In the US, we're basically trained to respond viscerally whenever we hear the truth, which explains why you probably hated Rachel. She is a very intelligent, hardworking sort who uses her gifts to help the rest of us see what's going on under our noses - if she'd applied her gifts simply to her own enrichment, she'd have been far better off economically. Needless to say, I admire her greatly.
@qwertypoiu4321 Even if she was one (and she's not) it wouldn't change the fact that she has a lot of wonderful qualities that are worth respecting in a human. If you don't like her then watch something else, don't go to videos just to hate on them, I'm here because I could listen to this woman talk for hours. Have some respect.
Maddow may be accidentally right on some things(idk, afghanistan, iraq, maybe some other issues), but she is an Economic deficient. She promotes economic vandalism and coercion, and upholds those thug views with her ignorant and lazy understanding of history. Period.
@qwertypoiu4321 hate to tell you...actually na i enjoy doing this... how is maddow's sarcasm comparable with Limbaugh's hatefilled rants, or Beck's crocodile tears?
@qwertypoiu4321 um... i dont think Beck is a socialist? and i think ur just flinging that word as an insult, without making sure that you're hitting the right targets
@qwertypoiu4321 thats faulty logic. so when Enron was greedy, and lied to the public, the problem was not greed, but regulation? Really? Man so the real villains are not Enron, are the bankers who tampered with information or did insider trading to hide their company's weaknesses, but the big bad government bullies? Really? You guys are so dogmatic, you can never once admit that regulation may be a good thing de vez en cuando
@dchris1990 Did the small Enron blip cause an economic contraction, Darwin? The allowance of WorldCom and Enron to pretend they were fine--just like Socialist Security--was the coercive federal reserve inflation bubble of the 1990s. Coercion has caused every economic contraction in US history, not a lack of coercion.
@qwertypoiu4321 again, its pretty obvious, that both of us only hear what we want to hear... but i personally blame deregulation of investment banks for the dumb, short sighted, institutional malpractice that led to the housing bubble, not the govt action that was made to keep commercial banks, and GM (which incidentally, is doing better than Toyota right now) from folding.
FYI, European markets are collapsing because American companies started the recession in the first place. We have the largest economy in the world, when we fail, everyone fails.
" Unwarranted risk " isn't that part of capitalism?
And did i hear correctly when she was talking about the 3 republicans that introduced this deregulation bill, but it was Clinton who signed off on it?. I like how she fails to mention that and when he brings it up shes real quite and says " That's right "
Also his metaphor with the street lights and signs is ridiculous.
I take issue when she says AIG is too big to fail, and that the government can't let it fail.
Nothing is too big to fail. The government is really big, and it has been failing for decades. When a business fails, the market is telling that business that it needs to cease to exist. The damage the government is doing to the economy by continuing AIG's existence is much greater than the damage AIG would cause if it was allowed to fail.
You may have a point there. Would you care to see if there are any CPA's willing to get some numbers on what the cost to government would be if they just started paying the pensioners and other hardworking honest people who have been tied to the gambling jerks without any knowledge of the high risk CDSs,
Wouldn't it be nice if the public money would only go to our pensioners instead of going to countries around the world for the gambling away of the principle the CEOs couldn't let grow slow.
Conversation between Bush & Paulson in 6/06, that never happened. Bush: ah, Pat what's this I hear about 20-1? Paulson: Yes sir, we now have 30-1 reserves at banks that are no longer banks since 04. Bush: well, like I said, 30-1. Doesn't that include you guys @Goldman? Paulson: well sir, it's AIG (swallow) & Spitzer Bush: Problem? Paulson: the CEO Joe Cassano is crazy & AIG is broke. Bush: broke? Make it & Spitzer go away. Paulson: but sir... the economy Bush: 2 more yrs, Pat Yes sir
Thank you for mentioning the Joe Cassano guy, I think he may have heritage back to the fall of Rome. Does anyone know if that guy is still in London? Maybe Mr. Obama could ask his a few questions of his intentions to participate in the restructuring.
