Who Is to Blame: Washington Or Wall Street?
Poll: Conservatives Blame Washington, While Liberals Blame Wall Street
A new poll by The Hill shows that voters assign blame for the financial crisis depending on party:
In the minds of likely voters, Washington, not Wall Street, is primarily to blame for the financial crisis and the subsequent recession.
The Hill poll found that only one in three likely voters blames Wall Street for the country s financial troubles, whereas more than half 56 percent blame Washington.
The split on the question of apportioning blame for the nation s economic travails corresponds closely with voters political ideologies: More than 7 in 10 conservatives blamed Washington for the recession, while more than 5 in 10 liberals blamed Wall Street.
But self-identified centrists, importantly, appear to be siding with the right on economic issues, with nearly half blaming Washington for the recession.
The difference also reflected voters views of Obama: Among those who strongly or somewhat approve of the president, most blamed Wall Street, while those who strongly or somewhat disapprove of the president blamed Washington.
Interestingly, those who described themselves as not sure about Obama nonetheless blamed Wall Street over Washington by a more than two-to-one margin, 55 percent to 23 percent.
The poll – conducted for The Hill by Pulse Opinion Research – asked the question of who is “more to blame for America’s recent financial crisis and recession”, Washington or Wall Street? But as shown below, that is the wrong question.
Who Is Really To Blame … Wall Street Or Washington?
So who is really to blame … Wall Street or Washington?
The answer – which can only be seen if we take of our partisan blinders long enough to look around – is both.
As Matt Taibbi pointed out yesterday:
Take, for instance, the matter of the Too-Big-To-Fail banks …. These gigantic institutions have put millions of ordinary people out of their homes thanks to a massive fraud scheme for which they were not punished, owing to their enormous influence with government and their capture of the regulators.
This is an issue for the traditional “left” because it’s a classic instance of overweening corporate power — but it’s an issue for the traditional “right” because these same institutions are also the biggest welfare bums of all time, de facto wards of the state who sucked trillions of dollars of public treasure from the pockets of patriotic taxpayers from coast to coast.
Both traditional constituencies want these companies off the public teat and back swimming on their own in the cruel seas of the free market, where they will inevitably be drowned in their corruption and greed, if they don’t reform immediately. This is a major implicit complaint of the OWS protests and it should absolutely strike a nerve with Tea Partiers, many of whom were talking about some of the same things when they burst onto the scene a few years ago.
The banks know this. They know they have no “natural” constituency among voters, which is why they spend such fantastic amounts of energy courting the mainstream press and such huge sums lobbying politicians on both sides of the aisle.
Indeed, it is really the malignant symbiotic relationship between Big Government and Big Corporations (what Mussolini called “fascism”, numerous economists have called “socialism”, and others have called “crony capitalism”) which is the problem:
Conservatives tend to view big government with suspicion, and think that government should be held accountable and reined in.
Liberals tend to view big corporations with suspicion, and think that they should be held accountable and reined in.
Conservatives hate big unfettered government and liberals hate big unchecked corporations, so both hate legislation which encourages the federal government to reward big corporations at the expense of small businesses.
Most Americans whether they are conservative or liberal are disgusted that virtually all of the politicians are bought and paid for. No wonder people of all stripes have lost all trust in our government.
And everyone hates government-enabled fraud. The big banks, of course, committed massive fraud. But the auditors, rating agencies and regulators also all committed fraud, which helped blow the bubble and sowed the seeds of the inevitable crash.
The Dodd-Frank financial legislation wasn t a compromise where things landed somewhere in the middle between liberal and conservatives ideas. Instead, it enshrines big government propping up the big banks more or less permanently.
Many liberals and conservatives look at the government s approach to the financial crisis as socialism for the rich and free market capitalism for the little guy. No wonder both liberals and conservatives hate it.
And it s not just the big banks. Americans are angry that the federal government under both Bush and Obama have handed giant defense contractors like Blackwater and Halliburton no-bid contracts. [And Solyndra and other solar companies]. They are mad that instead of cracking down on BP the government has acted like BP s p.r. spokesman-in-chief and sugar daddy.
They are peeved that companies like Monsanto are able to sell genetically modified foods without any disclosure, and that small farmers are getting sued when Monsanto crops drift onto their fields.
They are mad that Obama promised change i.e. standing up to Wall Street and the other powers-that-be but is just delivering more of the same.
They are furious that there is no separation between government and a handful of favored giant corporations. [Indeed, Ben Bernanke has handed out more presents than Santa Claus to McDonald's Harley-Davidson, hedge funds and others.] In other words, Americans are angry that we ve gone from capitalism to oligarchy.
As I noted Sunday:
The corrupt, giant banks would never have gotten so big and powerful on their own. In a free market, the leaner banks with sounder business models would be growing, while the giants who made reckless speculative gambles would have gone bust. See this, this and this.
It is the Federal Reserve, Treasury and Congress who have repeatedly bailed out the big banks, ensured they make money at taxpayer expense, exempted them from standard accounting practices and the criminal and fraud laws which govern the little guy, encouraged insane amounts of leverage, and enabled the too big to fail banks through moral hazard to become even more reckless.
Indeed, the government made them big in the first place. As I noted in 2009:
As MIT economics professor and former IMF chief economist Simon Johnson points out today, the official White House position is that:
(1) The government created the mega-giants, and they are not the product of free market competition
(3) Giant banks are good for the economy
And given that the 12 Federal Reserve banks are private see this, this, this and this- the giant banks have a huge amount of influence on what the Fed does. Indeed, the money-center banks in New York control the New York Fed, the most powerful Fed bank. Indeed, Jamie Dimon the head of JP Morgan Chase is a Director of the New York Fed.
Any attempt by the left to say that the free market is all bad and the government is all good is naive and counter-productive.
And any attempt by the right to say that we should leave the giant banks alone because that s the free market are wrong.
The [corrupt, captured government "regulators"] and the giant banks are part of a single malignant, symbiotic relationship.
Indeed, while most Americans are in favor of free market capitalism, we don t have capitalism at the moment. Instead, we have socialism, fascism or crony capitalism, where the government allows a handful of companies to succeed by propping them up, covering up their fraud and handing them guaranteed profits but allows everyone else to struggle.
For these reasons, the proper question is do you know that the unholy alliance between Big Government and Big Government has destroyed the American economy and political system?
View the original article at Washingtons Blog