Bernanke & Paulson Broke The Law

[sealybobo]

NPR: BOA Pressured By Feds?

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo says former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke pressured Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis to complete the bank's purchase of Merill Lynch. In a letter sent to members of Congress and federal regulators today, Cuomo says the government officials threated to get rid of the bank's management, including Lewis, if the deal did not go through. The Wall Street Journal reports:

They also asked Lewis to mislead his stockholders, which is against SEC regulations. That could land these men in jail.

 

[Yurt]

so the threat to remove is against the law?

 

[sealybobo]

so the threat to remove is against the law?

None of the details revealed by Lewis' testimony to Cuomo's office--all substantive matters that would have been of keen importance to shareholders of Merrill Lynch and Bank of America--were ever made public before the deal went through on Dec. 31. That is a shocking violation of the requirement to inform shareholders of any material matters that could impact their vote or holding of shares in either company. This nondisclosure of market sensitive information means all the trading between Dec. 15 and April 22--tens of millions of shares of the largest U.S. bank--was executed on the basis of withheld information. This is a shocking violation of 75 years of securities regulation.

Incredibly, the SEC was never informed of any of this: that Merrill was about to report a huge $15 billion loss, that Lewis wanted to kill the deal, that Paulson told Lewis that Bernanke had instructed him to fire Lewis and dismantle his entire board if he refused to go through with the merger. It's not exactly clear what authority Paulson and Bernanke were going to use to replace Lewis and his board--powers they might assume in a pending systemic breakdown?

"Notably, during Bank of America's important communications with federal banking officials in late December 2008, the lone federal agency charged with protecting investor interests, the Securities and Exchange Commission, appears to have been kept in the dark," states Cuomo's letter to congressional leaders. "Indeed, Secretary Paulson informed this office that he did not keep the SEC chairman in the loop during the discussions and negotiations with Bank of America in December 2008." In other words, Paulson's disdain for SEC Chairman Christopher Cox meant that the Treasury was operating in an autonomous, somewhat high-handed fashion.

BUSTED!!!!!

Lies, Threats, Deal: Paulson, Bernanke, Lewis - Forbes.com

Yes, highly illegal and charges can be brough.

 

[Indiana Oracle]

Do not doubt some version of this is true. Why he would recommend buying a company in such financial trouble would be a mystery otherwise.

 

[DamnYankee]

so the threat to remove is against the law?

None of the details revealed by Lewis' testimony to Cuomo's office--all substantive matters that would have been of keen importance to shareholders of Merrill Lynch and Bank of America--were ever made public before the deal went through on Dec. 31. That is a shocking violation of the requirement to inform shareholders of any material matters that could impact their vote or holding of shares in either company. This nondisclosure of market sensitive information means all the trading between Dec. 15 and April 22--tens of millions of shares of the largest U.S. bank--was executed on the basis of withheld information. This is a shocking violation of 75 years of securities regulation.

Incredibly, the SEC was never informed of any of this: that Merrill was about to report a huge $15 billion loss, that Lewis wanted to kill the deal, that Paulson told Lewis that Bernanke had instructed him to fire Lewis and dismantle his entire board if he refused to go through with the merger. It's not exactly clear what authority Paulson and Bernanke were going to use to replace Lewis and his board--powers they might assume in a pending systemic breakdown?

"Notably, during Bank of America's important communications with federal banking officials in late December 2008, the lone federal agency charged with protecting investor interests, the Securities and Exchange Commission, appears to have been kept in the dark," states Cuomo's letter to congressional leaders. "Indeed, Secretary Paulson informed this office that he did not keep the SEC chairman in the loop during the discussions and negotiations with Bank of America in December 2008." In other words, Paulson's disdain for SEC Chairman Christopher Cox meant that the Treasury was operating in an autonomous, somewhat high-handed fashion.

BUSTED!!!!!

Lies, Threats, Deal: Paulson, Bernanke, Lewis - Forbes.com

Yes, highly illegal and charges can be brough.

Not to mention, coercion is illegal.

