Harper's right... everything catered to and revolved around giving U.S. consumers what they wanted, and U.S. consumers took full advantage of it by spending more money they didn't have than ever before. Blaming banks for subprime is like blaming McDonalds for making people fat. And just because anyone else in the world would have done it doesn't mean that U.S. consumers didn't do it.
Where the Hell have you been? The whole world participated in the "borrow and spend out-of-your-farkin'-mind" phenomenon.. Central Banks around the world were pumping money supply 15-20% per year for the last 5 years, or more. And the fact that American consumers were "consuming over their heads".. also lead to Asian companies "producing over their heads" to sell to American consumers. America's blame here is only proportionate.
Re-read what I wrote and engage your brain this time. Your second paragraph supports my point so you're arguing against yourself.
I see where you're going, and I sort of agree. But the McD's argument doesn't hold well - here's why: Banks had something to lose when they loaned out to everyone and anyone. They weren't selling something only. It's not like people eat fast food and then get fat, and then McD's has a liability going further (exclude stupid law suits). The banks lent out and then got caught with their pants down. Do consumers share part of the blame? Absolutely, but it's not an American fault. It's a human fault. Stupid people exist in all parts of the world. You could argue that the US system is one of enabling this type of behavior, and I would be inclined to agree. But so did the UK, Spain, Ireland...etc. I can even tell you from experience that Russians - when given open credit - do the exact same thing that anyone else does. They spend it, regardless of whether they can pay it back or not. I would make the dangerous assumption that every nation's people - if given the opportunity to go hog wild with little reprocussion, would do the same.
The reason behind is all about eventual election or promoting the Conservative Party which he is currently the big boss. If you read the document, it mentioned that the unconservative idea had lead to the problem that we are facing right now. In other words, "vote for Conservative is safe because our values sound", while "vote for the Liberal is unsafe" as you can see right now. In brief, the target was not US consumers nor Bush/Obama administration but the real target was the Liberal Party.
Had all banks held their loans I'd agree with you but loan securitization in many cases pushed the net effect toward the "just selling something" end of the spectrum like McDonalds. I agree that in general it's a human fault, not an American fault, but in this specific case American consumers were at the center of the storm.
Ok, then we agree. Americans were certainly at the center of the storm, but any nationality - given the same resources - would have done the same. Of course that doesn't fix anything or make it better.
That would be Dick Cheney: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26402-2004Jun8?language=printer http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml
Americans "alone" were not at the center of the storm... England was equally bad. And with Central Banks around the world "pumping money like they were on crack", it's inaccurate to isolate Americans as any more than a proportionate contributor.