Capitalism fails when it gets too big to fail , and it has

[Penelope]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

 

[fncceo]

 

[Mac1958]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

Capitalism absolutely needs effective, efficient, elastic regulation to stay on proper course. The problem is that both political ends, when given the power, will predictably knee-jerk too far in one direction or the other.

While the regular partisans deny it, under-regulation (fueled aggressively by Greenspan, Rubin & Summers and agreed to by Clinton & Dubya) was a primary factor in the 2008 Meltdown. And they were warned clearly in the late 90's about it.

And amazingly, the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail, and we remain at significant risk because of it.

Just another example of how partisan politics damages. It removes a person's capacity to think clearly and rationally.
.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

You do know that Jeff Bezos the owner of Amazon and the Washington Compost(rag newspaper) has over 105 billion dollars? He is a flaming liberal. Where is your outrage against this 1%er who pays his workers minimum wage while also laying off hardworking individuals so Jeff can make more billions? Don't come to me with your holier than thou attitude until you clean up your own bullshit party. How do you spell Hypocrisy "LIBERALISM".

 

[fncceo]

Capitalism isn’t the problem. People exchanging goods and services in a free market for mutual benefit is the most efficient form of commerce. Even in systems where the free market is forbidden or restricted a ‘Black Market’ will spontaneously evolve to provide that which only free markets can provide.

In a free market the ability to efficiently enforce a contract, arbitrate a dispute, or seek redress through tort has traditionally been enough to ensure market fairness which we now seek to obtain through excessive legislation.

This becomes problematic when politicians can be persuaded to create market regulations that benefit those who can influence the politicians.

“When buying and selling is legislated, the first thing to be bought and sold is legislators.”

 

[Moonglow]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

You do know that Jeff Bezos the owner of Amazon and the Washington Compost(rag newspaper) has over 105 billion dollars? He is a flaming liberal. Where is your outrage against this 1%er who pays his workers minimum wage while also laying off hardworking individuals so Jeff can make more billions? Don't come to me with your holier than thou attitude until you clean up your own bullshit party. How do you spell Hypocrisy "LIBERALISM".

Boy that really addressed the issue..

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

Capitalism absolutely needs effective, efficient, elastic regulation to stay on proper course. The problem is that both political ends, when given the power, will predictably knee-jerk too far in one direction or the other.

While the regular partisans deny it, under-regulation (fueled aggressively by Greenspan, Rubin & Summers and agreed to by Clinton & Dubya) was a primary factor in the 2008 Meltdown. And they were warned clearly in the late 90's about it.

And amazingly, the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail, and we remain at significant risk because of it.

Just another example of how partisan politics damages. It removes a person's capacity to think clearly and rationally.
.

the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail,

Who was the President for the past 8 years before President Trump took over? Just asking, who Banks could be even MORE huge now?

 

[miketx]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

Corporate...blah blah blah....Trump blah blah blah...bad...blah blah blah...peeing school girls...

 

[Mac1958]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

Capitalism absolutely needs effective, efficient, elastic regulation to stay on proper course. The problem is that both political ends, when given the power, will predictably knee-jerk too far in one direction or the other.

While the regular partisans deny it, under-regulation (fueled aggressively by Greenspan, Rubin & Summers and agreed to by Clinton & Dubya) was a primary factor in the 2008 Meltdown. And they were warned clearly in the late 90's about it.

And amazingly, the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail, and we remain at significant risk because of it.

Just another example of how partisan politics damages. It removes a person's capacity to think clearly and rationally.
.

the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail,

Who was the President for the past 8 years before President Trump took over? Just asking, who Banks could be even MORE huge now?

This condition has been getting worse since the late 90's.

The banks were merged into their current super-bank status at the end of Dubya's term, when the economy was literally hours from abject collapse and no viable options remained.

Make this about partisan politics all you want. All that allows you do is "see" half the picture.
.

 

[fncceo]

the banks are even MORE huge now

Huge banks aren’t the issue.

Banks who know they can make bad investments or flog insolvent instruments and be bailed out by taxpayers when things go hugely wrong is the issue.

 

[Mac1958]

the banks are even MORE huge now

Huge banks aren’t the issue.

Banks who know they can make bad investments or flog insolvent instruments and be bailed out by taxpayers when things go hugely wrong is the issue.

There's much more to it than that.
.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

Capitalism absolutely needs effective, efficient, elastic regulation to stay on proper course. The problem is that both political ends, when given the power, will predictably knee-jerk too far in one direction or the other.

While the regular partisans deny it, under-regulation (fueled aggressively by Greenspan, Rubin & Summers and agreed to by Clinton & Dubya) was a primary factor in the 2008 Meltdown. And they were warned clearly in the late 90's about it.

And amazingly, the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail, and we remain at significant risk because of it.

