GOP Members Falling Away From McConnell on Bank Reforms

• Footwedge

  Most Americans are still frosted off about the multi million dollar bailouts the Wall Street banksters were pulling down. Especially given the ultra high unemploymrnt rate and the recently announced record in foreclosures (20%) around the country.
  
  Mitch McConnell has a lot of "friends in high places" over there in the bankster industry.....and as such, has had his campaign pockets lined by these shysters from the Street.
  
  Mitch would like to see the status quo of corporate welfare remain for these high rollers...whereby "heads I win and tails I win too" has been the norm.
  
  Now, the new legislation wants these "too big too fail" banksters to actually assume the real risk in their casino like endeavors.
  
  Imagine that....a world without corporate welfare and charity from the taxpayers.
  
  It's about time.
  
  http://www.kentucky.com/2010/04/15/1224749/mcconnell-to-big-banks-rescue.html
• I Wear Pants

  I cannot believe that there is anyone that doesn't want reforms for the banking/financial industry.
• derek bomar

  

  The Dodd bill sucks
• believer

  

  I'm trying to understand this.
  
  So it's a good thing to want corrupt, inefficient Big Government Feds to super-regulate the corrupt, greedy Big Business Wall Streeters to make sure the taxpayers are protected?
  
  Isn't this like asking the inmates to run the asylum, or the blind leading the blind, or asking Jesse James to insure that Al Capone is playing by the rules?
• LJ

  

  believer wrote: I'm trying to understand this.
  
  So it's a good thing to want corrupt, inefficient Big Government Feds to super-regulate the corrupt, greedy Big Business Wall Streeters to make sure the taxpayers are protected?
  
  Isn't this like asking the inmates to run the asylum, or the blind leading the blind, or asking Jesse James to insure that Al Capone is playing by the rules?

  If you are playing monopoly, would you trust everyone to not cheat if you left the room? Or would you ask one of the other people playing to make sure everyone follows the rules?
• bigmanbt

  If the politicians would just stop taking the special interest handouts and say government will not be in bed with ANY company things would be much better than they are now. I have trouble finding fault with big business because they are doing what they are suppose to, answering to their stock holders and trying to make money. It's the politicians that need to stop the government sanctioning of these MNCs and not get in bed with them. Some regulations are good, but many just lead to loopholes that only certain businesses can access, restriciting competition, which is the real driving force of an economy.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  LJ wrote:

  believer wrote: I'm trying to understand this.
  
  So it's a good thing to want corrupt, inefficient Big Government Feds to super-regulate the corrupt, greedy Big Business Wall Streeters to make sure the taxpayers are protected?
  
  Isn't this like asking the inmates to run the asylum, or the blind leading the blind, or asking Jesse James to insure that Al Capone is playing by the rules?

  If you are playing monopoly, would you trust everyone to not cheat if you left the room? Or would you ask one of the other people playing to make sure everyone follows the rules?

  Neither. I don't trust anyone. If you leave the room, you're out of the game.
  
  However, anyone who thinks big government is going to somehow make it all better regarding the crooks on Wall Street needs to go back to having their nanny read them fairy tales...because it's obviously what they're used to hearing.
• IggyPride00

  

  Neither. I don't trust anyone. If you leave the room, you're out of the game.

  I understand your skepticism towards the government, but are you saying we should do nothing in terms of regulating the banks and just let them continue on as is?
  
  The derivatives market is completely unregulated and free of the government, and is a certified waste area that is nothing but a ticking time bomb on the who world.
  
  If not the government, who do you advocate should regulate them? They have shown through their actions they can't handle an unregulated market responsibly, so in the absence of the government I don't see how to fix the problem.
• LJ

  

  Writerbuckeye wrote:

  LJ wrote:

  believer wrote: I'm trying to understand this.
  
  So it's a good thing to want corrupt, inefficient Big Government Feds to super-regulate the corrupt, greedy Big Business Wall Streeters to make sure the taxpayers are protected?
  
  Isn't this like asking the inmates to run the asylum, or the blind leading the blind, or asking Jesse James to insure that Al Capone is playing by the rules?

  If you are playing monopoly, would you trust everyone to not cheat if you left the room? Or would you ask one of the other people playing to make sure everyone follows the rules?

  Neither. I don't trust anyone. If you leave the room, you're out of the game.
  
