New Poll Reveals 56 Percent Of Americans Favor Bank Nationalization
New Poll Reveals 56 Percent Of Americans Favor Bank Nationalization
A new Newsweek poll finds that 72 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of President Obama, 58 percent approve of the job he is doing, and 65 percent are very or somewhat confident that he will be successful in turning the economy around.
The poll also contains the interesting and “somewhat surprising” finding that a majority of the American public supports nationalizing the banks:
11. Temporary nationalization is another way for the federal government to deal with large banks in danger of failing. This is where the government takes over a failing bank, cleans its balance sheets, and then quickly sells it off. In general, which do YOU think is the better way to deal with failing banks…
29 Government financial aid WITHOUT any government control of the bank, OR
56 Nationalization, where the government takes temporary control?
11 Neither/Other (VOL.)
4 (DO NOT READ) Don’t know
It appears that the Obama administration has thus far resisted nationalizing the banks because it views that option as not politically viable. Obama has argued “America’s different” than other countries which have embraced nationalization.
But, in addition to the American public, the noteworthy list of those who are advocating nationalization is bipartisan and growing. It includes Paul Krugman, Alan Greenspan, Nouriel Roubini, Lindsey Graham, James Baker, and now Thomas Hoenig. Hoenig is the Kansas City Fed President, and in remarks yesterday, he criticized the Treasury Department for moving forward with nationalization in a “piecemeal” rather than a comprehensive manner.
As Pat Garofalo explains on The Wonk Room, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s “public-private investment” rescue plan appears to be operating on a faulty theory:
He seems to believe that the problem with the assets is not that they are actually relatively worthless, but that they have an “artificially depressed value” that will return as soon as a market for them is created. [...]
Geithner has posited that the toxic assets have a “basic inherent economic value” that is absent because of “the absence of financing and credit.” Unfortunately, today’s market valuations may reflect actual prices, which would throw a serious wrench into everything about the administration’s plan.
Matt Yglesias warns that the Geithner plan is more likely to fail “by being too cautious rather than overreaching.”
Mr. Obama rode to the White House partly on his savvy use of new media, and he has a staff-written blog on his presidential Web site. Even so, he said he did not find blogs a reliable source of objective information, citing the economy as one example. “Part of the reason we don’t spend a lot of time looking at blogs,” he said, “is because if you haven’t looked at it very carefully, then you may be under the impression that somehow there’s a clean answer one way or another — well, you just nationalize all the banks, or you just leave them alone and they’ll be fine.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
If possible, I’d rather they stay private.
¶ AIO
March 7th, 2009 at 12:12 pmPeter Schiff has been predicting these economic circumstances all along. While everyone in the financial media was laughing at him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw
Here’s what he’s saying now (the bailouts are are mistake):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbvL4u-MrVM
March 7th, 2009 at 12:12 pmWe should have a new song, to commemorate this new socialist dawn. Something with trumpets, and trombones, and a bridge that goes “wah… wah… wah…”
March 7th, 2009 at 12:16 pmWhat would a community organizer know about running the banking system?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:16 pmYou people have to be kidding!
If the people weren’t being constantly liedto by you and the MSM they would definitly not want your little hands on their financial futures.
New Poll Reveals 56 Percent Of Americans Favor Bank Nationalization
– - Concurrently, 94% of the respondents said they had no idea what nationalizing the banks means.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:18 pmCome CJH, let us link our hands in socialist solidarity.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:19 pmAnd I’d like to tell Kaine to stop lying about Michael Steele and Rush.
By the way, Obama strikes me as a coward.
He made some nasty comments about small town Pennsylvanians thinking he wouldn’t be quoted.
And now Obama is using the power and prestige of his office to bully a private citizen into silence.
And all bullys are cowards (that means you, Obama).
March 7th, 2009 at 12:19 pmbackup Says:
Peter Schiff…
March 7th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Peter Schiff? You really want to go with that one, huh? Whatever…
March 7th, 2009 at 12:20 pmI know progressives resist conservative charges that the new administration is pursuing socialism, but here’s the definition:
And here’s the definition of nationalization:
If we oppose socialism, we should resist nationalizing the banks.
If we intend to pursue nationalization, the administration should acknowledge that socialism is what we are pursuing.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:21 pmCJH, Comrade Bush has brought us to the gates of socialist Utopia. Let us all embrace the new American Century together.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:22 pmWe nationalize banks now, today. Just not the big banks. Hells bells, we nationalized a bank in Georgia yesterday. (Isn’t that nationalization?)
I do wish Geithner would get over his ideological opposition to bank “nationalization” and notice we’ve been doing it for a long time, and continue to do it. Just not with the megabanks. “Nationalization” is a very scary word that arrests thinking processes.
(Maybe he thinks he can’t nationalize big banks without staff and Treasury is short-staffed still).
March 7th, 2009 at 12:23 pmPeter Schiff? You really want to go with that one, huh? Whatever…
Zooey. Did he call the current economic crisis?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:23 pmThanks for your concern, b-cup.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:26 pmbackup Says:
I know progressives resist conservative charges that the new administration is pursuing socialism, but here’s the definition:
socialism: a political theory advocating state ownership of industry
Only posting a partial definition? Tell me it ain’t so, B-man.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:26 pmFunny, the poll doesn’t say anything about public-private partnerships, Geithner’s plan to rescue our flagging financial system.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:26 pmbackup Says:
Zooey. Did he call the current economic crisis?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
That ain’t so hard, backup. I called it three years ago.
And I have always encouraged people to save, rather than run up debt. However, I don’t advocate for more of the same old deregulation and free market capitalism that got us here in the first place — like Schiff. Even HE admits that his books telling people how to pick the meat off the carcasses created by this economy aren’t working. Duh…
March 7th, 2009 at 12:28 pmI believe that there is much wishful thinking going on in financial circles. No one seems (or wants) to understand that the US has slowly marginalized itself over the last 25 years as it’s eviscerated its own manufacturing base. Just about the only finished goods we make anymore are weapons systems. You can’t be prosperous just by moving money around and charging a commission or outsourcing labor to gin up the balance sheets. “Wealth” built on the backs of those strategies is ephemeral. Assets valued on that wealth are always over-valued. For Geithner to think that more financing and credit is going to re-inflate the bubble seems a bit naive.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:31 pmIt’s kind of amusing to see the contortions the trolls impose on themselves in order to make their world make sense, if only to themselves.
For instance, they insist on identifying the President of the United States as a “community organizer”, as if the only qualification he had for the highest office in the land was his first job out of college.
They insist that a syndicated radio host with reportedly 10 to 20 million listeners a week, who recently had an hour-plus address to a national conservative convention televised in full by two “news” networks is merely a “private citizen”.
They’re a riot.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:31 pmCJH Says: What the hell do you think we did during the savings and loan crisis? Why don’t you get off the Rush talking points and do some research on your own and learn some history. You really don’t have a clue what the hell your talking about.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:32 pmralph. you should be concerned, too.
Here’s a guy that has been telling people all along that our policies were setting us up for economic problems:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw
He seemed pretty prescient. Wouldn’t it make sense to consider what he has to say about our current circumstance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbvL4u-MrVM
How does that not make sense?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:32 pmTHanks for your concern, b-cup. Really. I mean that.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:33 pmOnce the entire country caves in there won’t be time to nationalize anything.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:33 pmbackup has found a new god…
March 7th, 2009 at 12:34 pmCJH:
That private citizen (Rush, I assume) is using (abusing) the PUBLIC air way.
¶ AIO
March 7th, 2009 at 12:38 pmZooey. I understand what you are saying. I just find it hard to dismiss Schiff, because of the consistent record of predicting the current crisis; especially when you consider how nearly everyone else got it wrong.
It also seems reasonable to consider what Schiff has to say today, considering the vindication of his past predictions.
If Schiff was so prescient about our current situation, why should we believe that he is so wrong today?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:39 pmGeitner and policies that favor the banking interests will be Obama’s downfall. Sad, but true.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:40 pmAmerica exported its “jobs muliplier” to China, sending over 2 million jobs across the Pacific. This was done by multinational companies many people think of as American companies.
Instead the Chamber of Commerce sold the “cheap goods dollar extender” line. Multiple problems hit in a financial perfect storm, none of which our leaders were prepared for.
Greed,leverage and pay for performance imploded Wall Street. Off balance sheet items mean annual reports have no meaning. A company can disappear overnight due to risky financial instruments.
Despite the crisis, leaders in Washington and corporate board rooms want to continue the practices that drove us here. The shadow banking system, private equity and hedge funds, want to remain in the shadows. They’re the funding source for Geithner’s public-private partnerships.
Pay for performance is the tonic to solve health care and education. It can and will cause the same suboptimization seen on Wall Street. Ignorance got us into this mess, and more of the same won’t get us out.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:41 pmDidn’t watch all what Schiff said but got the gist of it. Now, who’s going to kick off our next big production phase in this country?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:41 pmI don’t think so. I just think that if we are considering the best course forward, it probably makes sense to consider those that offered good guidance in the past.
Or, I guess we could just hunker down in partisan corners and wing it.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:42 pmIf Schiff was so prescient about our current situation, why should we believe that he is so wrong today?
Paul Krugman also predicted the current mess.
What else do they have in common?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:42 pmbackup Says:
Zooey. I understand what you are saying. I just find it hard to dismiss Schiff, because of the consistent record of predicting the current crisis; especially when you consider how nearly everyone else got it wrong.
It also seems reasonable to consider what Schiff has to say today, considering the vindication of his past predictions.
If Schiff was so prescient about our current situation, why should we believe that he is so wrong today?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
My record of predicting the current situation is flawless as well, and I say Schiff is wrong. Seems we have a bit of an impasse.
That’s how much sense you’re making, backup — not much.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:43 pmhellinabucket.
This is a great point and argument for the green technology push championed by Obama.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:44 pmThe banks obviously can’t manage themselves. I’m for nationalization. Maybe we could look to Sweden for an example. I see too many economists point to Japan as an example of all that could go wrong – that’s a red herring. There are ways to do it right.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:45 pmFurther evidence of the disconnect between all who claim to know about what is good/right/correct and the actual people down in the trenches…
It’s been a good feeling and quite a change from the bush era. People are getting it and they are less susceptible to the bloviators.
We are all worried, but somehow O is providing a degree of solace.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:46 pmbackup – the definitions of socialism and nationalization that you used are far too simplistic. Start here:
Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating public or state ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equal opportunities for all individuals, with a fair or egalitarian method of compensation.
Nationalization, also spelled nationalisation, is the act of taking an industry or assets into the public ownership of a national government or state. The motives for nationalization are political as well as economic. It is a central theme of certain brands of ’state socialist’ policy that the means of production, distribution and exchange, should be owned by the state on behalf of the people to allow for rational allocation and operation, and rational planning or control of the economy. Many socialists believe that public ownership enables people to exercise full democratic control over the means whereby they earn their living and provides an effective means of redistributing wealth and income more equitably.
The real problem is that we, in the U.S., have been indoctrinated to equate socialism (and communism) with totalitarianism. And here’s a definition of that term:
Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a concept used to describe political systems whereby a state regulates nearly every aspect of public and private life. Totalitarian regimes or movements maintain themselves in political power by means of an official all-embracing ideology and propaganda disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, a single party that controls the state, personality cults, control over the economy, regulation and restriction of free discussion and criticism, the use of mass surveillance, and widespread use of terror tactics. The term has been applied to many states, including: the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Sh?wa Japan, German Democratic Republic (East Germany), People’s Republic of Hungary, Socialist Republic of Romania, People’s Socialist Republic of Albania, Ethiopia, People’s Republic of China, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) [2] and Communist Czechoslovakia.
I’m quite sure you can see some parallels of this definition in what we’ve seen in the U.S. during the Bush administration. Especially with the new knowledge of the legal memos finally released, that basically said the 1st, 4th and 5 Amendments in the Bill of Rights were no longer applicable to the Executive. So obviously, totalitarianism and/or a dictatorship can certainly exist within a capitalistic society, which inevitably becomes a corporatist society as well.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:47 pmNationalize only the big boys and those who really needed TARP funds. Don’t close regional local banks that are sound. I hope this is exactly what is going on after the FDIC is finished looking under the skirt of the 20 or so big ones.
Then (1) do not let commercial banks, investment banks and brokerages ever live together under the same umbrella again, not ever!
March 7th, 2009 at 12:47 pm(2) Stop ALL short selling immediately.
(3) Break up the big banks. If they are too big to fail they are by definition too big.
(4) Give us transparency as to counter-party risk at AIG. Some information is leaking out, but give us the list.
(5) All “innovative” financial instruments must be exchange-traded and cleared.
(6) Take the time to investigate ALL of the suspicious activities that have resulted in the looting of the USA. Hang-em high.
backup, your CNN link spouts more BS GOP talking points. “The problem is you don’t make anything anymore,” is a lie.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:48 pmTemporary nationalization of the big failing banks may be the only way to go. Having the government take control, get rid of the toxic assets and then selling them back, may be the only way to get the banks back on the right track. I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for the same clowns who have been running these banks, to do anything but to continue to line their own pockets. They have shown us over and over again that they are not up to the job.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:49 pmbackup Says:
Backup, to your credit, Pete Schiff did see this thing coming (as did Ron Paul).
However, I’m still not going out to spend my life savings on gunpowder and whiskey as Schiff recommends.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:49 pmHow about you go buy the guns and whiskey, and if the greenback does collapse in totality, I’ll trade you food and medicine for them. Deal?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:51 pmZooey. I did not see the current circumstance as you did. (I imagine you don’t have the video record that Schiff has, but I trust your account).
Please understand my confusion.
We have gotten ourselves into an economic crisis by going into too much debt to spend money we did not have.
Now, we are being told the solution is to go into significantly more debt to spend much more money that we still don’t have.
Is it crazy to question that?
I know I’ve seen this quote from progressives here:
Couldn’t it apply in this situation?
Schiff sounds reasonable to me.
I’ve got to split, but I’ll check back later.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:52 pmbackup found someone that predicted an economic collapse after 8 years of republican rule. Hell he could have asked anyone here……..I know, he’s concerned.
Seriously backup, that was weak sauce, even for you.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:52 pmthe brown acid Says:
How about you go buy the guns and whiskey, and if the greenback does collapse in totality, I’ll trade you food and medicine for them. Deal?
This post-collapse you’re talking about?
The only deal you’ll get, is a bullet in the head.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:54 pmI’ve got to split, but I’ll check back later.
Predictable.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:55 pmJeebus, backup! Schiff IS advocating more of the same old thing, except he recommends that we save money and not run up debt (good thing), while at the same time saying we still don’t need any of the regulation stickiness AND throwing in a survival of the fittest component.
WTF?
March 7th, 2009 at 12:57 pmbrown acid. That’s fair enough. I don’t know that much about Schiff. I imagine he’s probably said plenty of other questionable things.
I would be open to links to information that discredits Schiff. To be honest, I would rather not believe his vision for the future.
Another thing I would like to get to the bottom of, is the charge that FDR’s New Deal didn’t really end the Depression, but actually prolonged it.
I hear it more and more, but it goes against history as I understand it.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:58 pmOk, I’m done with backup AGAIN. Why the hell do I keep banging my head on that wall? Can someone tell me this?
I have a paper to write. Toodles.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:00 pmThanks for ignoring me again, B-cup. That tells me you’re only interested in promoting your faux concern about the economy.
But it’s a pretty transparent ruse, by this time.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:02 pmPersonally, I think more Americans should put their money into credit unions and their small local banks.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:03 pmZooey. We agree on the saving money and avoiding debt. I think we only disagree on Schiff’s position to let the market correct itself. I think the answer may be in weather the New Deal actually fixed the economic conditions of the 30’s. If it’s conclusive that it did, it would go along way towards supporting the new efforts at stimulus.
But, I honestly don’t have enough information on it. I’m in the middle of a biography of FDR, maybe that will shed some light.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:05 pmBackup….
Um listening to Peter Schiff would have cost you mucho dinero….but just as a stopped clock can also be correct twice a day using Peter Schiff’s comment is at best taken with many grains of salt
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/01/peter-schiff-was-wrong.html
March 7th, 2009 at 1:05 pmPersonally, I agree with KayInMaine. The prescription for getting through this mess seems to be strong *local* economies and communities to nurture said economies.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:05 pmbarfly. I’m not ignoring you. What do you mean here?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:06 pmCome on backup, you KNOW who is responsible for the smears against FDR – and you KNOW why they’re doing it.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:07 pmSchiff also put forth the false “but we don’t make anything here anymore,” line, to tie in with conservative talking point #97: “if only the capital gains and corporate tax rates were lessened, we’d have manufacturing in the US again.”
March 7th, 2009 at 1:07 pmgrumpyoldvet.
Thanks for the link. That makes sense to me. (the broken clock, right twice a day)
March 7th, 2009 at 1:08 pmIt’s not rocket science. To think otherwise is voodoo.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761584403/great_depression_in_the_united_states.html
Although economic conditions improved by the late 1930s, unemployment in 1939 was still about 15 percent down from 25 percent.
We entered the war in 41.
You can’t be that ignorant unless you want to be.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:08 pmAnyone taking a trip to the industrialized parts of Los Angeles would quickly see how much lie this is, backup.
There is manufacuring of all sorts, including heavy equipment.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:10 pmI’m sure it would not be that difficult to find, but it seems that their should be economic data that would show reversals in unemployment and other economic growth following implementation of the New Deal.
I’ve got to look it up.
And I’m backing off my Schiff position. It is possible that someone took any and all of his valid predictions and omitted his mistakes. That is very possible.
And I obviously see the motivation that free market capitalists would have in rewriting the history of the ’30s. But, I weigh it against the motivations of union educators that wrote the history in the first place.
The objective economic data should be out there.
I’ve really got to split. Barfly, I’ll check for your comment later. Sorry.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:13 pm*slapping The Brown Acid five* ;-)
March 7th, 2009 at 1:14 pmOr come down here to San Diego and visit the shipyards, where they fabricate and repair cargo ships. “We don’t make anything anymore” is, and always has been, baloney.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:14 pmProud Says:
Might as well take over the banks, Obama has to start somewhere with his socialist agenda, thank goodness he has received the full support of Chaves.
And Lindsey Graham. And Alan Greenspan. And James Baker. They’re all peas in the same pod with Chavez, right?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:17 pmorange Says:
“back up is a TP sock-puppet & is probably Zooey”
You’re not from around here, are you?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:20 pmBush’s fascist agenda to destroy America started with Cheney’s secret energy policy. It only got worse from there and we’re seeing the effects of it still today.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:21 pmIf these companies aren’t ramping up lending with the taxpayer dollars they’re provided, then they’re not positioning themselves to restart revenues and repay the government.
As long as there is a lien on these large companies for taxpayer money, the government is the majority stakeholder and has the right to step in and reposition the company so that revenues/profits can be generated and the treasury of the united states can be repaid.
Problem is, Timothy Geithner’s Treasury Department is understaffed. Woefully understaffed. I was previously calling for his resignation without that known known. At any rate, I don’t know what to think of his performance at this point.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:25 pmKay, to be fair, I don’t think Bush set out specifically to destroy America. I think he set out to make his friends a ton of money and destroying America was just collateral damage.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:26 pmWe are already nationalizing banks. Whenever a bank fails, the FDIC in effect takes over. We nationalized hundreds of S&Ls in the 1980s and eventually sold off the assets and they went back into priivate hands. Nationalization does not have to be permanent, but right now with Citi trading at a dollar and other banks just as bad it may be the only option. What Japan did wrong is allow the banks to continue to exist as zombie banks, not making loans but continuing to just suck the life out of their economy.
Bush really managed to royally____ everything up. Mission Accomplished
March 7th, 2009 at 1:28 pmwhat’s that orange? Your grade scale, or your skateboard ramp?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:29 pmMr. Obama rode to the White House partly on his savvy use of new media, and he has a staff-written blog on his presidential Web site. Even so, he said he did not find blogs a reliable source of objective information, citing the economy as one example.
Well thanks a lot MR. Obama, now you tell me.
I was being lead to believe that all the answers were right here, now come to find out that these people are all BLITHERING IDIOTS that even you don’t take seriously or listen to.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:29 pmthis is not the way progressives should be talking
we need to nationalize “banking”, not “banks”
we do NOT need to take over their toxic assets, I don’t want to pay their gambling debts
we need them to keep their waste and the government tkaing over future distribution of loans
banks could “possibly” earn a small fixed commision that floats down the bigger the loan
March 7th, 2009 at 1:30 pmWhen the $700 billion bailout was being debated, I remember at least one troll defending the proposed (and now executed) looting of the treasury to these honchos by saying, “These companies paid that much much in taxes!” Fred and others promptly knocked down the troll with a now oft-cited report that 2/3 of companies pay no income taxes.
So with that pattern, you can be sure that fiscal responsibility isn’t in the minds of today’s republicans. They simply hate the motive of working in the best interests of the people. They don’t want any funds directed toward that cause.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:31 pmAlGore Says: “I was being lead to believe that all the answers were right here,”
That’s what happens to sheep.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:32 pmAlGore: I gunna go watch Faux News again yupieeeeee!!11
March 7th, 2009 at 1:33 pmorange Says:
bye
Write if you find work…
March 7th, 2009 at 1:34 pmHow many times are asholes allowed to f-up things? How many times are we the people suppose to turn over our money to the same asholes?
Hey I want a jet too. Where can I find a job where I can f-up and get a fat bonus? Oh yeah…the private sector.
chimpy proved private money=private wars.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:35 pmProud Says:
Might as well take over the banks, Obama has to start somewhere with his socialist agenda, thank goodness he has received the full support of Chaves.
Don’t forget the majority of the American people proud. you and yours made sure everyone knew President Obama (man, I never get tired of typing that) was a socialist, and America chose him, so that means America wants socialism.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:35 pmAlGore Says:
Well thanks a lot MR. Obama, now you tell me.
I was being lead to believe that all the answers were right here, now come to find out that these people are all BLITHERING IDIOTS that even you don’t take seriously or listen to.
We apologize, we should have told you sooner that you make a colossal ass of yourself. Now you’ve lost the interest of the president.
Look what you’ve done.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:35 pmTrolls are really skittery today, ain’t they? Must be fixin’ to rain.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:40 pmmore likely, you have punked yourself….heh. Figures.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:41 pmCJH Says:
What would a community organizer know about running the banking system?
You people have to be kidding!
If the people weren’t being constantly liedto by you and the MSM they would definitly not want your little hands on their financial futures.
Yer right the CJH, who would want a community organizer, who is also a constitutional scholar, a law professor at the University of Chicago and a first rate intellect to deal with this republican created financial crisis when we could have had a senile old goat who was up to his ass in the last financial crisis (the savings and loan failure of the 80’s), who was 5th from the last in his graduating class at Annapolis, who couldn’t not crash a jet, and who is a serial adulterer. Tough choice, if yer a moron.
And isn’t it a good thing that the dems were able to keep your buddies from investing social security in the stock market? That was a brilliant idea, from the same people you are supporting now. moron.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:42 pmIs orange talking to the voices in his head?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:43 pmAshton Kutcher is a Righty?
Those poll results sure are awesome. Bet those righties don’t like that at all.
Ouch – democracy.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:43 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
Trolls are really skittery today, ain’t they? Must be fixin’ to rain.
Well cows will just lie down under a tree before it rains, I guess that makes our trolls dumber than dairy cows.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:45 pmorange @67, 75…
talk about a waste of bandwidth…
so, what did you guys do last night, anyway?
sounds like you need to worry…
ah hahahahaha!
March 7th, 2009 at 1:46 pmNevar Says:
orange Says:
bye
Write if you find work…
I’m guessing orange will find work as a side-show geek, biting the heads off chickens, or maybe a janitor at a brothel…
March 7th, 2009 at 1:46 pmCJH Says:
By the way, Obama strikes me as a coward.
He made some nasty comments about small town Pennsylvanians thinking he wouldn’t be quoted.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
__________
What was nasty about what he said? Small town hicks in Pennsylvania DO cling to guns and religion. Sorry if you don’t like the truth…
March 7th, 2009 at 1:46 pmTrue, but had he not been comfortable what was happening beneath him in his administration and across this country, he could have stepped in, fired people, and made good choices when he had the chance to. But he didn’t.
He did, however, make a ton of money for his friends as you pointed out! He was very good at it.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:49 pmProud Says:
Might as well take over the banks, Obama has to start somewhere with his socialist agenda, thank goodness he has received the full support of Chaves.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
__________
Sounds good to me. Bush proved that the unchecked capitalist agenda is a recipe for disaster. I say we try some socialism for a while and see how it works out.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:50 pmT.P. Wrote:
… What? Like CNBC is ahead of the information?
Someone please send Obama the tape of John Stewart!
.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:52 pmOh, I see. The trolls have no plan, no alternatives, no sanity. Revisit the GOP tombstone, Decision ‘08.
Bottom line: President Obama has been doing everything a president should be doing, and then some. Bush took his ass back to the ranch after being selected.
The trolls never did answer my question — where in the constitution is your partisan expectation of a candidate’s experience supported? In other words, where in that document does it say that a democrat (sic) president must have a certain level of experience to make republicans happy?
Because no level of experience will make the republican party happy. They want easy & permanent power with no benefit to the people and want to see the party of better ideas fail.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:53 pmThese companies that are receiving the money are going to tank, President Obama is giving these ashole time to regroup but they want to waste the money for their own self-interests. Imagine raising interest rates on the people who lent you money.
Dishonest wall st and 19th century financial institutions have lived their usefulness. Democracy is based on honesty and repugs showed us how easy it is to ruin everything with dishonest people at the helm.
Just as chimpy eliminated the checks and balances at the executive level, he also did the same thing with everything he touched.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:54 pmMax-1
I’m not offended by this, and I hope no one else is. I hope to hell President Obama is getting information from the most informed people he can find.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:54 pmbarfly: Or come down here to San Diego and visit the shipyards, where they fabricate and repair cargo ships. “We don’t make anything anymore” is, and always has been, baloney.
The US has 1% of the world shipbuilding market. You think that’s good?
March 7th, 2009 at 1:57 pm.
Dear Proud,
Agree or disagree?
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/03/hbc-90004488
George W. Bush’s Disposable Constitution
By Scott Horton
You’re fighting an overhyped “SOCIALIST SCARE” all the while you slept through, even cheered on the usurpation and subordination of The Bill of Rights.
I see where your priorities/loyalties lay…
You, (R)ush, Bin Laden…
… HOPE AMERICA FAILS!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×8247661
.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:58 pmProud Says:
Might as well take over the banks, Obama has to start somewhere with his socialist agenda, thank goodness he has received the full support of Chaves.
Hey proud, why don’t you isolate yourself and stop using our socialist services.
Look where your socialist for the rich and greedy got us.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:59 pmUS shipbuilding
March 7th, 2009 at 2:00 pmCJH Says:
What would a community organizer know about running the banking system?
You people have to be kidding!
If the people weren’t being constantly liedto by you and the MSM they would definitly not want your little hands on their financial futures.
This coming from someone in a party that did so well with our financial future. What a hoot.
You have to remember troll, that your president was an MBA. Now one would think that an MBA would know how to make the financial future of this country great. Instead he completely destroyed it.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:01 pmWell, lets take AIG for example, some 180 billion have been pumped into this too big to fail financial insitution, yet its total market value is less than 1 billion.
Why take over such a huge failure and resell it at a huge loss?
Let the zombies die. Heck they could create new banks for the cost of the bailouts.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:02 pmsorry, let’s try that link again.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:02 pmBobwurst,
March 7th, 2009 at 2:02 pmYes, Obama should be getting the best info available…
… Just that CNBC has proven a recent record that is far less outstanding than say, Paul Krugman has, NO?
Why NO Mention of the Ratings Companies, Like Moody’s or Standard and Poors??
These Highly paid Wall St. Denizens were Using their Professional Skills and Abilities to Give Packages of Toxic Sub Prime Mortgage Assets a AAA Rating.
I Agree…the problem is Not the Banks..it is the Banking SYSTEM.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:02 pmCJH Says:
What would a community organizer know about running the banking system?
You people have to be kidding!
If the people weren’t being constantly liedto by you and the MSM they would definitly not want your little hands on their financial futures.
You’re right. I prefer a sometime PTA mom taking over the presidency.
HAHAHAHAHA
March 7th, 2009 at 2:02 pmI’m still trying to figure out what Proud is proud about? He doesn’t seem to be proud about the country he lives in or its people, so whats he proud about?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:03 pmXisithrus
Exactly!
March 7th, 2009 at 2:04 pmangels81 Says:
I’m still trying to figure out what Proud is proud about? He doesn’t seem to be proud about the country he lives in or its people, so whats he proud about?
She is proud of her ignorance.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:05 pm.
George W. Bush …
… C(rappy) student!
Look what America got…
… Now, what’s the lesson here?
.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:06 pmAnd, now that Im thinking of it, just what are we bailing out? Derivatives gambles? Didnt the subprime mortgages get sold, as SIV’s to pension funds, cities, towns and investors around the globe to get this risk off the banksters balance sheets?
Im not in favor of bailouts, nor nationalizing but allowing new banks, without the same private owners as before who created this mess, come into being.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:06 pmOff Topic, Orange, posts #67 & 75 look suspiciously like Trajan, also known as Voice From The Past.
Sorry guys, had to look it up. It looked awfully fishy. And, if he says we’ve been pawned. He did alot of troll slaying for us.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:06 pmWell we saw what a guy with an MBA did……..nuff said.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:06 pmarleang Says:
Nationalize only the big boys and those who really needed TARP funds. Don’t close regional local banks that are sound. I hope this is exactly what is going on after the FDIC is finished looking under the skirt of the 20 or so big ones.
Then (1) do not let commercial banks, investment banks and brokerages ever live together under the same umbrella again, not ever!
(2) Stop ALL short selling immediately.
(3) Break up the big banks. If they are too big to fail they are by definition too big.
(4) Give us transparency as to counter-party risk at AIG. Some information is leaking out, but give us the list.
(5) All “innovative” financial instruments must be exchange-traded and cleared.
(6) Take the time to investigate ALL of the suspicious activities that have resulted in the looting of the USA. Hang-em high.
That was a great post. If there’s any nationalization, AIG needs to be the first. A lot of investigating and unclogging needed there. It seems the pattern of coming back and asking for money while attempting to hide retreat locations from the very same people who foot the bill is proving to be a very difficult pattern to break.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:08 pmangels81,
Proud is quite happy…
… HOPING AMERICA FAILS!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×8247661
.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:09 pmThanx Game of Life!
March 7th, 2009 at 2:10 pmhussein toasterhead Says:
Proud Says:
Might as well take over the banks, Obama has to start somewhere with his socialist agenda, thank goodness he has received the full support of Chaves.
March 7th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Sounds good to me. Bush proved that the unchecked capitalist agenda is a recipe for disaster. I say we try some socialism for a while and see how it works out.
I agree completely. The thing that you don’t hear the conservatives screaming about socialism say is exactly what is wrong with it. Countries like Sweden and Denmark, which have some socialist programs, are stable, peaceful and prosperous countries and their people are happy and content.
So, trolls, here’s the challenge. Tell us what is wrong with socialism (at least partial socialism because there aren’t any industrialized nations that are totally socialist, they just have some socialist programs like national health care).
March 7th, 2009 at 2:10 pmSiegfried in Roy droppings
March 7th, 2009 at 2:12 pmGreat………
Could be, Rich H. But if so, who really cares?
What was accomplished? He fooled a bunch of people who couldn’t see or hear him, but could only read words in a blog forum? That takes some craftiness, eh?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:13 pmI don’t like the fact that we keep giving the same clowns more bailout money so they can continue to do the same old shit. That’s why I think that maybe nationalization is what we should do. Get rid of the toxic assets, break these giants up into smaller and leaner banks and sell them off. This way tax payers may even get their money back, instead of pouring it down a black hole for rich fat cats.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:13 pmXisithrus Says:
Well, lets take AIG for example, some 180 billion have been pumped into this too big to fail financial insitution, yet its total market value is less than 1 billion.
Why take over such a huge failure and resell it at a huge loss?
Let the zombies die. Heck they could create new banks for the cost of the bailouts.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Another spot-on post. AIG could be broken up and the SBA could be beefed up to provide start-up resources to the socially-responsible entrepreneur — one who wants their own bank charter, for example. A series of new startups could provide instant recovery. Then, new merger regulations should be enacted so that no company becomes too big to fail.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:14 pmCJH Says: What would a community organizer know about running the banking system?
Im sure McCain, part of the Keeting scandal, and Palin, moosehunter, would know what to do, right?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:14 pmXisithrus Says:
Im not in favor of bailouts, nor nationalizing but allowing new banks, without the same private owners as before who created this mess, come into being.
And how are those new banks going to be capitalized?
Personally I like the idea of creating a National Bank of the US and funding it with TARP funds. Then use that bank to buy up all the “toxic” mortgages and refinance them. After that, start lending money to main street at reasonable interest rates. Then if the banks want to compete, they will do so or die.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:15 pmLet me try Bilbo
Because it would quelch my “Freedom” to take advantage of those less fortunate or **shudder** a different color or ***shakes violently*** God Forbid teh Gay!
Is that close?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:15 pmNationalization is a nice distraction from the fact all of the people that ran these institutions into the ground should be on trial!
March 7th, 2009 at 2:17 pmWe already heard what McCain would do…NOTHING.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:17 pmAlGore Says:
Mr. Obama rode to the White House partly on his savvy use of new media, and he has a staff-written blog on his presidential Web site. Even so, he said he did not find blogs a reliable source of objective information, citing the economy as one example.
Well thanks a lot PRESIDENT Obama, now you tell me.
I was being lead to believe that all the answers were right here, now come to find out that these people are all BLITHERING IDIOTS that even you don’t take seriously or listen to.
I don’t blame him. Listening to a fool like you or your ilk is fruitless and silly.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:18 pmIt is not only the blogs that are saying nationalize.
Make no mistake about folks, Obama may be a puppet.
Don’t let his populist jive talk fool you.
Pull up the list of banksters in his cabinet and on his economic advisory board and you’ll know why he’s taking that position.
It’s looks like they’re going ride this baby until the wheels fall off, or maybe get FDIC more involved.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:18 pmSo 56 percent of Americans don’t know what they’re talking about. So?
56 percent of Americans think Noah’s Ark was a historical event.
Nationalizing the banks BEFORE we even TRY what’s worked before is nonsense, and designed to do one thing and one thing only.
Permit the republicans to complete their image of President Obama as a socialist.
In October 2007 three men that worked for different parties and different Presidents, Paul Volker, Eugene Ludwig and Nicolas Brady wrote an article entitled “RESURRECT THE RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION”, calling on President Bush to use the successful tactics employed by Bush 1 to deal with the Savings and Loans crisis of the 80’s.
Mr. Brady was U.S. Treasury secretary from 1988-1993. Mr. Ludwig was U.S. comptroller of the currency from 1993 to 1998. Mr. Volcker was chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1979-1987. These men are not amateurs and in the article they called on Bush 2 to bring back the RTC to do the same thing it did before.
1. Liquidate failed assets
2. Redistribute the residual wealth
3. Inject massive amounts of capital into healthier institutions.
4. Impose federal oversight over the salvaged institutions to ensure proper use of federal funds for LENDING.
The RTC was effective, and it stabilized the economy and put America back on a forward moving track. And it did this BEFORE the tech boom of the 90’s, which came in on the heels of the RTC, and took the economy off to heights never anticipated.
Bush 2 rejected the article, and the notion of the government involvement on that level and dismissed the article, and the men writing it.
But that doesn’t mean we should.
Why do you people think LINDSEY GRAHAM is one of the chief advocates trying to coerce President Obama into nationalization of the banks?
Why do you think other key republicans want this done?
To help America?
Come on.
They want him to do it so they can complete their picture of him as a SOCIALIST. They want capitalism, to fail on a democrats watch.
Look, if Nationalization was the ONLY option, then fine.
But people out there are ignorant today. We have incredibly short memories, and an incredibly loose grasp of history. It’s like no one remembers the fact that we’ve BEEN HERE BEFORE, and we KNOW THE WAY OUT.
