 percent of people under age 25 with a bachelor’s degree — about 1.5 million people — were unemployed or underemployed. It is the highest percentage in more than a decade, reflecting just how far the economy is from recovery.

[sfam]

My point was all seem to focus on gun control, yet ignore the financial collapse of America.

The unemployment stats of 18-25 year olds is astounding...and a similar run up took down Greece and is killing Spain/Italy. The numbers below we're from 2012, it's gotten much worse this year.

In my time in the States most ignored the stock bubble in the late 90s, due to greed/piling on. Most ignored the housing bubble in the early-mid 2000s for the same reason.

This is a different bubble, one far more dangerous. No true growth can be created without taking care of the financial foundation of the country. Instead of dealing with the problem, politicians have chosen to ignore it and point fingers which continuing to enrich themselves.......a very 3rd world move. The MO of the "fragile states" you mention above. Also the MO of the 5+ fragile states I've spent over 2 years each throughout my life.


---------
Government data last year found that 53.6 percent of people under age 25 with a bachelor’s degree — about 1.5 million people — were unemployed or underemployed. It is the highest percentage in more than a decade, reflecting just how far the economy is from recovery.

I'm having a hard time remembering a debate in DC in the last 6 years where the debt wasn't front and center. It pretty much dominates everything from health care to war discussions, to Wall Street excesses. I don't see how you can say we've forgotten about the debt or the economy. There are differences of opinion of how to solve this - that seems to be the stalemate. Republicans, when a democrat is in office are all about austerity at all costs. Not so much when they're in charge. Regardless, austerity doesn't lead to growth, it leads to shrinkage. The question is how do we grow jobs in this country again, and in the process, improve the health of the manufacturing sector.

But this is a completely separate question from the gun debate. Unfortunately, Congress as inept as they are, really has to do something about both.

And the MO of fragile states is for officials in office take the money from the people and enrich themselves personally to the tune of many millions of dollars. This is not what's happening here. Corruption is not endemic in the US - in fact its hardly a speck in our eye compared to some of the countries I've visited. For instance, I have never had anybody in the US working in the lobby of a building I've visited stick out their hand, expecting money when I ask them which floor a business is located on (Nor is there always a list of businesses and associated floors on the wall). Case in point, the Surplus spending by and large went to fund the projects it was targeted for (remember all those signs promoting the jobs coming from the projects?). We did not have massive instances where nothing at all was undertaken, and instead, the money ended up in someone's pocket in congress or in the Department of Labor - this is the MO of fragile states, and it just didn't happen here in the US.

The question on the table is do we grow ourselves out of the current problems with the aid of government spending (which is not going to government officials), or do we shrink government spending whereupon growth will magically emerge.

[popper]

The recession and financial crisis were the result of systemic financial corruption. IMO it had several layers; 1. easy money policy of the fed 2. govt. forcing banks to make mortgage loans to people that couldn't afford the payments 3. securitization of risky mortgages by large financial institutions and faulty ratings by in-the-pocket rating agencies 4. nationalization of losses that should have been born by private entities.

The response to the recession is a predictable failure and continues to stymie any recovery. The false recovery we are in now is propped up the the fed's gargantuan stimulus of near 0% percent interest and vacuuming up of mortgage securities (again nationalizing what will become future losses covered by the taxpayer instead of private entities).

The next shoe to drop is also easily predictable. Feds eventually back out of easy money policy and stimulus, the markets tank and interest rates on cars and mortgages skyrocket. Economy shrinks again.

The corruption is deep and wide and until it is reversed the economy will either slink along or tank again.

The future could be bright but only if honest and wise leaders are put in charge.

[DCZards]

The gun issue, when speaking of the tragedies at schools etc is misplaced. The real issue is the horrid financial situation in the US, and the role those guns could eventually play if things don't improve in DC.

When excessive austerity measures are implemented and people have trouble feeding their kids.....I doubt they'll be pawned for cash for those unhappy with DC leadership.

Historic debt, poor leadership, huge tax increases, jobs/credit disappearing......that's when guns become an issue. Poorer citizens revolting becomes a real concern with those variables. Greece had no guns, the US has millions.

Induveca, anyone who has read your posts on this thread knows how little you think of America's leaders and the state of our economy (Personally, I think you're a little jealous of us.) But this scenario of blind-with-economic-rage Americans pulling out their guns and turning on its leadership and each other in an almost cannabilistic fashion is downright insulting. You really underestimate both the resiliency and the character of the American people.

[Induveca]

The gun issue, when speaking of the tragedies at schools etc is misplaced. The real issue is the horrid financial situation in the US, and the role those guns could eventually play if things don't improve in DC.

When excessive austerity measures are implemented and people have trouble feeding their kids.....I doubt they'll be pawned for cash for those unhappy with DC leadership.

Induveca, anyone who has read your posts on this thread knows how little you think of America's leaders and the state of our economy (Personally, I think you're a little jealous of us.) But this scenario of blind-with-economic-rage Americans pulling out their guns and turning on its leadership and each other in an almost cannabilistic fashion is downright insulting. You underestimate both the resiliency and the character of the American people.

I'm merely stating facts. Greek friends told me the same in the 90s, Spanish as well (admittedly I dislike Spain).

What you may find interesting is I am an American citizen. My wife is American, as is my newly born child.

I've learned many times in my life to not ignore major trends, when most are in convenient denial. It's a great way to recognize opportunities, and protect yourself.

If you don't think Greece's violent protests over austerity and economic depression would have been exceedingly violent if they had the firearm ratio similar to the US you are fooling yourself.

You're missing the point and becoming emotional/flag waving. I likely have far more riding on the economic success of the US than you. Politics in DC are gridlocked at the worst financial moment since the Great Depression.

Yet Americans continue to pile on debt, and will remain largely ignorant of the dire financial straits until austerity measures are enacted, or a Cyprus like initiative is proposed *initially* against the "rich".

It honestly saddens me that when a fellow financially responsible/successful US citizen speaks of fast-approaching dangers, based in fact and historical precedent I receive blind patriotic responses.

Let me put it more simply, learn to be financially responsible for your family and take all precautions necessary to protect those you love. Investing in other currencies and foreign stock markets is a wise move in times of uncertainty.

[hands11]

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/ ... u-thought/

[Zonkerbl]

The recession and financial crisis were the result of systemic financial corruption. IMO it had several layers; 1. easy money policy of the fed 2. govt. forcing banks to make mortgage loans to people that couldn't afford the payments 3. securitization of risky mortgages by large financial institutions and faulty ratings by in-the-pocket rating agencies 4. nationalization of losses that should have been born by private entities.

The response to the recession is a predictable failure and continues to stymie any recovery. The false recovery we are in now is propped up the the fed's gargantuan stimulus of near 0% percent interest and vacuuming up of mortgage securities (again nationalizing what will become future losses covered by the taxpayer instead of private entities).

The next shoe to drop is also easily predictable. Feds eventually back out of easy money policy and stimulus, the markets tank and interest rates on cars and mortgages skyrocket. Economy shrinks again.

The corruption is deep and wide and until it is reversed the economy will either slink along or tank again.

The future could be bright but only if honest and wise leaders are put in charge.

Uh, a lot of what you say is right and accurate but no one was forcing anyone to do anything. The housing crisis was willful blindness on the part of a lot of people. You know how they normally won't make a loan to you unless your debt payments aren't more than a certain percent of your income? Blew right by that. Afterwards I asked a specialist, well, why did they allow that to happen? How come no one raised any alarm bells? The answer? "Everybody thought the market was different." In other words, everybody knew that something was going to go wrong, and no one wanted to be the one to pull the plug.

No one forced anyone to do anything. It was a willful swindle on the part of everyone involved, from the Fed, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Wall St, everybody. Criminal negligence on a scale so massive we couldn't arrest those culpable without putting all of the Fed and half of Wall St. in jail.

[nate33]

Banks could make the loans knowing they'd sell the mortgage to Fannie Mae and eliminate the risk. The real problem was Fannie Mae and it's government sponsored entity status. Everyone knew the Fed would bail them out if anything went wrong. Therefore, there was no risk. As long as Fannie Mae was buying mortgages, banks would make loans.

The day that Greenspan made his "irrational exuberance" speech, he should have also announced that the government would not, under any circumstances whatsoever, bail out the GSE's. That would have reigned things in before they got out of control. But they secretly didn't want to make such an announcement because everybody was making so much money by shifting risk to taxpayers.

[popper]

The recession and financial crisis were the result of systemic financial corruption. IMO it had several layers; 1. easy money policy of the fed 2. govt. forcing banks to make mortgage loans to people that couldn't afford the payments 3. securitization of risky mortgages by large financial institutions and faulty ratings by in-the-pocket rating agencies 4. nationalization of losses that should have been born by private entities.

The response to the recession is a predictable failure and continues to stymie any recovery. The false recovery we are in now is propped up the the fed's gargantuan stimulus of near 0% percent interest and vacuuming up of mortgage securities (again nationalizing what will become future losses covered by the taxpayer instead of private entities).

The next shoe to drop is also easily predictable. Feds eventually back out of easy money policy and stimulus, the markets tank and interest rates on cars and mortgages skyrocket. Economy shrinks again.

The corruption is deep and wide and until it is reversed the economy will either slink along or tank again.

The future could be bright but only if honest and wise leaders are put in charge.

Uh, a lot of what you say is right and accurate but no one was forcing anyone to do anything. The housing crisis was willful blindness on the part of a lot of people. You know how they normally won't make a loan to you unless your debt payments aren't more than a certain percent of your income? Blew right by that. Afterwards I asked a specialist, well, why did they allow that to happen? How come no one raised any alarm bells? The answer? "Everybody thought the market was different." In other words, everybody knew that something was going to go wrong, and no one wanted to be the one to pull the plug.

No one forced anyone to do anything. It was a willful swindle on the part of everyone involved, from the Fed, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Wall St, everybody. Criminal negligence on a scale so massive we couldn't arrest those culpable without putting all of the Fed and half of Wall St. in jail.

You're right - I should have said the govt. "provided irresistible financial incentives" to make risky loans instead of "forced"