Coercion in law, the unlawful act of compelling a person to do, or to abstain from doing, something by depriving him of the exercise of his free will, particularly by use or threat of physical or moral force. In many states of the United States, statutes declare a person guilty of a misdemeanor if he, by violence or injury to another's person, family, or property, or by depriving him of his clothing or any tool or implement, or by intimidating him with threat of force, compels that other to perform some act that the other is not legally bound to perform. Coercion may involve other crimes, such as assault . In the law of contracts, the use of unfair persuasion to procure an agreement is known as duress ; such a contract is void unless later ratified. At common law, one who commits...

http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/coercion.aspx

 

[Yurt]

so the threat to remove is against the law?

None of the details revealed by Lewis' testimony to Cuomo's office--all substantive matters that would have been of keen importance to shareholders of Merrill Lynch and Bank of America--were ever made public before the deal went through on Dec. 31. That is a shocking violation of the requirement to inform shareholders of any material matters that could impact their vote or holding of shares in either company. This nondisclosure of market sensitive information means all the trading between Dec. 15 and April 22--tens of millions of shares of the largest U.S. bank--was executed on the basis of withheld information. This is a shocking violation of 75 years of securities regulation.

Incredibly, the SEC was never informed of any of this: that Merrill was about to report a huge $15 billion loss, that Lewis wanted to kill the deal, that Paulson told Lewis that Bernanke had instructed him to fire Lewis and dismantle his entire board if he refused to go through with the merger. It's not exactly clear what authority Paulson and Bernanke were going to use to replace Lewis and his board--powers they might assume in a pending systemic breakdown?

"Notably, during Bank of America's important communications with federal banking officials in late December 2008, the lone federal agency charged with protecting investor interests, the Securities and Exchange Commission, appears to have been kept in the dark," states Cuomo's letter to congressional leaders. "Indeed, Secretary Paulson informed this office that he did not keep the SEC chairman in the loop during the discussions and negotiations with Bank of America in December 2008." In other words, Paulson's disdain for SEC Chairman Christopher Cox meant that the Treasury was operating in an autonomous, somewhat high-handed fashion.

BUSTED!!!!!

Lies, Threats, Deal: Paulson, Bernanke, Lewis - Forbes.com

Yes, highly illegal and charges can be brough.

oh.....then you fully support obama being charged with removing the CEO of GM....

 

[DamnYankee]

so the threat to remove is against the law?

None of the details revealed by Lewis' testimony to Cuomo's office--all substantive matters that would have been of keen importance to shareholders of Merrill Lynch and Bank of America--were ever made public before the deal went through on Dec. 31. That is a shocking violation of the requirement to inform shareholders of any material matters that could impact their vote or holding of shares in either company. This nondisclosure of market sensitive information means all the trading between Dec. 15 and April 22--tens of millions of shares of the largest U.S. bank--was executed on the basis of withheld information. This is a shocking violation of 75 years of securities regulation.

Incredibly, the SEC was never informed of any of this: that Merrill was about to report a huge $15 billion loss, that Lewis wanted to kill the deal, that Paulson told Lewis that Bernanke had instructed him to fire Lewis and dismantle his entire board if he refused to go through with the merger. It's not exactly clear what authority Paulson and Bernanke were going to use to replace Lewis and his board--powers they might assume in a pending systemic breakdown?

"Notably, during Bank of America's important communications with federal banking officials in late December 2008, the lone federal agency charged with protecting investor interests, the Securities and Exchange Commission, appears to have been kept in the dark," states Cuomo's letter to congressional leaders. "Indeed, Secretary Paulson informed this office that he did not keep the SEC chairman in the loop during the discussions and negotiations with Bank of America in December 2008." In other words, Paulson's disdain for SEC Chairman Christopher Cox meant that the Treasury was operating in an autonomous, somewhat high-handed fashion.

BUSTED!!!!!

Lies, Threats, Deal: Paulson, Bernanke, Lewis - Forbes.com

Yes, highly illegal and charges can be brough.

oh.....then you fully support obama being charged with removing the CEO of GM....

Probably didn't realize what the corner looked like before the painting began....

 

[sealybobo]

so the threat to remove is against the law?

None of the details revealed by Lewis' testimony to Cuomo's office--all substantive matters that would have been of keen importance to shareholders of Merrill Lynch and Bank of America--were ever made public before the deal went through on Dec. 31. That is a shocking violation of the requirement to inform shareholders of any material matters that could impact their vote or holding of shares in either company. This nondisclosure of market sensitive information means all the trading between Dec. 15 and April 22--tens of millions of shares of the largest U.S. bank--was executed on the basis of withheld information. This is a shocking violation of 75 years of securities regulation.

Incredibly, the SEC was never informed of any of this: that Merrill was about to report a huge $15 billion loss, that Lewis wanted to kill the deal, that Paulson told Lewis that Bernanke had instructed him to fire Lewis and dismantle his entire board if he refused to go through with the merger. It's not exactly clear what authority Paulson and Bernanke were going to use to replace Lewis and his board--powers they might assume in a pending systemic breakdown?

"Notably, during Bank of America's important communications with federal banking officials in late December 2008, the lone federal agency charged with protecting investor interests, the Securities and Exchange Commission, appears to have been kept in the dark," states Cuomo's letter to congressional leaders. "Indeed, Secretary Paulson informed this office that he did not keep the SEC chairman in the loop during the discussions and negotiations with Bank of America in December 2008." In other words, Paulson's disdain for SEC Chairman Christopher Cox meant that the Treasury was operating in an autonomous, somewhat high-handed fashion.

BUSTED!!!!!

Lies, Threats, Deal: Paulson, Bernanke, Lewis - Forbes.com

Yes, highly illegal and charges can be brough.

oh.....then you fully support obama being charged with removing the CEO of GM....

Why? Did Obama tell the CEO of GM to do something or else?

Seems more to me like Obama just fired him.

You know what? You right wingers, corporate defenders, free market, deregulators, do not get in corporate americas way even if they are poisoning us because they need to make a profit!!!

If we don't allow corporations to do whatever they want, they might raise prices or lay people off. Waaaa!!!!

Pussies!!! As if Corporations are more important than people. You right wingers are pathetic.

PS. Here in Michigan, we were the only state where a person could not sue the pharmacutical companies if their drugs were approved by the FDA. Can you believe that? The reason we did that was to lure the drug companies to Michigan.

Well they have left now. So fuck them, right? You would think Michigan would lift that law since it isn't keeping Pfeiser around, right?

WRONG!!!

The Michigan GOP won't let it go up for a vote. They are defending the drug companies right to murder us for profit.

How can I see it any other way?

But I must admit, I love it that the GOP has lost their way. They're the pro torture, pro murdering us citizens, pro hoping for another terrorist attack so they can win the next election, party of NO.

That'll win back a lot of voters. And you guys call me a partisan hack?

 

[Meister]

Actually, this is a good thread Bobo, I'm surprised that you posted it. This did impress me. We will be seeing a lot more of this coming from our government as it grows and starts nationalizing businesses. Strong arming, from our government is shameful, and not really what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they set up this great nation. The writing is on the wall, but I wonder if anyone is reading it?

 

[Meister]

None of the details revealed by Lewis' testimony to Cuomo's office--all substantive matters that would have been of keen importance to shareholders of Merrill Lynch and Bank of America--were ever made public before the deal went through on Dec. 31. That is a shocking violation of the requirement to inform shareholders of any material matters that could impact their vote or holding of shares in either company. This nondisclosure of market sensitive information means all the trading between Dec. 15 and April 22--tens of millions of shares of the largest U.S. bank--was executed on the basis of withheld information. This is a shocking violation of 75 years of securities regulation.

