Maybe it's because the conservatives have to clean up the spectacular economic messes left by liberals like Carter

Oh.

Apparently it doesn't account for inflation, but that's not that important if you're only looking at the last 28 years. I don't think it changes the rankings.

I still wonder if an inflation-adjusted list would include any bankruptcies from, say, the great depression. I'm having trouble finding any hard data, but even some states went bankrupt back then. (According to at least one source. Last time I took American History was 10 years ago, so please feel free to correct me if this is incorrect.)

@m4ximusprim3: I agree completely. It's too bad we all have to live through these times before we can really see what's going on.

I was telling my SO about current events (we live in the "internet-free house"--NOT by choice, but by circumstance) so he's out of it. Once I was done with the quick run-down, he stated, "We need to get out of this country."

I suggested stockpiling weapons and ammo, raising our own cattle (we have room for it) and getting a generator, instead. Thankfully we have a well, so our fresh water issues are taken care of.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine!

Politics always intersects with economics to a degree, but let's avoid pot-shots across partisan lines and discuss substantially.

Thanks.

@cmdrsass: I agree that some of the causes of the slump are simply the market cycles. But some of the sources of the current crises are political as well. Meaning, that one poltical party's policies is based on their economic philosophy. Through those policies regulations are created (or eliminated/ignored/not enforced). So, a regulation requiring banks to verify incomes could have fundamentally changed our present circumstances. Likely it would have inhibited some economic growth but mitigated the fallout we're seeing now.

... the next closest bankruptcy was Worldcom, which had $103.9 billion in assets before the filing - 535.1 BILLION DOLLARS less than Lehman Brothers. Damn.

Unless /usr/bin/bc is lying, the total of all the other bankruptcies adds up to $417 billion, which is still less than Lehman (not inflation adjusted).

$103.9 + $63.4 + $61.4 + $35.9 + $33.9 + $33.3 + $30.2 + $29.8 + $25.2 == $417.0

@Ein2015: The interesting book will be written in 10 years, examining the aftereffects of the cratering of the large investment banks and the massive government backing of the financial industry - will it lead to even more risk exposure by the remaining financial giants which the government sees as "too big to fail"?

I'm constantly amazed at the way people still claim that Republicans want to reduce spending when the only president in the last thirty years to actually act like a fiscal conservative was Clinton.

When Republicans talk about reining in spending, they are flat out lying. They talk the talk but don't walk the walk.

@Michael Belisle: Given that it doesn't account for inflation, it probably doesn't matter.

Lehman Brothers collapse cause
Lehman Brothers collapse why

etc.

There's plenty of stuff there. Business publications are having a time of their lives writing about it :)

You guys who think that corporate solvency is related to who sits in the White House are funny. Seriously, you slay me.

What I find interesting is that when Enron filed, there was great wailing and gnashing of teeth about how huge it was, and why didn't anyone step in and do something about it.

(Sorry for doublepost.)

From what I understand they overexposed themselves to a single risk factor and when the house of cards began to fold, they couldn't fund their operations any more. That's the simplified version.

So a book that describes what happened would be kinda boring. A book describing what the hell went on inside the heads of the decision makers who caused the mess could be much more interesting. Somehow I don't think they'll be talking any time soon.

@m4ximusprim3: Someone tell that guy it totally undermines his credibility when he uses the wrong form of "there". Idiot.

@TVarmy: Nailed it. Enron is unique not because if its size, but because of the massive, massive idiocy and moral bankruptcy which led to its failure.

While Lehman Bros definitely did not act intelligently to protect their assets in a changing market, if their was a "top 10 bankruptcies by size, cross referenced by ineptitude", enron would occupy the top 5 spots. at least.

I think blaming it on one party or another is too tenuous. The reality is this: if you think that deregulation is the root cause of much these messes, then Republicans have a larger than half share of blame. If you think these messes were caused by too much government spending, then democrats share a larger than half share of the blame. Of course the last 8 years by definition but more pressure on the Republicans because they didn't reign in spending and they deregulated.

@shadax:
Did you have a chance to see Mitt Romney on CNN (may have been MSNBC) this morning? They were asking him about the collapse of all the different banks and financial institutions and the business backgrounds of the candidates. I was late for work because I was laughing so hard when he said he would happily put either McCain or Palin in as CEO in any finacial institution in which he either had ownership or (large) investments. Seriously?

Maybe Reaganomics doesn't work?

/You're an idiot if you think that one party or person is responsible for this.
//You're also an idiot if you think that every presidential candidate before has been the same-old-same-old, but you believe that one of the two candidates now will break that mold and magically cause "change".

None from 1992-2000 huh...Unfortunately this time, neither candidate can stop what's going to happen in the next few years.

On another note... The aww shucks hero maverick whatever etc. is like nails on a chalkboard. Color me crazy, but I don't think there's any excuse for any future presidents to be anything short of brilliant. That makes me lean towards Obama, even though I don't agree with a lot of his politics (I'm a fiscal conservative, but neither candidate really is). Though I can imagine why Joe 6-pack would like the "everyman" candidate, because they think they're more in tune with their everyman plight. Sorry. Wrong.

I know there's been a number of books written about the failure of Enron. I wonder if anybody will be writing some about the failure of the Lehman Brothers? Keep an eye out for us will ya, Consumerist?

Thanks Meg for the article! :)