  However, anyone who thinks big government is going to somehow make it all better regarding the crooks on Wall Street needs to go back to having their nanny read them fairy tales...because it's obviously what they're used to hearing.

  I suggest you read up on the type of market we have in this country, monopolistic competition. Basically, if you leave it to the market to make up the rules of the game and monitor it themselves, the end result will always be people cheating and creating nothing but a bubble.
• Footwedge

  LJ wrote:

  Writerbuckeye wrote:

  LJ wrote:

  believer wrote: I'm trying to understand this.
  
  So it's a good thing to want corrupt, inefficient Big Government Feds to super-regulate the corrupt, greedy Big Business Wall Streeters to make sure the taxpayers are protected?
  
  Isn't this like asking the inmates to run the asylum, or the blind leading the blind, or asking Jesse James to insure that Al Capone is playing by the rules?

  If you are playing monopoly, would you trust everyone to not cheat if you left the room? Or would you ask one of the other people playing to make sure everyone follows the rules?

  Neither. I don't trust anyone. If you leave the room, you're out of the game.
  
  However, anyone who thinks big government is going to somehow make it all better regarding the crooks on Wall Street needs to go back to having their nanny read them fairy tales...because it's obviously what they're used to hearing.

  I suggest you read up on the type of market we have in this country, monopolistic competition. Basically, if you leave it to the market to make up the rules of the game and monitor it themselves, the end result will always be people cheating and creating nothing but a bubble.

  Wow LJ....I never thought I'd read a post like this from you. Well done sir.
• LJ

  

  Footwedge wrote:

  LJ wrote:

  Writerbuckeye wrote:

  LJ wrote:

  believer wrote: I'm trying to understand this.
  
  So it's a good thing to want corrupt, inefficient Big Government Feds to super-regulate the corrupt, greedy Big Business Wall Streeters to make sure the taxpayers are protected?
  
  Isn't this like asking the inmates to run the asylum, or the blind leading the blind, or asking Jesse James to insure that Al Capone is playing by the rules?

  If you are playing monopoly, would you trust everyone to not cheat if you left the room? Or would you ask one of the other people playing to make sure everyone follows the rules?

  Neither. I don't trust anyone. If you leave the room, you're out of the game.
  
  However, anyone who thinks big government is going to somehow make it all better regarding the crooks on Wall Street needs to go back to having their nanny read them fairy tales...because it's obviously what they're used to hearing.

  I suggest you read up on the type of market we have in this country, monopolistic competition. Basically, if you leave it to the market to make up the rules of the game and monitor it themselves, the end result will always be people cheating and creating nothing but a bubble.

  Wow LJ....I never thought I'd read a post like this from you. Well done sir.

  I;ve always thought that our economy demands regulations and oversight. There has to be rules to the game, or else when everything comes to the break even point (which ever product does) companies are either going to improve it or cheat. You take a guess as to which one is easier
• believer

  

  LJ wrote:I suggest you read up on the type of market we have in this country, monopolistic competition. Basically, if you leave it to the market to make up the rules of the game and monitor it themselves, the end result will always be people cheating and creating nothing but a bubble.

  So we need corrupt special-interest driven socialist politicians to step in to police the monopolistic capitalist cheats to keep the bubble from bursting? :dodgy:
• LJ

  

  believer wrote:

  LJ wrote:I suggest you read up on the type of market we have in this country, monopolistic competition. Basically, if you leave it to the market to make up the rules of the game and monitor it themselves, the end result will always be people cheating and creating nothing but a bubble.

  So we need corrupt special-interest driven socialist politicians to step in to police the monopolistic capitalist cheats to keep the bubble from bursting? :dodgy:

  No, you don't want a bubble in the first place. Honestly, anyone who doesn't believe in oversight and regulation by a separate entity (aka not the market itself) really needs to take a look at how they think they understand our economy. If it was possible to have a truly "free" market, then maybe, but we don't, and there won't be.
• believer

  

  ^^^I hope in my posts you detect that I trust greedy Wall Streeters about as far as I can toss a left-wing Beltway politician.
  
  Unfortunately we're faced with the irony of hoping one set of crooks keeps the other set of crooks in check. Since they're both in bed together I don't see much chance of "balance in the force."
• I Wear Pants

  Well then we're all fucked believer and we should just give up.
  
