kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-22-10 01:05 PM
Original message |
Do you think President Obama was tough enough on Wall Street? |
|
As a couple of commentators have said, if one of these trillion-dollar banks got into trouble, our government would bail them out, no matter the price.
If that is true, then a $50 billion dollar fund would only be a drop in the bucket. Who would pick up the rest of it? The taxpayers? Again?
Should the Congress break up these largest banks? Ten or twelve years ago, the top six banks' holdings equalled 17% of the GNP. Today, the top six equal 63% of the GNP. What does that tell you?
Should the President have been tougher or did he play it just about right? What is your opinion?
|
DJ13
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-22-10 01:30 PM
Response to Original message |
1. No, he's not tough at all |
|
To me tough would be to break up the TBTF banks into more manageable sizes instead of digging his heels in and keeping them alive.
One small point though, that $50 billion fund is supposedly only there to pay for banks to go into bankruptcy, not to bail them out (at least thats been the WH's message, dont know for sure).
|
kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-22-10 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. But those that say he should be tougher.. |
|
...say that none of these biggest banks would be permitted to go under. We would pay whatever it cost to protect them. The $50 billion would not start to save one of these banks...
|
amborin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-22-10 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
6. agree; not tough at all |
|
and until naked shorting is banned from banks, not merely "regulated" ( a sham), the fraud and bubbles will continue
|
caty
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-22-10 01:37 PM
Response to Original message |
3. I would like added to the bill |
|
that no public company (that sells stock) can give a raise or a bonus if that company is losing money. And even have the salaries cut in half for the top executives until they start making money again. Stock buyers are really being ripped off when the price of their stock plummets and then bonuses are handed out in the millions. It's going to get to the point where no one will want to invest their money in the stock market.
|
zipplewrath
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-22-10 01:48 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Don't you have to be tough, before we can decide whether it was "enough"?
|
ecstatic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-22-10 01:49 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Do theatrics really matter? |
TheKentuckian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-22-10 01:55 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Nope, still begging them to "join us". They don't have to join anything |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:54 PM
Response to Original message |