Actually, Joe Cassano doesn't get enough mention as far as I'm concerned. Cassano is probably in London as we speak & I gave him a much undeserved promotion. He was not CEO he was President of AIG's Financial Products Div. It should also be said that in 2005 then NYS AG Spitzer sued AIG for massive fraud & got it's CEO Hank Greenberg to resign. In 02/08 then NYS Gov Spitzer was, in turn, forced to resign as client #9. IMO, Spitzer knew that AIG was broke... & the rest can almost write itself.
The reason the economy thrived so much under clinton was because he was too busy getting hand jobs from interns to do any actual work.
Additionally, the house and senate were in virtual gridlock from arguing and filibustering for a number of the clinton years so they didn't do much law making either.
It's amazing how well the country can do when the government is out of the way.
Rachel, you %ucking lying COW... HR 5660 was never voted on in House/Senate or signed, yet you are definitely trying to spin it as the action that created deregulation.... you're a sick cow!
In mid 2001 came Senate Bill 3283, also named the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. This time around the sponsor was Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, and now Phil Gramm was listed as one of the bills co-sponsors. Like it had in the House, this bill was destined to go nowhere until, late one night, it was attached as a rider to an 11,000-page appropriations bill which was signed into law by President Clinton.
Yes of course.. and O'Reily, Hannity, Malkin, and Rush are all fair and balanced.
The ecomony THRIVED under Clinton. What the fck did Bush acheive? Over 300,000 deaths in Iraq, 4 million refugees, "You're doing a great job Brownie!" Worst economy since the Depression...And Bin Laden is still on the lose...I'll take a president who likes blow jobs any time
I didn't vote for Bush...and I didn't vote for Obama...
My point, Rachel is an assclown just like OReally, Hannity and Rush.... she is just polarized the opposite direction... dig deeper into the DEM history and you won't find it so appealing..
BTW, Clinton had nothing to do with thriving economy......Oil was cheap as dirt. Wait til Oil Prices explode in the DEMs faces over $200/bbl.... haahahaa, economy is gonna really blow...wink, wink!
It's be nice to back up your statements with facts. I can't think of anything she state above that can be refuted with facts. Until you have the facts on your side, you need to keep your mouth shut.
Oh, so all the trillions Obama flushed down the toilet yesterday is because of some butterfly in central park 10 years ago. Scary. Kind of like 9/11 happened because of some stupid ass butterfly not keeping his eye on the ball 4 years earlier. The buck never seems to make it to the presidents desk. It always gets stuck somewhere in the past.
"Oh, so all the trillions Obama flushed down the toilet yesterday is because of some butterfly in central park 10 years ago. Scary. Kind of like 9/11 happened because of some stupid ass butterfly not keeping his eye on the ball 4 years earlier. The buck never seems to make it to the presidents desk. It always gets stuck somewhere in the past."
Don't bother trying to explain anything to this putz. His blinders are on too tight and his homophobic remarks about Rachel makes it apparent there is no getting through to him with logic.
Don't be to hard on him. He almost got it right. Just replace butterfly with "corporate loving neoconservatives" and he's on the mark.
Why he used butterfly as an example I have no clue.
BTW, Bush never took responsibility for one thing in eight years. Just like you trying to blame 911 on Clinton (not you but the poster your responding to). Simple fact is 911 happened on 9/11/2001 . Nearly 8 months into Bush's first term and you still try and pin it on Clinton. What a joke.
Ok, have it your way. 911 was bush's fault. But when september 09 comes, and the bailouts still haven't worked, I probably won't find you saying : Nearly 8 months into Obama's first term and you still try and pin it on Bush. What a joke.
This depression has been years in the making. When it happened everyone was pretty surprised. 911 and the terrorist threat was also years in the making. Maybe huge problems like terrorism and global recession didn't materialize overnight.
