Read the rest of the post beyond the part you quoted for the short answer. As fun as it is to point at one guy or one term, simplistic explanations are seldom realistic in an economic context. Might also recall where the impassioned pleas for that $750B came from (am I the only one that recalls Pelosi screaming at GOP legislators in the house for trying to obstruct that bailout?) , and to whom the money went as well as which legislators they had long been in bed with. The crash was largely due to speculative trading of a highly leverages nature based on poorly collateralized real estate loans that should never have been made. It was the failure of the real estate loans that triggered the fall. The entire mess was set in motion with programs that preceded Bush... and all it took was a hiccup for the whole thing to come down. Basically it was like the worlds largest Ponzi scheme combined with the worlds wealthiest (and stupidest) gambling ring. Bush was the one there when the hiccup that stopped the inflow occurred, but he wasnt there when the game was set up. I didnt suggest Bush be absolved entirely, I pointed out that he was just the one left without a chair when the music stopped... and the music began long before he hit Washington. Gotta look at the cozy relationship Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had with Countrywide and their ilk, who all those people were funding in Congress, who was proposing and protecting that mess in DC... and when the brilliant programs like the sub=prime loans originated. Again, it's no doubt fun to point to the guy you dont like and say it happened on his watch... it just isnt accurate portrayal of the reality. A huge corps of assholes in DC from both parties was getting their campaign chests filled and getting sweetheart real estate loans to protect the programs that brought the economy to the precipice of destruction... most had been doing it before Bush left Texas, and few will ever be held accountable. People prefer simple explanations, so they Blame Bush. It's easier.
The amazing thing is, the financial reform bill being pushed through congress right now does nothing to solve this issue which is very much at the core of the collapse. Our Washington leadership just politicized the issue and used it as a weapon against their political enemies, along with the formation of two brand new government agencies. You can still get a $750k Fannie/Freddie home mortgage as a first time buyer in California with 3.5% down and a 620 credit score. While I agree we can't blame this whole mess on any one person, things are not truly going to change until we at least get rid of the major players who knowingly helped get us unto this mess and block all efforts at reform. Dodd and Frank need to go at any cost.
Frank should be jailed for graft if not treason IMO. If I had to pick out the biggest enablers of the mortgage end of this thing, his name would top the list. Congress had a much larger hand than anyone in the White house regardless of which occupant was in it. The 2008 bust was largely based on bad real estate loans... whether created by outright fraud (which happened a lot) or whether created by programs that should never have been allowed. There was a government program created that actually recreated the old "up-for-down" scenario that once got you thrown in jail. As far as having a hand in the bad loans... "the guilty" include anyone in America played along, not just the idiots in Washington that got paid off to set the wheels in motion or the people that paid them off. The guilty includes buyers that got what they wanted but couldnt afford, plus lenders, appraisers, underwriters, and realtors that became enriched only if they played ball. My wife was an underwriter who was threatened with removal if she actually tried to do her job... because pointing out little things like mortgage fraud wasn't "business friendly". [Yes, The term was actually used.] Appraisers that raised flags when contract prices were over-inflated were weeded out Darwin style... if they didnt "cover value", they were removed form the mortgage company's "approved" list. Failing to "cover value" was effectively a letter of resignation from their job. The reason the 2008 bust went so disproportionately ballistic was the fact that those loans were used to collateralize securities which were then traded in a speculative leveraged fashion that'd scare the hell outta the wildest gambler in Vegas. The leveraged securities performed the same role as the parts of an atomic bomb that take a relatively small primer charge and multiply it to form a nuclear chain reaction. In the end, the lenders and the securities dealers that played the largest role in the 2008 bust were enriched by causing it and then their eventual losses were covered by the government. If you dont recall Nancy Pelosi standing on the floor of the house literally screaming at GOP congressmen for trying to stop that bailout, try Google. The biggest players in the institutional side of this thing were in the House and the Senate... not the White House. They were well paid by the lenders and the security industry, and they were on both sides of the aisle. The guys with their fingerprints on the neck of anyone that tried to put on the brakes to this scam were largely DNC, but there were Republicans too. Barney Franks was the leader of the pack.
The man is protected by gerrymandering. Nearly impossible to remove in the current situation, even though his roommate was busted for growing marijuana. The only way to get some of these people out is going to be term limits. The problem is, none of the less sleazy congressmen really want to push that issue forward either.
The real estate debacle was just the Cherie on the shake - $750 billion bailout is nothing a prepared Administration could not have handled with its actual value now around $90 billion in real terms. That episode really began in the 80s when Merrill Lynch was allowed to function as a bank....to the ponzie. Off-budgeting an unnecessary war in Iraq while reducing revenue, shifting the burden to the middle class for the Republican drunkenness for earmarks and a philosophy of non regulatory oversight are indeed simple explanations for some of the more onerous defects leading to the Great Recession of the Bush Administration but non the less the reasons for it and the latent inability to recover from it. The Bush Administrations responsibility for the Great Recession is the simple truth and the underling reason for the Scholars assessment that time will only reinforce.
If you don't see a "drunkenness for earmarks" on both sides of the aisle, you're missing half of a great story. The real estate debacle wasnt a cherry on the cake... it was the primer that made the bomb go boom. The uber-leveraged real estate backed securities was what made it turn into a global financial mushroom cloud. Might want to check and see who was getting money from both of those industries, cause they weren't all wearing the GOP uniform by a longshot.
It is funny that the same guys who were singing Bush praises and considered him a hero, now consider the best defense of Bush presidency is to declare that he was totally useless and had no effect or influence on anything that happened during his "presidency".
Having made no such declaration I won't spend effort providing rebuttal to the forums resident troll.
Let me get this straight: We were attacked by Al Queda in 2001 during Bush's term, killing 3,000 people, destroying the world trade center and the pentagon; We went after the perpetrator as any nation would, had him surrounded, let him go; can't find him; basically ignored that situation for 8 years essentially snatching virtual defeat from the jaws of victory; After all those accomplishments its a wonder the historians didn't give Obama a few points for having the perseverance to try and clean up the many messes Bush left. we have had the most devastating recession in the last 70 years during Bush's term and during this decade the entire center of Africa basically south of the Sahara and North of South Africa is an entire 1/2 a continent of war, upheavals, tribal killings....and somehow O_Nation thinks Bush putting money into Aids assistance into Africa is a great accomplishment Democratization was a reason why Hamas got to partake in an election in Gaza...then killed murdered and slaughtered Fatah to take over Gaza and become this horrendous destructive dangerous terrorist organization....all because of the urgings of democratization; during the decade much of the democratization that occurred during the collapse of the Soviet Union collapsed into dictatorships (so much for Bush spreading democracy) Its no wonder that the historians used common sense to identify Bush as the worst modern president.
For the record, can you please state clearly for all of us that 1.1 million lives saved is not a great accomplishment? Just want to get you on the record with that one. So true. And a nobel prize as well. /Yawn. Thanks for expanding on my point. Democratization has been attempted by many a US president, and has consistently failed. If Iraq succeeds, Bush will be the first president to have successfully implemented it. Historians will study the model for decades in an effort to not only duplicate the process, but improve on it. I can only imagine how much that must urk the Bush detractors.