  There are two things we can do, regulate the industry by saying, "Hey assholes, stop it" or we can just let the industry keep chugging along as it is and drive us straight into the ground.
  
  What is the alternative to putting some regulations on the industry?
• BCSbunk

  I Wear Pants wrote: I cannot believe that there is anyone that doesn't want reforms for the banking/financial industry.

  Oh yeah there are plenty of "conservatives" that want no such regulations.
  
  Regulations mean Socialism!!!!! The Fascist right has spoken the corporations benefit mankind and must not be controlled or regulated. They mean the best for mankind and would never do evil to them.
  
  ALL HAIL THE REPUBLICANS!!
• LJ

  

  Even in war, there's rules to the game.
• queencitybuckeye

  Where did we come up with the assumption that the only options are government oversight or self-regulation?
• stlouiedipalma

  queencitybuckeye wrote: Where did we come up with the assumption that the only options are government oversight or self-regulation?

  What other options would you suggest?
• IggyPride00

  

  Turns out the decision to prosecute Goldman was made along party lines at the SEC with 3 Democrats voting in favor and 2 Republicans against.
  
  I wonder if that is going to be a new rallying cry to try and gain public support for reform as you know Democrats would love to paint Republicans as being in bed with Goldman right now given how toxic they are (even though historically Democrats have received far more campaign contributions from them).
  
  Needless to say, this will be yet another part of the new narrative now we can expect to hear more of.
  
  http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=amvJPx_1cPwo&pos=1
• I Wear Pants

  queencitybuckeye wrote: Where did we come up with the assumption that the only options are government oversight or self-regulation?

  How else can you stop the industry from fucking us all other than making some rules or expecting them to grow a heart?
• believer

  

  I Wear Pants wrote: Well then we're all fucked believer and we should just give up.
  
  There are two things we can do, regulate the industry by saying, "Hey assholes, stop it" or we can just let the industry keep chugging along as it is and drive us straight into the ground.
  
  What is the alternative to putting some regulations on the industry?

  We're already screwed. When it comes down to it, I'll trust in the free market to ultimately police itself any day over government interference, over-regulation and take-over. Basically you want one set of assholes to yell "stop" at another. That fixes what?
  

  I Wear Pants wrote:How else can you stop the industry from fucking us all other than making some rules or expecting them to grow a heart?

  So you place you trust and heart in the benevolence of Big Government?
• Footwedge

  Do you think we should get rid of the beat cops too? They're also paid for by the tax dollar. Imagine not having a single cop out there. More to the point....when (not if) the system completely collapses again, you all in for another trillion dollar printing press fiesta?
• I Wear Pants

  believer wrote:

  I Wear Pants wrote: Well then we're all fucked believer and we should just give up.
  
  There are two things we can do, regulate the industry by saying, "Hey assholes, stop it" or we can just let the industry keep chugging along as it is and drive us straight into the ground.
  
  What is the alternative to putting some regulations on the industry?

  We're already screwed. When it comes down to it, I'll trust in the free market to ultimately police itself any day over government interference, over-regulation and take-over. Basically you want one set of assholes to yell "stop" at another. That fixes what?
  

  I Wear Pants wrote:How else can you stop the industry from fucking us all other than making some rules or expecting them to grow a heart?

  So you place you trust and heart in the benevolence of Big Government?

  What benevolence?
  
  We're just talking about restrictions on the bullshit that banks pull all the time to make money. Not a freaking government takeover of the industry.
• I Wear Pants

  believer wrote:

  I Wear Pants wrote: Well then we're all fucked believer and we should just give up.
  
  There are two things we can do, regulate the industry by saying, "Hey assholes, stop it" or we can just let the industry keep chugging along as it is and drive us straight into the ground.
  
  What is the alternative to putting some regulations on the industry?

  We're already screwed. When it comes down to it, I'll trust in the free market to ultimately police itself any day over government interference, over-regulation and take-over. Basically you want one set of assholes to yell "stop" at another. That fixes what?
  

  I Wear Pants wrote:How else can you stop the industry from fucking us all other than making some rules or expecting them to grow a heart?

  So you place you trust and heart in the benevolence of Big Government?

  Even an asshole can stop another asshole from raping someone sometimes.