Incredibly, the SEC was never informed of any of this: that Merrill was about to report a huge $15 billion loss, that Lewis wanted to kill the deal, that Paulson told Lewis that Bernanke had instructed him to fire Lewis and dismantle his entire board if he refused to go through with the merger. It's not exactly clear what authority Paulson and Bernanke were going to use to replace Lewis and his board--powers they might assume in a pending systemic breakdown?

"Notably, during Bank of America's important communications with federal banking officials in late December 2008, the lone federal agency charged with protecting investor interests, the Securities and Exchange Commission, appears to have been kept in the dark," states Cuomo's letter to congressional leaders. "Indeed, Secretary Paulson informed this office that he did not keep the SEC chairman in the loop during the discussions and negotiations with Bank of America in December 2008." In other words, Paulson's disdain for SEC Chairman Christopher Cox meant that the Treasury was operating in an autonomous, somewhat high-handed fashion.

BUSTED!!!!!

Lies, Threats, Deal: Paulson, Bernanke, Lewis - Forbes.com

Yes, highly illegal and charges can be brough.

oh.....then you fully support obama being charged with removing the CEO of GM....

Why? Did Obama tell the CEO of GM to do something or else?

Seems more to me like Obama just fired him.

You know what? You right wingers, corporate defenders, free market, deregulators, do not get in corporate americas way even if they are poisoning us because they need to make a profit!!!

If we don't allow corporations to do whatever they want, they might raise prices or lay people off. Waaaa!!!!

Pussies!!! As if Corporations are more important than people. You right wingers are pathetic.
PS. Here in Michigan, we were the only state where a person could not sue the pharmacutical companies if their drugs were approved by the FDA. Can you believe that? The reason we did that was to lure the drug companies to Michigan.

Well they have left now. So fuck them, right? You would think Michigan would lift that law since it isn't keeping Pfeiser around, right?

WRONG!!!

The Michigan GOP won't let it go up for a vote. They are defending the drug companies right to murder us for profit.

How can I see it any other way?

But I must admit, I love it that the GOP has lost their way. They're the pro torture, pro murdering us citizens, pro hoping for another terrorist attack so they can win the next election, party of NO.

That'll win back a lot of voters. And you guys call me a partisan hack?

Sealy, when you talk about corporate America, your talking of thousands of law abiding businesses that need no regulation. There is a very small percentage that needs to be handled. Please when you talk about corporate America...look at the big picture, and not catagorize all of them into something negative.

 

[sealybobo]

oh.....then you fully support obama being charged with removing the CEO of GM....

Why? Did Obama tell the CEO of GM to do something or else?

Seems more to me like Obama just fired him.

You know what? You right wingers, corporate defenders, free market, deregulators, do not get in corporate americas way even if they are poisoning us because they need to make a profit!!!

If we don't allow corporations to do whatever they want, they might raise prices or lay people off. Waaaa!!!!

Pussies!!! As if Corporations are more important than people. You right wingers are pathetic.
PS. Here in Michigan, we were the only state where a person could not sue the pharmacutical companies if their drugs were approved by the FDA. Can you believe that? The reason we did that was to lure the drug companies to Michigan.

Well they have left now. So fuck them, right? You would think Michigan would lift that law since it isn't keeping Pfeiser around, right?

WRONG!!!

The Michigan GOP won't let it go up for a vote. They are defending the drug companies right to murder us for profit.

How can I see it any other way?

But I must admit, I love it that the GOP has lost their way. They're the pro torture, pro murdering us citizens, pro hoping for another terrorist attack so they can win the next election, party of NO.

That'll win back a lot of voters. And you guys call me a partisan hack?

Sealy, when you talk about corporate America, your talking of thousands of law abiding businesses that need no regulation. There is a very small percentage that needs to be handled. Please when you talk about corporate America...look at the big picture, and not catagorize all of them into something negative.

How should I do it? Often I just call them either THE RICH or CORPORATE AMERICA.

But you know what? For awhile I thought, "boy, the oil companies are really fucking over the car companies", but now it looks like the car companies have set themselves up to fail ON PURPOSE, just like the bankers did.

They made money on the way up, bonus' on the way down, and now they will get billions in handouts from the government. And then they'll go bankrupt and renig on all those pensions.

And I work for a mega corporation. They are profitable, yet they keep making us work/sell more and we are making less, yet the CEO here too is getting outragous pay.

Almost every company has CEO's, Executives and Board of Directors and they are all greedy sons of bitches. If wages are going up, its their wages.

But I do see what you are saying. I am almost NEVER talking about small business'. Don't lump small business' in with the corporate America I'm talking about.

IBM and Microsoft say that they can't find any IT people, so they keep begging the government for more worker visas so they can hire cheap labor from india. If there is such a demand for computer pro's, how was IBM able to cut their IT staff's pay 15%? Impossible. If demand were where they say it is, they would have lost their entire staff.

Any corporation that sends lobbyists to washington are bad. They send lobbyists to washington to bribe our politicians to do things for them that they would otherwise not do. It is unfair.

PS. Yes they all need regulations. For example, the secret ballot for unions. Corporations have been fighting unions. I understand why they don't want unions, but that doesn't mean I agree with them. So the Dems are going to pass the Free Choice Act and employees are going to get the chance to organize. Sorry corporations, but you are going to have to deal with it.

Corporations have been breaking the unions since Reagan broke the air traffic controllers. Now it is our turn to fight back.

Now if Obama would just start tariffing companies that went overseas so they come back. Or give new start up companies a great loan to set up shop in America to compete with those oveseas companies, who we will tariff so they can not succeed.
And I don't blame corporations. They aren't even human beings. Their only mission is to profit. I blame government that helps them hurt us.

 

[sealybobo]

Actually, this is a good thread Bobo, I'm surprised that you posted it. This did impress me. We will be seeing a lot more of this coming from our government as it grows and starts nationalizing businesses. Strong arming, from our government is shameful, and not really what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they set up this great nation. The writing is on the wall, but I wonder if anyone is reading it?

Sorry, but you are wrong. It is you who has ignored what our founders warned us.

Markets are a creation of government, just as corporations exist only by authorization of government. Governments set the rules of the market. And, since our government is of, by, and for We The People, those rules have historically been set to first maximize the public good resulting from people doing business.

If you want to play the game of business, we've said in the US since 1784 (when Tench Coxe got the first tariffs passed "to protect domestic industries") then you have to play in a way that both makes you money AND serves the public interest.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

I post this op ed all the time because it contradicts you right wingers and your believe that it isn't governments role to regulate business. It sure fucking is.

 

[Indiana Oracle]

Why? Did Obama tell the CEO of GM to do something or else?

Seems more to me like Obama just fired him.

You know what? You right wingers, corporate defenders, free market, deregulators, do not get in corporate americas way even if they are poisoning us because they need to make a profit!!!

If we don't allow corporations to do whatever they want, they might raise prices or lay people off. Waaaa!!!!

Pussies!!! As if Corporations are more important than people. You right wingers are pathetic.
PS. Here in Michigan, we were the only state where a person could not sue the pharmacutical companies if their drugs were approved by the FDA. Can you believe that? The reason we did that was to lure the drug companies to Michigan.

Well they have left now. So fuck them, right? You would think Michigan would lift that law since it isn't keeping Pfeiser around, right?

WRONG!!!

The Michigan GOP won't let it go up for a vote. They are defending the drug companies right to murder us for profit.

How can I see it any other way?

But I must admit, I love it that the GOP has lost their way. They're the pro torture, pro murdering us citizens, pro hoping for another terrorist attack so they can win the next election, party of NO.

That'll win back a lot of voters. And you guys call me a partisan hack?

Sealy, when you talk about corporate America, your talking of thousands of law abiding businesses that need no regulation. There is a very small percentage that needs to be handled. Please when you talk about corporate America...look at the big picture, and not catagorize all of them into something negative.

How should I do it? Often I just call them either THE RICH or CORPORATE AMERICA.

But you know what? For awhile I thought, "boy, the oil companies are really fucking over the car companies", but now it looks like the car companies have set themselves up to fail ON PURPOSE, just like the bankers did.

They made money on the way up, bonus' on the way down, and now they will get billions in handouts from the government. And then they'll go bankrupt and renig on all those pensions.

And I work for a mega corporation. They are profitable, yet they keep making us work/sell more and we are making less, yet the CEO here too is getting outragous pay.

Almost every company has CEO's, Executives and Board of Directors and they are all greedy sons of bitches. If wages are going up, its their wages.

But I do see what you are saying. I am almost NEVER talking about small business'. Don't lump small business' in with the corporate America I'm talking about.

IBM and Microsoft say that they can't find any IT people, so they keep begging the government for more worker visas so they can hire cheap labor from india. If there is such a demand for computer pro's, how was IBM able to cut their IT staff's pay 15%? Impossible. If demand were where they say it is, they would have lost their entire staff.

Any corporation that sends lobbyists to washington are bad. They send lobbyists to washington to bribe our politicians to do things for them that they would otherwise not do. It is unfair.

PS. Yes they all need regulations. For example, the secret ballot for unions. Corporations have been fighting unions. I understand why they don't want unions, but that doesn't mean I agree with them. So the Dems are going to pass the Free Choice Act and employees are going to get the chance to organize. Sorry corporations, but you are going to have to deal with it.

Corporations have been breaking the unions since Reagan broke the air traffic controllers. Now it is our turn to fight back.

Now if Obama would just start tariffing companies that went overseas so they come back. Or give new start up companies a great loan to set up shop in America to compete with those oveseas companies, who we will tariff so they can not succeed.
And I don't blame corporations. They aren't even human beings. Their only mission is to profit. I blame government that helps them hurt us.

Holy smokes. Stay away from open windows and don't buy a weapon.

 

[Meister]

Actually, this is a good thread Bobo, I'm surprised that you posted it. This did impress me. We will be seeing a lot more of this coming from our government as it grows and starts nationalizing businesses. Strong arming, from our government is shameful, and not really what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they set up this great nation. The writing is on the wall, but I wonder if anyone is reading it?

Sorry, but you are wrong. It is you who has ignored what our founders warned us.

Markets are a creation of government, just as corporations exist only by authorization of government. Governments set the rules of the market. And, since our government is of, by, and for We The People, those rules have historically been set to first maximize the public good resulting from people doing business.

If you want to play the game of business, we've said in the US since 1784 (when Tench Coxe got the first tariffs passed "to protect domestic industries") then you have to play in a way that both makes you money AND serves the public interest.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

I post this op ed all the time because it contradicts you right wingers and your believe that it isn't governments role to regulate business. It sure fucking is.

Hmm, you have me wrong Sealy. First...our early politicians went to serve the people, and after a term or two, they went back to the farms, or whatever employment they had. Now it's a career. Just too much temptation to the big bucks from lobbists. They aren't there to serve the people who they are suppose to represent. I am for regulation of some industries....but there is a fine line of regulation, and over regulation. I just don't trust politicians to do the right thing.
Like I've stated before...I'm an Independant..not dem., not repub. I've voted on both side of the parties. But, I don't like what I've been seeing coming from the George Soros side.

 

[sealybobo]

Actually, this is a good thread Bobo, I'm surprised that you posted it. This did impress me. We will be seeing a lot more of this coming from our government as it grows and starts nationalizing businesses. Strong arming, from our government is shameful, and not really what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they set up this great nation. The writing is on the wall, but I wonder if anyone is reading it?

Strongarming, you mean like telling the credit card companies they can't fuck us anymore with small print and tricks like moving around the due date?

Yea, sorry corporate America, but this country was founded for us citizens, not you. You only operate if we say you can, and only if you serve the public some good. That means hiring Americans, not illegals. Sorry if that rule gets in the way of your higher profits.

You can't sell us poison. Yet the GOP wants the drug companies to be immune from prosecution if their drugs kill us.

Anyone who thinks the GOP is the party for them needs their head examined.

 

[Meister]

Actually, this is a good thread Bobo, I'm surprised that you posted it. This did impress me. We will be seeing a lot more of this coming from our government as it grows and starts nationalizing businesses. Strong arming, from our government is shameful, and not really what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they set up this great nation. The writing is on the wall, but I wonder if anyone is reading it?

Strongarming, you mean like telling the credit card companies they can't fuck us anymore with small print and tricks like moving around the due date?

Yea, sorry corporate America, but this country was founded for us citizens, not you. You only operate if we say you can, and only if you serve the public some good. That means hiring Americans, not illegals. Sorry if that rule gets in the way of your higher profits.

You can't sell us poison. Yet the GOP wants the drug companies to be immune from prosecution if their drugs kill us.

Anyone who thinks the GOP is the party for them needs their head examined.

Strongarming....like switching preferred stock to common stock.

 

[sealybobo]

Actually, this is a good thread Bobo, I'm surprised that you posted it. This did impress me. We will be seeing a lot more of this coming from our government as it grows and starts nationalizing businesses. Strong arming, from our government is shameful, and not really what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they set up this great nation. The writing is on the wall, but I wonder if anyone is reading it?

Sorry, but you are wrong. It is you who has ignored what our founders warned us.

Markets are a creation of government, just as corporations exist only by authorization of government. Governments set the rules of the market. And, since our government is of, by, and for We The People, those rules have historically been set to first maximize the public good resulting from people doing business.

If you want to play the game of business, we've said in the US since 1784 (when Tench Coxe got the first tariffs passed "to protect domestic industries") then you have to play in a way that both makes you money AND serves the public interest.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

I post this op ed all the time because it contradicts you right wingers and your believe that it isn't governments role to regulate business. It sure fucking is.

Hmm, you have me wrong Sealy. First...our early politicians went to serve the people, and after a term or two, they went back to the farms, or whatever employment they had. Now it's a career. Just too much temptation to the big bucks from lobbists. They aren't there to serve the people who they are suppose to represent. I am for regulation of some industries....but there is a fine line of regulation, and over regulation. I just don't trust politicians to do the right thing.
Like I've stated before...I'm an Independant..not dem., not repub. I've voted on both side of the parties. But, I don't like what I've been seeing coming from the George Soros side.

You're worried about lobbyists now? We just got out of 8 years where lobbyists fucking wrote US policies. Energy lobbyists wrote our energy policies with Cheney, for example. Remember the California rolling blackouts? That was all faked so they could raise rates. Remember Enron? They were deregulated and then they started cooking their books.

I can tell you lean right.

And after the market meltdown that we are experiencing right now, you actually think we are regulating corporations too much? The oil companies gouged us because they weren't being regulated. The Credit card companies started scamming their customers. The Countrywides predatory lended because they weren't being regulated. The bankers didn't keep enough cash on hand because they were de-regulated.

Here is how I describe Independants. Independants like conservative values but they know the GOP aren't really upholding to those principles, and they don't like liberals but they know liberals are usually right.

 

[sealybobo]

Actually, this is a good thread Bobo, I'm surprised that you posted it. This did impress me. We will be seeing a lot more of this coming from our government as it grows and starts nationalizing businesses. Strong arming, from our government is shameful, and not really what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they set up this great nation. The writing is on the wall, but I wonder if anyone is reading it?

Strongarming, you mean like telling the credit card companies they can't fuck us anymore with small print and tricks like moving around the due date?

Yea, sorry corporate America, but this country was founded for us citizens, not you. You only operate if we say you can, and only if you serve the public some good. That means hiring Americans, not illegals. Sorry if that rule gets in the way of your higher profits.

You can't sell us poison. Yet the GOP wants the drug companies to be immune from prosecution if their drugs kill us.

Anyone who thinks the GOP is the party for them needs their head examined.

Strongarming....like switching preferred stock to common stock.

Hey, if we have to loan a Corporation money, they no longer get to complain about too much government interferance.

And any company that is "too big to fail", needs to be regulated. Or broken up. You decide.

