Worst Crisis Since '30s, With No End Yet in Sight

Lingering hopes that the damage could be contained to a handful of financial institutions that made bad bets on mortgages have evaporated. New fault lines are emerging beyond the original problem -- troubled subprime mortgages -- in areas like credit-default swaps, the credit insurance contracts sold by American International Group Inc. and others. Full Story »

Posted by Derek Hawkins
Tags Help
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Derek Hawkins - Sep 18, 2008 - 6:37 AM PDT
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Kaizar Campwala - Sep 18, 2008 - 11:49 AM PDT

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Derek Hawkins
4.2
by Derek Hawkins - Oct. 1, 2008

Superb, comprehensive writing on the financial crisis that is now upon us in full. I'm always impressed by how well WSJ explains complex issues to the outsider. Here, the paper has effectively called the current crisis the worst since the Great Depression -- before the end of the article I'm convinced.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Fabrice Florin
3.9
by Fabrice Florin - Oct. 1, 2008

Excellent overview of the U.S. financial crisis, with clear, informative sections on important economic factors such deleveraging and credit-default swaps. This report is well-researched, based on multiple sources, and provides great insights to help us better understand the complex issues behind this crisis. Particularly helpful was the comparison between the U.S. financial system and a patient in intensive care -- a simple metaphor that explains the recent market convulsions and the ever-more invasive treatment by the "doctors in charge," Ben Bernanke and Henry Paulson. Highly recommended.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Jack Dinkmeyer
3.8
by Jack Dinkmeyer - Oct. 1, 2008

The article manages to make financial jargon understandable for us common folk. The information is valuable as far as it goes, but given the conservative proclivity of the WSJ, it’s understandable why they don’t dare step into the quagmire of explanations about neocon’s responsibilities for this mess—which could have been avoided. Let's hope this crisis doesn't become worse than the 30s.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Jim Lang
3.8
by Jim Lang - Oct. 1, 2008

This article provides a simplified technical description of what is going on in the financial markets, giving rise to the current crisis. As such it is informative journalism. However, as analysis, it sidesteps the question of how this could happen -- i.e., what set of actions or inactions allowed, triggered or contributed to the current situation. On that basis, the piece gets lower marks.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Richard Beserra
2.7
by Richard Beserra - Oct. 1, 2008

I think this article lacks real depth. It talks about the problems, provides a thin explanation, but does not point to historical decisions, like de-regulation, lack of oversight by the SEC and other agencies as well as some cases no regulation at all that may have lead to the problems in the first place. More it fails to call a spade a spade....the socialization of Wall Street....only when it is in trouble. Wall Street shares it woes but rarely its rewards with the average taxpayer which is very true with the Bush Tax cuts for the wealthiest. Well written, but more insight to the problem needed.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Patricia Blochowiak
3.1
by Patricia Blochowiak - Oct. 1, 2008

Basically good, but could mention the role of deregulation and lack of appropriate oversight in the creation of this crisis.

See Full Review » (5 answers)
Rudy Oross
2.4
by Rudy Oross - Oct. 1, 2008

I have read the WSJ rarely; The early 90's and lately. A specialty source is a trudge. So also the stiff tracks scripted in the Congressional Record and linked articles about the privatizing and manipulation of our nations wealth and credit. This article is readable and encourages further research.

See Full Review » (6 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.7

Good
from 10 reviews (50% confidence)
Quality
3.7
Facts
4.5
Fairness
3.6
Information
4.3
Sourcing
3.7
Style
3.7
Accuracy
4.0
Balance
3.5
Context
3.3
Popularity
4.0
Recommendation
4.1
Credibility
4.0
# Reviews
5.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!