Banks are too big to prosecute

[RayClay]

Yeah it's pretty amusing to watch CTC, public advocate, show up. Wish he was here from 2006-2009.

He must have searched furtively until he was sure no threads with us arguing about Glass steagall, Gramm, Leach Bliley etc. survived the crash or changeover here.

[ctc]

He must have searched furtively until he was sure no threads with us arguing about Glass steagall, Gramm, Leach Bliley etc. survived the crash or changeover here.

don't need to search. And we have spoken about Clinton signing onto the demise of Glass steagall haven't we.

[ctc]

LOL. Do you know what lobbying organizations do?

CEOs sometimes LOVE regulations, provided they get to write them. For instance the credit ratings agencies absolutely LOVED the regulation that required the sell side to purchase credit ratings for bonds, at least if you were one of the original 3 agencies that were granted legal recognition as being acceptable ratings agencies.

What they DON'T love is regulations they can't capture. And what they absolutely despise if regulatory agencies that are largely independent of their influence which the CPBB would be if the Republicans ever funded it.

If you'd like to offer some quotes from say the chamber of commerce or other business organizations speaking about the inherently bad effects of regulations do offer them.

In the meantime save your rhetoric for the peanut gallery, they'll slurp that **** like it's mommas milk.

[flyerhawk]

If you'd like to offer some quotes from say the chamber of commerce or other business organizations speaking about the inherently bad effects of regulations do offer them.

In the meantime save your rhetoric for the peanut gallery, they'll slurp that **** like it's mommas milk.

Wow. I thought you were a bit more savvy than that.

But here you go...

Here you go

[thelittlecheese]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...-to-jail-.html

In an on-camera interview, which aired recently, Breuer stated plainly that some financial institutions are too large and too complex to be held accountable before the law.

So, laundering billions in drug money is apparently 'okay' and the banks are above the law. It really does stretch the bounds of reason and gains you an "I told you so" from conspiracy theorists everywhere.

[ctc]

Wow. I thought you were a bit more savvy than that.

But here you go...

Here you go

Link isn't working

[flyerhawk]

Link isn't working

Works for me. Do a search for REGULATION NATION: THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION'S REGULATORY EXPANSION VS.
JOBS AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY

[Hyped]

This doesn't surprise me one bit...and I am at least glad that the justice department is doing it's "homework" in the impact of prosecution. While their consulting sources may be "questionable"..it's a good step in the right direction. The idea is not to prosecute, but introduce new legislation to prevent the same thing from happening again. For example, create laws where a corporation will be fined 50 million for forging a SINGLE document...or something like that.

We cannot crash big banks..the effects would be devastating to middle class employees at the banks....we also cannot prosecute individuals since we're talking about corporations here... we need to make new laws that allows the justice department to slap some wrists here and there...

[RayClay]

don't need to search. And we have spoken about Clinton signing onto the demise of Glass steagall haven't we.

We spoke about the effect the repeal of glass steagall had on the eventual financial collapse. Little to none according to you.

[Diamondeye]

The banks run the government through both enormous political contributions and their inside man in the Federal Reserve.

They're sucking this country dry through a combination of debt and inflation, while people argue over trivial sh1t.

People talk about the end of the Glass Steagall act as if it was significant in the grand scheme of the things, but it was Nixon in 1971 who sealed this country's fate, by ending any tangible discipline on the expansion of currency and debt. The explosion in debt and price increases since the mid-1970s reflects this.

I know people hate gold-based money, but the truth is that I do not care if our money is based on the production of corn, oil, or cow sh1t, but it needs to be based on something of REAL value.

If not, we're yielding power to the banks with strictly debt-based money.

[ctc]

Works for me. Do a search for REGULATION NATION: THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION'S REGULATORY EXPANSION VS.
JOBS AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY

You think that piece is the chamber saying regulations are 'inherently' bad?

You need to re-visit the definition of inherent.

[ctc]

We spoke about the effect the repeal of glass steagall had on the eventual financial collapse. Little to none according to you.

If you can show how the repeal caused people to exercise poor judgement have at it.

[ctc]

This doesn't surprise me one bit...and I am at least glad that the justice department is doing it's "homework" in the impact of prosecution. While their consulting sources may be "questionable"..it's a good step in the right direction. The idea is not to prosecute, but introduce new legislation to prevent the same thing from happening again. For example, create laws where a corporation will be fined 50 million for forging a SINGLE document...or something like that.

We cannot crash big banks..the effects would be devastating to middle class employees at the banks....we also cannot prosecute individuals since we're talking about corporations here... we need to make new laws that allows the justice department to slap some wrists here and there...

When the secretary to the IMF is wondering about the lack of prosecutions you don't think he isn't infinitely more cognizant of the risks?

And if you've been paying the least bit of attention you'd know that these organizations are fined regularly, to the point that it is perceived as simply the cost of doing business, for bad behaviour.

[RayClay]

If you can show how the repeal caused people to exercise poor judgement have at it.

Only if, in history, you can show me how people that control money and credit were at the mercy of people with bad credit and judgment.

Maybe the case against S&P will show how much consumer "judgment" was involved.

There aren't fewer people with bad judgment around today, they just can't get loans.

[flyerhawk]

You think that piece is the chamber saying regulations are 'inherently' bad?

You need to re-visit the definition of inherent.

Uh huh. And the NRA doesn't believe that gun regulations are inherently bad either. They just oppose all of them.