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
 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
15. "Wall St got screwed by Obama"
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 01:46 PM
Jan 2012

"the onerous regulations they now have."

Note: I don't do ROFL smilies. But if any post has ever earned them!

The Wall Street banks only exist today, and can only continue their perpetual extraction of profit out of the productive economy and subjugation of whole nations to debt slavery, because after the Bush regime started the rescue package to keep the criminal banks in business, the Obama administration continued and expanded on it: AIG, Citi and BoA bailouts, TARP, support for the Fed unlimited self-service windows, allowing guaranteed interest rate arbitrage (loans to banksters at 0%, government bonds at 3-6&), taking hundreds of billions in private toxic assets into the public sector, appointments of Wall Street stooges to all key economic positions, reappointment of Bernanke, and, of course, since the spring of 2009 suspending mark-to-market (officially ending capitalism as it applies to capitalists, although of course it still applies to the rest of us patsies).

Just you wait. The learning curve is accelerating. I wonder what Goldman and Co. will do later this year, when 200,000 people are marching in downtown Manhattan, chanting "Mark to Market! Mark to Market!"

They are expecting these "investments" to yield significant returns. SharonAnn Jan 2012 #1
+1 The Traveler Jan 2012 #3
Pretty much the best investments that exist Capitalocracy Jan 2012 #25
Probably because the perception is The Traveler Jan 2012 #2
That's interesting laundry_queen Jan 2012 #4
I don't know if contributions would fall under the "business judgment rule" jsmirman Jan 2012 #7
I wouldn't complain about charitable contributions to the communities... Frustratedlady Jan 2012 #16
Those can be serious end-arounds, though jsmirman Jan 2012 #17
I agree on WS. I am particularly concerned about the mega computer banks trading 24/7. Frustratedlady Jan 2012 #21
It is too long a topic to get into in depth jsmirman Jan 2012 #35
Because stockholder lawsuits are so hard to bring? Sanity Claws Jan 2012 #5
Yes, I've wondered about executive pay, as well. Frustratedlady Jan 2012 #9
For one, stockholders are generally ignorant jsmirman Jan 2012 #6
Folks, some pretty essential information is right here ^^^^^ jsmirman Jan 2012 #18
I have read and stored the information you presented. I appreciate your thoughtful input. Frustratedlady Jan 2012 #31
Good to hear jsmirman Jan 2012 #34
What corporate contributions? Link please. Obama took no corporate money in 2008. banned from Kos Jan 2012 #8
I was referring to the new corporate contributions to political campaigns without limits. I didn't Frustratedlady Jan 2012 #10
Well, there is no evidence of that either - from what I can tell. banned from Kos Jan 2012 #13
Each time I contribute to a candidate Yupster Jan 2012 #37
Really? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #12
The $35,000 a plate donations go to the DNC, don't they? banned from Kos Jan 2012 #14
"Wall St got screwed by Obama" JackRiddler Jan 2012 #15
You spend too much time at ZeroHead. Mark-to-market has been legit since 1993. banned from Kos Jan 2012 #19
Huh? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #33
Because political influence is effectively the corporations' best profit center? JackRiddler Jan 2012 #11
Did they release a listing? joeglow3 Jan 2012 #20
I often wonder about the stockholders. Not only about these contributions but don't they give a jwirr Jan 2012 #22
I agree. Must be that the yearly reports are in such small print and so complicated to read... Frustratedlady Jan 2012 #23
This is one of those differences between corporations and unions gratuitous Jan 2012 #24
Also, the power of shareholders vs the Exec boards is shrinking librechik Jan 2012 #26
We ape each other in many ways. Frustratedlady Jan 2012 #36
It has been illegal for corporations to contribute to federal candidates since 1910. former9thward Jan 2012 #27
And here is the list of recipients from the PAC organized by Goldman Sachs for 2008. banned from Kos Jan 2012 #28
No I don't notice. former9thward Jan 2012 #29
I agree with you. Unfortunately I replied to your post. banned from Kos Jan 2012 #30
If you had a bunch of money in these corporations, you'd be one of the 1% hobbit709 Jan 2012 #32
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»With all the corporate po...»Reply #15