Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: A question for Obama and\or his supporters here: [View all]Marr
(20,317 posts)106. Another natural follow-up question is,
"Why is an institution that is 'too big to fail' in private hands?".
If an institution really can crash the national economy all on it's own, then there's no excuse for not seizing it, or at the very least regulating it so tightly that it is essentially a government operation. No private group should have the power to destroy the nation's economy.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
182 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Hunh? Possibly garbled syntax in your response. But I'm in the process
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#65
Not sure what the FDIC has to do with the question I raised, since the FDIC
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#5
If the FDIC did not have enough funds to rescue the banks under its charter, then
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#146
Wow, I must have touched a nerve without really intending to. I meant that
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#6
That's basically assuming something that wasn't, in the event, tested.
Spider Jerusalem
May 2012
#85
Actually, I can wrap my head around your position (I think). You're
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#88
I'll bookmark this and get back to you as I was writing a book to answer here, LOL.
freshwest
May 2012
#8
The IMF estimates that the global banking crisis cost in the neighborhood
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#167
I plan to vote for Obama as the lesser of two evils in November. But
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#72
You won't get a good answer because you're dealing with people who fundamentally do not understand..
girl gone mad
May 2012
#147
Thanks. I know that these are difficult issues to comprehend for all of us sometimes. I do think
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#150
I'm not talking about 'nationalizing everything' (at least in the context of
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#152
Sorry, it's not an article, it's a great book called "Freefall". I just
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#161
Well, actually, I was asking why the banking segment of society received preferential
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#159
lol well the shareholders of WAMU don't agree and in court arguing exactly the opposite.
grantcart
May 2012
#166
The bailout was bipartisan. It was begun under Bush and continued under Obama. The
HiPointDem
May 2012
#13
You forget, perhaps conveniently, that Obama fought to help the American people too
lunatica
May 2012
#16
Actually, it's those who own shares of stock in banks who are the 'owners' of the banks, not
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#105
You know, upon reflection, I think you are 99% correct here and I was 99% incorrect. Specifically,
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#139
Nobody bailed out "the autoworkers"; the UAW contract was broken, and "dual tier" wages were
Romulox
May 2012
#28
Banks generally charge a premium ("interest") for the use of money. Paying back the principle
Romulox
May 2012
#29
Not *Market rate* interest. That was the entire point in having the gov't intervene;
Romulox
May 2012
#59
SENATOR Obama was a huge supporter of the bankster bailouts. Do you think people don't remember?
Romulox
May 2012
#30
I don't have the bill number but I remember that McCain wanted to suspend the Presidential Campaign
LynneSin
May 2012
#51
This is the bill. Obama didn't just *vote* for it--he lobbied his fellow Senators.
Romulox
May 2012
#58
The answer is that it would've been ARMAGEDDON if James Dimon hadn't lived to lose another $3 Bil
Romulox
May 2012
#31
Wha? He's not far to the right on any issues. MAYBE a centrist on some but far to the right??
FarLeftFist
May 2012
#52
I don't think you understand Marrah's response at all. And certainly don't tell me what I am.
FarLeftFist
May 2012
#75
Except the GOP majority held tax cuts for the middle class hostage as well.
FarLeftFist
May 2012
#124
Does that mean the US is still fighting WW 2 considering where you have troops? n/t
Bodhi BloodWave
May 2012
#176
Bailout was bipartisan. The mess was created by a Republican Admin with Republican policies.
MatthewStLouis
May 2012
#49
Just so everyone is clear - Obama was a US Senator when the bank bail-outs happened
LynneSin
May 2012
#50
Good points. We did have a mechanism already in place (the FDIC) that
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#86
Understood, but if the problem was that the FDIC was underfunded, there
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#182
Well, a jury of my peers voted 1-5 to leave it standing (see below), so
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#92
I am Juror #5. I particularly object to your blaming Obama for TARP, a Bush law and then
stevenleser
May 2012
#95
This *precisely* the kind of conversation you voted to cut off. Should your post be alerted?
Romulox
May 2012
#115
No, it isnt. I voted to cut off a post that blames Obama for something Bush did. Nice try though.
stevenleser
May 2012
#117
I think your technique of denying the obvious leaves no room for an actual exchange.
Romulox
May 2012
#119
I think it is you who refuses to acknowledge that TARP was passed under Bush and therefore
stevenleser
May 2012
#123
I think I agree with all 3 of your points here, strange as that may sound. Well, I might have a few
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#140
Senator Obama voted for TARP, and lobbied his fellow Senators for its passage. You're misinformed.
Romulox
May 2012
#97
You spoke of "blaming Obama for TARP"--he is responsible for his vote as Senator, as well as
Romulox
May 2012
#101
Wherein you *finally* explain why you voted to hide a truthful post? I can hardly wait. nt
Romulox
May 2012
#112
The TARP funds were spent under his watch b/c it was signed into law by Bush.
FarLeftFist
May 2012
#104
Senator Obama helped pass it with his vote. I'm not doing the School House Rock thing for you. nt
Romulox
May 2012
#111
Yup. Just like every other sane person. Are you looking for a mentally unstable president? See: Bush
FarLeftFist
May 2012
#126
Fair question, but didn't Bush bail out the banks? Obama and Congress bailed out the auto industry
rustydog
May 2012
#100
According to Joseph Stiglitz, in March 2009, Obama's administration launched
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#132
jpak vs. Nobel Economics Laureate Joseph Stiglitz = gnat vs. elephant. But
coalition_unwilling
May 2012
#171
I think that at the time, it was a matter of having no choice but to bail out the Super Banks
GarroHorus
May 2012
#131
"a Romney presidency would simply be an unmitigated disaster for this country and the globe."
cstanleytech
May 2012
#142