Its time to break the banks up

[Kimura]

The main problem is that Too-Big-Too-Fail has been integrated into the federal system so to speak. They've become these douchy, quasi-public institutions since they're backstopped by the FED.

Personally, if I was running the show, I'd run in the other direction of fully nationalizing any risk management. It breeds corruption all over the place. I'd like to see basic retail banking with tons of local credit unions and small banks, with the caveat that they are required to be organized in a partnership model as opposed to the LLC model.

In the end, the best solution is nationalized retail banking (USPS could serve as bank, for example). We could also charter private commercial banks but they'd be have a cap in terms of assets with no government backup and under close supervision by the FDIC.

I also wouldn't mind seeing banks relegated to risk management at the end of the day.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

There is nothing natural about governments printing money to help rich people.

newly printed money usually enters the economy through the housing market to help the middle class. Isn't learning fun?

Sure it does.

That explains why the stock market is high even though the economy sucks, because the middle class is getting all the benefits of the fed creating money that doesn't exist.

dear, I said usually? Can you reread for comprehension. 0% interest in highly unusual but certainly benefits middle class home and car buyers and in general folks with debt. Also, it has taken trillions from fat cats living on trust fund interest and those with millions in savings. Do you understand now?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

In the end, the best solution is nationalized retail banking (USPS could serve as bank, for example).

what could be better than to bring the efficiency of a socialist monopoly to banking!! Great Idea!!

 

[Kimura]

In the end, the best solution is nationalized retail banking (USPS could serve as bank, for example).

what could be better than to bring the efficiency of a socialist monopoly to banking!! Great Idea!!

Banks are supposed to serve public purpose. Or we can continue down the same path of TBTF, that's work out oh so great.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Banks are supposed to serve public purpose.

all businesses are, and they do it very very well in the absence of liberal interference! Ever wonder why the average Chinese person is getting so rich just when they switched to capitalism? A liberal will reason: capitalism is making the Chineses rich so we should switch to socialism.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Or we can continue down the same path of TBTF, that's work out oh so great.

who is recommending that? Both sides have long supported antitrust. Also, there is a huge mistaken assumption that liberals love, namely, that all the recent bankruptcies and near bankruptcies and huge fines have somehow going unnoticed by the banks and their customers. Now that's idiotic andn liberal!

 

[Desperado]

Past time to bust them up. That should have been done the first time in 2008.
Nothing has changed and they are doing the same shit they did before.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Nothing has changed and they are doing the same shit they did before.

of course you are a typical liberal liar which explains why you cant tell us what they are doing the same as before!!

 

[Two Thumbs]

'Too Big To Fail' Lives As Regulators Slam Banks' Living Wills
(snip)

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said October blueprints submitted by banks, including JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, detailing how they think they'd be resolved in bankruptcy if they neared collapse were "not credible." The Federal Reserve, another bank regulator, said the so-called living wills need significant improvement by July 2015 or the government may force them to shrink.

"Each plan being discussed today is deficient and fails to convincingly demonstrate how, in failure, any one of these firms could overcome obstacles to entering bankruptcy without precipitating a financial crisis," Thomas Hoenig, FDIC vice chairman, said in a statement. "Despite the thousands of pages of material these firms submitted, the plans provide no credible or clear path through bankruptcy that doesn't require unrealistic assumptions and direct or indirect public support."

monopolies are bad right? Bust 'em up. I think Obama may be as bought-and-paid-for by wall st interests ,as all repub Presidents, in recent memory have been

Fucking racist.

How dare you say that obama is owned!

Bet you think all black men are owned!










sucks to hear your bullshit coming back atcha, doughnut?


well welcome to the fiscally right side of the road.

 

[Two Thumbs]

low-IQ posters, like EdwardBaiamonte, are not welcome in this discussion

As to the OP, we can thank Repubs for guaranteeing that banks hold sway over Capital Hill due to Gingrich, Citizens United, & other initiatives they've undertaken to keep big money in politics

What have the dems done to rid themselves of their influence?


here's a hint; It's less than nothing

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

low-IQ posters, like EdwardBaiamonte, are not welcome in this discussion

As to the OP, we can thank Repubs for guaranteeing that banks hold sway over Capital Hill due to Gingrich, Citizens United, & other initiatives they've undertaken to keep big money in politics

What have the dems done to rid themselves of their influence?


here's a hint; It's less than nothing

sort of idiotic and liberal to say banks hold sway when BoA just paid fed 17 billion in fines. Is that a liberal's idea of holding sway?

 

[itfitzme]

'Too Big To Fail' Lives As Regulators Slam Banks' Living Wills
(snip)

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said October blueprints submitted by banks, including JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America, detailing how they think they'd be resolved in bankruptcy if they neared collapse were "not credible." The Federal Reserve, another bank regulator, said the so-called living wills need significant improvement by July 2015 or the government may force them to shrink.

"Each plan being discussed today is deficient and fails to convincingly demonstrate how, in failure, any one of these firms could overcome obstacles to entering bankruptcy without precipitating a financial crisis," Thomas Hoenig, FDIC vice chairman, said in a statement. "Despite the thousands of pages of material these firms submitted, the plans provide no credible or clear path through bankruptcy that doesn't require unrealistic assumptions and direct or indirect public support."

monopolies are bad right? Bust 'em up. I think Obama may be as bought-and-paid-for by wall st interests ,as all repub Presidents, in recent memory have been

Here is the thing...

There is no such thing as a bank failing without taking a piece of the economy with it. That's like suggesting an auto tire that doesn't touch the road. Or human beings that don't die when they stop breathing. Or a suspension bridge cable that can break without the bridge failing. It's simply non-sense.

Second, there is no such thing as small banks not failing simultaneously. It simply doesn't exist.

The private banking system is what creates money. When a bank fails, all the money it ceated disappears. When money disappears, that part of the economy, that depended on that supply of money, stops.

There is no such thing as the government not "bailing out" the banks. It is a requirement of having a free market monetary economy.

Risk and failure are a requirement of a free market economy. Banks are part of that.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. When a bank fails, all the money it ceated disappears.

well if I have a home loan from a bank the goes under I still have the home and still owe payments to whoever acquired my loan from the failed bank so I'm not sure in what sense the money I borrowed disappeared.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

There is no such thing as the government not "bailing out" the banks. .

well, governments usually elect to transfer the business of failed banks to another bank but they do rountinely not bail out failed banks.