If you like "Too Big To Fail" Wall Street speculation, you'll love Hillary

Dot Com

Nullius in verba
Feb 15, 2011
52,842
7,883
1,830
Fairfax, NoVA
Sanders supporters and activists on the left disagree with this assessment, saying Clinton's financial industry fundraisers and highly paid speeches to Goldman Sachs and others suggest she would be soft on Wall Street as president while Sanders would proactively bust up the big banks, impose much higher taxes on the wealthy and aggressively prosecute white-collar criminals.

They also worry that Clinton would bring Wall Street executives to top regulatory jobs, while Sanders would purge agencies of anyone with a banking background.

“Especially given her multi-hundred thousand dollar speeches to Wall Street executives the burden of proof is higher for her to show voters that she will truly hold Wall Street accountable and make the big picture changes our economy needs,” said Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “And continuing to raise big money from some of the more odious actors on Wall Street is not confidence-inducing for voters who want them held accountable.”



Read more: Why Clinton can't stop raising Wall Street cash
90
 
Last edited:
Maybe they should revive Cash for Clunkers to rescue Hillary's campaign!
 
Clean up the Wall-ST instigated corruption in Washington by voting for someone who makes paid speeches singing Wall Streets praises

Establ Dem pretzel logic
 
Don't forget, Hillary started her career out-trading every other Commodity trader who ever drew a breath. Her track record of turning $1,000 into $100,000 in record time is still unmatched
 
Don't forget, Hillary started her career out-trading every other Commodity trader who ever drew a breath. Her track record of turning $1,000 into $100,000 in record time is still unmatched
Her secret to picking winners is said to be a coin toss.
 
hillary didn't create the political game or the citizens united playing field she is forced to compete on.

simpletons and hillary haters are only fooling themselves with this silly rhetoric aka 'the artful smear'.




70.gif



December 5, 2007


Now we know that not far from here Wall Street is humming. The phones are ringing, the blackberries are buzzing. And people are making billions of transactions that raise capital for corporations and deliver value to shareholders every day.

And what happens on Wall Street today - like every day - will ripple across the country and the world. I'm proud to represent New York, to represent the financial capital of the world. I see a lot of people who I recognize in this audience that are integral to what happens in our markets, how we create wealth, how we provide a dynamic economy that will hold out the promise of a better life for so many of our fellow citizens, but indeed for people far flung from here. I do want to recognize Speaker Silver, Shelly Silver, thank you very much for being here with me.

And we in New York, probably more than anyone anywhere, know how critically important is it for our economy and for the global economy, that Wall Street stay on the cutting edge of finance and remain what it always has been, the global finance capital of the world. But we know that the standard for any economic system is not just that it creates growth, but that it lifts up families across America who work hard and dream big every day.


...

In short, we've seen too many middle class families struggling in an economy that is simply not working for them right now. An economy that, in recent months, has been the subject of increasingly worrisome headlines about weakening consumer confidence, about a declining dollar and ballooning national debt.

Now these economic problems are certainly not all Wall Street's fault - not by a long shot. But the reality of our interconnected economy is that what happens on Wall Street impacts main streets across America. It happens sometimes within minutes, sometimes over the course of months or even years.

If we're honest, we need to acknowledge that Wall Street has played a significant role in the current problems, and in particular in the housing crisis. A "see no evil" policy that financed irresponsible mortgage lending. A bond rating system riddled with conflicts of interest. A habit of issuing complex and opaque securities that even Wall Street itself doesn't seem to understand.

I believe we need a new beginning in our economic policy - one that strengthens our middle class and ensures that prosperity is widely shared, and is based on an ethic of shared responsibility. A new beginning that makes Wall Street shoulder its responsibility for this crisis, and that gives homeowners the breathing room they need. One that makes the most well-off among us pay our fair share and gives the middle class the help it needs for education, health care, and retirement security.

Our economy has been at risk by investment schemes aimed at making not just a few, but many extra dollars, and we need to start insisting on the right rules and transparency so this doesn't happen again.

So I'm here today to call on Wall Street to do its part - to help end the foreclosure crisis that is devastating middle class families and threatening the health of our economy.

Wall Street needs to be part of a comprehensive solution that brings to the table all those responsible and calls on them to do their part. Wall Street helped create the foreclosure crisis, and Wall Street needs to help us solve it.

Let's start with an honest, clear-eyed assessment of what went so terribly wrong.




Hillary Clinton: Remarks on Wall Street on Housing Crisis
 
Big banks are the bogeymen of the 2016 presidential campaign, even though the grinding recession they helped cause began nearly a decade ago and they’ve since paid more to the government in fines and interest than they got from taxpayers through the unpopular bailouts of 2008.

There’s no statute of limitations on outrage, however, which is why Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has been able to build a whole campaign around a plan to break up the banks. Republican contender Ted Cruz says he wouldn’t save a big bank even if it were about to collapse. And the biggest liability faced by Democrat Hillary Clinton may be her coziness with Wall Street, manifest in copious campaign donations from financial firms, not to mention several million dollars in fees she earned for speeches given to bank employees.

Sanders wants to separate banks’ traditional activities—taking deposits and issuing loans—from riskier activities in securities and capital markets, so that a bank could do one or the other, but not both. He may get his wish—without ever having to sign or back a bill. “Bernie doesn’t have to worry, because it’s going to happen by itself,” says Roy Smith, a former Goldman Sachs (GS) partner who’s now a professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business. “In many ways, their long-term viability is in doubt, which will most likely cause them to break themselves up.”


The big banks will break themselves up before Bernie Sanders ever gets to it
 
can you give us a timeline Valerie? :eusa_whistle:

Pressure grows on Hillary Clinton to release Goldman Sachs speeches


Hillary Clinton continued to resist calls to release her transcripts of paid speeches she gave to Goldman Sachs and other banks, saying she would hold onto them until Bernie Sanders and other rivals for the U.S. presidency released theirs.

Sanders, her populist rival for the Democratic presidential nomination who has surged in polls with his furious rebukes of Wall Street and its role in the 2008 recession, said on Friday he had none to release because he does not give paid speeches to banks.
 
why would financially savvy people ever seek advice form an idealistic simpleton like bernie?






Overall, Sanders’ tax hikes would amount to around $1 trillion a year. “It is hard to grasp the enormity of the tax increases Bernie Sanders is proposing,” Howard Gleckman of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Institute wrote recently.

Sanders’ fresh-start approach, of course, is a big part of his appeal. But Hillary Clinton—and many others—contend that Sanders’s proposals are so radical they have zero chance of ever going into effect. Given that at least one house of Congress seems sure to be controlled by Republicans for the foreseeable future, a President Sanders would probably meet a brick wall at the other end of Pennsylvania Ave.


Sanders’ surprising strength suggests a lot of people wouldn’t mind seeing the next president govern with dynamite, whether it’s practical or not.


Clinton
is undoubtedly right when she says she’s the more pragmatic candidate, with policy proposals designed to improve the system instead of blowing it up.


How Bernie Sanders would remake the whole U.S. economy
 
Last edited:
Top 10 Donald Trump Failures

Donald Trump is very proud of himself for forcing President Obama to release his birth certificate, ending the debate over whether he was legally fit to lead the country. But not everything the Donald has put his name behind has succeeded. TIME takes a look at some gambles that went bust

Full List
 

Forum List

Back
Top