Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, etc., would weather an economic downturn, or likely any other catastrophic event, better than Sanders or Warren.

Biden and Buttigieg would let criminals off the hook. Klobuchar, which her background in prosecution may do better. As for Warren, her Ending Too Big to Jail Act, is before the Senate. Bush II put principals of Enron and Worldcom behind bars. The record of the Obama administration, in this respect, is shameful.

WorldCom's Bernard Ebbers, for example, was convicted of fraud because of his false financial reporting.

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Ebbers

Former Enron CEO Jeff Skilling, for example, was convicted A Houston-based jury in May 2006 convicted Skilling of 19 counts of conspiracy, securities fraud, insider trading and lying to auditors. and was originally sentenced to 24 years.

Link: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-skilling/former-enron-ceo-jeffrey-skilling-released-from-federal-custody-idUSKCN1QA2ZK

In each of those cases, there were things like paper trails to show that these people had broken the law. When Barack Obama was inaugurated, he first needed to fix the economy, and then he needed to get healthcare in place. He only had two years to it, due to Democrats getting killed in 2010. After 2010, all kinds of things that Obama wanted to do were put on hold, especially things like going after finance crooks. There is no way the Republicans would pass legislation to clean up U.S. finance after 2010.

The problem with the scumbags who helped to cause the meltdown in 2007 and 2008 is that a lot of what they did was not illegal. Due to 3 Republicans putting forth a bill in 1999 that some Democrats voted for, a lot more Republicans voted for, and Bill Clinton signed basically repealing Glass Steagal, lots of banks could once again issue IPOs and do all kinds of investment stuff.
( link: https://www.thebalance.com/glass-steagall-act-definition-purpose-and-repeal-3305850 )

This was now legal, and it made things much tougher on consumers. Why did this mess things up? Well, before, when banks were separate from financial companies, the banks would do due diligence on things like stock offerings to make sure that the stocks were decent before recommending to consumers whether or not they should buy various stocks. Once banks started getting into all kinds of financial markets, they soon stopped doing the research on the investments. Why? Well, what if as part of their research, they found out that one of the investments that they were offering was not a good deal? That might cut into their own profits. They didn't want that to happen, right? So, slowly, big banks that offered all kinds of investments just started taking the words of people outside of the banks on what investments were worth--or they would have some in house guy do the research..but found all kinds of ways of motivating them to make sure that the report turned out good. Everyone was making a lot of money as long as everyone said that every stock was worth something, so no one was motivated to actually figure out what things were really worth.

This is why Glass Steagall was put in place in the first place, to stop this mutual back-scratching and "let's not bother to do investment research" attitude to go away. It was as if cops had decided that they would not arrest shoplifters anymore. Not much would change at first, but eventually, the problems would become rampant. Soon everyone would be shoplifting. So you see, there was a big problem with the idea of holding some of the greedy investment scum accountable. A lot of what they did was not strictly illegal, and by the time Obama got the economy back on track and got Healthcare in place, he no longer had the votes to do a serious fix on the financial industry. Which meant he no longer had the votes to make some of the scummy things that they did illegal again. Thus, Obama was not able to either create a really huge change in the financial industry nor hold a lot of these scum accountable.

Obama did get some legislation through before the Republicans took the house in January 2011 that tightened up some things in the financial industry. Unfortunately, when the Republicans took control of the Presidency, the House, and the Senate in 2017, they made sure that a lot that was defanged.

Holder said Citigroup learned of serious and widespread defects among the increasingly risky loans its employees were using as the basis to create securities but, nonetheless, “concealed these defects” from investors.

The settlement “does not in any way absolve Citigroup or its individual employees from facing any possible criminal charges in the future,” Holder said.

“The bank’s activities shattered lives and livelihoods throughout the country and also around the world,” he said. “They contributed mightily to the financial crisis that devastated our economy in 2008.”

https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-citigroup-subprime-mortgage-settlement-20140714-story.html

No criminal charges were brought. The managing director and vice chairman of Citigroup Corporate and Investment Banking, Louis Susman was appointed UK ambassador in October 2009. He bundled $500,000 for the Obama Campaign.

Kenneth "Kenny Boy" Lay, of Enron was one of W's biggest donors. He was charged by the DOJ, and completed suicide.

EDIT: Louis Susman is now bundling for Biden. Perhaps his wife could accept the ambassadorship this time around.

for crash, whether true or not.

Try passing healthcare, childcare, college debt reduction, etc., during a crash.

Such certainty about a hypothetical situation. The Banks and Millionaire's hated FDR with a ferocity far exceeding their distaste of Elizabeth Warren, yet he stabilized a free fall.

completely at odds with the published data. I now feel at lot better about your criticism of Warren's stand on the TPP. Thank you.

was still 15% in 1940.

Hope the explanation is less populist than most of Warren’s campaign rhetoric.

When FDR took over the economy was in free fall: a further 13% contraction year on year, unemployment was at 25%, the banking system in the midst of a new panic. FDR - who Wall Street and the rich hated more than anyone in history stabilized the economy, ushering in four years of strong, sometimes spectacular economic growth. Did the GOP backed 1937 austerity budget bring on a recession, driving unemployment back to 20% - yes but that's another story.

Warren "couldn't" calm the markets? Neither "could" FDR - but he did.

https://www.thebalance.com/unemployment-rate-by-year-3305506

What is a recession?

A recession is a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales. A recession begins just after the economy reaches a peak of activity and ends as the economy reaches its trough. Between trough and peak, the economy is in an expansion. Expansion is the normal state of the economy; most recessions are brief and they have been rare in recent decades.
https://www.nber.org/cycles/jan08bcdc_memo.html


What is a depression?

(informally) A particularly severe recession - steep contractions lasting years.

You can define 'The Great Depression' as high unemployment in the 1930s if you want to, but I would have though that is the kind of sloppy popularism you associate with Warren's advocates.

A depression is a severe sustained economic contraction, not high unemployment - Economics 101.

Edit: The Great Recession.

The Great Recession began in December 2007 and ended in June 2009, which makes it the longest recession since World War II. Beyond its duration, the Great Recession was notably severe in several respects. Real gross domestic product (GDP) fell 4.3 percent from its peak in 2007Q4 to its trough in 2009Q2, the largest decline in the postwar era (based on data as of October 2013). The unemployment rate, which was 5 percent in December 2007, rose to 9.5 percent in June 2009, and peaked at 10 percent in October 2009.

https://www.federalreservehistory.org/essays/great_recession_of_200709

Unemployment was 9.5% in June 2010. The recovery was slow.

You can define a recession or depression as meaning high unemployment if you want to, and throw economics out the window. It's exactly the sort of lazy, sloppy thinking that you ascribe to populists.

Will usher in a bloodbath on the republican side.

Watch the FOX turn and begin to tear flesh off the rotting bones, as every republican runs to try and avoid blame or sweep up the left overs.

Because it will all come out. From HUD to USDA, from the White House to the Republican Caucus room the piles of shit that has been covered up will begin to stink as the fog recedes.


To be honest that is exactly why I settled on Klobuchar. Harris was to hard and would have mixed it up and gotten in the way of the Republican fight too much. Warren would push to hard at the beginning so that the Republicans could unite in defense. Booker could do it I felt but his message of love and respect would make him go to soft. I think Buttigieg could learn to do it, but he doesn't know the players well enough to know where the leverage points are and that has to be understood at the top

But Klobuchar is just practical enough to use it and nasty enough to use it to increase the disunity.

which curtails the influence of lobbyists. She has said if this is blocked, she will take the campaign out again, up and down the country. This might unite the Republicans, but ....