2 ms·
There's an awful lot of assumptions to unpack in this comment so I'm not going to address everything. But can we all agree that a country which had GSEs pouring
by jacoblyles 16y ago
There's an awful lot of assumptions to unpack in this comment so I'm not going to address everything. But can we all agree that a country which had GSEs pouring $500 billion into the mortgage market and a decade's worth of government holding short term interest rates at 0% isn't some kind of laissez-fare paradise?
You had "Chicago style" economists yelling at the government to dismantle Fanny and Freddie for years before the collapse, those shining examples of government long-term economic planning. For decades free market economists advocated replacing the Federal Reserves short-term focus on quarterly GDP with a mandate to maintain long-term price stability. Oh, and they have been railing against both parties for racking up such a huge public debt.
Then when the shit hits the fan, all people remember is a caricature of "Chicago-style" economists, not what they actually said and did.
The narrative that the United States lost its way through too much deregulation and free market fundamentalism is cheap rhetoric that doesn't become any more true the more often it is repeated. It is symptomatic of too much education by the way of opinion articles.
- forkandwait 16y agoYou might be right if you said that my argument was too simplistic... but I think there is plenty of "cheap rhetoric" on your side as well, and the ad hominem attack ("too much education by way of reading opinion articles" is pretty slimy, if you ask me. I could easily have said "too much watching of Fox News"....