Reply With Quote
There's nothing wrong with becoming Western Europe.
http://thehill.com/ -morris/obama...009-04-21.html
By Morris
Posted: 04/21/09 05:21 PM [ET]
President Obama showed his hand this week when The New York Times wrote that he is considering converting the stock the government owns in our country’s banks from preferred stock, which it now holds, to common stock.
This seemingly insignificant change is momentous. It means that the federal government will control all of the major banks and financial ins utions in the nation. It means socialism.
The Times dutifully dressed up the Obama plan as a way to avoid asking Congress for more money for failing banks. But the implications of the proposal are obvious to anyone who cares to look.
When the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) intervention was first outlined by the Bush administration, it did not call for any transfer of stock, of any sort, to the government. The Democrats demanded, as a price for their support, that the taxpayers “get something back” for the money they were lending to the banks. House Republicans, wise to what was going on, rejected the administration’s proposal and sought, instead, to provide insurance to banks, rather than outright cash. Their plan would, of course, not involve any transfer of stock. But Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) undercut his own party’s conservatives and went along with the Democratic plan, ensuring its passage.
But to avoid the issue of a potential for government control of the banks, everybody agreed that the stock the feds would take back in return for their money would be preferred stock, not common stock. “Preferred” means that these stockholders get the first crack at dividends, but only common stockholders can actually vote on company management or policy. Now, by changing this fundamental element of the TARP plan, Obama will give Washington a voting majority among the common stockholders of these banks and other financial ins utions. The almost 500 companies receiving TARP money will be, in effect, run by Washington.
And whoever controls the banks controls the credit and, therefore, the economy. That’s called socialism.
Obama is dressing up the idea of the switch to common stock by noting that the conversion would provide the banks with capital they could use without a further taxpayer appropriation. While this is true, it flies in the face of the fact that an increasing number of big banks and brokerage houses are clamoring to give back the TARP money. Goldman-Sachs, for example, wants to buy back its freedom, as do many banks. Even AIG is selling off assets to dig its way out from under federal control. The reason, of course, is that company executives do not like the restrictions on executive pay and compensation that come with TARP money. It is for this reason that Chrysler Motors refused TARP funds.
With bank profits up and financial ins utions trying to give back their money, there is no need for the conversion of the government stock from preferred to common — except to advance the political socialist agenda of this administration.
Meanwhile, to keep its leverage over the economy intact, the Obama administration is refusing to let banks and other companies give back the TARP money until they pass a financial “stress test.” Nominally, the government justifies this procedure by saying that it does not want companies to become fully private prematurely and then need more help later on. But don’t believe it. They want to keep the TARP money in the banks so they can have a reason and rationale to control them.
The Times story did not influence the dialogue of the day. People were much more concerned with the death of 21 horses at a polo match. Much as we will miss these noble animals, we will miss our economic freedom more.
Serious questions to conservatives. How would Obama or the deomcrats benefit from socilaizing our country? If they were successful then all rich democrats would suffer. So why would Obama and the dems do it?Please save the talking points I want to hear in your own words how Obama or the democrats will specifically benefit from this change. If you can't answer this in your own words you need to shut the f*ck up and stop claiming that Obama is trying to do it.
(crickets)..
There's nothing wrong with becoming Western Europe.
The idea that this is some kind of novelty would be laughable if the ignorance it betrays were not so abysmal. This process started 75 years ago, the last time capitalism the bed.
Why do you think people voted for Obama, Darrin? If the Dems can't deliver some version of social democracy what good are they?
no answer?
Perhaps, but never quite this rapidly.
Any bank that needs the handout deserves to be owned and reorganized by the USG. Insolvent banks are supposed to be nationalized.
, "prompt action" legislation requires the FDIC to take them over as soon as they pose "any significant risk" to the taxpayer, well before any actual default.
What happened? No transparency. Insolvent banks kept us all in the dark about their true financial condition until it was too late to do anything about it, and now we're all left holding the bag.
Any firms so large that they can threaten the US economy by holding a gun to their own heads deserve not to exist.
Last edited by Winehole23; 04-24-2009 at 12:42 PM.
Dependence = Control = Power = Money
Control for who? Who gets rich?
"control all of the major banks and financial ins utions in the nation."
the major banks in question are all bankrupt, kaput, have lost control of themselves.
"It means socialism."
There They Go Again! with that always undefined term. Anyway, capitalism and capitalist have failed, AGAIN, so why not try something else?
"500 companies receiving TARP money will be, in effect, run by Washington."
Only if the Feds' block of voting stock is 51%. The mgmt of the 500 companies have FAILED to run their companies, except into bankruptcy. So why not try something else?
"whoever controls the banks controls the credit and, therefore, the economy."
Asshole finally got something right.
And the people who have been controlling the banks have ed up the banks and ed up the entire world's economy. They have violated their fiduciary responsibilities (but they still get $Ms in bonuses paid from taxpayers subsidies).
"They want to keep the TARP money in the banks so they can have a reason and rationale to control them."
Really? Morris is a infallible mind-reader.
Typical right-wing bull , spewing bull FUD, but without offering any alternative (how about: let BoA, Citi, AIG, etc, all go bankrupt), and hiding the fact the McLiar would have continued Goldie Paulsen's Robbery.
a depression doesn't mean capitalism has failed. a depression means capitalism is purging bad investments.
too bad that isn't being allowed to happen, and thanks to Bush and Obama we're getting all the pain of a depression with none of the gain of a quick, efficient, reallocation of resources.
and Morris is a tool.
I need to study this issue since I'm no banker.
Those bad investments have led to a worldwide recession. It's a massive fail.
...it is a massive fail.....but seriously, nobody was minding the shop for 8 years, so some of that massive fail blame goes to the American voters...
Yep.
*shakes head*
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
