i can't support any further bank bailouts/loans that don't include nationalization...

[dysfunctional press]

it seems crazy to me that we should be paying oodles of tax-dollars just to get the banks healthy enough to resume their predatory loan practices.

it's a lot like asking the zebra to drive the lion to the vet, and then pay all the bills too, until the lion is back on his feet.

[leftstreet]

1. Oh but they ARE going to 'nationalize' them - just temporarily

Rid them of their toxic badness, then hand them back over to private investors.

Capitalism, Fuck Yeah!

Orwell must be rofl at the way they're using terms today like 'nationalize' and 'universal.' Nice psyop!

[tangent90]

2. Hey, they could let the Post Office run them...they make good money!

Oh, wait...

[dysfunctional press]

3. if the government is good enough to run the police, fire dept, and the military...

i'm sure they can handle the mortgage business.
look at medicare for example- they do on 3% administrative costs what the private sector insurance companies do on 20%.
but the necessity of single-payer universal healthcare is for another post.

btw- i didn't realize the post office was meant to be a profit-making enterprise- i thought it was about quality mail service for the general populace...:shrug:

[tangent90]

5. Well, it would be nice if the PO could just break even instead of losing their (our) ass

every year. As for the police, yeah those tasering yahoos are some real cool dudes. I will never accept the government taking over all
business...that's a recipe for the worst kind of oligarchy. It really could be worse than it is.

[dysfunctional press]

6. who said anything about all busines...?

i'd just like to see the banking industry taken over- seeing as it's so vital to everything else in our economy, and the private sector has proven time and again that it can't be trusted to be faithful stewards of the responsibility and privilege.

as for the post office- i think they should raise the postage to either 50 cents or even 75 cents, and be done with it. it would STILL be one helluva bargain for the mailer.

[tangent90]

9. But I don't remember banks receiving this kind of opprobrium some years ago.

Not that it isn't deserved but wouldn't you agree their malfunctioning is more due to deregulation (and encouragement) the past couple of decades than to any fundamental flaw in the concept? I can't imagine how the hell I could fiscally function without a bank. :shrug:

editing...I don't disagree with your comment on postage rates :-)

[dysfunctional press]

10. "their malfunctioning is more due to deregulation..."????

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

um...no. it's due to their wanton GREED. pure and simple.

btw- the banks would still be there- it's just that they would be under new management.

how about this as an alternative, that would let you keep your private banker-

we only nationalize home mortgages. if you're financing a residence, it's done thru the government mortgage agency. all loans are fixed rate- 3.5%, with terms from 5-100 years.(in the case of the looong term mortgages, they would be 'generational', that is- the kids or an heir would assume them upon the death of the originator- same terms, no messy fees).

people could also convert their existing mortgages to the same rate for the remaining term of their loans- or refinance for more money or a longer term if they like.
something like that would be a great way to give the people who have been responsible all along a little something-something to stop their whining, and put an infusion of cash and spending back into the economy. we'll call it 'trickle up' economics.

[tangent90]

11. Was it really worth 3 rofls? I just meant that minimal regulation creates an atmosphere where

greed is -allowed- to be the controlling factor. Oh here comes Jindal I wanna hear him whine

[KharmaTrain]

4. When The Government Takes Over A Majority Of The Voting Shares...

...that bank is nationalized. In many cases we're there already as the more money we pump into these deadbeats, the more control the government buys. And that doesn't even cover the many small banks the government, through the FDIC, have "eated" over the past several months. It's not if, it's admitting the reality and then deciding what to do from here.

Here's the rub...much of the bailout money has been horded by banks to cover their assets against possible runs...their toxic debts are so intertwined with the good stuff that that we don't see how this money prevented a collapse, but also it hasn't helped turn things around. The only way for the toxic to be cleansed is to move them into an RTC or other "bad bank"...then restructure what's left of the "good banks", break 'em into small, manageable and regularly audited ventures. The day of the big bank is over.

[sixmile]

7. Your post is half correct

I can't support any further bank bailouts/loans. Period.

[dysfunctional press]

8. if we owned/ran them- i don't suppose there'd be any bailouts anyway.

:shrug: