Taking on the Big Banks is a job for BOTH parties

The Dodd-Frank law attempts to outlaw bail-outs of huge banks that would otherwise be considered “too big to fail,” meaning that they are so large that their collapse would threaten not just the U.S. economy but the global financial structure as well.

(The banks in question are JP Morgan Chase, BankAmerica, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Morgan Stanley.)

But the fact remains that those six banks are still, in fact, too large to be allowed to fail, and everyone in banking knows it even if they do not admit it. Attorney General Eric Holder has acknowledged that the banks may even be “too big to prosecute,” because again the economic impact of doing so would be enormous:

“I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if you do prosecute, if you do bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy.”

Banking regulators in the United Kingdom are dealing with similar issues.

So what do we do? Influential voices are being raised to again attempt to address the problem.

As The Hill reports:

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Wednesday that he still views “too big to fail” banks as a “major issue” that must be addressed….

“I don’t think ‘too big to fail’ is solved now. We’re doing a number of things which I think will help,” he said. “If we don’t achieve the goal, I think we’ll have to do additional steps … it’s not just something we can forget about.”

“Too big to fail was a major source of the crisis, and we will not have successfully responded to the crisis if we do not address that issue successfully,” he said.

Perhaps the most prominent and vocal advocate of addressing the “too big to fail” problem has been Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Bernanke was blunt in his comments yesterday, saying that “I agree with Elizabeth Warren 100 percent that it’s a real problem.”

But here’s the thing. Some important conservatives also recognize that it remains an issue. As Sen. David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, put it in a Senate hearing this week, “My top concern is actually the same as Mrs. Warren’s. There is growing bipartisan concern across the whole political spectrum about the fact that too big to fail is alive and well.”

Last week at CPAC, Richard Fisher, head of the Dallas Federal Reserve and a conservative voice on the Fed board, made a similar argument in a sparsely attended speech. As the Wall Street Journal reports:

“Dealing with too-big-to-fail banks is a cause that should be embraced by conservatives, liberals and moderates alike,” Mr. Fisher said. “The American people will be grateful to whoever liberates them from a recurrence of taxpayer bailouts.”

Staying away from monetary policy, Mr. Fisher used his speech to again argue that in the wake of the financial crisis, the problem of bank concentration has only gotten worse, and that the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation that was supposed to help fix the problem didn’t. He said the cores of banks have gotten so large that their failure would be a major risk to the system.

The idea that a revised set of regulations that would downsize banks and allow them to more easily pass through bankruptcy is a fix for the banking system didn’t sit well with some at the event.”

The problem, at its core, is that smaller banks will be allowed to fail and they know it, a fact that injects a degree of caution and risk-assessment into their operations. At larger banks, such as JP Morgan, under fire for allowing the loss of $6 billion in high-risk derivative gambling, that risk does not exist, because bank officials and regulators alike understand that if the bank goes under, the economy goes with it.

That knowledge allows those banks to take high-profit risks that smaller banks cannot, further cementing their advantage through what amounts to a government subsidy. In effect, they are immune to market discipline and they know it.

“The current system “makes for an uneven playing field, tilted to the advantage of Wall Street against Main Street, placing the financial system and the economy in constant jeopardy,” as Fisher said.

As the WSJ report notes, some conservatives at CPAC and elsewhere are unconvinced, because the solution to “too big to fail” is government intervention, forcing those banks to reduce themselves in size or face significantly tighter regulations on their operations. But as conservatives who look at the issue in practical rather than ideological terms understand, you have three choices:

1.) Intervene now, in relatively mild ways, to prevent those banks from indulging in high-risk trades that threaten their bottom line and in turn the economy.

2.) Wait until the inevitable happens again, when overconfident bankers take on more risk than they should in search of huge profits and bonuses, and then bailout the banks out again through a TARP-like intervention.

3.) Do nothing, which amounts to playing a game of chicken with the big banks. They will continue to take big risks, the federal government will continue to claim that they will not be bailed out when they falter. Then, when the crisis comes, allow them to go down and take the rest of down with them.

Option 1 is clearly the lesser of three evils. But our political system seems to have lost the capability to make decisions on that kind of basis.

– Jay Bookman

390 comments Add your comment

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 21st, 2013
8:33 am

Oh no, you mentioned Dodd-Franks, that is gonna cause a lot of knee jerk hurts

Lord Help Us

March 21st, 2013
8:35 am

Isn’t Dodd Frank (along with Benghazi, Obama’s American hating, socialist agenda, and the ‘war on gas’) one of the things ‘killing’ our economy? Can all the right-wing media sites be wrong?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 21st, 2013
8:36 am

But our political system seems to have lost the capability to make decisions on that kind of basis

They sure will spout a lot of talk like they are doing something. It’s time we stop the undermining of the intent of Dodd-Frank. Eliminate too big to fail and too big to jail and stop subsidizing Wall Street.

Doggone/GA

March 21st, 2013
8:43 am

Here’s the thing: if they’re too big to fail because it will bring down the economy, and they’re too big to jail because it will bring down the economy, and we can’t force them to become smaller because it will bring down the economy, and we can’t do nothing because they could do something stupid and bring down the economy….my take on it is that we should regulate them to become smaller, because AT LEAST we will KNOW the outcome and can plan for it. With any other option…we have no idea when it’s going to happen. We just know it will…sooner or later.

liberal hack

March 21st, 2013
8:44 am

In a way, I don’t think Dodd-Frank does enough to protect us from gov’t bail outs for banks. I personally believe that they should be forced to down size to a more manageable way. So, if they engage in risky behavior, they fail, and the cost of insuring people’s deposits aren’t so high. Frankly, thats why I use a credit union. We as some consumers have some choice.

I’m as conservative as they come, but I’m really tired of the govt’ subsidizing mega large entities like banks and other large corporations.

Normal, Plain and Simple

March 21st, 2013
8:44 am

Make the “Too Big To Fail” banks splinter like they did with AT&T, Western Electric and Southern Bell. Then they won’t be “too big to fail”.

Granny Godzilla

March 21st, 2013
8:45 am

Elizabeth Warren: “When banks are too big to fail, too big to jail, too big for trial, too big to regulate, too big to shrink… they are just too big.”

This woman can and will fight the fight.

Peadawg

March 21st, 2013
8:45 am

Is there a 4th option? Yikes.

Normal, Plain and Simple

March 21st, 2013
8:46 am

If they do fail and bring down the economy, we can always do what Cyprus is doing… :lol:

Welcome to the Occupation

March 21st, 2013
8:48 am

Here’s what we’re up against and one of the reasons we are unlikely to see any major challenge to banks’ power:

JPMorgan is one of the best managed banks there is. Jamie Dimon, the head of it, is one of the smartest bankers we got and they still lost $2 billion and counting

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/banking-financial-institutions/227307-obama-jp-morgan-one-of-the-best-managed-banks#ixzz2OBKexJkD

Stevie Ray

March 21st, 2013
8:52 am

JAY

Amen brother. I’ve been obsessed with this since the leglislative protections began to erode in the 80’s. The Dodd-Frank Act is not simply a turd in a bowl, it does zero (typically) to address this issue. So imagine if you will, our government passes a law to, among other things, protect us and they miss the 800 lb elephant in the room in favor of some growth of government oversight crap the won’t work.

We all know the problem..it’s as obvious as the solution. Re-election trumps all. Wall Street plays our politicians like childrens puppets. Each administration assigns GS or other leaders to cabinet posts and they push actions in favor of the institution the left then return and reap huge margins and compensation from the very actions they enacted while in government.

So we have an economic implosion and nothing is done about the root cause…typical.

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

March 21st, 2013
8:52 am

I just wish BOA would put an ATM on my side of town.

fedup

March 21st, 2013
8:52 am

I wonder what FOX pundits have to say about this problem.

Stevie Ray

March 21st, 2013
8:54 am

Funny how in addition to us being on the hook for bailing out a too big to fail (and growing with no signs of change) government, we are also on the hook for these institutions…what will be next.

Most bi-partisan activity in DC, disrespect for our cash.

Thomas Heyward Jr

March 21st, 2013
8:54 am

“The big banks are the state apparatus which we need to bring about socialism, and which we take-ready made from capitalism; our task here is merely to lop off what capitalistically mutilates this excellent apparatus, to make it even bigger, even more democratic, even more comprehensive…A single State Bank the biggest of the big, with branches in every rural district, in every factory, will constitute as much as nine-tenths of the socialist apparatus. This will be country-wide book-keeping, country-wide accounting of the production and distribution of goods, this will be, so to speak, something in the nature of the skeleton of socialist society.”
Vladimer Lenin
.
.
The three choices above are ridiculous and regardless of which one the plebes chooses…only strengthen Centralized Authority….as per Lenin.
.
The answer is simple and Ron Paul showed the way.
End the Fed.
.
(Or at least………..to mitigate the panic among the frightened statists/progs…………allow competing currencies.).
.
This is happening anyhow….so ya’ll might as well get used to it.

independent thinker

March 21st, 2013
8:56 am

Simple solution- since the monster banks have greater reserves and liquidity than small banks, remove FDIC guaranties and FNMA/Freddie Mac guaranties on their mortgages. Make them insure themselves with adequate reserves or private insurance. Remember the good old days when you needed private mortgage insurance if you did not have enough equity in the property to get a loan?Instead these genius banker limited their exposure by slicing and dicing the mortgages, sold the pieces as securities so that others absorbed the risk. Watch how quickly they downsize themselves.

Stevie Ray

March 21st, 2013
8:58 am

fedup

March 21st, 2013
8:52 am

Why the preoccupation with what another predictable media outlet is doing? If you want fodder to pursue the boring FOX, LImbaugh blah blah blah just do what others do here many times a day. Go to Fox, find a particular quote, with or without context, and post it here with what are now boring anecdotes.

I’m not Fox guy but the overused deflection that one is a FOXBOT or whatever is really a non argument..only exceeded in its ridiculousness by “there’s your sign”, or IOKTBAR..

Granny Godzilla

March 21st, 2013
8:59 am

Jamie Dimon?

“Then came the Big Reveal. Last Thursday, a 300-page Senate report delving into the details of the $6.2 billion London Whale loss pointed the finger of blame directly at Jamie Dimon. An email containing the words “I approve” made it clear that the guy known for micromanagement and checking out data knew exactly what was going on at JPM. He had specifically told his people to take on riskier business and he approved new ways of hiding it.”
.
.
.
.
Is Jamie too big to jail?

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

March 21st, 2013
8:59 am

Well, I got a question for you. If we go up against the big banks who’s going to be there to ream us with late fees, outrageous interest rates, annual fees, monthly fees, foreclosures and such? Bet you never thought of that.

If we go after the big banks it’ll be like little kids rebelling against their Mommy and Daddy. What kind of Commie are you anyway?

We always need somebody to shaft us big-time. If it ain’t the big banks then it’ll be somebody else that has to step in. Do we want to take that chance?

So let’s go right on bailing the big banks out when they make a few mistakes. It’s better than taking a chance of getting somebody worse to bend us over and . . . well, you know.

That’s my opinion and it’s very true. Have a good Thursday everybody. And since I’ll have to be out here hauling and lugging while the games are going on today I’d appreciate it if some of you will let me know when RedneckCon has won. Thank you very much.

Stevie Ray

March 21st, 2013
9:02 am

Thomas Heyward Jr

March 21st, 2013
8:54 am

Agree with ending the fed but taxpayers risks have been severely ill affected by the combination of demise of GS, campaign cash, and idiotic government responses like Dodd Frank…

In this case (very unlike me), banks should be broken up as prior to GS…only good things can come about. The prime reason the politicians allowed a free for all in the first place was to kneel to the banks BS pitch that they were not competitive globally.

ty webb

March 21st, 2013
9:05 am

Fauxcahontas is after some scalps.

RB from Gwinnett

March 21st, 2013
9:06 am

Why limit the discussion to banks? Toss GM, Chrysler and some other companies in there too. What if Wal Mart fails? Microsoft?

MiltonMan

March 21st, 2013
9:08 am

“Elizabeth Warren: “When banks are too big to fail, too big to jail, too big for trial, too big to regulate, too big to shrink… they are just too big.”

This woman can and will fight the fight.”

It’s the indian in her

JohnnyReb

March 21st, 2013
9:09 am

The big banks should be forced now to break into smaller independent companies of a size small enough that if they fail they go under – no more bailouts.

That would be far superior to more regulation/government control.

Paul

March 21st, 2013
9:10 am

First, congrats to Republican politicians who put aside ideology in the face of conflicting reality. Good luck to them in convincing their constituents that all their past remarks that had the rank and file’s heads bobbing are no longer valid.

“Richard Fisher, head of the Dallas Federal Reserve and a conservative voice on the Fed board, made a similar argument in a sparsely attended speech.”

The fact it was sparsely attended tells you a lot about the CPAC attendees.

“… the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation that was supposed to help fix the problem didn’t.”

Of COURSE it didn’t fix the problem, because EVERYONE at CPAC KNOWS it was Bwany Fwank who FORCED those banks to make loans to people who couldn’t afford them and THAT’S what caused the financial collapse. (For the caffeine-deprived, that’s sarcasm).

“The idea that a revised set of regulations that would downsize banks and allow them to more easily pass through bankruptcy is a fix for the banking system didn’t sit well with some at the event.”

Because they know regulations are the other part of the problem and if we just got rid of regulations the free market in the greatest country the world has ever seen would self-correct. (More sarcasm) Note to Marco Rubio: you might want to consider your line of ‘we don’t need new ideas ’cause this is America!!!!” CPAC line.

independent thinker 8:56

I’ll tag onto your idea with another: what if, as a fallback position, we acknowledge what AG Holder said and write new laws that impose severe criminal penalties on the people in the institutions who caused the losses?

Regnad Kcin

March 21st, 2013
9:10 am

“Toss GM, Chrysler and some other companies in there too. What if Wal Mart fails? Microsoft?”

RB – do you believe that if one of these companies fail, it will take down the economy? Really?

Please go reread Jay’s article – I don’t think you caught what it was about, quite.

GT

March 21st, 2013
9:10 am

Too big to fail is like one of those ghettoes in America that is so dangerous cops refuse to patrol it. I do not believe the economic bomb would be unlivable to the masses of Americans who are suffering the consequences of this recession. I do believe it will drag down the government and this country along with it. As long as we have government we have hope, but this thing is a cancer, the government need to let it run its course bad and good or we will be like the old Soviet empire bankrupt because we became a freak of nature. Chaos will fill the streets.

We had anti trust laws on the books for this very reason. We have dismantled these laws mainly because the Congress does not understand what Wall Street does. All the hearing in the world will not produce positive results when the interviewed speak a different language than the interviewer.

