the crooks aren't going to jail, except for handful of the 1000s of financial crooks. The finance sector crimes far exceed the enforcement of even weak regulations, and the House Repugs relentless defund the policing functions if they can't actually kill the regulations, as felony tax criminal Bishop Gecko proposed.
the system doesn't present (finance) candidates to the voters who would overthrow, or even mildely correct, the system in favor of the 99%.
the only way it would work is if the government was NOT allowed to borrow from this bank, if it wasn't there in the vaults then they wouldn't be able to spend it. giving the govt the ability to borrow at 0% isn't any better than allowing them to borrow at .25-2%..they'd just borrow infinite amounts until the currency is debased either way.
Actually they do, but gullible partisan sheep such as yourself immediately write them off as extremists, isolationists, and nutjobs.... then you wonder why nothing changes but the letter next to the President's name (if even that)...
"Actually they do"
name them
the "system" is 100% rigged, impregnable by the 1% against the 99%. and, as you say, it's all my fault!gotdam, you right-wingers are naive, stupid s.
So if the system is 100% rigged and unfixable, remind me again why you think that rigged unfixable system should be in charge of all the banks?
The state of ND has BND seems to working great, even if the banking sector blocked it from being even better.
A govt bank would be a non-profit bank, no dividends to pay, no multi $100Ms salaries and stock options to pay to top mgmt and board of directors.
A govt bank should also set up its own electronic card payments system in compe ion with VISA, charging only the cost of the transaction instead of the 70% margin VISA charges.
the 1% has convinced, distracted you right-wing s that GOVT IS THE PROBLEM, so you don't place the blame where it really goes, with the 1%.
Yeah except the part where you're living in a fantasy world thinking that the fox guarding the henhouse would be ok if the fox were the government and we were the hens tbh. Government would just borrow more money out of thin air than ever before, end result being an inflation tax on you and me.
There He Goes Again:
The govt is the Fox, NOT the 1% that has corrupted and operates the govt.
It's like talking to a brick wall, tbh... you clearly see the 1% cronyism in the government but your solution is to give them MORE control of our money.... you really don't see the problem with that logic?
Dude, it's Boutons.
True, but at least he's not spamming articles yet....
so at least we agree, America is ed and un able.
the difference between the Repugs and Dems is that the feckless Dems won't un it while the Repugs will America deeper and harder.
B
the government IS the 1%...they enable the 1% to do their thing and are handsomely rewarded for doing so and in turn become part of the 1%. the government is the problem right now with their crony capitalism favoring the rich, the fact that you think giving more power to the government will fix the problem is pretty funny. name one group that became all powerful and didn't abuse that power in any way..good luck.
America is so corrupt and controlled by corporations that nothing short of a violent uprising where the greedy corrupt people start to fear for their life will fix anything. The misconception is that Big government is what got us to this point and it didn't. Ronald Reagan and George Bush's small government got us to this point because they shrank government enough where corporations could start controlling it.
ummm big government is the ones who got bought off and enabled it, and continue to enable it. it takes 2 to tango imho. if government wasn't so big and intrusive they wouldn't have the authority to pass all of the bull they pass and subject us to on the daily. they should be powerless except for enforcing tax collection, national projects such as highways, and in times of war.
Why haven't Canada and Germany's government been bought off yet if big government is bad?
None of this was enabled prior to Ronald Reagan's mission to shrink government. You can revise history all you want, but America was at its best during the 50s and 60s when we had "big government" and tax rates as high as 90%. Small government that practices laissez-faire economics has been a proven failure throughout the history of man.
Small governments don't get involved in like Iran Contra, nor do they pump dollar after dollar into the welfare state like George H.W. did near the end of his presidency...
I was referring to George Bush Jr. I wasn't talking about Sr., he barely made an impact and I agree was not a small government type guy.
Small governments don't get involved in like Iran Contra, nor do they pump dollar after dollar into the welfare state like George H.W. did near the end of his presidency...
How did Ronald Reagan's small government decisions like the complete deregulation of the finance industry work out?
What does regulation do when regulatory bodies can easily be filled with corporate/special interest cronies?
1) I like how you keep avoiding how Ronald Reagan's deregulation directly led to the great recession
2) I'm not denying that Obama's form of "regulation" (i.e. giving the auto industry and finance industry a blowjob when they managed themselves into bankruptcy) sucks. I'm saying that regulation and high taxes are necessary if you want a country with a stable middle class and a strong economy.
Tbh, regulate through the justice system and send the crooks to jail... and stop encouraging malinvestments, risky behavior from the financial industry, and debasement of our currency through the Fed's fraud interest rates and money printing....
I'm not conceding the argument at all. We need to try something, ANYTHING, to get some control and power back from the 1%.B
ACA, as ugly as the for-profit health corps made it, is still a step forward for the 99%. That's why the Repugs and their ignorant base JUST HAVE TO HATE IT like it was smallpox. ACA is actually govt HELPING Americans, and that's 100% an hetical to the Repugs.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 11-23-2012 at 07:18 PM.
lol nobody is talking about deregulation. shrinking government control and influence over every little facet of our lives doesn't necessarily mean any deregulation at all. what good would come out of putting government in charge of the financial sector? you expect them to regulate themselves? they're the ones who turned a blind eye to the whole subprime thing that started this mess and arrested NO ONE because it was all more CRONY capitalism like i've been speaking of. certain people and companies are allowed to get away with murder while the compe ion isn't, it isn't free market at all. again, break your psychological conditioning, deregulation and smaller government are not synonymous terms at all. whenever i talk about shrinking government im talking about getting rid of the TSA and bogus surveillance and erosion of civil liberties, get rid of these 15 or so agencies dedicated to just spying and interfering in other countries foreign affairs. the government needs less influence in our lives, not more, and putting them in charge of banking fixes nothing. if by "deregulation" you mean less regulating of my underpants and what is contained therein at the airport then yeah, i'm for ing deregulation.
there aren't the insane amounts of wealth in those countries as there are here, that's why. the more wealth and greed there is, the more opportunity for corruption. and you're insane if you think those countries live in some awesome utopia where everyone lives like kings and there's freedom and liberty for all. for instance, canadians who have money come here for treatment because their own ty socialistic medicine that all you liberals ooh and ahhh over ing sucks. the average canadian earns slightly less on average as well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
