View Poll Results: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

Voters
42. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    9 21.43%
  • No

    33 78.57%
  • Dunno

    0 0%
  • I don't care

    0 0%
Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 176

Thread: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

  1. #21
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,650

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    No private company should EVER be nationalized in America.

    Additionally, no private company should EVER be bailed out again.
    They would have been "bailed out" anyway, just by calling the "bluff" of congress and demanding that Fannie/Freddie make the "sub-prime" mortgage paper "good" (using gov't backed mortgage insurance), which would have made the taxpayers responsible, in the end, anyway. Only the "blame" was shifted, not the costs. It just sounds better, politically, to make it the fault of the "greedy bankers" than to admit that the morons in congress made this mess. Yes they did!
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 06-03-12 at 10:16 AM.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  2. #22
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,650

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    Can I just point out that if we could get quality banking reform for regulations we would neither have banks doing shady business practices nor require bailouts to save them and the shareholders of these institutions?
    It was "banking reform", creating these "sub-prime" mortgage laws, that caused the problem, the banks were mere pawns in the GOV'T scheme. The gov't said lend this new and "fair" way, and the banks simply said OK, but only if you will "guarantee" these loans. Since the gov't "owns" Freddie/Fannie they went along with the scam and gave Freddie/Fannie authority for handsome "bonus" payments (hush money?), while knowing that Freddie/Fannie had no way to cover all of those "sub-prime" mortgage notes when (not if) they failed to get paid back.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  3. #23
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by Disputatious71 View Post
    In a free market capitalist system those too inept to succeed should fail ! Nationalizing these companies would fundamentally change our system into either fascism or socialism both of which will rely more on the capriciousness of the controller. Think US Postal Service but delivering more than just mail !
    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    No private company should EVER be nationalized in America.

    Additionally, no private company should EVER be bailed out again.
    I agree entirely with the two quotes above.

    Let any such company go through the proper, established bankruptcy procedures.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  4. #24
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,650

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    I agree entirely with the two quotes above.

    Let any such company go through the proper, established bankruptcy procedures.
    You misunderstand what the BULK of TARP was about. These banks were not bankrupt, they had GOV'T backed insurance via Freddie/Fannie for over 90% of the "troubled mortgages" that they held. If they did call the notes due (via insurance) then the taxpayers were still going to "bail them out", it would just have exposed congress for the morons that they are, rather than let congress pretend it was a "banking error", "real estate bubble", or "greedy bankers" that caused the need for bailouts, not simply stupid federal laws, that they had made. Did you not find it curious that not ONE bank was closed or charged with any wrong doing at all? This was NOT due to the action of "greedy bankers", it was due to the actions of DC morons, but either way the taxpayers get stuck with the tab. Yes they did!
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 06-03-12 at 10:34 AM.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Yea, Bob doesn't seem to understand that finance is outsourced from government for a reason.

    The government messed things up in communicating that it wanted more loans made, so it paid the price. If it didn't, that would have been principal-agent conflict where the bureaucrats and agencies (Fannie and Freddie) in charge of communicating the government's intentions weren't held responsible for their actions.

  6. #26
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,650

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    What we have here is a failure to communicate. Whether the gov't uses bail-outs, subsidies, low interest (gov't guaranteed) loans, tax "loopholes" or special tax deductions/credits - it is all the SAME thing; the gov't playing with or micro-managing the "private" economy using taxpayer money. When the gov't "invests in" or "stimulates" the economy, it is the taxpayers that take all of the risks, yet largely only the politically connected private entities that reap the rewards (if any). Sure, congress and the president will say that it is "good for the people"; but is it really? The gov't building roads is, in fact, investment for the public good (we the people own it), yet selecting Solyndra, Exxon or Bank of America for special treatment is not "public" investment, it is simply gambling public money, for a "guaranteed" rate of return far too low, for the risk involved, to attract any private investment.
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 06-03-12 at 10:53 AM.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  7. #27
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    And Countrywide, along with others who followed similar practices, are just innocent lambs.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  8. #28
    Light△Bender

    grip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ☚ ☛
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 02:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,224
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    "Too big to fail" should never have happened but now should be broken up. Nationalizing just makes them part of failed gov control experiment. The gov is suppose to limit the size and regulate business not get involved in the profit and loss end of it. It isn't gov that controls corporations it's the other way around.


    Lobbying Client Total

    US Chamber of Commerce $857,015,680
    American Medical Assn $269,507,500
    General Electric $268,810,000
    Pharmaceutical Rsrch & Mfrs of America $219,393,920
    American Hospital Assn $219,214,136
    AARP $214,872,064
    Blue Cross/Blue Shield $184,878,020
    National Assn of Realtors $184,433,988
    Northrop Grumman $176,015,253
    Exxon Mobil $173,592,742
    Verizon Communications $168,984,841
    Edison Electric Institute $162,835,999
    Business Roundtable $160,310,000
    Boeing Co $159,634,310
    Lockheed Martin $154,390,388
    AT&T Inc $142,039,336
    Southern Co $134,740,694
    General Motors $130,034,170
    National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $127,770,000
    Pfizer Inc $123,607,268
    Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

  9. #29
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,650

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by grip View Post
    "Too big to fail" should never have happened but now should be broken up. Nationalizing just makes them part of failed gov control experiment. The gov is suppose to limit the size and regulate business not get involved in the profit and loss end of it. It isn't gov that controls corporations it's the other way around.


    Lobbying Client Total

    US Chamber of Commerce $857,015,680
    American Medical Assn $269,507,500
    General Electric $268,810,000
    Pharmaceutical Rsrch & Mfrs of America $219,393,920
    American Hospital Assn $219,214,136
    AARP $214,872,064
    Blue Cross/Blue Shield $184,878,020
    National Assn of Realtors $184,433,988
    Northrop Grumman $176,015,253
    Exxon Mobil $173,592,742
    Verizon Communications $168,984,841
    Edison Electric Institute $162,835,999
    Business Roundtable $160,310,000
    Boeing Co $159,634,310
    Lockheed Martin $154,390,388
    AT&T Inc $142,039,336
    Southern Co $134,740,694
    General Motors $130,034,170
    National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $127,770,000
    Pfizer Inc $123,607,268
    What? Corporations can not vote, yet they are heavily regulated and taxed, resulting in regulation and taxation without representation. In order to have a voice they have no choice but to use lobbying "citizens" on their behalf. Perhaps the BEST way to get corporations out of the process of gov't is to get gov't out of the process of micro-managing corporations. If corp. A is given a subsidy or tax break, it is only natural that corp. B will want that too. ;-)
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  10. #30
    Light△Bender

    grip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    ☚ ☛
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 02:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,224
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    What? Corporations can not vote, yet they are heavily regulated and taxed, resulting in regulation and taxation without representation. In order to have a voice they have no choice but to use lobbying "citizens" on their behalf. Perhaps the BEST way to get corporations out of the process of gov't is to get gov't out of the process of micro-managing corporations. If corp. A is given a subsidy or tax break, it is only natural that corp. B will want that too. ;-)
    Peddling influence and power to the point they do now is obscene. They're not doing worse but better than ever in history profit wise. GE and some of the larger companies pay little to NO taxes with offshore hoarding and hiding. I don't buy this "poor companies" crap. I also don't believe in over or unfairly taxing them, simply get the gov and corps out of business together.
    Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •