or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Nationalize the Banks???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nationalize the Banks???

post #1 of 55
Thread Starter 
There is more chatter related to the notion or idea of nationalizing the banks.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...009-02-15.html

"Rep. Maxine Waters was lambasted as a left-wing radical last year when she raised the idea of nationalizing the oil industry. But on a Sunday morning talk show, a Republican senator came off even more supportive than her of nationalizing banks.

I would not take off the idea of nationalizing the banks, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), said on ABCs This Week with George Stephanopoulos.

Graham, a confidant of former Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), said that the problems in the economy and the financial sector are so severe that U.S. policy makers may have to start thinking about things once labeled unthinkable.

This idea of nationalizing banks is not comfortable, said Graham, appearing downcast. But I think we have gotten so many toxic assets spread throughout the banking and financial community throughout the world that we're going to have to do something that no one ever envisioned a year ago, no one likes.


Your thoughts?

What odds do you see of this happening?

likely?

not likely?

other?

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #2 of 55
Who is John Galt?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #3 of 55
I don't understand why we would need to nationalize anything. All we need to do is:

1. Halt stock trading on bank X
2. Put bank X into bankruptcy
3. Bankruptcy judge wipes out common and preferred shares of bank X
4. Bankruptcy judge converts bondholders of bank X to common shareholders
5. Bank X leaves bankruptcy, possibly just a few hours after entering it
6. Stock of bank X resumes trading
7. After a few weeks, a stake is put in the ground on the CDSes, and the issuers
of those CDSes pay out based on what the bondholders have lost (bond strike price -
market share price)

Form a standard valuation model for the mortgage backed assets - and do the above to any bank that is insolvent based on that model. Once all the banks are solvent again, use that standard model to see their total capital, which should be plenty once the debt is gone.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #4 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Who is John Galt?

A figment from the imiginationland of a mind from the old stale and tired Objectivist school of thought.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #5 of 55
that's a great cheat code...

john galt... let's see what the wikipedia says... oh right there, rand. ew. let's see, blah d blah blah. oh yes, a romantic hero for the objectivists fuck all movement.

hmm. it's too bad really that science and engineering and life in general is so gosh darn collaborative. if only we toiled like social pariahs, driven only by the need to .... .... .... do what exactly? what's the fucking point of doing anything when you are the only one to benefit? i mean, really, nick, what's the fucking point?

perhaps i will write a novel, a social distopia inspired by randian illogic, and my oft repeated question will be what's the fucking point?
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #6 of 55
Sanity. Maybe -- you guys keep your fingers crossed.


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2ad3b750-f...nclick_check=1

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #7 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

I don't understand why we would need to nationalize anything. All we need to do is:

1. Halt stock trading on bank X
2. Put bank X into bankruptcy
3. Bankruptcy judge wipes out common and preferred shares of bank X
4. Bankruptcy judge converts bondholders of bank X to common shareholders
5. Bank X leaves bankruptcy, possibly just a few hours after entering it
6. Stock of bank X resumes trading
7. After a few weeks, a stake is put in the ground on the CDSes, and the issuers
of those CDSes pay out based on what the bondholders have lost (bond strike price -
market share price)

Form a standard valuation model for the mortgage backed assets - and do the above to any bank that is insolvent based on that model. Once all the banks are solvent again, use that standard model to see their total capital, which should be plenty once the debt is gone.

Nationalization, by any other name -- any sort of orderly receivership process would do. I don't think anyone wants them nationalized permanently.

That said, the insurance companies and bond holders will need to be seen to -- and that is not trivial -- and this would have to be coordinated worldwide to avoid some sort of spontaneous freak-out monetary dislocation orgy.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #8 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

Nationalization, by any other name -- any sort of orderly receivership process would do. I don't think anyone wants them nationalized permanently.

That said, the insurance companies and bond holders will need to be seen to -- and that is not trivial -- and this would have to be coordinated worldwide to avoid some sort of spontaneous freak-out monetary dislocation orgy.

No - it isn't nationalization, it is bankruptcy. At no point in the process above does the government own the assets.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #9 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

No - it isn't nationalization, it is bankruptcy. At no point in the process above does the government own the assets.

That's hardly worth mentioning at this point. Especially since it will take U.S. Treasury sized juevos to back this up.

How would you handle the insurance companies after you wipe out the bondholders? I'm thinking something analogous to backing up the pensions and letting automakers go under.

This will take some serious stones to pull off.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #10 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

How would you handle the insurance companies after you wipe out the bondholders?

If you mean the issuers of CDSes, they will also go bankrupt if they have written insurance that they can't pay. Although there are trillions of dollars of CDSes out there, most cancel each other out - Lehmann had $400 billion of CDSes, but only a couple billion actually changed hands in the bankruptcy.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #11 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

If you mean the issuers of CDSes, they will also go bankrupt if they have written insurance that they can't pay. Although there are trillions of dollars of CDSes out there, most cancel each other out - Lehmann had $400 billion of CDSes, but only a couple billion actually changed hands in the bankruptcy.

From what I understand -- and it's not that much -- the ripple effect on the insurers would be very bad. I'd imagine there are other companies that are bondholders as well. And let's not forget, the equities market at large would make a pimple on the bond market's ass.

Also, I heard that the Lehman thing is what's freaking everybody out. They don't want another lock up -- dislocation.

I've heard very good arguments either way on Yves Smith's blog and elsewhere. But let's face it -- receivership is the only moral alternative. As it stands, my unborn grandchildren are already being taxed without representation.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #12 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

From what I understand -- and it's not that much -- the ripple effect on the insurers would be very bad. I'd imagine there are other companies that are bondholders as well. And let's not forget, the equities market at large would make a pimple on the bond market's ass.

Also, I heard that the Lehman thing is what's freaking everybody out. They don't want another lock up -- dislocation.

I've heard very good arguments either way on Yves Smith's blog and elsewhere. But let's face it -- receivership is the only moral alternative. As it stands, my unborn grandchildren are already being taxed without representation.

Obviously I don't understand bankruptcy, because as far as I can see it would have been much better to turn the bondholders into stockholders, instead of going through liquidation like they did. If they went through Lehmann style liquidation for a bunch of the top 25 banks, then it would be disastrous I admit.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #13 of 55
Too true -- also -- where is everybody? AI seems dead.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #14 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

Too true -- also -- where is everybody? AI seems dead.

- recall an incident last August, when Nick and ShawnJ had a tantrum which killed the forum.
post #15 of 55
Why not increase the % of money that needs to be deposited with the federal entity by the banks? This will ensure proper capital adequacy.
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
post #16 of 55
Sorry to go all Sammi-Jo on the forum, but the more I look at how this is playing out, the more this looks like a crisis that has been engineered by design to align world banking powers and rules under the direction of a select few.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #17 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Sorry to go all Sammi-Jo on the forum, but the more I look at how this is playing out, the more this looks like a crisis that has been engineered by design to align world banking powers and rules under the direction of a select few.

Yes, thats what I said 6 months ago, and everyone laughed at me...
post #18 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

Yes, thats what I said 6 months ago, and everyone laughed at me...

Yep. And that's what C.H. Douglas said seventy years ago and everybody laughed at him!
John Mitchell who followed on as chairman, even after receiving a letter-bomb deserves substantial credit.
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #19 of 55
Thread Starter 
Just keeps becoming more common. This idea to nationalize the banks....

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e310cbf6-f...nclick_check=1

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #20 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

Yep. And that's what C.H. Douglas said seventy years ago and everybody laughed at him!
John Mitchell who followed on as chairman, even after receiving a letter-bomb deserves substantial credit.

Yep, pretty much everyone who gets labeled a gold bug or who complains about the creation of the Fed has had that idea.

This is why so many strike out so harshly and irrationally about a simply phrase like "Who is John Galt?" The spiral is clear and government is increasingly the answer to government intervention. The answer to looters is more looting. The answer to moving from a gold standard, to a fractional gold standard, to fiat currency is massive inflation of that currency while the government controls everything and mandates everyone buy the big lie for a bit longer.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #21 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Yep, pretty much everyone who gets labeled a gold bug or who complains about the creation of the Fed has had that idea.

This is why so many strike out so harshly and irrationally about a simply phrase like "Who is John Galt?" The spiral is clear and government is increasingly the answer to government intervention. The answer to looters is more looting. The answer to moving from a gold standard, to a fractional gold standard, to fiat currency is massive inflation of that currency while the government controls everything and mandates everyone buy the big lie for a bit longer.

And YOU didn't give a fuck about all the things, - infact YOU defended every single one of the things - that have now blown up in our faces.

It doesn't really bother me much - but

Have you thought about all the millions of people that are going to starve to death now?,

Have you given any thought to all the people who are going to become homeless now?

The millions of people who are going to be deprived of a proper start in life, and will have to turn to crime, prostitution, drugs and vice to scrape a living, instead of going through university and getting a career.

Did you think about all the people that will die because they now cant afford doctors or medicine?

Did you think about all the people who will die now because some punk beat them senseless for a few dollars?

Did you think about all the inevitable consequences of where we have been led for the last decade? You were given enough warnings on this very board.

I might suppose you have thought - but in typical Republican Trumptman fashion concluded...

"No care - whats in it for me - um um... stick to the talking points"




[edit] just incase anyone is mistaken, I am having a quite happy evening, am quite in control of myself, and just having a little friendly banter between AI members
post #22 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

And YOU didn't give a fuck about all the things, - infact YOU defended every single one of the things - that have now blown up in our faces.

It doesn't really bother me much - but

Have you thought about all the millions of people that are going to starve to death now?,

Have you given any thought to all the people who are going to become homeless now?

The millions of people who are going to be deprived of a proper start in life, and will have to turn to crime, prostitution, drugs and vice to scrape a living, instead of going through university and getting a career.

Did you think about all the people that will die because they now cant afford doctors or medicine?

Did you think about all the people who will die now because some punk beat them senseless for a few dollars?

Did you think about all the inevitable consequences of where we have been led for the last decade? You were given enough warnings on this very board.

I might suppose you have thought - but in typical Republican Trumptman fashion concluded...

"No care - whats in it for me - um um... stick to the talking points"


[edit] just incase anyone is mistaken, I am having a quite happy evening, am quite in control of myself, and just having a little friendly banter between AI members

All questions amount to capitalism solved 85% of the problem, but there is still this 15%.

Meanwhile everything else has either not solved the problem, solved it to a lower percentage or made it worse.

Finally, via generational theft, how does feeding, clothing and housing a million today really help if it guarantees five million will be starved and homeless in the future.

How do you expect the people to solve these problems when the sum total for the obligations exceeds the entire world GDP? Will good intentions grow the food, build a home, or put clothes on someone?

Stealing the planting seed with the good intention of feeding my brother has left my brother, myself, and our children starved.

Fuck good intentions.

[edit] just incase anyone is mistaken, I am having a quite happy evening, am quite in control of myself, and just having a little friendly banter between AI members

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #23 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by talksense101 View Post

Why not increase the % of money that needs to be deposited with the federal entity by the banks? This will ensure proper capital adequacy.

No, it won't. Look at Lehmann - $600 billion in "assets" (really worth $48 billion once they went through bankruptcy liquidation), and $500 billion in debt - net worth of $100B on paper, and real world net worth of negative $452 billion.

How would higher deposit requirements have helped them?
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #24 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

No, it won't. Look at Lehmann - $600 billion in "assets" (really worth $48 billion once they went through bankruptcy liquidation), and $500 billion in debt - net worth of $100B on paper, and real world net worth of negative $452 billion.

How would higher deposit requirements have helped them?

So how does any of this address the fundimental issue of the fact that we now have paper money back with paper bonds backed with good faith that is no longer good?

That is how $600 billion in "assets" really becomes $48 billion, someone realizes the big lie. It doesn't matter whether it is oil, a home, whatever, it has an intrinsic value and no amount of fiat money, bonds, or anything else will fix that.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #25 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

So how does any of this address the fundimental issue of the fact that we now have paper money back with paper bonds backed with good faith that is no longer good?

That is how $600 billion in "assets" really becomes $48 billion, someone realizes the big lie. It doesn't matter whether it is oil, a home, whatever, it has an intrinsic value and no amount of fiat money, bonds, or anything else will fix that.

It's almost as if you believe there weren't boom-bust cycles when money wasn't fiat...

More to the point: the great expansion of economies seen during the twentieth century owes its source to the fact that fiat currency doesn't require an expansion of a resource to match the expansion of the economy. Otherwise, you are simply playing the same games... Changing the exchange rate of a dollar wrt a metal, say, is no different than changing the amount of dollars produced or varying the interests rates.

What people realized a long time ago and have forgotten is that the two forms of currency are the same goddamn thing in an economy not limited by the resource upon which the money is based. Say, if we instead used hydrogen...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #26 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Yep, pretty much everyone who gets labeled a gold bug or who complains about the creation of the Fed has had that idea.

This is why so many strike out so harshly and irrationally about a simply phrase like "Who is John Galt?" The spiral is clear and government is increasingly the answer to government intervention. The answer to looters is more looting. The answer to moving from a gold standard, to a fractional gold standard, to fiat currency is massive inflation of that currency while the government controls everything and mandates everyone buy the big lie for a bit longer.

The system has to change to interest free loans and zero inflation, until then the cycles of never ending debt transferred around individuals, businesses and countries will continue to take it's human and environmental toll and leave people with zilch other than an iou. IMO that will happen, simply for the reason that it can't work any other way for long.
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #27 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

All questions amount to capitalism solved 85% of the problem, but there is still this 15%.

Meanwhile everything else has either not solved the problem, solved it to a lower percentage or made it worse.

Finally, via generational theft, how does feeding, clothing and housing a million today really help if it guarantees five million will be starved and homeless in the future.

How do you expect the people to solve these problems when the sum total for the obligations exceeds the entire world GDP? Will good intentions grow the food, build a home, or put clothes on someone?

Stealing the planting seed with the good intention of feeding my brother has left my brother, myself, and our children starved.

Fuck good intentions.

[edit] just incase anyone is mistaken, I am having a quite happy evening, am quite in control of myself, and just having a little friendly banter between AI members

I dont think you quite understand, thats ok, im more than happy to explicitly point out the obvious.

It's not 'what' you are saying that causes involuntary spasms in my gut, its the complete hypocrisy of who is saying it - and the all to obvious motive behind this new found 'enlightenment'.

Trumptman sees 'upside' in preching righter than right holiness.
post #28 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The system has to change to interest free loans and zero inflation, until then the cycles of never ending debt transferred around individuals, businesses and countries will continue to take it's human and environmental toll and leave people with zilch other than an iou. IMO that will happen, simply for the reason that it can't work any other way for long.

I also think the long term solution for developed countries, is to have very moderate growth, like 0.5-1% pa, or whatever the number is that equates to natural population growth.
post #29 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

I also think the long term solution for developed countries, is to have very moderate growth, like 0.5-1% pa, or whatever the number is that equates to natural population growth.

I can see the G20 facilitating that eventually. The strain on businesses to grow is compounded by there debt burden and so they borrow yet more. Add into the equation that national export surpluses will always adversely counteract those heavily reliant on imports and the result is that global economies are inherently unstable, which in such an interconnected world harms everyone.
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #30 of 55
To many it seems like when the government tries to fix things it always makes things worse in the end. I'm not convinced that more control means more stability.

I'm sure to many here a nationalized banking system (hey wait don't we already have that?) sounds like a good idea in the era of hope and change. Would it seem equally good if McCain had won? I'm guessing not. The reason is because injecting politics into business is a bad idea. Look at how badly the likes of Barney Frank did with Fan/Fred? Do you really want him to "roll the dice" with every bank?

Perish the though!
post #31 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

To many it seems like when the government tries to fix things it always makes things worse in the end. I'm not convinced that more control means more stability.

I'm sure to many here a nationalized banking system (hey wait don't we already have that?) sounds like a good idea in the era of hope and change. Would it seem equally good if McCain had won? I'm guessing not. The reason is because injecting politics into business is a bad idea. Look at how badly the likes of Barney Frank did with Fan/Fred? Do you really want him to "roll the dice" with every bank?

Perish the though!

Well we've seen what no control leads to haven't we?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #32 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Well we've seen what no control leads to haven't we?

Don't be silly. How could you possible call what we've had for years "no control". Unless you're just being unserious.
post #33 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Don't be silly. How could you possible call what we've had for years "no control". Unless you're just being unserious.


Who brought us deregulation? Who opened the door for all those bad loans? What party thinks it's best because the market can take care of itself?

And mostly who's been at the wheel for 8 years?

I'd call that no control.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #34 of 55
Who wanted to "roll the dice" with home mortgage? Who wanted the GSE Fan/Fred to buy most of the dicey paper out there, putting the tax payers on the dime and upsetting the free market?


jimmac you're still caught in "we're the good ones, they are the bad ones" lock step.

I'll take it you concede that there has hardly been "no control" of bank holding companies or investment banks. Silly statement on your part.
post #35 of 55
You know Floorjack, you seem to give yourself a lot of latitude for partisan quips and digs and yet admonish everyone on the left who does the same.

So, either cut it out and commence with a serious discussion or stop with the lectures about "who's good and who's bad". Mmmkay!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #36 of 55
There is a fix out there: bring back the estimated US$10 to US$16 TRILLION (not a misprint!) "offshored" by American citizens and businesses now sitting in offshore financial centers (OFCs) to circulate through the US financial system.

How did it get there? Tax avoidance reasons--and it ended up out of the USA through legal loopholes in our tax laws. If we had positive incentive to bring that money back through a major change in our tax laws, that money would become the world's largest private "bailout," easily covering the financial needs of the entire USA, providing a gigantic new base of liquidity for things like new loans and lines of credit so necessary to run businesses.
post #37 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Who brought us deregulation? Who opened the door for all those bad loans? What party thinks it's best because the market can take care of itself?

And mostly who's been at the wheel for 8 years?

I'd call that no control.

As I have pointed out many times before, the U.S. financial system was deregulated under your guy's watch and with the stroke of his pen. (Love the source, don't you?)

Even Clinton acknowledges his role in this and is currently claiming that the "deregulation" you claim is the problem isn't really the problem at all.

So get your story straight. Either Clinton is lying or his deregulation is the actual problem.

On the Glass-Steagall thing, like I said, if you could demonstrate to me that it was a mistake, I'd be glad to look at the evidence. I can't blame (the Republicans). This wasn't something they forced me into. - William Jefferson Clinton
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #38 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by SactoMan01 View Post

There is a fix out there: bring back the estimated US$10 to US$16 TRILLION (not a misprint!) "offshored" by American citizens and businesses now sitting in offshore financial centers (OFCs) to circulate through the US financial system.

How did it get there? Tax avoidance reasons--and it ended up out of the USA through legal loopholes in our tax laws. If we had positive incentive to bring that money back through a major change in our tax laws, that money would become the world's largest private "bailout," easily covering the financial needs of the entire USA, providing a gigantic new base of liquidity for things like new loans and lines of credit so necessary to run businesses.

How would you like it though, if after successfully stealing all that money and buying up cheap assets someone asked you to contribute a little something back?
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #39 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

How would you like it though, if after successfully stealing all that money and buying up cheap assets someone asked you to contribute a little something back?

Of course, I would offer to bring that money back through a major change in our tax laws, but also include other changes to our financial system:

1. Up the minimum margin requirements for trading commodities and stock futures to at least 20%, with even higher percentages if you trade in critical commodities. That weeds out all the speculators that drove up and down the price of crude oil like a fast-moving elevator, for starters!

2. Put in a LOT more "teeth" into enforcing our securities laws to watch for and stop fraudulent schemes like what Bernie Madoff pulled off.
post #40 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Who wanted to "roll the dice" with home mortgage? Who wanted the GSE Fan/Fred to buy most of the dicey paper out there, putting the tax payers on the dime and upsetting the free market?


jimmac you're still caught in "we're the good ones, they are the bad ones" lock step.

I'll take it you concede that there has hardly been "no control" of bank holding companies or investment banks. Silly statement on your part.


Floorjack this is all about deregulation and people taking advantage of it. Just like in the problem in the 80's with the S & Ls only on a much larger scale.

It's really great that we're in this fix because of the republicans and now that they've lost the election all they can do is piss and moan and try to stand in the way of someone trying to fix this.

Paul Krugman thinks Obama's doing the right thing ( and I don't need to tell you what he thinks of Bush ) only it's going to cost a lot more than we've spent already. He's won a Nobel prize for his work. I think I'd rather listen to him than you.

We've been warning posters here for years about the direction Bush and CO were taking the country. Did anyone on the other side listen?

But politics aside the important thing now is to fix this situation. We've got to try something. Not just sit on our hands and do nothing or the same old thing.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Nationalize the Banks???