Just another example of how partisan politics damages. It removes a person's capacity to think clearly and rationally.
.

the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail,

Who was the President for the past 8 years before President Trump took over? Just asking, who Banks could be even MORE huge now?

This condition has been getting worse since the late 90's.

The banks were merged into their current super-bank status at the end of Dubya's term, when the economy was literally hours from abject collapse and no viable options remained.

Make this about partisan politics all you want. All that allows you do is "see" half the picture.
.

Says the guy making it about partisan politics and doesn't even realize it. Fucking hypocrite.

 

[Mac1958]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

Capitalism absolutely needs effective, efficient, elastic regulation to stay on proper course. The problem is that both political ends, when given the power, will predictably knee-jerk too far in one direction or the other.

While the regular partisans deny it, under-regulation (fueled aggressively by Greenspan, Rubin & Summers and agreed to by Clinton & Dubya) was a primary factor in the 2008 Meltdown. And they were warned clearly in the late 90's about it.

And amazingly, the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail, and we remain at significant risk because of it.

Just another example of how partisan politics damages. It removes a person's capacity to think clearly and rationally.
.

the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail,

Who was the President for the past 8 years before President Trump took over? Just asking, who Banks could be even MORE huge now?

This condition has been getting worse since the late 90's.

The banks were merged into their current super-bank status at the end of Dubya's term, when the economy was literally hours from abject collapse and no viable options remained.

Make this about partisan politics all you want. All that allows you do is "see" half the picture.
.

Says the guy making it about partisan politics and doesn't even realize it. Fucking hypocrite.

It IS about partisan politics. That's my point.

Would you like to me try to explain it again?
.
.

 

[fncceo]

the banks are even MORE huge now

Huge banks aren’t the issue.

Banks who know they can make bad investments or flog insolvent instruments and be bailed out by taxpayers when things go hugely wrong is the issue.

There's much more to it than that.
.

Fundamentally the banking crisis wasn’t about the size of the banks. It was about government promises that no matter what they did they wouldn’t be held fiscally responsible.

You can hate the game. But don’t hate the players.

 

[Mac1958]

the banks are even MORE huge now

Huge banks aren’t the issue.

Banks who know they can make bad investments or flog insolvent instruments and be bailed out by taxpayers when things go hugely wrong is the issue.

There's much more to it than that.
.

Fundamentally the banking crisis wasn’t about the size of the banks. It was about government promises that no matter what they did they wouldn’t be held fiscally responsible.

You can hate the game. But don’t hate the players.

There's much more to it than that. It was a little complicated.
.

 

[fncceo]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

Capitalism absolutely needs effective, efficient, elastic regulation to stay on proper course. The problem is that both political ends, when given the power, will predictably knee-jerk too far in one direction or the other.

While the regular partisans deny it, under-regulation (fueled aggressively by Greenspan, Rubin & Summers and agreed to by Clinton & Dubya) was a primary factor in the 2008 Meltdown. And they were warned clearly in the late 90's about it.

And amazingly, the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail, and we remain at significant risk because of it.

Just another example of how partisan politics damages. It removes a person's capacity to think clearly and rationally.
.

the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail,

Who was the President for the past 8 years before President Trump took over? Just asking, who Banks could be even MORE huge now?

This condition has been getting worse since the late 90's.

The banks were merged into their current super-bank status at the end of Dubya's term, when the economy was literally hours from abject collapse and no viable options remained.

Make this about partisan politics all you want. All that allows you do is "see" half the picture.
.

Says the guy making it about partisan politics and doesn't even realize it. Fucking hypocrite.

It IS about partisan politics. That's my point.

Would you like to me try to explain it again?
.
.

It is only partisan in that each party will loudly accuse the other of what they’ve both been doing all along.

 

[fncceo]

the banks are even MORE huge now

Huge banks aren’t the issue.

Banks who know they can make bad investments or flog insolvent instruments and be bailed out by taxpayers when things go hugely wrong is the issue.

There's much more to it than that.
.

Fundamentally the banking crisis wasn’t about the size of the banks. It was about government promises that no matter what they did they wouldn’t be held fiscally responsible.

You can hate the game. But don’t hate the players.

There's much more to it than that. It was a little complicated.
.

It actually wasn’t. Banks were allowed to make sub prime loans knowing they were backed by the taxpayers and were able to create worthless banking instruments such as mortgage based securities which appeared valuable because the regulators said they were.

The banks were doing these things because they paid congress to set up a system where they could.

When it all went pear-shaped the banks were bailed out by the same politicians that set up the system.

It amazes me that we can vilifiy businesses for doingf wring and yet fully trust the politicians that set up the system that allows this kind of chicanery.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

and expect it to get only worst not better.