PS. Did you know that the original TARP of $350 billion, for every $100 we gave, they gave us back 66 cents in stock. THEN, the stock dropped. So literally we gave AIG $175 billion no questions asked.

And you are worried we are telling them what to do?

 

[Meister]

Strongarming, you mean like telling the credit card companies they can't fuck us anymore with small print and tricks like moving around the due date?

Yea, sorry corporate America, but this country was founded for us citizens, not you. You only operate if we say you can, and only if you serve the public some good. That means hiring Americans, not illegals. Sorry if that rule gets in the way of your higher profits.

You can't sell us poison. Yet the GOP wants the drug companies to be immune from prosecution if their drugs kill us.

Anyone who thinks the GOP is the party for them needs their head examined.

Strongarming....like switching preferred stock to common stock.

Hey, if we have to loan a Corporation money, they no longer get to complain about too much government interferance.

And any company that is "too big to fail", needs to be regulated. Or broken up. You decide.

PS. Did you know that the original TARP of $350 billion, for every $100 we gave, they gave us back 66 cents in stock. THEN, the stock dropped. So literally we gave AIG $175 billion no questions asked.

And you are worried we are telling them what to do?

Sealy...there is no company too big to fail. IMHO let the companies fail..let the chips fall where they will. let them file Chapter 11...that's what we have that for..let them restructure. But, don't let the government get involved bailing them out. This is where you think we need the government and I don't. The government gave the auto industries money, then more money, then they are still going to file bankruptsy. Don't you get that???? Some companies need to no longer exist. From that new companies will be born with better ethics. Geeze You left are so dense.

 

[Meister]

Sorry, but you are wrong. It is you who has ignored what our founders warned us.

Markets are a creation of government, just as corporations exist only by authorization of government. Governments set the rules of the market. And, since our government is of, by, and for We The People, those rules have historically been set to first maximize the public good resulting from people doing business.

If you want to play the game of business, we've said in the US since 1784 (when Tench Coxe got the first tariffs passed "to protect domestic industries") then you have to play in a way that both makes you money AND serves the public interest.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

I post this op ed all the time because it contradicts you right wingers and your believe that it isn't governments role to regulate business. It sure fucking is.

Hmm, you have me wrong Sealy. First...our early politicians went to serve the people, and after a term or two, they went back to the farms, or whatever employment they had. Now it's a career. Just too much temptation to the big bucks from lobbists. They aren't there to serve the people who they are suppose to represent. I am for regulation of some industries....but there is a fine line of regulation, and over regulation. I just don't trust politicians to do the right thing.
Like I've stated before...I'm an Independant..not dem., not repub. I've voted on both side of the parties. But, I don't like what I've been seeing coming from the George Soros side.

You're worried about lobbyists now? We just got out of 8 years where lobbyists fucking wrote US policies. Energy lobbyists wrote our energy policies with Cheney, for example. Remember the California rolling blackouts? That was all faked so they could raise rates. Remember Enron? They were deregulated and then they started cooking their books.

I can tell you lean right.

And after the market meltdown that we are experiencing right now, you actually think we are regulating corporations too much? The oil companies gouged us because they weren't being regulated. The Credit card companies started scamming their customers. The Countrywides predatory lended because they weren't being regulated. The bankers didn't keep enough cash on hand because they were de-regulated.

Here is how I describe Independants. Independants like conservative values but they know the GOP aren't really upholding to those principles, and they don't like liberals but they know liberals are usually right.

DAMN RIGHT, I LEAN RIGHT!!!!! I'm not a fucking socialist. You want George Soros to run you party...live with it, I won't. How do you know when I worried about lobbists, I've never liked them.
You show me where we were gouged by the oil companies. Democrats have had several committees to try and prove your very allegations...they came up with nothing except for a few service station owners doing that. So go pound sand with your tripe. Your last paragraph is just a left wing loon spouting bullshit, and you know it. Independants know that there is no perfect party..unlike yourself. Independants go with the best of what both parties offer. So once again go pound sand...hack