Are you for or against the FDIC (which insures your bank deposits)? It's a government en y but its works based on bank contributions not tax payer dollars. Of course, if a major bank like any of the top 10 ever went under the FDIC wouldn't have even close to enough to cover the losses so tax payers would probably fit the bill.
Yeah, it was established as a anti-great depression tool but that was before conservatives repealed Glass-Steagall regulations which mean the odds of a commericial bank going down have increased since so many now also make risky investments (e.g., Citi).
True "free marketeers" out there should say deposit at your own risk.
20% of something is better than 100% of nothing though it should be regulated to garnish 100% of your investment.
The problem today is that banks have been allowed to go beyond that of which they were intended on being and it has always been foolish to intrust one's money to an en y that is allowed to do as they please with your money yet critical and unfair to the depositors which contribute to their establishments.
Sounds like government intervention no matter which way you slice it.
FDIC made banks trustworthy, because you couldn't trust them with your money in the 20s and 30s, and you can't trust them now after Phil Gramm killed Glass-Steagal and snuck in blocking regulation of derivatives to allow retail banks to get into the investment banking casino.
Now the govt tries to maintain trust in banks by lying to the public, not telling which banks are sucking which qty of money out of the govt to cover their losses, and allowing the banks to play casino and Monopoly behind secrecy.
Magic Negro and Congress is/will cave to Wall St and permit unregulated, secret business as usual, with toothless window dressing meant to fool people the bubble/pop happening now won't happen again.
Since I have money in the bank, I'm for it. They actually shepherded one of the biggest banking en ies through a failure without so much as an interest rate change in my CD, so I can't complain.
I am for it, but apparently former President Bush was either against it or didn't believe in it, and bailed out a bunch of banks rather than risk people protecting their money, which the FDIC had to do anyways...
Let the big inefficient banks fail, and let the smaller smarter more nimble banks take their place. It is how the big banks got to be big in the 1st place. That is how American Capitalism is supposed to work.
Corrupt moron.
dude even the big tier banks that survive the GFC, ended up buying up the failed banks below value....WAMU is sueing fdic and the other company that bought them for 1.5b when wamu had 300b worth of under management...they got jobbed there...
FDIC: For.
Even the free marketeers recognize that there is no market without people being able to trust that the money they put in the bank is safe.
"they got jobbed there"
yep, it's called "crisis/disaster capitalism", when the vultures with money swoop down to gobble up the weaklings and disaster cases for pennies on the dollar, and then clean up by reducing compe ion, cartelizing the market, flipping the assets for close to market value.
it was no accident that Goldman Paulson let Goldman's main investment banking compe or Lehman go bankrupt, while Goldman Paulson bailed out AIG, who owed Goldman $15B, tax dollars that flowed right into Goldman's coffers. Letting AIG go bankrupt would have hurt Goldman badly.
Exactly. It pisses me off that the elite don't let the system work how it's proven to work well, but have to bail out their rich friends instead.
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 08-24-2009 at 02:37 PM.
I agree that there were some massive conflicts of interest going on when Hank Paulson decided to bailout the banks but that doesn't mean it wasn't the right decision. Paulson is your conservative's conservative, the ultimate free market guy. However, even he, realized that a banking collapse would have effectively ended the American Economy by freezing credit markets, bankrupting the FDIC, and flooring the stock market.
FDIC is Hated Big Government. Kill it first thing Monday.
The really rich people don't around with FDIC-insured banks. Their money goes to tax havens where Foreeign Big Government laws protect their secrect piles of $Bs.
This is true. In fact, I believe some swiss bank was forced to give up the names of people hiding their money there to the U.S. Gov. I'm sure there are some pro-tax evasion people here (because that's really what it is).
.....but now its all better?
LMAO. Now that gets to happen but over the course of a decade instead.
We're so much better off.
So you're disappointed the American economy didn't end.
It's been less than a year since it happened and many economic indicators are already showing turnarounds.
I didn't say the bailout was a panacea. It was deregulation that allowed banks to invest in toxic assets and forced action to be taken. It was a bad situation and the right decision. After all, I'm giving a republican credit for creating it and pushing it through congress. Paulson is a Harvard MBA but any good business man knows you make decisions based on empiracal evidence and not just prinicples.
Here's another interesting fact. The Bailout actually earned the American Taxpayer $1.4 billion dollars of interest when Goldman Sachs returned its share.
In fact, the following banks have already returned the bailout money and each return earned taxpayers million (and some billion) dollar returns: JPMorgan Chase & Co., Morgan Stanley, American Express Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., U.S. Bancorp, Capital One Financial Corp., Bank of New York Mellon Corp., State Street Corp. and BB&T Corp.
Of course the American Goverment is not an investment bank but that wasn't really the purpose of these loans (a.k.a. bailouts)...
Exactly. The deregulated 'free-market system' that so many conservatives worship at the alter of was on the verge of a complete, and utter melt-down...for better or worse, these loans loosened the credit markets and combined with sound Keynasian economic theory principles by the Obama administration are getting the economy going again....This collapse brought to us Dubya and the do-nothing Congress that let lobbyist write their own regulations could have been much, much worse.
the American economy is not a free market system. Its a managed economy in every sense of the word.
It fell apart because the managers made the money too cheap and good ole fashioned greed took care of the rest.
the economy is "growing" because the fed printed more money and gave it to banks to play the stock market with.
There are no free markets in the world, but the US is about as close as you can get.
In a completely free market, Bernie Madoff would be walking around unshackeled, because Ponzi schemes would be legal. The rules of the road would be comprised of the words Caveat Emptor. You also likely wouldn't ever get a quarterly financial statement, another pesky SEC regulation that companies and investment houses would never do on their own.
Do you actually believe that?
Are you aware of how by calling loans a synonym investment banks got away with fraud and unregulated cash. Had there been a government who regulated, perhaps using a synonymous word for security wouldn't have gotten risk-taking execs playing with other people's money off the hook...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