If people would stop trying to get President Obama to do “something new”, something different, and instead counsel him to do what has WORKED BEFORE, then we could all go back to work and put this stupid, stupid crisis behind us.
America is not suffering from a financial crisis.
We’re suffering from an stupidity crisis.
Bush is gone.
Lets stop acting like he’s still here.
Bring back the RTC and lets get this ship to shore.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:18 pmAnd how are those new banks going to be capitalized?
Not by me
March 7th, 2009 at 2:18 pmRalph, #117
I know, it just looked fishy and I think I said I was sorry. I just caught it, that’s all.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:19 pmMax-1 Says:
Bobwurst,
Yes, Obama should be getting the best info available…
… Just that CNBC has proven a recent record that is far less outstanding than say, Paul Krugman has, NO?
Agreed, but blogging is a hobby for Krugman. I wouldn’t want President Obama to be a forward on the Bulls either.
(ignore me if this isn’t making sense)
March 7th, 2009 at 2:19 pmbackup Says:
Now, who’s going to kick off our next big production phase in this country?
hellinabucket.
This is a great point and argument for the green technology push championed by Obama.
Ok, this is a first. B-Cup actually said something intelligent!
I believe that green technology is going to be as big a boon to our economy as the tech industry was. Let’s just hope that we don’t allow it to form a bubble that will burst like the tech bubble. Let’s keep it on a realistic level.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:22 pmGeithner has said he will do whatever to keep the banking cartel in private hands. Nationalizing is just a means to make the taxpayer the greater fool and buy the crap investors dont want. And after the greater fool buys the junk it will be resold to the same folks who wanted it nationalized.
Its a lose lose situation for the taxpayers.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:22 pmHere’s what’s odd about the President’s additional comment:
1. President Obama says he inherited the financial crisis
2. The recession started in late 2007, according to many economists
3. The crisis reached epic proporations in September. Congress flailed about for two weeks.
4. It is ongoing. Take GE Capital’s record cds prices last week.
And blogs haven’t been a useful resource in an ongoing crisis? Paul Krugman has a blog. Other economists with knowledge have blogs. Some are devoted to private equity. Bloggers mine SEC reports, something the mainstream media rarely does.
The blog ‘dis’ sounds remarkably Bush-like. Once the public gets Tim Geithner’s PPP plan, should blogs continue to be ignored?
How many blogposts has TP/WR devoted to Geithner’s plan in the last day? I recall at least three. Should those also be discounted?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:26 pmStupid troll doesn’t even want to admit that the wheels are already off……
Yeah, what exactly is there to ride again?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:26 pmIf the banksters don’t want to nationalize, then how about the Robert Ruben’s of the world, who got rich, go in their own bank accounts and pitch in to save the banks.
Why should the American people foot the bill alone?
March 7th, 2009 at 2:28 pmFrom PD’s link:
The United States has 1 percent of the commercial shipbuilding market.
“Any country that has a commercial shipbuilding industry heavily subsidizes its industry,” said Cynthia Brown, president of the American Shipbuilding Association. Starting out, shipyards sold their products below cost to fill their order books, she said.
So, is pd saying we need to socialize shipbuilding as well?
Actually, “shipbuilding” includes parts suppliers, and those in the trade known as “outside processing:” those things like bulge, stretch, friction, and hydroform forming of parts, plating, electroplating, flame-brazing, heat-treating, painting, machining, and chem-milling. These aren’t figured in the job estimates when one talks about “ship-building,” because they also perform tasks for other customers. They work for aircraft manufacturers, as well as processing solar/wind/geothermal-specific parts and equipment, and other, more mundane stuff, like light-poles, and pre-fabbed building sections. This “we don’t make stuff here” is bunk.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:30 pmFind and read the book “The Creature from Jekyll Island”. All of this will make a lot more sense when you do. I’m a quarter of the way through it and have found it to be a real eye-opener.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:31 pmWhy should the American people foot the bill alone?
BINGO!
Let’s remove the earnings cap on SSI, and make these fatcats pay on every dollar earned, just like the rest of us.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:33 pm“New Poll Reveals 56 Percent Of Americans Favor Bank Nationalization”
_____________
56% of Americans are Commies?
Who knew???
March 7th, 2009 at 2:35 pmTypical state, misinformation and plausible fallacy. This is what Obama said. He never said it wasn’t a valuable resource.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
barfly Says:
Let’s remove the earnings cap on SSI, and make these fatcats pay on every dollar earned, just like the rest of us.
__________
Hell… if you just raised the rate, w/out lifting it completely, it’d help…
March 7th, 2009 at 2:36 pmBarfly,
I believe the Manufacturing Sector is making just as much stuff…but doing it with a lot LESS people.
Productivity is a double edged Sword.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:37 pmOne thing about the government helping Americans with their mortgages (the ones that prove they suffered a hardship to have lost their home: job loss, healthcare costs, the tripling of their mortgage rate etc.) is that it helps the banks in the end, so basically, it’s killing two birds with one stone.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:37 pmAnd of course, when I suggest that we remove the earnings cap on SSI, I mean in a prudent manner, not all at once. Say, raise it $10,000 a year, until they’re fully vested.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:37 pmTheAntichrist Says:
If the banksters don’t want to nationalize, then how about the Robert Ruben’s of the world, who got rich, go in their own bank accounts and pitch in to save the banks.
Why should the American people foot the bill alone?
Who is footing the bill these days, TA? Everything seems to be a run on the print press. We have no choice but to spend our way out of this — the spending priorities of the last eight years have drained the life out of priorities that should have been given consistent attention in the first place, therefore making it more expensive to repair the damage.
I like the idea of taking it one day at a time. The toughest decisions are yet to be made, and the treasury dept. is understaffed to make them. Nominees become impatient and withdraw.
We have lots of good ideas to deal with this, but the fear of roiling Wall Street, I’m sure, causes a lot of indecisiveness.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:38 pm@WAYNEBRO
Good point.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:38 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
Kay, to be fair, I don’t think Bush set out specifically to destroy America.
____________
No… just the Federal govt.
Taking down the entire country w/ it is just part of the bargain.
Satan drives a mean deal…
March 7th, 2009 at 2:38 pmFred Says:
Obama said blogs aren’t a reliable source of information about the economic crisis,
———-
I beg to differ, Fred. MY information is almost ALWAYS good… and when not good, is at least funny as all get out…
March 7th, 2009 at 2:40 pmNo need to apologize, Rich. if that is in fact the case, it’s good to know. I appreciate the heads-up.
My point basically was: how pathetic is it that a troll would need to play-act and then claim credit for fooling people in a situation where all we have to go by is words typed in a standardized forum? All it would require is the willingness to type shit you don’t mean.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:41 pmkeep as it is or do it % 50 % 50.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:42 pmSince the private sector has failed us as a society, why continue to allow it to function intact. Perhaps a nice timeout, with some recompensation to allow it to bloom again in a responsible, chaperoned vista may be possible.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:44 pmstateofthedivision Says:
The blog ‘dis’ sounds remarkably Bush-like. Once the public gets Tim Geithner’s PPP plan, should blogs continue to be ignored?
How many blogposts has TP/WR devoted to Geithner’s plan in the last day? I recall at least three. Should those also be discounted?
Personally I think that President Obama’s comments were spot on. I don’t think he was talking about bloggers like Krugman. I think he was talking about bloggers like you and me who have opinions on what to do about the economy but most of us don’t have a clue how our monetary system works or how our economy works. It isn’t really helpful to have us all spouting off about how we shouldn’t put any more money into the banks, even though we don’t know what would happen if they fail.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:44 pmNo argument there TROS. I tune in here frequently for the rib ticklers…
March 7th, 2009 at 2:47 pmRUCerious Says:
Since the private sector has failed us as a society…
_____________
I duuno, RU… I, for one, think “the invisible hand of the marketplace” worked exactly the way it’s supposed to… the bankers went overboard and that hand just b-slapped them right out of their silk boxers.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:48 pmFred Says:
No argument there TROS. I tune in here frequently for the rib ticklers…
____________
Thank yoooooouuuuuu… thak yooooooouuu verry much…
I see it as my sacred duty to bring some levity to the moment…
March 7th, 2009 at 2:49 pmMcWars Says:
I like the idea of taking it one day at a time. The toughest decisions are yet to be made, and the treasury dept. is understaffed to make them. Nominees become impatient and withdraw.
I think that they aren’t impatient, more like terrified. They see what’s coming down the pike and they run like scared rabbits rather than standing tall and being part of the solution rather than part of the problem.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:49 pmYeah, TRoS, except they’re laughing all the way to their gold lined closet to get their silk slippers as our homes get foreclosed on…Most of them are still getting their millions in parachute money, even though they ruined their industry.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:50 pmI’d like to see some sort of recompense for their irresponsible actions…
TRoS says:
I see it as my sacred duty to bring some levity to the moment…
WOW! Are you one of those people who can lift things up in the air with your mind!??
March 7th, 2009 at 2:51 pmthe bankers went overboard and that hand just b-slapped them right out of their silk boxers.