Carl Icahn, a good buddy of Trumps, is known as a corporate raider. Big fish buy little fish, due to greed, they just can have enough money.

Where are the laws to protect against this, and also why are businesses allowed to set up secretive shell companies?

Capitalism absolutely needs effective, efficient, elastic regulation to stay on proper course. The problem is that both political ends, when given the power, will predictably knee-jerk too far in one direction or the other.

While the regular partisans deny it, under-regulation (fueled aggressively by Greenspan, Rubin & Summers and agreed to by Clinton & Dubya) was a primary factor in the 2008 Meltdown. And they were warned clearly in the late 90's about it.

And amazingly, the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail, and we remain at significant risk because of it.

Just another example of how partisan politics damages. It removes a person's capacity to think clearly and rationally.
.

the banks are even MORE huge now, they REMAIN too big to fail,

Who was the President for the past 8 years before President Trump took over? Just asking, who Banks could be even MORE huge now?

This condition has been getting worse since the late 90's.

The banks were merged into their current super-bank status at the end of Dubya's term, when the economy was literally hours from abject collapse and no viable options remained.

Make this about partisan politics all you want. All that allows you do is "see" half the picture.
.

Says the guy making it about partisan politics and doesn't even realize it. Fucking hypocrite.

It IS about partisan politics. That's my point.

Would you like to me try to explain it again?
.
.

Lets just say that with liberals, who don't follow the law, and make themselves filthy rich by crooked means, Jamie Dimon the head of JP Morgan Chase was giving subprime mortgages to the poor so they could live the American dream even though they couldn't afford it, with the backing of Fannie and Freddie, who were products of the liberals. When in 2004 if was pointed out that soon Fannie and Freddie was going to fail, Barney Frankfurter eater Franks, Whacko Maxine Waters, and Chrissy Dodd, called those who were worried RACISTS for wanting to stop the subprime loans, and then in 2007 it happened. Liberalism is all about failure, that way they can make everyone equal, equally poor and equally miserable, then the liberals have achieved FAIRNESS.

Why is it every election cycle, the liberals complain about income inequality.
1960s LBJ, income inequality and the War on Poverty
1970s Jimmy Carter, income inequality and the War on Gasoline
1990s Bill Clinton, income inequality and the War on Middle Class(Enron, WorldCom and Dot com go bust).
2008 Barrack Hussain Obama, income inequality and the Rich got much Richer and the most in Poverty since the War started.

When are you liberals ever going to learn, your side hates you...

If you want to stop income inequality you can do like me, get skills that enable you to get a high paying job, go overseas for a few years, where you don't pay taxes. Come back and invest your obscene profits into the stock market and over 20 or more years amass a fortune that puts you in the 1% status. Otherwise stay a worthless victim of LIBERALISM, stay poor, and continue to have that income inequality...I don't feel sorry for stupid people who stay poor.

 

[Mac1958]

the banks are even MORE huge now

Huge banks aren’t the issue.

Banks who know they can make bad investments or flog insolvent instruments and be bailed out by taxpayers when things go hugely wrong is the issue.

There's much more to it than that.
.

Fundamentally the banking crisis wasn’t about the size of the banks. It was about government promises that no matter what they did they wouldn’t be held fiscally responsible.

You can hate the game. But don’t hate the players.

There's much more to it than that. It was a little complicated.
.

It actually wasn’t. Banks were allowed to make sub prime loans knowing they were backed by the taxpayers and were able to create worthless banking instruments such as mortgage based securities which appeared valuable because the regulators said they were.

The banks were doing these things because they paid congress to set up a system where they could.

When it all went pear-shaped the banks were bailed out by the same politicians that set up the system.

It amazes me that we can vilifiy businesses for doingf wring and yet fully trust the politicians that set up the system that allows this kind of chicanery.

The motivation wasn't that the government would back them up. That had nothing to do with it. It was the fees they were making.

It was the fact that there were no regulations - none, zero - on the content of shit CDO's and CMO's.

It was the fact that the ratings agencies were fooling the world by selling AAA ratings - Treasury Bond-level ratings - for shit securities.

It was the fact that companies like AIG, especially AIG, were not required to have ONE dollar in reserves for the hundreds of billions of dollars of swaps they were selling.

It was the fact that the banks could sell shit mortgages knowing they could package them and have them off their books in 12 hours after the signatures dried.

It was the fact that consumers who knew better signed for mortgages they knew they couldn't afford, especially after the teaser rate was gone.

It was the fact that Greenspan, backed by Rubin and Summers and Clinton and Bush, absolutely refused to regulate securities HE ADMITTED HE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND.

It was the fact that politicians from BOTH parties let it all happen.

For starters.

It. Was. Not. One. Thing.
.

 

[DGS49]

Where has socialism succeeded?

And before you attempt to answer, look up the fucking word. Norway is NOT a socialist country.