Gingrich spurs lively dialogue in jam-packed Chapel: Comments

Comment on "Gingrich spurs lively dialogue in jam-packed Chapel"

Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:16:10 -0500

I agree with John that all this moral outrage that Newt Gingrich and his allies are indulging in is just a little too rich. And while Rob is right that there is plenty of blame to go around, I do think that the philosophical commitments of the Republicans to deregulation make this calamity much more their responsibility than the Democrats'. Let us not forget that the Republicans controlled Congress during much of the time that these policy decisions were enacted.

So while the sins of the Democrats were mostly those of omission (not stopping these policies), for the Republicans these were sins of commission, since such deregulation was a goal they embraced, and we now see its fruits.

I do agree with Rob, however, that the attempt to subsidize home ownership through policy initiatives is a goal that needs to be critically evaluated.

And to Clifford: I don't think we need to worry about Colgate students coming out with an unrealistically liberal view of the world. I taught there recently as a visiting scholar--it is still a student body that is pretty middle of the road, perhaps leaning more toward the conservative end of the spectrum politically (but not socially--in that sense they're closer to moderate Republicans, I'd say.)

Marianne Janack '86

- Marianne Janack

Comment on "Gingrich spurs lively dialogue in jam-packed Chapel"

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:22:06 -0500

I don't agree with Gingrich or his party but I am glad that Colgate is getting a diversity of opinions before its studentry. I am concerned that the institution has become unrealistically liberal and PC in preparing young people for the real world.

- F. Clifford Gibbons '83

Comment on "Gingrich spurs lively dialogue in jam-packed Chapel"

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 12:24:57 -0500

John,
While I understand your point, I would ask you: Did ANYONE present a serious and viable method to avoid the economic crisis prior to 2008? I think you'll find the answer is a resounding no.

Mainly, because very few people understand the dual nature of the mortgage crisis. It wasn't just the packaging of high-risk loans into "low-risk" consolidated assets. The bottom fell out because the entire market was grossly overvalued, especially in certain markets.

This had been happening for a long time, as a result of several well-intentioned policies to promote home ownership. The result of which was to create the APPEARANCE that "your home is your best investment." In other words, each time the government added a layer of home-buying incentives (VA loans, mortgage interest exemptions, STAR, on and on . . .) the market for housing (which should logically mark to inflation) would sustain an artificial increase.

And financial planners everywhere told clients,"Buy as much house as you can afford."

Common-sense tells us that buying an immense excess in housing capacity will lead to market correction, when the artificial returns drop back to zero.

This was further complicated by households financing their day-to-day by borrowing against imaginary equity (the "ATM effect").

Blaming the mortgage brokers alone is easy, but insufficient. Congress did not understand the problem, and therefore could not have fixed it.

Maybe we should send them all, Pres. Obama included, back to Econ 101 & 102?

This might be what Gingrich meant by "going back to first principles"?

All the best,
Rob

- R. Lingo

Comment on "Gingrich spurs lively dialogue in jam-packed Chapel"

Sat, 28 Mar 2009 19:25:41 -0500

Can anyone recall one comment from Gingrich the past decade about the dangers of obliterating any pretense of regulating all the new financial instruments, derivatives, credit default swaps, etc., that led us to our present disaster?

Indeed, Gingrich was leading the pack of the deregulators and those who struck down the wall of separation between commercial and investment banking. Is he lining up with Obama in his proposals to reinstitute regulation of these financial instruments and practices? Not on your life.

While at least he has more civility than Rush, Gingrich's principal hope is to see the Obama Administration "fail." Gingrich is a voice from the past that conveniently ignores his past role in bringing the country to its present crisis. Lively and provocative he surely is. Wise and accountable for his past record he surely isn't.

- John G. Stewart '57