What is going to happen is nature will take control. The one thing bigger than government in the country is Wall Street and if we bail it out one more time it ,not all these side issues of entitlement, will destroy this country. Not one Republican candidate pointed towards that sink hole as the cause of the recession. It is the gorilla in the room they don’t acknowledge because we now have unlimited campaign donations and a artificial economy that looks healthier than it is.

clem

March 21st, 2013
9:12 am

but banks buy both parties off, and have natural ally in repubs

JohnnyReb

March 21st, 2013
9:13 am

Elizabeth Warren – a stopped clock is correct twice a day. She’s a nut job.

ev

March 21st, 2013
9:16 am

Uhm….isn’t this a core belief of Ron Paul and Rand Paul and most libertarians? We have only been saying it for years. 5 of the 6 national banks wouldn’t be profitable without tax payer subsidies in the first place.

Paul

March 21st, 2013
9:16 am

JohnnyReb

I think your post was cut off. I missed the next part where you say “because” and follow with three or four documented examples.

zebra

March 21st, 2013
9:17 am

The “market is God” idiots should object to these big banks as much as anyone else.

The problem, though, is the banks can afford to buy enough legislators to protect themselves.

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
9:17 am

What if Wal Mart fails?

10’s of 1,000’s of Chinese slaves will be out of work and will starve to death.

Julia

March 21st, 2013
9:17 am

I think a whole bunch of those exec at those too big to fail banking institutions should be doing the perp walk on their way to LONG prison sentences at some not so nice federal prisons. they think they’re above the law, and apparently they are.

li'l Aynie

March 21st, 2013
9:18 am

Once a upon a time, a bank was a trusted institution housed in a dignified building on Main Street. The President of the bank was a respected member of the community. The business of the bank was to accept and pay interest on customer deposits, and extend loans at a reasonable rate of interest to trustworthy customers.

The bank’s operating expenses and profits were the difference between interest collected on loans, and interest paid to depositors. The net benefit of the banking business was that the savings of people in the community were used to finance worthwhile projects in the community, resulting in economic growth in the community.

Then came state-wide banking, then interstate banking, now six banks “too big to fail”. The big banks mix retail banking, which operates IN the economy, and investment banking, which operates ON the economy.

Let’s go back to the concept of retail banks, where the sole source of income for the bank is interest collected less interest paid, where some of the deposited capital is invested in the community from which it was collected.

Let’s cut investment banks out of the retail business. Let them offer their well-heeled customers all the thrills of derivatives, hedge-funds, and overleveraged investment portfolios, and let them maintain the bank’s own speculative portfolio. Let’s just tax them properly: all dividends and capital gains taxed as ordinary income, with a 15% gaming surtax on financial instruments that are not based on job-creating enterprise.

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
9:19 am

Remember, you have until noon to join the NCAA group from here and fill out your bracket. Even you knot headed far right wing fanatics are welcome to join. We have lucky 13 right now. I THINK even Redneck Convert joined………

Paul

March 21st, 2013
9:19 am

ev

They’re not profitable now. Wells Fargo hadn’t paid federal income tax for years, which is obviously why Republicans are against imposing new taxes. I mean, if a multibillion-dollar bank that controls a significant part of the market doesn’t pay taxes, imagine the stress we’d put on the bank and the market share it would lose if we suddenly actually forced them to pay income tax?

weetamoe

March 21st, 2013
9:20 am

Let them fail and prosecute the ones who have not yet managed to sneak away with the loot as, for example, Robert Rubin who fleeced Citi managed to do. The old savings and loan mess resulted in over 100 prosecutions. This time there have been none. The TEA party opposed bailouts, TARP, and stimulus. Bernanke’ s reckless attempt to lower the unemployment figures to 6.5% continues to have disastrous consequences. My investments are doing better than I ever imagined and yet given the circumstances and reasons, that is not a good sign.

Granny Godzilla

March 21st, 2013
9:20 am

Sorry if this sounds tea partyish….

but seems Elizabeth Warren scares some folks.

Squaw jokes all you wish….I wouldn’t want
her on a warpath that led to my wigwam -

Neither do the big banks.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 21st, 2013
9:21 am

The big banks should be forced…

Followed by:

In effect, they are immune to market discipline and they know it.

But…but…but…the invisible had!

It’s never wrong!

Time to repost this

http://tinyurl.com/4zsrpfj

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That would be far superior to more regulation/government control.

Oh, the irony!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
9:21 am

Please go reread Jay’s article – I don’t think you caught what it was about, quite.

And this is unusual HOW lol? I don’t think he EVER reads more than the title, and often doesn’t even read that :grin:

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 21st, 2013
9:22 am

Fred, you are not SELLING it! “Here’s your chance to show how much smarter and more geniusey you are over a Kenyan born community organizing muslim, when you’re picks RuLe over him and show that wannabe king who can knock ‘em down like Barbie with an assault rifle and a 100 round clip.”

Scratch It

March 21st, 2013
9:23 am

I had no idea you were a fan of Pocahontas Jay? This woman is a dingbat that will certainly embarrass the nation and the people of Massachusetts.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 21st, 2013
9:23 am

Oops, should be:

The big banks should be forced…

Followed by:

That would be far superior to more regulation/government control.

Oh, the irony!

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

March 21st, 2013
9:25 am

Remember, you have until noon to join the NCAA group from here and fill out your bracket. Even you knot headed far right wing fanatics are welcome to join. We have lucky 13 right now. I THINK even Redneck Convert joined………

I should have registered as “Bus Driver” cause I’ll be taking you to school.

Thomas Heyward Jr

March 21st, 2013
9:25 am

Stevie Ray

March 21st, 2013
9:02 am

Thomas Heyward Jr

March 21st, 2013
8:54 am

Agree with ending the fed but taxpayers risks have been severely ill affected by the combination of demise of GS, campaign cash, and idiotic government responses like Dodd Frank…

In this case (very unlike me), banks should be broken up as prior to GS…only good things can come about. The prime reason the politicians allowed a free for all in the first place was to kneel to the banks BS pitch that they were not competitive globally.
————————————————-
.
Roger that.
.
A simple cancellation of the tax-payer FDIC would stop the problem…………..tomorrow.
The Freed-market COULD offer deposit insurance but the clovers would have a ninny because……………..
progs/statists confuse society with governmnent.
.
In their state-indoctrinated minds………..they can not conceptualize private libraries, law enforcement, and/or deposit insurance.
.
anyhoo……………no bank HAS failed.
They’re working as designed.
The modern state must also possess an apparatus of big banks, as Lenin wrote at the onset of the Bolshevik Revolution, for it is banks which perform most accounting and financial recording. In socialism, banks must be expanded, made more comprehensive and, in our globalized age, reach worldwide.

And so naturally, the Obama administration plans to give all US spy agencies full access to a large database containing the financial data on US citizens and those who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document dated March 4th.
The USA Patriot Act and Bank Secrecy Act ensure that these programs are perfectly legal.
This is fasco-communism, comrade. The state doesn’t outright own everything. But it does control everything. And it’s watching.
.
And if anyone thinks that the Indian from Mass Elizabeth Warren can fight it …or even wants too……..well then………………….
lol

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
9:26 am

That reminds me Keep…….. I didn’t YOUR bracket over there. Remember, you COULD win 1 million bucks……….

Paul

March 21st, 2013
9:26 am

Scratch It

You JohnnyReb posting under another name? Your choice of names kinda gives it away. So go back to the 9:16: ” I missed the next part where you say “because” and follow with three or four documented examples.”

That is, unless you’re getting carried away with scratching it….

indigo

March 21st, 2013
9:28 am

It’s hardly a secret that we have the best Congress money can buy.

But, which of our two Parties is the most bought and paid for?

Well, let’s just see how many Democrats and Republicans speak out about this “too big to fail problem”.

I’m guessing the bipartisanship is going to be pretty much one sided.

Welcome to the Occupation

March 21st, 2013
9:29 am

Granny Godzilla: ” Is Jamie too big to jail?”

He’s bosom buddies with the president. You better believe it.

Granny Godzilla

March 21st, 2013
9:29 am

Thomas Heyward Jr

March 21st, 2013
9:25
And if anyone thinks that the Indian from Mass Elizabeth Warren can fight it …or even wants too……..well then………………….
lol
.
.
.
G’head laugh up your sleeve.

I didn’t see much laughter as the GOP blocked her from the CPB, infact I swear I saw tiny little beads of sweat….

That lady is going places.

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
9:30 am

In their state-indoctrinated minds………..they can not conceptualize private libraries, law enforcement, and/or deposit insurance.

And in your delusional mind you don’t remember the Great Depression and WHY we have FDIC……….

Oh yeah, and I really WANT “for profit” law enforcement…………… I mean look at how well Park Atlanta is doing……..

Just damn.

Granny Godzilla

March 21st, 2013
9:31 am

Welcome to the Occupation

March 21st, 2013
9:29 am
Granny Godzilla: ” Is Jamie too big to jail?”

He’s bosom buddies with the president. You better believe it.
.
.
.
I’m thinking whatever body part buddy he is with anybody – he’s in the doo-doo…pretty deep.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 21st, 2013
9:31 am

Fred, you might have to look a little closer ;) But hey, I don’t watch sports so I’ll be out early.

Scratch It

March 21st, 2013
9:31 am

Paul:

You proved that your not very informed. Pocahontas made a fool of herself almost daily during her Senate race.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/09/21/elizabeth_warren_there_is_nobody_in_this_country_who_got_rich_on_his_own.html

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
9:33 am

Granny: I just read the Wiki on her. Where and how did she become an “expert” on finance? I mean her daughter has an MBA from Wharton and is a financial expert where as Elizabeth is a lawyer. Did she learn from her daughter?

Scratch It

March 21st, 2013
9:34 am

It’s exciting that Warren since she is 1/64 native American is our first Indian in Congress…

http://www.bluegrasspundit.com/2012/06/elizabeth-warren-claims-she-would-be.html

stands for decibels

March 21st, 2013
9:35 am

I missed the next part where you say “because” and follow with three or four documented examples.

1. FoxRushDrudge said she made up being Indian

2. ?

3. Profit!

Welcome to the Occupation

March 21st, 2013
9:36 am

Barack Obama is a neoliberal ideologue. He sees big finance as a pure distillation of the inner workings of the modern economics, as a kind of priesthood with direct communing with the divine spirit which mustn’t be hampered or challenged from doing its higher work.

Soothsayer

March 21st, 2013
9:37 am

“[O]ur political system seems to have lost the capability to make decisions on that kind of basis.”

The big banks enjoy the political system they bought and paid for. Witness the farcical “too big to fail” hearings where our senators prostrate themselves and grovel at the feet of the likes of Jamie Dimon.

Government does not tell big banks what to do, big banks tell the government what to do.

stands for decibels

March 21st, 2013
9:38 am

You JohnnyReb posting under another name?

naw, J-reb is no homophobe. Scratch it is terrified of the gays.

F. Sinkwich

March 21st, 2013
9:38 am

If I take the opposite position on any issue from Fauxcahontas, I’ll be correct 99.999999999% of the time.

flagboy?

March 21st, 2013
9:39 am

Taking on the big banks has two problems.

1. Banks are in the ear of government

2. People who head the banks are smarter about how they operate than the people who are supposed to regulate them.

Seriously Folks

March 21st, 2013
9:39 am

Thank you Jay. FINALLY bringing up what no one ever talks about…what caused our economic collapse! The sad thing about all this, is this crisis has shown how easily our country is distracted. The TEA Party had its roots in these massive closures and the run on banks…Washington Mutual and the lines of folks wanting their money comes to mind…That happened on the tail end of the TARP mess…then, in an effort that would make the Wizard of Oz proud, all the vitriol about “too big to fail” was focused onto that Kenyan-Socialist-Muslim-Guy-With-the-Funny-Name-Black-Guy…just likes Pavolov’s dogs….And the bankers skipped merrily along, whistling past the graveyard, confident that their folly would forever prevail!

JamVet

March 21st, 2013
9:40 am

Richard Fisher, head of the Dallas Federal Reserve and a conservative voice on the Fed board..

Paul, the same man who said in late 2008, As I see it, the seizures and convulsions we have experienced in the debt and equity markets have been the consequences of a sustained orgy of excess and reckless behavior.

And if the myopic and unread JReb calls someone a nutjob it is damn near proof that they are highly intelligent and qualified.

http://4closurefraud.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/wallstreet1-1024×518.jpg

Paul

March 21st, 2013
9:41 am

Scratching ‘It’

“You proved that your not very informed.”

Nope. See, the way things work here is, you state an opinion, people ask for concrete, supporting facts. The response should be to provide those facts, not to run by saying ‘if you were informed you’d know what I know.” That just makes you look like part of the deflecting crowd.

You said she ” will certainly embarrass the nation and the people of Massachusetts” That’s future tense. You came back with an old issue that the voters of Massachusetts obviously didn’t care about (for the record, I wrote back than that my opinion is that her claim and subsequent action showed a lack of character).

So, Scratching, what WILL she do what will embarrass the state and the nation? ’cause if your idea of ‘embarrass’ means ‘get elected’ then she’s not the one who’s going to get embarrassed.

Now, about those examples you have?

stands for decibels

March 21st, 2013
9:42 am

Where and how did she become an “expert” on finance?

Missed the part in the first graf as to how “She was previously a Harvard Law School professor specializing in bankruptcy law.”?

and then this?

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/nbrc/facts.html

and then this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren#TARP_oversight

appleseed

March 21st, 2013
9:42 am

Just move those banks to GA.Their failure will not be noticed.Common occurence around here.ST needs more company.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 21st, 2013
9:43 am

Fauxcahontas = Benghazi = Birth Certificate = Fast and Furious = Hillarycare = Obamacare = [whatever new cutesy name/insult without fact or reason] :roll: :roll:

What the real shame is that some of these posters think that makes them geniusey

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
9:44 am

If I take the opposite position on any issue from Fauxcahontas, I’ll be correct 99.999999999% of the time.

LOL F. You WISH you were as smart and well educated as that woman is.

Paul

March 21st, 2013
9:44 am

Morning, Sinkwich

“If I take the opposite position on any issue from Fauxcahontas, I’ll be correct 99.999999999% of the time.”

What about this issue?

godless heathen - owner of many things he does not need

March 21st, 2013
9:46 am

Keep: You gotta admit Fauxcahontas is pretty good.

Granny Godzilla

March 21st, 2013
9:46 am

Fred

She learned from her tenure at the National Bankruptcy Review Commission, FDIC Advisory Committee on Economic Inclusion and her work as a member of the National Bankruptcy Conference.

She, along with her daughter wrote “All Your Worth: The Ultimate Lifetime Money Plan” and “he Two-Income Trap: Why Middle-Class Mothers and Fathers Are Going Broke”

She was also member of the TARP oversight panel and was instrumental in
creating the CFB.

She took a better than average education and kept going.

