- Joined
- May 17, 2005
- Messages
- 12,257
- Reaction score
- 2,693
But Alas, the puppet masters behind Pelosi/Reid/Bush would not let that be and doubled down on it with Team Pelosi/Reid/Obama.
If we let the "Too Big To Fail" actually fail, we would have been climbing our way out of this mess already instead of heading towards a deep global depression. But Alas, the puppet masters behind Pelosi/Reid/Bush would not let that be and doubled down on it with Team Pelosi/Reid/Obama.
If we let the "Too Big To Fail" actually fail, we would have been climbing our way out of this mess already instead of heading towards a deep global depression.
Specifically how (else I imagine that you were merely offended and this is how you dismiss that which offends you - disbelieve it).Nice propaganda piece. Starts off pretending no bias and takes that mask off about half way through.
I still disagree with the "let them fail" position simply because it would have been hugely destructive to the average Joe (not that what was done instead has been great nor will it turn out well).
The government should have stepped in and AT&Ted (or Standard Oiled) the big financial institutions into smaller chunks including splitting the investment side from the banking side. Then you can keep the infrastructure you need to run the country and let all the casinos fold.
The big problem the US had was that the banks and the casinos were now the same institutions and you can't run an economy without your banks.
However, to actually do the right thing the government would have had to temporarily nationalize the banks which would have been a hard sell (all the media outlets would blast it - because they would stand to lose all their casino chips and the politicians would lose theirs).
The alternative would have been to set up a huge national bank and run the country out of that while letting the privates choke to death on their own vomit. This would have taken time but it's also a difficult option to spot because Americans tend to think that they already have a national bank.
No. I said they should set up a national bank, not a central bank. National would mean that it would be wholly owned by the government.It's called the Federal Reserve.