Congress grants the Executive branch the power to break up any company

[VaYank5150]

Obama is threatening business and banks right now to hire more people. It was JUST in the news. Give him the power to destroy business and Companies and that becomes one of the threats he will use.

Current events is not VaYank, Careforall or the liberals strong suit when it comes to their loved leaders.

Gunny, you have already proven that subjects like these are way above your comprehension level. I suggest you stay in the shallow end for your own safety.

 

[ba1614]

How do you determine what is "too big to fail"?

I personally don't believe there is such a thing. And if there is, gov't is the last entity in the world that needs to be deciding that.

Bush decided AIG was too big to fail. Obama decided GM and Chrysler were too big to fail. Apparently it is a POTUS thing? In my humble opinion, let the bastards fail!

I couldn't agree more, and I don't give a fuck what party's doing it, it's bullshit. Yes, it will hurt for some of these , "too big to fail" businesses to fail, (especially political contributions/favors), but in the long run somebody would pick up the slack for the failed business. Who knows, some innovation might even come out of it.

 

[VaYank5150]

How do you determine what is "too big to fail"?

I personally don't believe there is such a thing. And if there is, gov't is the last entity in the world that needs to be deciding that.

Bush decided AIG was too big to fail. Obama decided GM and Chrysler were too big to fail. Apparently it is a POTUS thing? In my humble opinion, let the bastards fail!

I couldn't agree more, and I don't give a fuck what party's doing it, it's bullshit. Yes, it will hurt for some of these , "too big to fail" businesses to fail, (especially political contributions/favors), but in the long run somebody would pick up the slack for the failed business. Who knows, some innovation might even come out of it.

I could not agree with this statement more. Kudos!

 

[HUGGY]

Congress grants the Executive branch the power to break up any company

We cannot afford to have companies that are too big to fail.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

In the end, IMHO, this proposed legislation is a good idea. No longer will the American taxpayer be called upon to bail out businesses deemed "too big to fail". Not they ever should have t begin with....

When the government steps in to break up a company, what does that mean? It means they are assholes and elbows in debt...guess who pays off the creditors once Uncle Sam owns said failing company....hint...YOU AND ME AND THE REST OF THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS.

But, I bet you we taxpayers won't be paying for BILLIONS in bonuses the following year to retain their "talent"....

No..we will be paying billions to creditors when they come a knocking at the WH door saying WTF...you own them...now PAY US!!!

Choose your poison...either way WE LOSE!!!!!

 

[VaYank5150]

When the government steps in to break up a company, what does that mean? It means they are assholes and elbows in debt...guess who pays off the creditors once Uncle Sam owns said failing company....hint...YOU AND ME AND THE REST OF THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS.

But, I bet you we taxpayers won't be paying for BILLIONS in bonuses the following year to retain their "talent"....

No..we will be paying billions to creditors when they come a knocking at the WH door saying WTF...you own them...now PAY US!!!

Choose your poison...either way WE LOSE!!!!!

I think you are getting ahead of yourself on this one. I believe this legislation is truly designed to ensure NO private companies ever get to the "too big to fail" status ever again. As long as measures are taken to prevent this, then your end result will not come to fruition.

 

[Care4all]

Obama is threatening business and banks right now to hire more people. It was JUST in the news. Give him the power to destroy business and Companies and that becomes one of the threats he will use.

Current events is not VaYank, Careforall or the liberals strong suit when it comes to their loved leaders.

Staying ON TOPIC of the thread op is a talent you are lacking in....

So, your answer is that there is NO PART of this bill being discussed, saying what you have been touting...thank you for letting me KNOW THIS.



Care

 

[Care4all]

How do you determine what is "too big to fail"?

I personally don't believe there is such a thing. And if there is, gov't is the last entity in the world that needs to be deciding that.

Bush decided AIG was too big to fail. Obama decided GM and Chrysler were too big to fail. Apparently it is a POTUS thing? In my humble opinion, let the bastards fail!

I couldn't agree more, and I don't give a fuck what party's doing it, it's bullshit. Yes, it will hurt for some of these , "too big to fail" businesses to fail, (especially political contributions/favors), but in the long run somebody would pick up the slack for the failed business. Who knows, some innovation might even come out of it.

I THINK this goes deeper than pastry.

While I tend to agree that we should have let them fail, because they are the ones that devised the entire crisis by taking huge risks from not following basic business protocol for sound banking.

HOWEVER, I have really been thinking about this and the question of WHY did President Bush and the congress and senate, believe that the bailout of these mega corporations was a 'life or death' of our country, situation?

And in my opinion, what was going on behind the scenes, was that our national debt had already risen to $11 trillion from the $5.6 trillion National Debt accumulated so far in our History as a country, which Clinton and his congress left them...was already requiring $400 billion in tax revenues to pay (back in 2005) for just the interest payment on that debt...AND this payment was at a fairly low interest rate, BECAUSE of our "A" credit rating....

sooooooooo, they were probably thinking that ALL HELL would break loose, IF the banks and AIG and Goldman Sachs, Fannie and Freddie etc failed, then our own Credit rating would be lowered, MAKING our yearly INTEREST payment on the National Debt rise to $800 BILLION a year of the Budget, leaving ONLY $400 billion left of our income tax revenues to RUN the rest of the country...like paying for Defense, paying for Medicare, and all else that they spend on...including the willy nilly crapola.

They wanted to be able to keep on keeping on, with their spending, without having to raise taxes in any quantities, which definitely would damper what they seem to do best, spend our money.

In addition to this, the higher interest rate, thus the doubling of our debt interest payment, could have cut us off from the borrowing needed, in any kind of national defense mission that could be put upon us.

I realize this is just speculation but I would bet I am right on this being a behind the scenes, factor, in all of this....

 

[DiamondDave]

Pastry?

 

[MaggieMae]

Kiinda hard to find a link if the MSM ain't covering it. Just sayin.

Then why even start a thread about it? It makes the OP look lilke he is trying to make something up. Just sayin'.

I recall you're the guy who never picks up a newspaper and never reads the news. Just sayin.
House approves financial regulation overhaul - Yahoo! News

In addition to systemic risk regulation and the CFPA, the broader House bill would give the government new powers over large banks and set up new protocols for dealing with large firms, known as "too big to fail," that get into trouble.

It would also impose new curbs on executive pay, strengthen

protections for investors and, for the first time, set up a federal office to monitor the insurance industry.

More at the source.

I haven't read the link yet, but you DO know that something the House passes has yet to become law, I would hope.

Stupid stupid stupid people trying to act smart really piss me off. Civics 101 will help.

 

[MaggieMae]

I love how some of these people are now aligning themselves with the very institutions that fucked over the American people. Go figure.

 

[saveliberty]

Does this power truly mean the President can breakup ANY company? Most companies require investment in infrastructure and personnel. Why take these risks if the government can, at any time, come in dictate what you can do? The economy rests on businesses selling to the public. You add enough uncertainty into that equation and growth will not happen.

Our econ class reject of a President thinks banks should lend more immediately. Why? The economic environment is uncertain as handed to us by the government. Banks don't lend in an uncertain situation. They are acting rationally. It is Obama that can't grasp what he has wrought.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

But, I bet you we taxpayers won't be paying for BILLIONS in bonuses the following year to retain their "talent"....

No..we will be paying billions to creditors when they come a knocking at the WH door saying WTF...you own them...now PAY US!!!

Choose your poison...either way WE LOSE!!!!!

I think you are getting ahead of yourself on this one. I believe this legislation is truly designed to ensure NO private companies ever get to the "too big to fail" status ever again. As long as measures are taken to prevent this, then your end result will not come to fruition.

That is not and never should be a power of the Government. It is not the intent nor the actual words of the Constitution.

 

[beowolfe]

No..we will be paying billions to creditors when they come a knocking at the WH door saying WTF...you own them...now PAY US!!!

Choose your poison...either way WE LOSE!!!!!

I think you are getting ahead of yourself on this one. I believe this legislation is truly designed to ensure NO private companies ever get to the "too big to fail" status ever again. As long as measures are taken to prevent this, then your end result will not come to fruition.

That is not and never should be a power of the Government. It is not the intent nor the actual words of the Constitution.