YOU have a point to consider. Yes you do and the detail of these things are the important considerations to bring to the public discussions. Wouldn't it be really great to say to Mr. clinton, " hey did you consider that this thing could get this out of hand?", Wouldn't it be nice to see how much of the money from these failed companies pay to political forces? Now there's a group of numbers that are worth getting, don't you agree?
There is no deregulation. We have been regulated for years. Instead
of letting business have their money so it can trickle down we are actually giving them money and hoping it will trickle down. We need a seperation of business and state. Let business do what they do best because govt. can't know how to run everything in an efficient manner like they did in the USSR. Peace.
Bill Clinton didn't repeal The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act into Law in 1999 repealed the part The Glass-Steagall Act that prohibited Banks from owning other financial companies. BTW in 1999 the House and Senate were Republican controlled
And the bill passed 90-8 in the Senate and 362-57 in the House. That requires a bit of bipartisan support. Seems to me that both parties did it. People should stop blaming one party or the other and just realize everyone screwed up.
I'm not blaming anyone stating facts isn't accusing it's just stating facts. There is plenty of blame to go around from the House the Senate the Presidents the financial industry the Fed you name it they all failed to view the long range consequences of their actions. They all had a hand in what has happened and the sooner we figure out what went wrong correct it without going overboard the sooner we and the rest of the world can get back to trusting the financial system.
There needs to be a list compiled and made easily accessible of all of the top salaried pimps in corporate America. Then, in order to show our support, Americans can do everything in their power to send a love note to these companies by avoiding absolutely everything they touch. Divesting all stock ownership, avoiding purchase of all of their products, refusing to go to any ball park with their name on it and gee, we can think of many more less savory ways to say "Hey fucko, enough is enough"
Are these greedy AIG whoreslutters dumb enough to believe stealing from taxpayers to put whore-bonus cash in their own pockets would go unnoticed? And now they're receiving death threats. Good. Each & every slutter should be forced to give the money back with 100% interest and then live in fear for the rest of their lives. Even now they should be looking over their shoulders afraid to even wear their $2,000 suits or to even step out of their whore-mansions.
And what exactly do you suggest we do with Dodd, Geithner, Obama, etc. in this case? Afterall, did they not designate themselves as the protectors of out tax money?
Comment removed
Seiku 5 months ago
I used to hate Maddow, but now I can see she is telling the truth about wall street.
optionsupdate 1 year ago
@optionsupdate,
In the US, we're basically trained to respond viscerally whenever we hear the truth, which explains why you probably hated Rachel. She is a very intelligent, hardworking sort who uses her gifts to help the rest of us see what's going on under our noses - if she'd applied her gifts simply to her own enrichment, she'd have been far better off economically. Needless to say, I admire her greatly.
chokkan7 4 weeks ago
who did not vote for this gramm leach biley act?
optionsupdate 1 year ago
The US Federal State caused the economic contraction by coercion(violent regulation and inflation).
Fannie/Freddie/The Fed/HUD/CRA/State coercion caused the economic contraction, not Gramm-Leach-Bliley.
qwertypoiu4321 1 year ago
Not to disagree with Rachel but,
I think the idea that the regulation is only necessary because of all the moral hazard created by government entities might have some validity.
tonybonez 1 year ago
Ok, when Rachel purrs at 2:55 I almost lost track of the rest of the video. Rar. Smart is sexy, I love a good political geek!
RaptorClaws24 1 year ago
@RaptorClaws24
Rachel is a fool.
qwertypoiu4321 1 year ago
@qwertypoiu4321 Even if she was one (and she's not) it wouldn't change the fact that she has a lot of wonderful qualities that are worth respecting in a human. If you don't like her then watch something else, don't go to videos just to hate on them, I'm here because I could listen to this woman talk for hours. Have some respect.