Good thing those private jets have lots of padding.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:52 pmThe Republic of Stupidity Says:
I beg to differ, Fred. MY information is almost ALWAYS good… and when not good, is at least funny as all get out…
The problem is that on the economy, all you read in blogs is different people’s opinions on what they think should be done. Since few of us are economists and know little about how our financial system works, all you hear is opinions not based on any quantifiable facts.
That’s why I am going to keep recommending people read “The Creature from Jekyll Island”. So far, it has been an eye opener to me, teaching me how our financial system was started and how it works.
March 7th, 2009 at 2:52 pmHi Rachel/Orange!
March 7th, 2009 at 3:02 pmLet’s just make sure the Zionist bankers don’t keep running things. Also, maybe we could start enforcing the laws against theft.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:02 pmThe timing of President Obama’s comment on blogs is interesting:
Bloggers and unions form group to push Democrats to the left
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/26/america/27webliberals.php
March 7th, 2009 at 3:03 pmWhat’s the problem with just running with credit unions, non profit organizations that pool our money and make credible loans?
March 7th, 2009 at 3:04 pmAnd State, if you’ve read any of Obama’s books, he makes it crystal clear that he intends to govern from the center left.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:06 pmWhy is that so hard for you to grasp?
Nothing to learn from financial blogs? Someone wrote “the Creature from Jekyll Island”. Might that be a blog today?
Consider this from PEHub. A Carlyle Group affiliate got a ratings upgrade (rare in today’s economy):
Company: American Achievement Corp.
Sponsor: Carlyle Group and Fenway Partners
Downgrade: S&P raised its corporate credit rating to ‘CCC+’ from ‘SD’ (selective default).
Highlights: AAC’s parent company repurchased $104 million of the senior PIK notes for $24 million, removing covenants and reducing consolidated leverage. Despite that and the company’s historically stable demand, “the company is unlikely to reduce its highly leveraged financial profile over the intermediate term.”
Senator Max Baucus D-MT gave firms buying back their debt a $25 billion tax break. He inserted the provision in the stimulus package.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310671578422199.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Would you like a tax break from buying back your mortgage for 24 cents on the dollar? This is not something that may happen. It’s in a bill that passed.
A Qatar paper revealed how The Carlyle Group plans to take advantage of this change.
http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=Business_News&subsection=market+news&month=March2009&file=Business_News2009030774951.xml
As a blogger, I commented:
http://peureport.blogspot.com/2009/03/what-happens-when-carlyle-sells-to.html
March 7th, 2009 at 3:18 pmRUCerious Says:
Yeah, TRoS, except they’re laughing all the way to their gold lined closet to get their silk slippers as our homes get foreclosed on…Most of them are still getting their millions in parachute money, even though they ruined their industry.
I’d like to see some sort of recompense for their irresponsible actions…
____________
There is NOTHING I’d rather see on the evening news than a Wall Street per walk.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:24 pmI don’t know what’s best for us and the banks, but I’m not afraid of socialism.
Would like to point out that President Obama was an Illinois State Senator for seven years, and a U.S. senator for four years.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:25 pm“The Creature from Jekyll Island” came out in paperback in 1998 (according to Amazon). Blogging was not a venue then.
With many journalists losing their jobs, they may use blogs to share their voice/findings/research.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:25 pmstateofthedivision Says:
The timing of President Obama’s comment on blogs is interesting:
Bloggers and unions form group to push Democrats to the left
http://www.iht.com/ articles/ 2009/ 02/ 26/ america/ 27webliberals.php
___________
And most likely completely unrelated. But you can pretend there’s a connection if it makes you feel important.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:26 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
The problem is that on the economy, all you read in blogs is different people’s opinions on what they think should be done. Since few of us are economists and know little about how our financial system works, all you hear is opinions not based on any quantifiable facts.
_____________
Geez… Bilbo… you know me well enough by now to recognize snark when you see it.
I agree. Sadly, a lot of us don’t have the background or access to enough information to really have a valid opinion. We’re kind of forced to watch from the sidelines whilst others try to work this out for us.
The time to have stopped this train was prolly 3 or 4 years ago.
Now we’re all stuck w/ the wreck.
March 7th, 2009 at 3:29 pmWhile President Obama’s books may be center left, his public-private partnerships and pay for performance are center right. They’re a continuation of Bush.
12-22-08 FederalNewsRadio
One of the top priorities of the Bush Administration over the last eight years has been expanding the use of pay-for-performance as a means of rewarding top performing federal workers.
7-30-08 WSJ
The Bush administration unveiled a plan to impose new tolls on freeways and encourage more private investment to finance road and mass-transit projects, a move aimed at stirring debate as lawmakers prepare for a major overhaul of transportation policy.
The White House says more tolls and public-private partnerships can solve perhaps the biggest problem confronting the nation’s aging infrastructure.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:22 pmBilbo, regarding the book “The Creature from Jekyll Island,” sounds interesting. But I would read it with a grain of salt. The author, G. Edward Griffin, has always been a little off the wall, as well as having been a speech writer for George Wallace’s running mate in 1968, Gen. Curtis LeMay and a long-time member and office of the John Birch Society. To me, someone who is a far-right libertarian is not exactly a Progressive’s role model.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:33 pmSorry, meant to include the link to info on Griffin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Creature_from_Jekyll_Island
March 7th, 2009 at 4:35 pm175. stateofthedivision Says:
Back in troll form I see. Don’t you get dizzy with all the spinning you do?
March 7th, 2009 at 4:37 pmwinddancer Says:
To me, someone who is a far-right libertarian is not exactly a Progressive’s role model.
I wasn’t recommending making the author a ‘role model’ I was recommending reading the book. It’s a good education on how the Federal Reserve came to be and how our monetary system works.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:41 pmBilbo, heaven forbid you learn anything about management theory.
http://deming.org/index.cfm?content=66
March 7th, 2009 at 4:45 pmstateofthedivision Says:
Nothing to learn from financial blogs? Someone wrote “the Creature from Jekyll Island”. Might that be a blog today?
And where did anyone say there is nothing to be learned from “financial blogs”. Another straw man argument from the king of straw men.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:45 pmCJH @ 4 & 7
Those are some over used hate America talking points you have used. Do you guys ever think on your own?
The gopper party is an empty suit with entertainers such as Rush, an entertainer only, leading you down the cliff.
Even Specter wants out.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:46 pmGood idea and about time.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:47 pmIf Bush pushed pay for performance and public-private partnerships, which is well documented for anyone paying attention the last eight years, why is President Obama pushing the same thing?
Ignornance is the answer. Optimizing part of the system suboptimizes the whole. This isn’t troll spin, it’s the teachings of the world’s foremost quality guru.
What problems do we have in spades today? Poor quality, from medicines to peanut butter to investment products to our elected leaders. They operate on bad theory.
Ignorance is as ignorance does.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:51 pmWow Bilbo, your super sharp Ginzu troll knife can split hairs. President Obama talked about economic blogs in relation to banks, which are part of the financial industry.
You can pay attention to corporate winners in the stimulus package, like The Carlyle Group, or you can ignore it. I don’t blame President Obama for Max Baucus’s insertion, but he did sign the bill with $25 billion in Corporafornication.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:55 pmCapitalism and the “free market system” in America are broken, thanks to deregulation of everything by President Ronald Reagan. Reagan removed all the government watchdogs and told us we should trust people like Bernard Madoff, Kenny Boy Lay, and the Bush family.
If President Obama doesn’t put the regulations back in place, the whole country will crumble from debt and corruption. If that’s the definition for socialism then we had better do it ASAP. God, I wish Senator Bill Proxmire was still alive and fighting for us in Washington D. C.
March 7th, 2009 at 4:55 pmBut, in addition to the American public, the noteworthy list of those who are advocating nationalization is bipartisan and growing. It includes Paul Krugman, Alan Greenspan, Nouriel Roubini, Lindsey Graham, James Baker, and now Thomas Hoenig. Hoenig is the Kansas City Fed President, and in remarks yesterday, he criticized the Treasury Department for moving forward with nationalization in a “piecemeal” rather than a comprehensive manner.
Nationalize the banks. And keep them that way. Until abolition of the wage system.
====
March 7th, 2009 at 5:14 pmSeeing the way that the Bank Execs used the Bailout money (at least the ones we know about – don’t forget most banks won’t even tell the govt what they did)……
the question is how do we provide a shot in the arm for the industry and not let them waste it again.
Socialist nationalization is almost always the govt taking over a highly lucrative and profitable business. If taking over the banks is an attempt at socialization, then I have to say that congress is doing it all wrong.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:17 pmCJH
Perhaps Your Weekly Address found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ may help undo some of the damage set in by the hate America entertainers.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:30 pmTheAntichrist
With the straight talk the repugs do how can we go wrong?
March 7th, 2009 at 5:36 pmHe made some nasty comments about small town Pennsylvanians thinking he wouldn’t be quoted.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:38 pmMapleStreet Says:
Socialist nationalization is almost always the govt taking over a highly lucrative and profitable business. If taking over the banks is an attempt at socialization, then I have to say that congress is doing it all wrong.
Did you forget that these financial institutions are highly lucrative and profitable because of their piss-poor, greedy, stealing business practices? Government isn’t taking it over to gain profits; it’s trying to stop the bleeding.
