A Bankster Calls For Glass-Steagall

Discussion in 'Economy' started by B. Kidd, Jul 27, 2012.

  1. B. Kidd
    Offline

    B. Kidd Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    12,096
    Thanks Received:
    1,883
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Western Lands
    Ratings:
    +6,728
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Billo_Really
    Offline

    Billo_Really Litre of the Band

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2005
    Messages:
    21,907
    Thanks Received:
    1,786
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Long Beach, Ca
    Ratings:
    +3,261
  3. B. Kidd
    Offline

    B. Kidd Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    12,096
    Thanks Received:
    1,883
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Western Lands
    Ratings:
    +6,728
    Wouldn't be a cure-all, but at least it would get us moving in the right direction.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Widdekind
    Offline

    Widdekind Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2012
    Messages:
    813
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +35
    "Bust the banks" smacks of anti-monopoly legislation in the early 1900s. Invoking government, into markets, is dangerous. Private market forces already, and alone, may "restructure" big banks. Invoking government, to "attack" big, successful, (bank) businesses, is not Libertarian. Inexpertly, the Public could FDIC insure personal deposits, only; and, so, perhaps require that "safe" personal deposits be backed by "safe" collateral (vault cash, reserves, safe loans). Meanwhile, what does government know, that "activist investors", with their own money involved, do not? Investors themselves may restructure banks, without need of Public action.
     
  5. B. Kidd
    Offline

    B. Kidd Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    12,096
    Thanks Received:
    1,883
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Western Lands
    Ratings:
    +6,728
    Hell, even casinos have 'house rules'. Why? To protect 'the house'! Banks aren't protecting their own 'houses'.
    Just ask Jeff Dimon.............:smoke:
    (At least casinos know what the left hand is doin' as the right hand deals da' cards.......)
    Also, tell me wunderkind, when was the last time taxpayers' had to bail out a casinos' zombie books?
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2012
  6. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    Sandy Weill joins Alan Greenspan under the Wheels of the Crowded Conservative Bus

    and as the right wing throws this piece-o-shit under the proverbial bus (must be clogged under there?): Who is Sandy Weill

    reason #1 to break the banks up: "Bankers say being big has many benefits" - yeah, these people led us over the cliff a few years ago. :eusa_hand:

    The former Citigroup Inc CEO, who was in many ways the architect of the "too big to fail" giant bank system, dropped a bombshell on Wall Street on Wednesday by proposing that universal banks should be broken up because they are too big and complex to manage. [ID: nL2E8IP6F1]

    The Citigroup CEO Who Broke Glass-Steagall Wants It Back | Crooks and Liars

    as with Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, the right wing will dispose of Weill as a traitor to ideology. It's more Conservative claptrap of Ideology over National good.
    ---

    [youtube]bAH-o7oEiyY[/youtube]
     
  7. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    Libertarians today value ideological purity over national unity, and what is good for the people, versus what is good for the so-called free market
     
  8. EdwardBaiamonte
    Online

    EdwardBaiamonte Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    27,540
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +3,046
    its very simple, you deregulate the banks and let the free market take care of everything. Is anyone buying those MBS's today? Is Jefferson County buying those deriviatives anymore?

    When you have government regulation consumers assume everything is safe because the government regulators have your back. As soon as the regulators are stupid or corrupt the entire nation is doomed. But, when there is no government regulation everyone must be assured individually or there is no business for the banks!!
    Any damage or fraud or corruption is localized and the nation merely moves on.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2012
  9. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    15,460
    Thanks Received:
    1,864
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +4,239
    I would seek the same effect and end by requiring ALL corporations, all institutions registered with the state, to uphold the same Bill of Rights and 14th Amendment (and perhaps the Code of Ethics for Govt Service) required of govt to prevent from oppressing grievances and due process of people affected by collective authority/resources/influence.

    as long as there is adequate check on corporations as with govt, then abuses and conflics of interests can be resolved. currently even our legal and judicial system needs to undergo reform because it has been corrupted by conflicts of interests obstructing due process.
     
  10. B. Kidd
    Offline

    B. Kidd Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    12,096
    Thanks Received:
    1,883
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Western Lands
    Ratings:
    +6,728
    If 'gaming commissions' did not exist, I'm sure less people would be flocking to casinos'.
    There is a balance to be achieved. When THAT balance (gov't regulation vs. private sector) tilts too far in either direction, then the people (taxpayers or players) lose, both ways.
    And if the people/consumers lose too much, they'll just go someplace else or figure something else out.
    Banks currently have little loan business, as most consumers are in the foreclosure department. One must have assets to take out a loan, and 40% of the middle class wealth has been wiped out and they are spent. Why do you think banks are sitting on so much cash, alot of it fiat?
    And you are calling for NO Gov't regulation after all has been spent and done? :cuckoo:
     

Share This Page