Reply #162: Wrong, wrong and uh, wrong

[HamdenRice]

As for 1929, there are hundreds of peer reviewed articles, and historical books, about how the 1929 crash happened. None of them, I assure you, say that it was intentional. I could cite a loony article that says the earth is flat or the moon is made of green cheese, but that wouldn't make it true. Consensus reality is that 1929 was a stock bubble, exacerbated by easy credit, excessive leverage and the structure of investment companies, that wiped out most of the "fat cats" who, under paranoid theory, one would expect to be "intentionally" orchestrating it. One of the earliest and best summaries is John K. Galbraith's "The Great Crash."

In what way is Wall Street "controlled"? Do you even know what "Wall Street" actually is? Who do you think controls it? Goldman Sachs? All the investment banks? The Bildenbergers?

You still haven't explained how $350 billion in bailout funds can fund a deficit of $1.7 trillion. That's kind of like loaves and fishes, isn't it? Moreover, how can the banks be hoarding the bailout money while also lending it? And if the bailout funds are being lent to the government, why is almost all the fear in the news about funding the deficit about the concern that Asian lenders (the Chinese central bank and currency authority and Japanese central bank) continue funding the deficit? Are those reports all wrong?

Lastly, you make a common mistake on these boards. You think that because you don't know the terms of the bailout, they are secret. They aren't secret. They're online for anyone to read, and I've read them -- the 100 pages of the TARP bill, and the terms of the preferred stock that the Treasury sold to the banks. It's all there. Don't confuse your lack of knowledge or laziness in finding out with "gubment secrecy."