Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Did President Obama save the world from a Great Depression? Probably not.
Did President Obama save the world from a Great Depression? Probably not.
Dec 18, 2025 11:29 AM

There’s not a lot of agreement when es to the Great Recession and the 2008 financial crisis; either about what caused it or what ended it. In a recent speech, President Barack Obama blamed the “reckless behavior of a lot of financial institutions around the globe” and “the folks on Wall Street” for causing this economic slump. Who or what finally ended this recession? According to President Obama: President Obama. While reflecting on what his presidency will be remembered for, he said, “I don’t think I’ll have a good sense of my legacy until 10 years from now when I can look back with some perspective and get a sense of what worked and what didn’t. There are things I’m proud of … Saving the world economy from a Great Depression, that was pretty good.” Acton’s director of research, Samuel Gregg, was “startled” by the president’s claim.

In a new piece for The Stream, Gregg argues that far from saving the planet, the president and government “probably mucked things up.” While he agrees that banks’ recklessness were partially to blame for the financial crisis, government agencies and their poor policies had a bigger effect:

Back in December 2007, the Nobel economist Vernon Smith warned that the activities of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were buttressed by the assumption that, as government-sponsored enterprises with lower capital-requirements than private institutions, they could always look to the Federal government for assistance if unusually high numbers of their clients defaulted. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Smith underscored, had always been understood as “implicitly taxpayer-backed agencies.” Hence they continued what are now recognized as their politically driven and fiscally irresponsible lending policies until both were consigned to Federal conservatorship in September 2008.

There are many other examples of similar behavior by government officials and organizations. These include those politicians who legislated to cajole banks into making subprime mortgage loans in the first place, central bankers who kept interest-rates too low for too long, and regulators who failed to recognize the growth of dangerously high leverage-levels in the system. I doubt, however, whether President Obama would recognize any of these as major contributing factors to the 2008 financial meltdown.

As for the president’s claim that he “saved the world?” Gregg fears that some of the action the government took in response to the recession may have exacerbated the situation.

[The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act] was one of the most significant changes to America’s financial regulatory framework. It’s surely what President Obama had in mind when he spoke of reforms that would reduce the possibility of 2008-like systematic failures in the future.

After the financial crisis, it was politically inevitable that significant regulatory change would occur. But Dodd-Frank has arguably worsened the “too-big-to-fail” problem. It created, for instance, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) Led by the Treasury Secretary, the FSOC, as stated on its website, “brings together the expertise of the federal financial regulators, an independent insurance expert appointed by the President, and state regulators.”

Among its many powers, the FSOC may “designate financial market utilities that perform payment, clearing, or settlement activities as systemic, requiring them to meet prescribed risk management standards and heightened oversight by the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.” It may do so if the FSOC decides that significant financial problems in such a business may facilitate systemic financial instability.

The insurance giant, AIG, which played a major role in spurring on the 2008 financial crisis, exemplifies such an institution. Indeed, AIG was one of the first such businesses to be identified by the FSOC as falling into this category.

But here’s the problem: by making such a designation, the FSOC effectively identifies particular financial businesses as too-big-to-fail, thereby exacerbating the problem of moral hazard. Ironically, this is directly at odds with one of Dodd-Frank’s stated purposes outlined in the Act’s very first paragraph: “to end ‘too big to fail’.”

