Sen Sanders - If The Big Banks Are Too Big To Fail, Then Break Them Up

[rhett o rick]

Senator Sanders on the big banks:

The function of banking is to facilitate the flow of capital into productive and job-creating activities. Financial institutions cannot be an island unto themselves, standing as huge profit centers outside of the real economy.

Today, six huge Wall Street financial institutions have assets equivalent to 61 percent of our gross domestic product – over $9.8 trillion. These institutions underwrite more than half the mortgages in this country and more than two-thirds of the credit cards.

The greed, recklessness and illegal behavior of major Wall Street firms plunged this country into the worst financial crisis since the 1930s.

They are too powerful to be reformed. They must be broken up.

Stand with Senator Sanders to address controlling the powerful banks and Wall Street firms.

See more on this and Sen Sanders other proposals at: https://berniesanders.com/issues/

Cross Posted in GD.

[djean111]

1. And to those who say why bother - it will never even come to a vote? You know what you get if

you don't even try? More of the fucking same thing. Which suits the current suits just fine, of course.
Not saying anything, not trying anything - that signals acceptance and compliance. Fuck that.
(Guess I would not make it far as a speech writer, eh?)

[rhett o rick]

3. Those that say "why bother" are really saying "Oh please don't change the status quo."

They think the poverty levels, unemployment levels, crumbling infrastructure, etc. really aren't too bad. They are afraid to fight for the freedoms and liberties. Our founders would be ashamed.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. Okay, here I go: " T H E "

[rhett o rick]

4. Thanks! I fixed it via edit. nm

[ChairmanAgnostic]

14. :)

[Marr]

5. It's still amazing to me that anyone finds this acceptable.

Individual businesses-- banks no less-- that are deemed so important, their failure would break the country. It's an outright admission of oligarchy, really. If you can destroy something, you control it. When politicians say this or that bank is 'too big to fail', they're really saying that bank is in charge.

[rhett o rick]

7. The frog in the pot isn't smart enough to jump out as long as the temp goes up slowly.

Those choosing the status quo are afraid to fight for their liberties and freedoms. They are afraid of losing what little they have.

[SusanCalvin]

10. And that's the way TPTB like it. nt

[JonLP24]

6. I have often repeated Bernie Sanders quote "if a bank is too big to fail it is too big to exist"

with nothing but positive feedback. This was mostly years ago right after the financial crisis but I wish I was plugging Bernie Sanders name as I was saying it, at-the-time I just didn't expect anyone else to know who he is in the real world.

[SusanCalvin]

13. It is a really good line that everybody gets

I picked it up way back in 2008, presumably from Bernie, since I see a YouTube of him with that title. At the time Bernie wasn't even on my radar, but I knew the truth when I heard it, it would appear. Actually, I don't even remember hearing it, but I guess I didn't just make it up myself.

[jwirr]

8. Absolutely agree. We are at the point where we have two choices: put our money in the banks

and let them gamble with it or put it under our mattress. The mattress is looking mighty good.


NOTE: I think that there is a third choice: Credit Unions.

[SusanCalvin]

11. CREDIT UNIONS!

I don't know what the breakdown is of real people money vs. corporation money in the financial institutions, but I bet we could at least get some attention if all the real people moved to credit unions.

[Generic Brad]

19. Do you realize they contract the big banks to do a lot of back end processing?

Banking regulations are so complex and stringent that credit unions and small banks have to outsource many pieces of their servicing to the very big banks everyone is demanding get broken up. Our system is way more complex and intertwined than most of us comprehend. Small banks and credit unions do not have the resources to do everything on their own today.

The popular thing to do is to scream at the sky and say that the big banks are the problem. But the solutions to our problems are infinitely more complicated than what has been proposed by Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. It makes for a nice populist sound bite but it is not realistic.

And now I that I have stepped on one of DU's 3rd rails, I will slink away while the blistering rebukes, the pronouncements that I am ignorant (despite the fact that my career has been devoted to customer service and banking) and threats to place me on ignore come out.

[SusanCalvin]

21. Not from me.

And apparently not from anyone else at this time.

What you say is interesting, and I don't doubt you.

However, it does not prove they should not be broken up - just that it will not be quick or easy.

[rhett o rick]

22. Not sure what your point it. You say, " But the solutions to our problems are infinitely more

complicated than what has been proposed by Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. It makes for a nice populist sound bite but it is not realistic." Do I understand you to say that it's not realistic to attempt reforms? What do you propose?

[Generic Brad]

24. It is realistic to attempt reforms

But the reforms that have been put in place by the CFPB have done far more damage to small banks than large ones. The only entities able to effectively manage the new regulations have been the larger institutions. Breaking up the big banks effectively leaves us with a system that is unworkable for everyone - large and small. It doesn't sound any different to me than calls from conservatives to abolish the Federal Reserve.

I agree that some reforms are needed. But we need to address our problems through changing and enforcing specific rules, regulations, and laws. Painting banks as bad guys with a broad brush does not advance the national discussion or help this nation solve real problems. It creates an "us against them" mentality. No positive change is possible without everyone working together.

[rhett o rick]

25. We are in an "us vs. them" situation as capitalism promotes. As the banksters steal

our money legally, they say it's just business. They have, using their enormous power to make their thief legal. But I agree it's just business and not personal. Capitalism says that you will push the envelope and even break the rules if overall profitable. But it is our obligation as citizens to protect ourselves and control the banks and all other businesses to prevent them from gaining too much power. The big banks have a strangle hold on our economy and we must break that.

With respect this statement, " No positive change is possible without everyone working together. " seems very naive in a capitalistic system where it's everyone for themselves. The banks are committed to gain as much wealth as they can. If that wealth comes from the lower classes, too bad, so sad, that's capitalism baby.

[Sunlei]

9. yes, let us have some new banks that will compete for our account business & no Gov. 'breaks'

to the large banks.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

12. I'm old enough to remember when banks competed for your business....

And they didn't do it by trying to impress us with who had the most expensive suit.

[cstanleytech]

15. Agreed the banks need to be broken up as do some others like AT&T especially when they feel powerful

enough to issue threats to the FCC.

[Marblehead]

16. Hillary

would never say this...that's her boss

[safeinOhio]

17. For your Fundy friends

Throw the money changers out of the Temple.

[The Wielding Truth]

18. 100%! Smaller banks means better attention to local and small businesses.

[cui bono]

20. k n r

[PowerToThePeople]

23. All banks should be regulated to NPOs. n/t

[HassleCat]

26. Excellent Issue

This is why it's important to have Bernie Sanders in the primary as long as possible. Yes, Clinton fans, you should be happy somebody (Sanders) is willing to speak about these "elephant in the room" issues. We need a candidate willing to push genuine progressive ideas.

[hollysmom]

27. I remember when A&T was broken up,

many predicted doom. We used to pay 10 dollars a month to rent a princess phone, you could not buy a phone, only rent them. Long distance calls were so expensive it had to be a special treat to use them. I remember calling my sister (soon to be celebrating her 50th wedding anniversary, so it was in this time period) it was over a dollar a minute to call her.
Once the phones were broken up into competitive companies, prices went down and we went into an innovative whirlwind.
Who is to say breaking up some of the huge banks (not all, maybe less than a dozen) would bring us some relief.

edited for typos - fingers not doing so good today.

[ibegurpard]

28. You can't

You'll never get the votes, too many blue dogs, globalization is inevitable, we can't be seen as bashing business...

what have I left out?

[Jefferson23]

29. Recommend. n/t

[woo me with science]

30. K&R