▪️This meme is an ignorant historical fantasy. It’s sort of funny that they say there was a bank crisis “almost every 10 years” (which could often mean 15+ years) and then use an 8 yr period, 2010-18, as some sort of victory. But this silly narrative ignores the real reason for bank crises.
▪️Ironically, the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980s resulted from bank regulations, many of which dated back to FDR in the 1930s. For example, the govt limited the interest rates S&Ls were allowed to pay, which caused depositors to flee when they could get better returns elsewhere.
https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/SavingsandLoanCrisis.html
▪️They were also limited on the mortgage rates they were allowed to charge, which types of loans they could make, banned from issuing adjustable rate mortgages, and highly localized because they were banned from operating across state lines.
▪️Even worse, the government’s deposit insurance (extended to S&Ls in 1934) charged every institution the same rates regardless of their risk. This set up a highly regulated industry with perverse incentives that was ripe for a crisis.
▪️What precipitated the S&L crisis was the inflation of the 1970s, which caused the Fed to rapidly raise interest rates. This left S&Ls with a bunch of mortgages that were at lower rates, while they had to pay higher interest on deposits. By 1982, the entire S&L industry had a negative net worth!
▪️In attempt to save the already doomed S&Ls, the govt tried a bunch of interventions, mostly dumb, instead of letting the zombie S&Ls fail. Some of these included “deregulating” the industry by letting banks make riskier loans and reducing capital standards.
▪️This exacerbated the crisis as banks gambled on risky strategies to become whole again. It ended up making the problem, and ensuing bailouts, much larger. But the fundamental cause was inflation, which caused rising interest rates in a highly regulated industry, precipitating a banking crisis.
▪️Which is what is happening now. We had a decade of 0% interest rates, where banks acquired lots of low yielding bonds, like US Treasuries, which were considered safe and encouraged by the govt.
▪️Now that rates have risen to fight inflation, these bonds are worth much less, while depositors are demanding higher rates. The fundamental problem was central banks holding rates so low for so on, not by “deregulation.”
▪️Notice, no one can point to a specific repealed regulation that would have prevented these bank failures. In reality, the banking sector is one of the most, if not the most, regulated industries. It’s just a mythical narrative, much like this meme’s supposed history of bank crises.
As with the leftist freak out over “banned books” this is not banning books, it’s still easy to get Harry Potter and bookstores should be able to limit whatever books they want for whatever reason. But not only does it show a double standard, the rationale is far less justifiable than removing certain content from school libraries. At least there the justification was the content of certain books are inappropriate for children, clearly not every book should be available in a school library. Here, there’s no argument about the content they just don’t like the author’s politics!
Because news came out about his letter to the FBI, revealing he was a nutcase. The letter was rambling and incoherent, claiming he was trained by the US military off the books, and that Walz had instructed him to kill Amy Klobuchar so he could run for Senate. None of it made any sense (Walz is not running for Senate) and none of the assassinations made any sense, even in a diabolical way.
Nearly all of his hit list was Democrats (including Walz) and abortion clinics, but he was supposedly working for Walz?! Plus, one of the guys he killed wasn’t even on his list, and others were no longer in office or deceased. None of it makes sense from any coherent angle.
Basically, it appears the guy was mentally ill and neither the left or right can use the incident to push their agendas anymore, so the story was dropped.
This is so dumb. First, this means LA began as Spanish land founded to support Spanish missions (i.e. colonialism). Which contradicts their entire premise. But the reality is that Los Angeles is a quintessential American city.
▪️When the US acquired California in the 1840s, LA was a small town of less than 2,000 people. It was basically nothing. It became large only after the gold rush and the railroads completed in the 1870-80s, which brought thousands of new settlers and a booming commercial center.
▪️But LA had a major issue limiting its growth, no water. It wasn’t until Mulholland found a water source and built an aqueduct down from Northern California that LA had the infrastructure to grow into a major city.
▪️Then, a combination of oil, real estate and the film industry caused it to boom in the early 1900s. Post WWII, industries like aerospace continued its spectacular growth. Calling this “Mexican land” is a brain dead take. Neither the Mexicans, Spanish nor ...
