devassocx

Too Big to Fail Banks: A Simple Solution

yes, what is this 'too big to fail' nonsense???

There is no reason to go beyond that statement.

The answer is simple...just cut up these giants.

Then their failure would not comprise devastation
on national economies.

Just no need to agonize over some expensive, convoluted and complex maze of laws and regulations.


On Nov 10 11:08 AM fizzicyst wrote:

> Not simple and not effective enough. You just gave the reasons why:
> lawyers/loopholes.
>
> The only foolproof way is break them into pieces small enough to
> fail and them let'em. No ineffective regulators involved !

Banking Sector: Worst Is Yet to Come

Yes, I think you are wrong...Politicians have always been just
as corrupt as now. The difference is that in the past it was much
easier to hide the corruption.

However, if you study history, a lot of corruption still happened.

Think about Chicago history and several other eastern cities and
even Seattle, Wa. All had periods rife with scandals.

On competence, I think that hasn't changed much either but perhaps
the complexity of the problems have increased.


On Oct 03 01:22 PM Mike from NYC wrote:

> Almost all former and current politicians are idiots and they appoint
> idiots like themselves to run our financial sector.
>
> During the Depression the politicians were smarter and less corrupt
> and they chose people like themselves to run the financial sector.
>
>
> Is it any wonder our financial sector has veered more and more out
> of control these past 15 years or so when Depression era regulations
> were repealed and called 'Market Reform'?
>
> Let's face it ladies and gentlemen, with such incompetent and corrupt
> politicians, both Democrat and Republicans, our country is screwed
> no matter how you cut the cake.
>
> Am I wrong?

Why GM's Not the Only Company Rush Limbaugh Should Boycott

I don't listen to Rush all the time but it seems to me that
recently GM ads have been running on his program, so I don't
really know what the point of this article is.


On Jun 10 11:32 PM Mr. Ed, Jr. wrote:

> The report is incorrect. Limbaugh does not support a boycott. (There
> is nothing in the author's quotes that has Limbaugh supporting the
> boycott-- he only is saying that many Americans are boycotting )
>
>
> The following is Limbaugh's response to the media story :
>
> " Now, for the record, ladies and gentlemen, I don't do boycotts.
> I do not sponsor them; I do not encourage them. I never have. I
> think it is media childishness when people start urging boycotts.
> I have never, ever done such a thing, and I didn't do this with General
> Motors. All I did, to clarify, was report a poll that said X number
> of Americans -- what was it, 18 or 20% -- say they are not going
> to buy a GM car anymore, after this bailout. "
>
> Also, I do not believe Sean Hannity is supporting a boycott. Last
> I heard, he was still doing "spontaneous" infomercials for his Cadillac.
>
>
> Hugh Hewitt was another conservative named in the Detroit News story.
> I do not know Hewitt's views on a boycott, but since the media has
> it wrong about Limbaugh (as usual), there is no reason to believe
> they got the rest of the story right.