#1 Should the banks that were bailed out be punished? The Top Execs? Tea Party opinion04-06-2010, 03:33 AM
I believe most people, myself included and the Tea Party (very vocally), were unhappy about the bank bailouts.
Is the Tea Party pushing for some sort of punishment on the banks and/or their top executives? How about anything to try to right the wrong of the government bailing them out with no strings attached?
04-06-2010, 03:54 AM
I wish I had time to go off on a rant, but instead I'll just leave you with this...
The bankster bailout (bankster takeover) was the biggest scam in history. A bunch of globalist Bernie Madoff's.
Bloomberg: Maybe A Secret Banking Cabal Does Run The World After All
04-06-2010, 04:06 AM
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Sonora, Texas
Right after Barney Fag..er... Frank, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd are punished, sure. But not until that condition is met. Fag and Todd must be punished before any exec or anyone else is punished and no one can recieve a harsger punishment than those two.
04-06-2010, 04:30 AM
Calling it a bailout is actually being nice considering the facts. It was more like a stick-up where you get to pay the robber interest on the money he stole from you.
Oh, and the banker bailout wasn't $750 billion, it was $28.7 trillion (total taxpayer exposure) most recently reported. It's probably well over $30 trillion by now and grows at a rate of about $2 trillion per month. Bloomberg seems to be the only news outlet that's reporting on this honestly.
AIG was used as the federal reserve's holding company to funnel tens of billions to off-shore foreign central banks... DERIVATIVES... Bernanke won't say where at least $2.5 trillion went... DERIVATIVES... Government backed pension funds are being asked nicely to prop up insolvent failed banks... DERIVATIVES...
I could go on and on.
04-06-2010, 05:20 AM
I'm assuming of course that you are being snarky and sarcastic since I don't really know you.
04-06-2010, 08:17 AM
What about the banks that have paid back their "bailout" money?“Progress is Providence without God. That is, it is a theory that everything has always
perpetually gone right by accident. It is a sort of atheistic optimism, based on an
everlasting coincidence far more miraculous than a miracle.”
G. K. Chesterton
04-06-2010, 10:56 AM
In my mind, it's more important to fix the regulatory issues and policy initiatives that opened up this can of worms. While there have always been a few banks willing to take on huge risks, the free-for-all we saw over the past 20 years is an unintended consequence of government intrusion into lending practices.
The idea that home ownership is some kind of stand-alone virtue is ludicrous. All the qualities that made home ownership virtuous in the past were tied to specific behaviors: steady employment, thrift, delayed-gratification, and fiscal prudence. Those were the virtues, home ownership was the by-product.
We need to unravel the social engineering imposed by the government first.
04-06-2010, 11:22 AMGovernment is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
We could say they are spending like drunken sailors. That would be unfair to drunken sailors, they're spending their OWN money.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|