They are the ones who got us into this mess in the first place. They were handed 350 billion dollars to unfreeze the credit markets and instead of unfreezing the credit markets they used the money to give themselves bonuses, buy other banks, and continue their old ways of giving expensive perks to their executives. They are laying off their middle class workers and protecting their Executive Suite. Let them go bankrupt and let their executives face lawsuits from investors.
No more money to them. Let them all fail for all I fucking care. Let the government become a direct lender and the banks that do good business will survive. It be cheaper in the long run than handing these assholes money only for them to continue to steal from the taxpayer. The ones that do bad business will fail. The ones that do good business will survive.
2. What I don't understand is since when do we turn over hundreds of billions of our tax dollars to CEO
banks and wall street gamblers without any plan at all. Our congress just handed them our tax dollars without any specific details on exactly what and where they can spend it. And Obama is going to do it again.
WTF, why are we being so absolutely reckless and irresponsible with our tax dollars? Have we gone crazy? Do we think CEOs, bankers and Wall Street gamblers are magically and mysteriously immune to corruption and crime? Of course they are going to waste and steal the money, when we hand it over to them with absolutely NO STRINGS attached. Aren't we giving the people who caused this mess our money? Have they suddenly changed their greedy, irresponsible ways?
All I can say is, Congress you sure are stupid, almost as stupid as bush thought you were. And Mr. President you better be attaching some strings to our money.
10. It was a scam. They gambled that gov't would bail them out so they didn't change course. They won.
There is no one who can convince me that many banks didn't see what was going to happen months and months before it was a 'crisis'. But if their actions are a clue to their intentions, it's clear that they figured that 1) if everyone was doing it, whatever happens, the individual managers wouldn't be blamed and 2) they (the big players) could CREATE a "crisis" where the gov't would actually bail them out of it!
We all know that investment bankers / brokerage houses had their hooks into Bush from the days of trying to privatize Social Security early in his 2nd term. Bush didn't blink in his support for the bailout, and his ending Presidency gave the rest of the party enough coverage (in their minds) to blame him and not their party. There is no question in my mind that the timing of the 'crisis' was not a coincidence.
That was the tin foil hatted part, the rest is well known.
The whole problem, IMO, was the product of allowing banks to constantly buy each other up, getting "too big to fail". So, instead of little banks failing, now they're "too big to fail" and the government HAS to buy out their bad decisions.
This is the downside of the economies of scale. Ultimately, a company is run from a centralized management and policy, and that policy can be in error because it's lost, if you will, the economies of diversification.
The results, as we can now see, can be catastrophic.
3. We still can't let the banks go bankrupt, but we can nationalize them.
Letting them go bankrupt would be catastrophic both for the banking system now and future confidence in the banking system later.
But if we nationalize them, all shareholders are wiped out, some unsecured bond holders are wiped out, and the executives would presumably be fired and replaced with executives that look out for the interests of their new owner (the government).
1. Capital managed so that it serves the producers and the people.
2. Capital controlling and exploiting the producers and the people.
Saying that "we have to have banks" neatly avoids that question, and always is used as an apology and a defense for option number two.
Since the New Deal, option number one has been in place in agriculture. That is why your access to food is not in the same shape as your home equity and 401K and wages and job security are now. You would be very hungry otherwise.
There is no "financial crisis" or "credit crunch" or foreclosures happening in farming as there is everywhere else. Government agencies protect the farmers from the financial industry and the banks and Wall Street, so that the people can eat. The same program could be used to make sure people are housed and working and have access to health care. It is a simple matter of getting the financial industry out of the power position. It can be done, has been done, and now must be done.
There is no credit crunch in farming, there is a shortage of applicants. Why is that? Because to qualify you have to commit to farming - to actually producing something. That is just about the only qualification. You cannot use the money, as everyone is trying to do, to make an investment in the hope of turning it and getting rich from it. No one wants to farm. Why is that? Because everyone has been seduced by the Reaganomics promise of the fast and easy buck.
Why work, why value work and the producers when you can get faaaaaabulously rich by cleverly turning, leveraging, investing, futuring, swapping, deriving and managing your portfolio? So the producers and the workers and the people are punished and impoverished, and the few, a very few, grab massive wealth. Pretty soon no one is producing anything, the workers are broke, the elderly, infirm and the children slide into desperate poverty, and the whole house of cards comes tumbling down on us.
Asking "do we need banks" is asking the wrong question. That is like defending child abuse because "we need parents" and saying that if there were no parents, the children would be worse off.
Hate the system. Change the system. The system rewards - demands - certain anti-social and destructive behavior.
I will hate the entity. Otherwise we frogmarch a few sacrificial lambs, enjoy a media circus around that, pat ourselves on the back that the "problem has been solved" and "the system works," and are distracted from the root problem - domination of our lives and the economy and the government by the financial industry; the ascendancy of capital over labor.
The problem is not "a few bad apples." The problem is that only bad apples can succeed and are rewarded.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.