Paul

March 21st, 2013
9:47 am

JamVet

“As I see it, the seizures and convulsions we have experienced in the debt and equity markets have been the consequences of a sustained orgy of excess and reckless behavior.”

See, you forgot to put in the ending to that. Here, lemme help: “because Bwany Fwank forced the banks to give mortgages to poor people who couldn’t afford to pay for them.”

There are some Eternal Truths that should never be dismissed just because of some junk science by so-called experts….

JamVet

March 21st, 2013
9:50 am

People who head the banks are smarter about how they operate than the people who are supposed to regulate them.

Smarter? It seems to me that they are woefully incompetent much of the time.

The fact is that if these banksters and white collar criminals had to run their businesses on their own, without constantly going to Uncle Sugar with their hats in their hands, they would be long gone.

It is the corporate destruction of capitalism that Ms. Warren, Mr. Nader, Ms. Bournsley, Mr. Stein and numerous others predicted years ago.

But our [tchy and Reb types preferred to believed that brain-dead POS, Dick Cheney, when he looked right into the camera and said, “Don’t blame him (George W. Bush), nobody saw this coming.”

OF COURSE, those playing stupid to perfection artists didn’t see it coming!! They had their heads up each other’s _____ so far, they couldn’t see a damn thing. Besides, it’s not as if Crime of the Century really hurt any of them…

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
9:51 am

dB; I DID miss the part about the bankruptcy law. As for the other two? Just because someone is on a committee isn’t a sign that they have more than a passing knowledge of it. I see it all the time in the business world as well as in Congress. I wasn’t disputing that she knows something (she’s written 2 books with her daughter) I was just curious WHERE she learned it or how.

I’m not a believer either that you have to have a degree or advanced degree in a subject to know it.

Paul

March 21st, 2013
9:51 am

Not even the end of the first page and the CPAC-types who never would’ve gone to a seminar by Richard Fisher think the main point of all this is someone’s family oral history and genealogy research methods……

mm

March 21st, 2013
9:53 am

In spite of the cons, Dodd-Frank got passed. The cons did however pull all it’s teeth in the process. And their still trying to sabotage it.

ty webb

March 21st, 2013
9:56 am

Nothings changed with ‘too big to fail”, in fact “they’re too bigger to fail”, and we’ve got a “CPAC crowd”, “cheney”, and “racism” as the real culprits.

Thogwummpy

March 21st, 2013
9:56 am

Gee, when is Jay going to come out against the real problem with American society: Big Welfare?

Road Scholar

March 21st, 2013
9:59 am

What if Walmart fails?

Good! Then the small business owners and new SB owners will have a chance! Small towns downtown business districts would recover.

“Make the “Too Big To Fail” banks splinter like they did with AT&T, Western Electric and Southern Bell. Then they won’t be “too big to fail”.

Seems good to me. Add to it, if they do not reform, and they need a bailout, all of the upper management and board members would have ALL their assets (including family members who benefited) here and overseas will be confiscated by the government to help soften the blow. To add a layer, then all Board Members and upper management will be shot for undermining the US by their fraud and subversive actions. Did I get someones’ attention?

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 21st, 2013
9:59 am

Gee, when is Jay going to come out against the real problem with American society: Big Welfare?

Blogspot.com

Create a blog. It’s free.

flagboy?

March 21st, 2013
10:00 am

yes. . smarter.

The people who made the money bundling terrible loans with average loans to affect their rating made a mint. In the process, they fooled the US gov, Moody’s, and other banks. And banks will continue to fool the government because there is better pay in it.

It is amazing you can blame it on Bush and Cheney though.

Road Scholar

March 21st, 2013
10:00 am

How do you spell “responsibility”?

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
10:00 am

Gee, when is Jay going to come out against the real problem with American society: Big Welfare Talk radio/FOXBOT dumb asses that can’t think and just spew nonsense all the time?

There. I fixed that for you.

F. Sinkwich

March 21st, 2013
10:01 am

“The Dodd-Frank law attempts to outlaw bail-outs of huge banks that would otherwise be considered “too big to fail,””

Oops, not so much.

But D-F made you lib ilks “feel good” about doing “something,” huh?

Want to begin to get our financila house in order? Start here:

Step 1) Repeal D-F
Step 2) Elect conservatives

JohnnyReb

March 21st, 2013
10:01 am

Paul – I assume you are looking for reasons I think Elizabeth Warren is a nut job. She proved that with her “you did not build that” campaigning which was actually ahead of Obama using it. Government built from tax payer money roads, etc are part of creating a better but level playing field. When she ventured into businesses being successful only because of government help she moved into the “nuts” category.

GT

March 21st, 2013
10:01 am

You take every problem the right rails about and you can find it on steroids on Wall Street. Illegal immigration, hell they give the Chinese a road map to own this country and rule it under their rules. They don’t have to even enter the country just our computers.

Drugs, more money is laundered through Wall Street for more sordid reasons that ever walk across the borders. If you don’t believe it explain how Madoff stayed off the radar for years stealing billions of dollars. That operation could have just as easily been a drug cartel or a terrorist operation and occasionally they catch small timers in this system. In fact the banks help people like Madoff by turning their heads to operations when the money is big enough. Several articles in the Times explain how illegal payday lenders are aided by banks that turn their heads. You hear a word of this on these streets, hell no we are too busy taking bread from the mouths of babies.

Entitlement, you just about sunk this country giving away trillions so these guys could make it to their next bonus before they go bankrupt. Capitalism works, this is not capitalism this is manipulation of an entire country for the greed of a few. And through that manipulation they manipulate the world.

Fred ™

March 21st, 2013
10:01 am

How do you spell “responsibility”?

L-O-B-B-Y-I-S-T

Doggone/GA

March 21st, 2013
10:01 am

“Gee, when is Jay going to come out against the real problem with American society: Big Welfare”

Gee, when it Thogwummpy going to get off his lazy butt and write his OWN blog? blogspot.com is ready when you are

JohnnyReb

March 21st, 2013
10:04 am

Kammy – glad you are enjoying the so-called irony, but fact is I blistered the White House when they first floated in public the bail outs. I was and remain against all bail outs including GM, Chrysler, and homeowner. I’m carrying the water and my reward is increased tax rate.

Erwin's cat

March 21st, 2013
10:04 am

independent thinker – Simple solution- since the monster banks have greater reserves and liquidity than small banks, remove FDIC guaranties and FNMA/Freddie Mac guaranties on their mortgages. Make them insure themselves with adequate reserves or private insurance.

I’m on broad with this as long as they actually put the reserves up for the self-insure, if they screw that up…it’ll need another bail out

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 21st, 2013
10:04 am

… they fooled the US gov, Moody’s, and other banks.

Fooled Moody’s?

If by “fooled” you mean wh0ring out themselves, then yeah.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2009/10/18/77244/how-moodys-sold-its-ratings-and.html

Paul

March 21st, 2013
10:08 am

JohnnyReb

” I assume you are looking for reasons I think Elizabeth Warren is a nut job. ”

Actually, I was looking for reasons you think she is.

Did you ever consider her point in the “you didn’t build that by yourself without relying on the efforts of anyone else” was to show that each of us makes sacrifices that contribute to the success of others, and part of humility and gratitude is to acknowledge what others have done for us? It can be on a grand scale, such as servicemen and women who give their lives, to something as mundane as the young couple with no children who pay thousands of dollars each year to pay for the education of other children so those kids can grow up and go build something?

I do not recall she said businesses are successful ONLY because of government help. I believe here point is government (meaning all of us working together thru our representatives) helped, in the ways I outlined above.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 21st, 2013
10:09 am

glad you are enjoying the so-called irony

“So called irony”?

First you say, “The big banks should be forced”.

“Forced” by whom?

Then you say it’s better than government control.

Forcing someone/something isn’t control?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Erwin's cat

March 21st, 2013
10:09 am

Fred – I’m not a believer either that you have to have a degree or advanced degree in a subject to know it.

but it does help….there’s knowing and theirs expertise…I think the latter requires a little of both hands on and book smarts

Doc Hollidawg

March 21st, 2013
10:10 am

Is there a 4th option?

Yes there is. First, move you account. Take your money out of the Big Banks and go to a community bank. Second, write your representatives and help get Dodd-Frank repealed. Dodd-Frank doesn’t help control the Big Banks, as documented here. They are too big. Dodd-Frank was a knee jerk reaction that is penalizing everyone else (banks that is). Create legisltation that will control and shrink the big banks and not tie the hands of the smaller banks that serve individual communities. Support your local community banks.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

March 21st, 2013
10:10 am

When she ventured into businesses being successful only because of government help she moved into the “nuts” category.

What a clownish assessment. She did NOT say it was ONLY because of govt help. Apparently you need to learn about the contribution of infrastructure, among other things. :roll:

JohnnyReb

March 21st, 2013
10:10 am

Elizabeth Warren – while her name is on the thread I want to point out that Scott Brown was elected to stop Obamacare – even Massachusets was against Obamacare. Dems used Reconciliation to pass it with not one Repub vote. Mass has gone back to their Liberal roots with Warren. And the Left has the balls to tell the Right we need to compromise.

Stuff your compromise up the puttutie.

Scratch It

March 21st, 2013
10:11 am

Paul

Nope. See, the way things work here is, you state an opinion, people ask for concrete, supporting facts. The response should be to provide those facts, not to run by saying ‘if you were informed you’d know what I know.” That just makes you look like part of the deflecting crowd.

You said she ” will certainly embarrass the nation and the people of Massachusetts” That’s future tense. You came back with an old issue that the voters of Massachusetts obviously didn’t care about (for the record, I wrote back than that my opinion is that her claim and subsequent action showed a lack of character).

So, Scratching, what WILL she do what will embarrass the state and the nation? ’cause if your idea of ‘embarrass’ means ‘get elected’ then she’s not the one who’s going to get embarrassed.

Now, about those examples you have?

Check out the video links provided. That obviously proves the woman is a dunce. But I guess to you libs she’s smart. Now prove yourself sport… Lets see some glaring evidence of brilliance on her part….