March 7th, 2009 at 5:44 pmCJH Says:
You are a moron. I am talking to YOU CJH. You let Rush do your thinking for you because you are stupid. You are of the Limborg. You are pathetic and ignorant. Come back when you have an opinion of your own that we havent heard a couple of hundred times from OTHER brainwashed morons that have Rush the Oxymoron do their thinking for them
March 7th, 2009 at 6:09 pmPresident Obama wants America’s shadow banking system, private equity and hedge funds, to bail out failing financial institutions. He’s made the quite clear.
The greed and leverage boys took us into the tailspin, and our President wants them to take us out.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:36 pmOnce more, which part of the Resolution Trust Corporation don’t you understand?
Which part of Lindsey Graham’s involvement in this eludes you?
We’ve been here before and we didn’t get out by nationalizing the banks.
We got out, by creating a vehicle (the RTC) for restructuring debt, liquidating failed financial institutions, and injecting capital and federal oversight to see that capital goes to making loans.
Why is that so hard for people to grasp?
Seriously, why is that concept so elusive?
Tell me, which would you rather do?
Keep your jobs and money?
Or “stick it” to the banks?
Which one do you think makes more sense?
March 7th, 2009 at 6:45 pmAnd by the way.
If the banks are “highly lucrative and profitable” as you first stated, then we wouldn’t need to bail them out, now would we?
:|
Come on people. We’re smarter than this, right?
March 7th, 2009 at 6:46 pmMapleStreet Says:
Seeing the way that the Bank Execs used the Bailout money (at least the ones we know about – don’t forget most banks won’t even tell the govt what they did)……
the question is how do we provide a shot in the arm for the industry and not let them waste it again.
Why are we asking questions we know the answers to?
I’ve spelled it out as plain as I can.
We reintroduce the RTC, or some similar federally owned vehicle to liquidate the failed banks, redistribute the residual wealth, inject capital and PROVIDE OVERSIGHT to ensure the capital is loaned out.
What are we “Bush stupid” now?
Did Bush make us all as stupid as himself?
Just because Bush handed out 350 billion to the banks without ANY OVERSIGHT ATTACHED….doesn’t mean we have to, does it?
:|
I mean, which part of this is so difficult?
We give them the money THROUGH AN OVERSIGHT BODY.
Like the Resolution TRUST CORPORATION.
Which part of that is so elusive for you?
March 7th, 2009 at 6:52 pmorange Says:
YOU wouldnt know reality if it kicked you in the ballz. YOU are stupid. YOU are worthless you are an ignorant troll without a shred of decency or self respect. You only come here to show everyone just how stupid you are.
March 7th, 2009 at 6:53 pmAnything would be better than the predictor banking system we have now.
Even thou I have bill pay that automatically pays bill on time, I still have to watch the accounts. Even the more reputable banks, credit cards will silently change the due date so if one is not paying attention a regular payment made on the 15th, now due on the 5th will be a late payment therefore increasing the interest dramatically on that account and most likely all other accunts too.
March 7th, 2009 at 7:00 pmYeah, lets not change a thing, lets just go with your ideas some more, they worked so well.
March 7th, 2009 at 7:23 pmbarack obomber Says:
Hey look!
This one’s got drool running out of both sides of it’s mouth!!
Must be a ‘Palinite’.
March 7th, 2009 at 7:36 pmstateofthedivision Says:
Bilbo, heaven forbid you learn anything about management theory.
Hyperbole never served reality well, Mr Deming.
March 7th, 2009 at 7:50 pmHyperbole-exaggeration used as a figure of speech.
I don’t recall Dr. Deming’s teachings on hyperbole. I do remember his encouraging managers not to bribe people. I also recall him stating one aim of business is to provide jobs.
All forgotten, if ever learned. America has an epidemic of poor quality. The good doctor’s teachings are needed now more than ever.
March 7th, 2009 at 8:08 pmI’m not trying to offend anyone, I’m just trying to get people to think. We’re all so busy talking these days I’m afraid few of us take the time to think anymore.
There’s no excuse for people to not be talking about the Resolution Trust Corporation and its role in the Savings a Loans crisis of the 80’s. Or the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, and its role in the depression of the 30’s.
There’s just no excuse to be talking about nationalizing the banks when we’ve yet to even address the methods that have worked before. Its like everyone is so busy trying to say something smart (not necessarily in here but everywhere) about the current crisis that no ones really looking at it, or where we’ve been before.
Repeating silly idioms like “its going to get worse before it gets better” only exasperates the problem, and does nothing to resolve it. Hiding behind claims of “just being realistic” does nothing to resolve it.
President Obama is not just making speeches when he says we can do it and we’ve done it before. He’s giving a history lesson.
I wish people would start listening to him, and STOP listening to the republicans.
Or did some of you out there think Lindsey Graham is leading this call for nationalization, because he wants to help?
March 7th, 2009 at 8:29 pmOT
Obama called back…
… The New York Times, saying he wanted to clarify a point from the interview (Sunday 3/8). Here is a transcript of that brief call:
President Obama: Just one thing I was thinking about as I was getting on the copter. It was hard for me to believe that you were entirely serious about that socialist question. I did think it might be useful to point out that it wasn’t under me that we started buying a bunch of shares of banks. It wasn’t on my watch. And it wasn’t on my watch that we passed a massive new entitlement – the prescription drug plan without a source of funding. And so I think it’s important just to note when you start hearing folks through these words around that we’ve actually been operating in a way that has been entirely consistent with free-market principles and that some of the same folks who are throwing the word socialist around can’t say the same.
March 7th, 2009 at 9:59 pmGame of Life Says:
Did you forget that these financial institutions are highly lucrative and profitable because of their piss-poor, greedy, stealing business practices? Government isn’t taking it over to gain profits; it’s trying to stop the bleeding.
Game – That just furthers my point. A dictatorship nationalizing resources would be take over a lucrative sector of the economy and continue with aggressive business practices. In this case, the banks are in trouble, no one knows how to value their assets, and they are bleeding like a stuck pig.
So if the govt should take over the banks, it is a totally different situation than, say, a South American country nationalizing their oil reserves to maximize money for the govt.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:05 pmWayneBro,
Sounds like we both agree that handing the banks billions of dollars with no strings attached was hastily done and turned out to be a bad idea ? Don’t know your view, but as banks fail and are taken over by the govt, my view is that they are then essentially nationalized.
I’m not against the idea of an RTC as a possible strategy. However, one of my questions is that considering the excesses of the banks, would the RTC have to take a level of control expansive enough that it essentially (but not in name) becomes a nationalization.
I’m also not willing to see nationalization taken off the table. The economic flow is so vital to a country, I see a compelling national interest in protecting the USA interests. I also note that the option being discussed is a **temporary** nationalization – as the bank regains its footing, it may repurchase itself from the govt. I also see this as a possible option.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:15 pmMore like stuck on stupid. You might not know how to value their assets, and maybe the republicans like Lindsey Graham doesn’t know how to value their assets, but I can assure there are people ready to go to work at the Resolution Trust Corporation, and do it the same way we did it before.
Why is this concept so elusive? Please tell me. Is there some gap in learning today, that prohibits knowledge of the 80’s and early 90’s? You were alive then, right?
Are there just a handful of us left who remember the Resolution Trust Corp and how it works?
We need to stop asking questions that the answers to have already been written down in our own history books. Our own RECENT history. We just got through one of these 20 years ago. So why do people keep asking “if not nationalization, then what?”
I’ve given you the answer.
Paul Volcker’s given you the answer.
Eugene Ludwigs given you the answer.
Nick Brady’s given you the answer.
And history, has given you the answer.
We do what we did last time.
We do what worked before.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:29 pmWell this isn’t about our views. This is about fact. And nationalizing the banks is nationalizing the banks.
Setting up a government “owned” Corporation, like FDIC, Fannie Mae, the RFC, the RTC, these are not government run banks. These are corporations that happen to be owned by the government that play a ROLE in the banks.
Oversight of the banks is not ownership of the banks. Theres a huge difference. For example, when Bush decided to throw out the 4th Amendment and started spying on our banking transactions, he had to get the banks to agree to it. There was a paper trail, and thats why we know about it.
If the government owns the banks, then the government can do what it wants, and can see where every single person spends every single cent.
You want that?
You cried for how long in here with the rest of us about domestic spying on our phone calls and banking transactions and now you want this?
What are you on drugs?
What’s WRONG with you people? Why are you listening to Lindsey GRAHAM? I’m serious, I’m not trying to be mean here. I’m in SHOCK!
March 7th, 2009 at 10:34 pmAnd yes, we both agree handing the banks large amounts of money with no oversight is stupid.
So we have OVERSIGHT!!!!
You people are sitting here wringing your hands saying “gee, how can we have oversight without nationalization?”.
And the answer is the SAME way we did it before.
Before Bush, Cheney and Graham removed it!
And we use institutions, like the RESOLUTION TRUST CORP to DO IT!!!
Why is that such a difficult concept?
We’re all so busy talking I think no ones bothering to learn anymore.
READ our history. Read our RECENT history.
Then talk about what we should do, and why.
When you know something about it.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:38 pmAnd sorry, I don’t mean to be so bellicose sounding, and no meanness is intended, believe me. I’m just so frustrated to have to be saying this.
