your first comment after a long dry spell here
placing it as being rooted in Marxism in any real way is dishonest at best
Nonsense. The movement, begun over 100 years ago, was heavily rooted in a Marxist understanding of the economy and labor. Wilson certainly held those views. Despite your protestations, this continues today. Obama believes -- or claims he does -- in the fundamental conflict between labor and owners, that owners primary gain wealth through exploitation of labor, and that government has all authority and responsibility to regulate owners in any way they see fit, without regard to morality or liberty.
Are you trying to suggest that only reason the republicans left the democratic-republican party was because they were alone and united in their opposition to slavery?
You're a bit confused. First, they didn't leave the Democratic-Republican Party, which had ended 30 years before the Republican Party began. Mostly, they left the Whig Party, but many of them were Democrats or came from other third parties.
But yes, the one unifying position they shared was opposition to slavery.
If so I would like to know where you get that idea from.
The words and deeds of the founders of the party, including their first platform in 1856, which was dominated by anti-slavery language.
[The Fed] was created by the government
Only partially true.
I'm not familiar with this new meaning of "partially" that you are applying here. The Fed was created by an Act of Congress, signed into law by the aforementioned Woodrow Wilson. Period.
it is regulated by the government
Not true at all.
So according to you, there aren't many laws on the books governing the behavior of the Fed. OK. I don't know why you are expressing such an obviously false position, but OK.
it's within the Executive Branch
What does that have to do with anything? They don't bend to the will of the president or anyone else.
Unless the President demands them to. In fact, all executive authority belongs to the President. Therefore, all the power the Fed has, belongs to the President. That's what the Constitution very clearly says.
Being as there is no meaningful case of that happening, your argument holds no water.
Nonsense. The original point was that "un-elected knobs" are granted the power. The criticism of that point was that the Fed is outside government. I pointed out that this is false, and further, that government could step in if it wanted to, because it is under the authority of the President and Congress, regardless of what anyone wants to pretend. All you are saying is that they are not usually overruled by the President, which isn't arguing against any point being made.
Further, no less than JFK himself wrote an executive order asserting control over the Fed, and the assertion isn't controversial: he literally did have power over the Fed. (I do not hold to any Fed involvement in any conspiracies to kill JFK; I agree with those that claim the executive order ultimately enhanced the power over the Fed, but it did so through asserting that the Fed is under the authority of the President.)
What happened, happened because we were so certain that wall street could self police and that we should roll back every regulation we possibly could.
Please stop lying. In fact, the amount of regulation significantly increased during the Bush years, including financial regulation.
The federal government was involved only in so much as to say "we don't know what you want to do, so just go ahead and go for it".
On the contrary, the federal government was explicitly saying what the financial institutions should do, and the increased regulation contributed to moral hazard, which was the real cause of the collapse. There was nothing inherently wrong with what most of these financial institutions did, other than the dishonesty: the problem was that people trusted that the investments were sound because they thought that if government allowed it, it must be sound. Government created the problem.
If the government was deeply involved as you claim, then why didn't the federal government hold anyone responsible for it?
It seems to me that you answered the question.