[hazov]

Reading too much from Mises Institute I presume.

I am really amazed anyone can take anything published there seriously, these guys always talk how mainstream economists always try to simplify human action in their models, such as when discussing the nature of money and how it came to exist, anthropologists are making the same points all the time.

But they certainly do love to forget this exact argument when they write their diatribes against ideas from people they disagree with them. Like you assuming what people in the past thought about an event without searching from some data to support your assertions.

Mind you I do not like the tone of the link and I thoroughly disagree with the premise of class struggle that those fond of Marx almost always take for granted.

[MordinSolus]

I don't read Mises, but thanks for the assumption. The causes of the housing crisis are and were, for lack of a better word, obvious. You don't need to read this or that, or even subscribe to a certain form of political thought to see why things happened as they did.

> Like you assuming what people in the past thought about an event without searching from some data to support your assertions.

They elected Roosevelt how many times in a row?

[hazov]

If it was obvious I would not see people discussing about causes of the crisis, right? Besides the fact that debt and the inability to pay for it was the main cause I do not saw something close to agreement in this area.

About Roosevelt, ok you're probably right about that, I am not American to say too much about that, but changes in office were not exclusive to the US, in some places some fringe parties got control of the government such as the Nazis.

For me this thread is over here but I would love if you can elucidate some points about your first paragraph.