President Obama certainly did not cause the Great Recession, but his claim that he ended it and saved us all from even worse economic disaster is a tad absurd. Read Gregg’s analysis in its entirety at the Stream.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Subsidiarity Inverted
Jeff Mirus of CatholicCulture.org flogs an address by Capuchin friar and dean of theology at St. Mary’s Seminary and University in Baltimore, Father David Couturier. I share Mirus’s assessment that “one is at times unsure exactly what Fr. Couturier means,” but some of his points do seem at odds with the vision of charity articulated by, for example, Benedict XVI in Deus Caritas Est, as Mirus points out. Especially perplexing is Couturier’s statement concerning the role of Capuchin Franciscans in...
Ex Ante vs. Ex Post Government Action
I haven’t started Marvin Olasky’s new book yet, but here’s a bit from the abstract of a new NBER paper, “Rules Rather Than Discretion: Lessons from Hurricane Katrina,” by Howard Kunreuther and Mark Pauly. Speaking of property owners who suffer severe damage and don’t have the resources to rebuild: To avoid these large and often uneven ex post expenditures, we consider the option of prehensive private disaster insurance with risk based rates. It may be more efficient to have an...
The Perfect, the Enemy of the Good
Voltaire had a saying: “The perfect is the enemy of the good,” or, “Le mieux est l’ennemi du bien.” It’s often repeated, especially in public policy circles, that the perfect the enemy of the good, implying that you should favor the realistic good that can be done rather than the unattainable perfect ideal. And now you know why. Because “good” beats “perfect” in a Google Fight, and by a rather handy margin. HT: Seth’s Blog, pares “unique”, “best”, and “finest”....
From the ‘Well, Duh!’ Department
“A human brain trapped inside a mouse’s body — not a good idea,” says Anjana Ahuja in the UK Times. Not convinced? Check out this piece of mine over at BreakPoint, “A Monster Created in Man’s Image.” ...
Rendering to Caesar, God, and MasterCard
A press release from the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys, linked over at WorldMagBlog, claims that the bankruptcy reform legislation passed last year is being “reluctantly” interpreted by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York to mean that “those going through bankruptcy may not tithe to their church or make other charitable donations … until after they have paid off credit panies and other creditors. Before the new law went into effect, bankruptcy court...
Abolish the FDA?
An interesting debate is going on over at Mere Comments. The main thread has to do with the morality of the Bush Administration’s approval of over-the-counter sales of the morning-after pill and the implications for Pennsylvania’s U.S. Senate race. Leaving those issues aside, I was struck by ment from “Daniel C.”, claiming that the problem really presents an “excellent case for dismantling the Food & Drug Administration.” It’s a question worth raising. I don’t know enough about the history or...
The Marketer’s Morality
Seth Godin issued a call recently for marketers to take stock of their trade and embrace the moral aspects of their industry: “You’re responsible for what you sell. When you choose to sell it, more of it gets sold.” I particularly like how Godin emphasizes personal responsibility. This is something that is not unique to a particular profession, of course, and is therefore a reality that constantly needs to be reiterated. “As marketers, we have the power to change things,...
How a Missional Perspective Changes Culture
The only way that culture can be truly changed, in terms of the gospel, is by movements of the Spirit that are birthed in congregational life. The Christian Right thinks that it can alter culture by direct partisan political pressure led by media personalities and tried-and-true techniques. They could not be more sadly mistaken. The failure of this approach is self-evident over the course of the past six years. The late missional theologian Lesslie Newbigin understood this well when he...
Evangelicals and the Brave New World: Why Natural Law Can No Longer Be Ignored
In the Introduction to an important new book by J. Budziszewski that engages four distinct traditions of evangelical political thought, Michael Cromartie observes: “While appreciative of the contributions of each of these thinkers [Carl Henry, Abraham Kuyper, Francis Schaeffer, and John Howard Yoder], Budziszewski finds fault with each, to a greater or lesser degree, for failing to develop a systematic political theory pelling as those offered by the secularist establishment. He suggests that evangelical political thought would be improved if...
Francis Collins – A Believer Looks at the Human Genome
Christian geneticist and author (The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Simon & Schuster Trade Sales) Dr. Francis Collins is the Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Human Genome Research Institute and head of the Human Genome Project. Recently he was the keynote speaker at the 61st Annual Meeting of the American Scientific Affiliation, a group of Christian geneticists, chemists and other scientists. Over the past week I transcribed his lecture from the audio...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved