Nationalization Gets a New, Serious Look

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by rayboyusmc, Jan 26, 2009.

  1. rayboyusmc
    Offline

    rayboyusmc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    4,015
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Florida
    Ratings:
    +338
    Yeah, let's blame this on Obama and not Bush who he inherited the mess from. As far as I'm concerned, if they can't run it without taking tax dollars, they don't deserve to own them and profit from them.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/business/economy/26banks.html?_r=1&hp
     
  2. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,507
    Thanks Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,920
    Funny? I thought the Dems controlled Congress last year and that FDR created the Idea the US would insure Banks?
     
  3. Vel
    Offline

    Vel Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    5,463
    Thanks Received:
    1,913
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Ratings:
    +1,914
    I not only thought that Democrats controlled Congress for the last two years, I also thought that the current POTUS had been an active member of that Congress.
    I don't know about anyone else but that whine we're hearing from Obama about the mess that he "inherited" are ringing very hollow. Please show me the remedies to our terrible economy that Obama sought while a senator.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2009
  4. WillowTree
    Online

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,095
    Thanks Received:
    10,150
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,636
    :lol:


    If it happens on obamalama's watch, it's his failure! obamalama's watch began Jan. 20th. did it not?
     
  5. rayboyusmc
    Offline

    rayboyusmc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    4,015
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Florida
    Ratings:
    +338
    You're right. This just started in the last two years with the Repubs filibustering. They didn't insure banks, they insured our individual deposits up to 100,000.00.

    I have no problem with the government taking these over. Maybe, we can make some money and reduce our taxes.:lol:
     
  6. Kevin_Kennedy
    Offline

    Kevin_Kennedy Defend Liberty

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    17,581
    Thanks Received:
    1,577
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +2,015
    We shouldn't be nationalizing any banks at all.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  7. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    We do not have to nationalize banks.

    WE ought to nationalize the FEDERAL RESERVE BANK, though.

    My suggestion is that we open up the FEDERAL reserve bank to the public instead of making it the loaner to private banks.

    Why should I pay more interest for a loan from the FEDS than Citibank?

    Even more to the point why should Citibank profit by lending me money they don't have, which they theoretically borrowed from the FED?

    Why are they so special that they get to lend me money they didn't have?

    Hell I'd rather pay my nation back for my mortgage than some freaking banker who loaned me money he didn't have to begin with.

    If I'm going to be borrowing invented money, anyway, let me borrow it from my national government who ORIGINALLY issued it.
     
  8. cunclusion
    Offline

    cunclusion Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    221
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +21
    That makes more sense than alot of things I have been hearing lately. Let them compete for banking services...
     
  9. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,507
    Thanks Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,920
    You make the claim, back it up, provide us that list of bills the Republicans filibustered that would have , if passed, helped with the Banking and housing problems.
     
  10. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    ACtually there'd be one bank...the FED.

    If people wanted to create private banks, fine, but the FED would have nothing whatever to do with them.

    They couldn't borrow money from the FED at a rate any better than the rest of us.

    What I am basically proposing is a national bank/treasury -- one where the average person would be borrowing the money FIRST and one where no intermediary private bank would be involved at all.
     

Share This Page