Things change. Period. And the Constitution, in all of its wisdom, couldn't (and didn't) predict everything. For instance, it didn't predict how anti-democratic monopolies would be. So, Teddy Roosevely introduced anti-trust laws. No one, to my knowledge, ever contemplated 'too big too fail', so to save the entire system, congress has put this in place in the hopes that it'll keep us off that particular cliff again.

 

[VaYank5150]

No..we will be paying billions to creditors when they come a knocking at the WH door saying WTF...you own them...now PAY US!!!

Choose your poison...either way WE LOSE!!!!!

I think you are getting ahead of yourself on this one. I believe this legislation is truly designed to ensure NO private companies ever get to the "too big to fail" status ever again. As long as measures are taken to prevent this, then your end result will not come to fruition.

That is not and never should be a power of the Government. It is not the intent nor the actual words of the Constitution.

Oh Gunny....STFU and go back to the Flame Zone and correct the spelling errors in the thread you started about me. Stupid fuck!

 

[Mr. Peepers]

Could you imagine the outcry from the loony left if Bush & Co. had done this?

Do what? Flush taxpayer money? He did. It's called Iraq. Killed many of our finest in the process too. But we won't go into that, right neocon?

 

[Liability]

Could you imagine the outcry from the loony left if Bush & Co. had done this?

Do what? Flush taxpayer money? He did. It's called Iraq. Killed many of our finest in the process too. But we won't go into that, right neocon?

Mr. Peepee (as usual) entirely misses the point.

No.

The issue is not the alleged "flushing" of money.

The issue is the almost unbelievable power grab by these thugs.

You might disagree with the decision to fight in Iraq. And it was expensive. But that is nowhere NEAR the issue presently under discussion.

You are not very bright, Peepee.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

You are not very bright, Peepee.

Apparently I'm brighter than you, or at least better at reading comprehension. Bush DID flush money down the crapper (see soggy's post I quoted) and that was Iraq. How does that not tie in to this conversation about Obama "flushing money" via the stimulus and setting new regulations on banks/businesses that got us into this mess to begin with? At least they're actually fixing infrastructure with this money here... Iraq was a no return situation.

And Bush/Cheney didn't power-grab? Seriously? They were the closest we've had to a dictator ever in our history.

 

[Liability]

You are not very bright, Peepee.

Apparently I'm brighter than you, or at least better at reading comprehension.

Nothing "apparent" about it, you idiot. Your claim is simply false. What a surprise.

Bush DID flush money down the crapper (see soggy's post I quoted) and that was Iraq. How does that not tie in to this conversation about Obama "flushing money" via the stimulus and setting new regulations on banks/businesses that got us into this mess to begin with? At least they're actually fixing infrastructure with this money here... Iraq was a no return situation.

And Bush/Cheney didn't power-grab? Seriously? They were the closest we've had to a dictator ever in our history.

Whether or not the Bush Administration "flushed" some money was not the topic of this thread -- and despite your bitching, moaning, pissing, crying and whining, it still isn't.

The "granting" to the Executive Branch the alleged "power" to break up companies is the topic at hand, you dimwit.

And no. President Bush did not "grab power," you stupid turd. Neither did Vice President Cheney. You making and reiterating that tired old lie does nothing to support it. And you can't support it because it just isn't true.

 

[HUGGY]

No..we will be paying billions to creditors when they come a knocking at the WH door saying WTF...you own them...now PAY US!!!

Choose your poison...either way WE LOSE!!!!!

I think you are getting ahead of yourself on this one. I believe this legislation is truly designed to ensure NO private companies ever get to the "too big to fail" status ever again. As long as measures are taken to prevent this, then your end result will not come to fruition.

That is not and never should be a power of the Government. It is not the intent nor the actual words of the Constitution.

Fuck you and your cheezy pathetic neg rep ya ignorant "dumb ass" loser. What a pussy. Wether you like it or not we get stuck with the bill when faced with failing institutions that are "too big to fail".

You and people like you are what is wrong with this country. You are too dumb to want correct a problem before it becomes unavoidable and too stupid to see it has happenned over and over. Did I say FUCK YOU!? Why didn't your invisible friend fix everything before we had to bail out the last several major failed institutions? Does you pathetic god hate our economic system? Oh did I mention...FUCK YOU!?