RaptorClaws24 1 year ago
@RaptorClaws24
"Even if she was one (and she's not)"
Maddow may be accidentally right on some things(idk, afghanistan, iraq, maybe some other issues), but she is an Economic deficient. She promotes economic vandalism and coercion, and upholds those thug views with her ignorant and lazy understanding of history. Period.
qwertypoiu4321 1 year ago
@qwertypoiu4321 hate to tell you...actually na i enjoy doing this... how is maddow's sarcasm comparable with Limbaugh's hatefilled rants, or Beck's crocodile tears?
dchris1990 1 year ago
@dchris1990 Maddow and Beck are socialists. The economic contraction happened because of coercion, not a lack of coercion.
qwertypoiu4321 1 year ago
@qwertypoiu4321 um... i dont think Beck is a socialist? and i think ur just flinging that word as an insult, without making sure that you're hitting the right targets
dchris1990 10 months ago
@dchris1990 Coercion has caused every single economic contraction in US, not a lack of coercion.
qwertypoiu4321 10 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321 thats faulty logic. so when Enron was greedy, and lied to the public, the problem was not greed, but regulation? Really? Man so the real villains are not Enron, are the bankers who tampered with information or did insider trading to hide their company's weaknesses, but the big bad government bullies? Really? You guys are so dogmatic, you can never once admit that regulation may be a good thing de vez en cuando
dchris1990 8 months ago
@dchris1990 Did the small Enron blip cause an economic contraction, Darwin? The allowance of WorldCom and Enron to pretend they were fine--just like Socialist Security--was the coercive federal reserve inflation bubble of the 1990s. Coercion has caused every economic contraction in US history, not a lack of coercion.
qwertypoiu4321 8 months ago
@qwertypoiu4321 again, its pretty obvious, that both of us only hear what we want to hear... but i personally blame deregulation of investment banks for the dumb, short sighted, institutional malpractice that led to the housing bubble, not the govt action that was made to keep commercial banks, and GM (which incidentally, is doing better than Toyota right now) from folding.
dchris1990 8 months ago
Right regulation is good... lookt at the overregulated Europeans, and they are doing WORSE than America right now Rachel.
Good lookin' out!
Ahhh gotta love dyke intelligence.
qlaw04 2 years ago
Actually Europe in many ways had fewer financial regulations than the US.
ciplexian 2 years ago
FYI, European markets are collapsing because American companies started the recession in the first place. We have the largest economy in the world, when we fail, everyone fails.
simpson9891 2 years ago
" Unwarranted risk " isn't that part of capitalism?
And did i hear correctly when she was talking about the 3 republicans that introduced this deregulation bill, but it was Clinton who signed off on it?. I like how she fails to mention that and when he brings it up shes real quite and says " That's right "
Also his metaphor with the street lights and signs is ridiculous.
Ironlung916 2 years ago
Comment removed
Ironlung916 2 years ago
I take issue when she says AIG is too big to fail, and that the government can't let it fail.
Nothing is too big to fail. The government is really big, and it has been failing for decades. When a business fails, the market is telling that business that it needs to cease to exist. The damage the government is doing to the economy by continuing AIG's existence is much greater than the damage AIG would cause if it was allowed to fail.
gerbinator2009 2 years ago
You may have a point there. Would you care to see if there are any CPA's willing to get some numbers on what the cost to government would be if they just started paying the pensioners and other hardworking honest people who have been tied to the gambling jerks without any knowledge of the high risk CDSs,
Wouldn't it be nice if the public money would only go to our pensioners instead of going to countries around the world for the gambling away of the principle the CEOs couldn't let grow slow.
laurasIs2c 2 years ago
Deregulation was a cause of these problems? GTFO! Even Geithner admitted today that there was too much regulation in place.
beelz3333 2 years ago
danger0usknowledge 2 years ago
Thank you for mentioning the Joe Cassano guy, I think he may have heritage back to the fall of Rome. Does anyone know if that guy is still in London? Maybe Mr. Obama could ask his a few questions of his intentions to participate in the restructuring.
laurasIs2c 2 years ago
danger0usknowledge 2 years ago
The invisible hand of unhindered free market capitalism
is a great concept. The Randites will say the
reason we are in this jam is b/c of, get ready, govn't
interference. Bill Clinton signed off on this turkey
b/c Summers & Citibank wanted it. Unlike the
southern senators on the banking committee
& gut check Bush, Clinton actually knew something
about economics. He would have put country
1st & done something about this mkt besides calling
in Paulson in 6/06 TO WATCH THE COUNTRY IMPLODE.
danger0usknowledge 2 years ago
The reason the economy thrived so much under clinton was because he was too busy getting hand jobs from interns to do any actual work.
Additionally, the house and senate were in virtual gridlock from arguing and filibustering for a number of the clinton years so they didn't do much law making either.
It's amazing how well the country can do when the government is out of the way.
gerbinator2009 2 years ago
s900 was voted in law by 26 Dems and 32 Repubs...... sounds pretty Bipartisan to me.....
How come Rachel-ugly Leftist winger --- and "spin-doctor" (herself) is spinning this!
Well, she appeals to uncertain UNSKEPTICAL class of people (those where one can easily pull wool over eyes).
UnderseaCaveman 2 years ago
Rachel, you %ucking lying COW... HR 5660 was never voted on in House/Senate or signed, yet you are definitely trying to spin it as the action that created deregulation.... you're a sick cow!
UnderseaCaveman 2 years ago
In mid 2001 came Senate Bill 3283, also named the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. This time around the sponsor was Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, and now Phil Gramm was listed as one of the bills co-sponsors. Like it had in the House, this bill was destined to go nowhere until, late one night, it was attached as a rider to an 11,000-page appropriations bill which was signed into law by President Clinton.
feltchallrednecks 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Signed into law by President "who, I am too busy to read, slide it under the door....hehehe... OH yeah, Moniqa....cigars?".......
Oh, and S900 was voted on "Yay" by 26 Dem Senators and 32 REpub Senators.... sounds Bipartisan?
My charges on Rachel stand, she's an assclown spin doctor!!
UnderseaCaveman 2 years ago
Yes of course.. and O'Reily, Hannity, Malkin, and Rush are all fair and balanced.
The ecomony THRIVED under Clinton. What the fck did Bush acheive? Over 300,000 deaths in Iraq, 4 million refugees, "You're doing a great job Brownie!" Worst economy since the Depression...And Bin Laden is still on the lose...I'll take a president who likes blow jobs any time
feltchallrednecks 2 years ago
feltredneck,
I didn't vote for Bush...and I didn't vote for Obama...
My point, Rachel is an assclown just like OReally, Hannity and Rush.... she is just polarized the opposite direction... dig deeper into the DEM history and you won't find it so appealing..
BTW, Clinton had nothing to do with thriving economy......Oil was cheap as dirt. Wait til Oil Prices explode in the DEMs faces over $200/bbl.... haahahaa, economy is gonna really blow...wink, wink!
UnderseaCaveman 2 years ago
It's be nice to back up your statements with facts. I can't think of anything she state above that can be refuted with facts. Until you have the facts on your side, you need to keep your mouth shut.
Corwin00 2 years ago
Oh, so all the trillions Obama flushed down the toilet yesterday is because of some butterfly in central park 10 years ago. Scary. Kind of like 9/11 happened because of some stupid ass butterfly not keeping his eye on the ball 4 years earlier. The buck never seems to make it to the presidents desk. It always gets stuck somewhere in the past.
iron1215 2 years ago
iron1215:
"Oh, so all the trillions Obama flushed down the toilet yesterday is because of some butterfly in central park 10 years ago. Scary. Kind of like 9/11 happened because of some stupid ass butterfly not keeping his eye on the ball 4 years earlier. The buck never seems to make it to the presidents desk. It always gets stuck somewhere in the past."
You don't understand what you're talking about
If you did you wouldn't have posted this comment
Watch the clip again. Pay attention this time
dluviam 2 years ago
Don't bother trying to explain anything to this putz. His blinders are on too tight and his homophobic remarks about Rachel makes it apparent there is no getting through to him with logic.
egrimnes 2 years ago
Don't be to hard on him. He almost got it right. Just replace butterfly with "corporate loving neoconservatives" and he's on the mark.
Why he used butterfly as an example I have no clue.
BTW, Bush never took responsibility for one thing in eight years. Just like you trying to blame 911 on Clinton (not you but the poster your responding to). Simple fact is 911 happened on 9/11/2001 . Nearly 8 months into Bush's first term and you still try and pin it on Clinton. What a joke.
artvandelay3911 2 years ago
Ok, have it your way. 911 was bush's fault. But when september 09 comes, and the bailouts still haven't worked, I probably won't find you saying : Nearly 8 months into Obama's first term and you still try and pin it on Bush. What a joke.
This depression has been years in the making. When it happened everyone was pretty surprised. 911 and the terrorist threat was also years in the making. Maybe huge problems like terrorism and global recession didn't materialize overnight.
gerbinator2009 2 years ago
YOU have a point to consider. Yes you do and the detail of these things are the important considerations to bring to the public discussions. Wouldn't it be really great to say to Mr. clinton, " hey did you consider that this thing could get this out of hand?", Wouldn't it be nice to see how much of the money from these failed companies pay to political forces? Now there's a group of numbers that are worth getting, don't you agree?
laurasIs2c 2 years ago
There is no deregulation. We have been regulated for years. Instead
of letting business have their money so it can trickle down we are actually giving them money and hoping it will trickle down. We need a seperation of business and state. Let business do what they do best because govt. can't know how to run everything in an efficient manner like they did in the USSR. Peace.
lexrex3 2 years ago
I love Rachel ... I could watch her talk alll day
Sinistertino 2 years ago 13
I thought it had something to do with Bill Clinton repealing the Steagal Act... that led to this problem...
gauharjk 2 years ago
Bill Clinton didn't repeal The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act into Law in 1999 repealed the part The Glass-Steagall Act that prohibited Banks from owning other financial companies. BTW in 1999 the House and Senate were Republican controlled
Ender1zero1 2 years ago 13
And the bill passed 90-8 in the Senate and 362-57 in the House. That requires a bit of bipartisan support. Seems to me that both parties did it. People should stop blaming one party or the other and just realize everyone screwed up.
joebeck2000 2 years ago
I'm not blaming anyone stating facts isn't accusing it's just stating facts. There is plenty of blame to go around from the House the Senate the Presidents the financial industry the Fed you name it they all failed to view the long range consequences of their actions. They all had a hand in what has happened and the sooner we figure out what went wrong correct it without going overboard the sooner we and the rest of the world can get back to trusting the financial system.
Ender1zero1 2 years ago 2
How did a Republican named Leach ever get elected?!?
RadarKat73080 2 years ago 5
lol
PoliticalSkeptic 2 years ago
He sucked up to Wall Street. lol
437thx1138 2 years ago 2
There needs to be a list compiled and made easily accessible of all of the top salaried pimps in corporate America. Then, in order to show our support, Americans can do everything in their power to send a love note to these companies by avoiding absolutely everything they touch. Divesting all stock ownership, avoiding purchase of all of their products, refusing to go to any ball park with their name on it and gee, we can think of many more less savory ways to say "Hey fucko, enough is enough"
Plutonwolf 2 years ago 4
Are these greedy AIG whoreslutters dumb enough to believe stealing from taxpayers to put whore-bonus cash in their own pockets would go unnoticed? And now they're receiving death threats. Good. Each & every slutter should be forced to give the money back with 100% interest and then live in fear for the rest of their lives. Even now they should be looking over their shoulders afraid to even wear their $2,000 suits or to even step out of their whore-mansions.
pig5689 2 years ago 2
AIG top management thought that corporate employees contracts were sacred, yet union contracts arent.
Even if the AIG-like top management knows they cant live up to their own contracts anymore then union contracts can be lived up to.
waltermh111 2 years ago 2
And what exactly do you suggest we do with Dodd, Geithner, Obama, etc. in this case? Afterall, did they not designate themselves as the protectors of out tax money?
DrunkenPublicness 2 years ago