Its like everyone’s in a trance. Like they don’t remember Phil Graham and Dick Cheney on TV just 8 short years ago announcing their “new programs” for home lending, and the removal of “federal entanglement”.
Its like everyones been taken over by some mind dampening drug, that erases recent memory in lieu of buzzwords and catch phrases.
We had regulation and oversight just a decade ago. And we can have it again. We just put it back. And bring back a vehicle like the Resolution Trust Corp to oversee liquidation of the failed banks and handle redistribution of wealth, just like they did in the 1980’s. Bush Senior wasn’t necessarily the best man in the world perhaps, but he certainly wasn’t the dumbest.
He knew when to get out of Iraq, and he knew not to follow Reagans failed policies dealing with the crisis. The Resolution Trust Corporation WORKED.
And it disturbs me no end that people are sitting here talking about nationalization when they aren’t even mentioning what has worked before.
March 7th, 2009 at 10:46 pmHere. I know I’ll be flamed for not providing a link but everyone should read this plea for sanity.
-From the Wall Street Journal-
March 7th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
Thanx for the common sense approach Waynbro..
March 7th, 2009 at 10:56 pmPerhaps because this was a “Bi Partisan” outreach people aren’t listening to it.
Perhaps we’re so caught up in blaming the other party, that when a truly bi partisan effort appears, we shun it, in favor of our own spite for the opposition.
I don’t know.
But this article is as brilliant as it is accurate, and represents a bi partisan outreach to Americans everywhere, (originally intended for Bush, and he rejected it, what does that tell you?) to simply take confidence in our strengths, and to do what has worked before.
Bush rejected this article and mocked the notion that such government involvement was necessary. And look where that got us.
Now, people are IGNORING this article, and acting like they’ve never heard of the RTC, and instead, they are listening to LINDSEY GRAHAM, and calling for the President to nationalize the banking system.
Fortunately for now, President Obama is smarter than most of those calling for this, and refusing to give up on our centuries old system of capitalism. And he likely is fully aware that the only reason Graham and the rest want us to nationalize the banks is so they can complete their portrait of him as a socialist.
But I fear given his proclivities towards compromise, that he will succumb to the ever growing voices on the left that are joining this crusade simply because they don’t know any better. And the way I know they don’t know any better is by the fact that they keep asking, “if not nationalization, then what?”. That question demonstrates a remarkable unfamiliarity with our own recent history.
We’ve been down this hole before, and we know the way out.
Its written down for us.
But for some reason, everyone’s saying, “quit playing with that ladder over there and tell us how we’re going to get out“.
March 7th, 2009 at 11:03 pmWhat the culture of corruption, greed and totalitarianism Republicans have done to our nation, and especially to our nation’s economy, is on the order of a category 5 hurricane hitting a Gulf Coast state or a major U.S. city like New Orleans…with the same results…a devastated business environment, bank buildings flooded with toxic waste waters, massive job losses, a housing market in disrepair, families struggling to rebuild.
So, of course, the conservative Republicans are against our federal government lending a helping hand, remaining true to their toxic ideological positions, making matters even worse among the widespread wreckage caused by their insane, anti-American, neo-fascist policies.
Which makes one wonder if there are any true Christians still left in the toxic, greed-mongering, war-mongering Republican Party?
March 7th, 2009 at 11:12 pmYea, so does Lindsey Graham.
My question is why?
Well not why for Graham, I know why he wants to nationalize. So he and the RNC can label the democrats socialists and say it was on a democrats watch the day capitalism died.
That much I know.
But why you?
Why would you want to nationalize the banks, when the Resolution Trust Corp can do the exact same thing, WITHOUT nationalizing the banks?
March 8th, 2009 at 12:19 amPresident Barack Obama
March 8th, 2009 at 12:26 amMarch 7, 2009
The Obama administration has resisted not only because its not politically viable, which its not, its political suicide, but its also just not necessary when there are other options out there. He is trying many of those options but I hope he listens to history, and brings back the RTC or something like it.
Because nationalizing the banks BEFORE we even try what worked before, is stupid. Just plain stupid.
Its not necessary, and it will damage the democratic party for years to come, plus, who among us wants the government looking at every single cent we spend?
We preach about privacy and the 4th Amendment, and we condemned Bush for looking into some of our bank accounts.
Well now the government will OWN our bank accounts!
They will not need to “look” at our transactions. They’ll be making them! They’ll see them as a function of their new job.
Every single one.
Is that what you want people? Is that what you’re all in here pleading for? You complained when Bush spied on them and now you want them to own them?
We can do the exact same thing by bringing back the RTC and the management and oversight that comes with it. It worked before and it can work again.
I’m sorry for over posting on this topic but I feel almost duty bound to do so. For some reason we are not supporting our President. He says no to nationalizing the banks, and why are we challenging him on that. He’s been in office for less than 2 lousy months.
Can’t we at least give him the benefit of the doubt for 90 days or so?
I mean come on people. Since when did we start listening to LINDSEY GRAHAM?
Or JAMES BAKER????
I mean JAMES BAKER??
Are you serious???
Lets get behind our President for a while folks, and know that some smart people are advising him and they are advising him right.
Nationalizing the banks is what the REPUBLICANS want us to do.
So if what I and others have said about how we can do the same thing just by using the RTC like we did before hasn’t convinced you its a bad idea, ….then maybe the fact that its what the republicans want, will.
James Baker and Lindsey Graham leading this charge towards nationalization, should be enough to send us running in the opposite.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:45 amThis just shows you why we don’t let the majority make important decisions about our government. Unless it is to amend a constitution to keep the gays from marrying. Then it’s OK.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:14 pm211. Waynebro,
Like I said before, for the RTC to work, it would require a measure of govt control so great that it would be, de facto, a nationalization.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:17 pmWaynebro,
reading some of your other posts, one place where we may differ.
I would hold that there is no perfect solution in a difficult situation. I’m not pushing for nationalization; I’m just not willing to take it off the table yet.
Instead, we would benefit from keeping a wide range of options open and then winnow down to the best possible solution.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:19 pmIf the people weren’t being constantly liedto by you and the MSM they would definitly not want your little hands on their financial futures.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:31 pmI know what you said before and it’s still as incorrect now as it was then. It shows you don’t understand what nationalization means. And I don’t say that mean spirited. It just means you don’t understand.
We already have and have had privately owned corporations that have a ROLE in managing certain functions for the banks, like liquidation and injecting capital, extending notes, etc.
What do you think the FDIC is?
No one would call the FDIC “de-facto nationalization”.
Because its a completely different entity from the banks and it is NOT a branch of the government.
Just like the RTC, the RFC, the HLC, and other federal entities set up to ASSIST banks.
The RTC would ASSIST banks.
The RTC would NOT be a branch of the govt. It is a corporation.
And the government would own the RTC, NOT the BANKS.
Nationalization means the government OWNS THE BANKS.
Something that is against our entire system of capitalization and something that would not only allow, but NECESSITATE the government monitoring every single nickel you spend and what you spend it on.
Do you understand now?
The two things are entirely different and what you are saying is just incorrect.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:53 pmThat “lets explore all options” talk works good when we’ve got time on our hands. We don’t. We don’t have time for nonsense.
Just because you are not familiar with history does not mean that others aren’t, and it does not mean that the rest of us have to wait on the people like you who are speaking about things you clearly do not understand.
You’re approaching this from a partisan perspective, I can see that. That’s fine but this is a crisis and we need action now by people who know a little about our history. If you understood the RTC you’d never call it “de-facto nationalization”.
Nationalization is the fed OWNING THE BANKS.
Here the fed owns the RTC. NOT the banks.
Just like they own the FDIC. NOT the banks.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:00 pmLike I said last night.
We’re down in a hole, and you and people like you are standing there saying to those of us who understand this crisis and know how we got out before;
“Hey, would you guys quit playing around with that ladder and help us figure a way out of this hole?”
March 8th, 2009 at 10:01 pmWe don’t need to explore “options”.
We need to do whats worked before FIRST.
That’s how you do it in science.
When the proven methods don’t work, THAT’S when you explore your options.
Once you’ve tried the PROVEN way first.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:04 pmhttp://www.progressivehistorians.com/2007/11/bill-clintons-role-in-mortgage-crisis.html
March 10th, 2009 at 7:54 pmXisithrus Says:
Im sure McCain, part of the Keeting scandal, and Palin, moosehunter, would know what to do, right?
Before making such a foolish statement, you should research who were involved in the Keeting Scandal.It may surprise you. Or not.
March 10th, 2009 at 7:58 pmKeating scandle also included these people.
The Lincoln Savings led to the Keating five political scandal, in which five U.S. senators were implicated in an influence-peddling scheme. It was named for Charles Keating, who headed Lincoln Savings and made $300,000 as political contributions to them in the 1980s. Three of those senators – Alan Cranston (D-CA), Don Riegle (D-MI), and Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ) – found their political careers cut short as a result. Two others – John Glenn (D-OH) and John McCain (R-AZ) – were rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for exercising “poor judgment” for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating.[11]
March 10th, 2009 at 8:07 pmfine
sikis
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:18 pmporno izle
porno videolar
porn videos