Breaking Up the Big Banks, and Why Congress Won't Do It
Two ideas are floating around Washington regarding how to handle 'too big to fail' banks, but only one is supported by the Treasury and the White House. Unfortunately, it's the wrong one.
Two ideas are floating around Washington regarding how to handle 'too big to fail' banks, but only one is supported by the Treasury and the White House. Unfortunately, it's the wrong one.
When it comes to dealing with Wall Street, President Obama seems to have traded in his position as our economy's commander-in-chief for a different role: pundit-in-chief. He and his top advisors are suddenly very big on urging, advocating, and cajoling. During his weekly radio address, which focused on the need to get America's banks lending to small businesses, the president laid out his plan of action: "We're going to take every appropriate step to encourage them to meet those responsibilities." Encourage them? How about make them? Columnists and bloggers encourage. Presidents execute. It's in the job description. Hence: the executive branch. And the executive branch has plenty of weapons at its disposal to force banks still dependent on billions of dollars in taxpayer funds and guarantees to change behavior.
A news item appeared this week that at least seems to offer reasonable hope that Goldman is beginning to use its good fortune to help remedy the foundering fortunes of Main Street America.
Goldman Sachs, poster child for the double-edge sword of mega-success, now finds that even an act of charity brings rebuke.
In mere days, my city, Chicago will be overrun by the worst of the worst. The lowest of the low. Criminals who have affected more lives than any mug...
Where once the King of Halloween confection was Candy Corn -- selling 8.3 billion kernels a year -- planners of today's Halloween parties lobby their new faves: the latest in gross and disgusting party food.
In New York, the oldest and snobbiest financial ventures are called "white shoe" firms. Their arrogance, risky investments and confounding dealing in derivatives threw the rest of us into the Great Recession.
We're gathering outside the American Bankers Association meeting to demand reform that will allow us to rebuild our communities, our lives and the real economy. We've got a lot to rebuild.
Congress is struggling to produce even the tiniest shards of regulation that would at least give the appearance of doing something to rein in the Street.
Unfortunately, the administration doesn't have the moxie to go after the most outrageous salaries and bonuses that are about to flow.
The Times shows its agenda when it refers to the not-yet-existing AIG bonuses slashes as "the humbling downfall of the once-proud giants" while all those pesky citizens won't stop with the "populist animosity."
American capitalism has now become rotten to the core. Gone is the American capitalist impulse's unique sense of fair play and adherence to a level playing field, accessible to all.
Two recent news stories keep coming together in my mind: The incredible Goldman Sachs bonuses amounting to more than $16 billion, and the recent report by the Coalition for the Homeless, of the record 40,000 homeless people sleeping in NYC shelters.
If only we could get one of the banking lobbyists or a Goldman Sachs executive to float away in a duct-taped flying saucer balloon, Wolf Blitzer and the rest of cable news might cover the real hoax.
Twelve months removed from the forced bailout of financial institutions by US taxpayers, Goldman Sachs is back to paying its employees an average annu...
If we're ever going to develop real financial stability, perhaps its time to consider eliminating the pesky middle man.
Whatever Obama decides to do in Afghanistan is of little consequence compared to Wall Street's ongoing "plutonomy."
by way of putting the five-figure Dow in perspective let note some other numbers that were released since the Dow hit the 10k mark and that matter a lot more to you and your future.
Our politicians thrive on chastising the fictitious welfare queens who supposedly turn our hard-earned tax dollars into Cadillacs. But when it comes to Wall Street we let the welfare kings walk all over us.
With all the interest in the damage Wall Street has done, activity that's the opposite should draw some attention. But coverage of the corporate social responsibility movement is not yet an idea whose time has come.
In the middle of the bath / In the middle of the bath I call your name / Oh Goldman, oh Goldmamn, my love will turn on you / My love will turn on you
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Who exactly was responsible for the original Wall
Street meltdown? No one ever investigated. Surely
they could trace trades. I think it was a planned
event, intended to cripple the economy, start us toward
Depression and put control into the hands of some of
the biggest money players, here in the US and in
international banking/speculation markets. Maybe
we haven't seen the rest of the bubbles yet.
Federal, individual taxation has created this unbelievable disparity.
The federal govt., by specification of the constitution, could levy certain monetary demands against the states to help support federal programs deemed necessary to avoid the prejudices of individual states. the true management of society was left to the states. the so-called income tax and its irs hitmen changed all that, without verifiable consent of the states.
state's rights became a sham, and still are. now taxes finance the massive excesses of the elite, who use ALL institutions in society to fleece the labor force, the children, the elderly, the sick and the ignorant.
i agree with one poster who simply said, in effect, that there will be NO really wealthy people, and NO really poor people. humans have no clue as to how little they actually need to live healthy, relatively stress free, productive and creative lives.
billionaires, and their close wannabes, are crazed and fearful parasites whose internal inadequacies are transferred to the 'poor' to cover their own zealous denials. wealth, other than the health of the planet's ecosystem, is a delusion of the reptile brain.
Overdog, do us all a favor. If you're going to go out of your way to defend the poor rich in this country then tell us where you stand economically. If you yourself are rich then I accept your rabid sefl interest. But if you aren't then explain why you aren't the ultimate patsy in this game. The rich depend on marks like you to go forth and defend them. But if no check is in the mail, then I really can't understand why anyone would defend the richest and most powerful against the weak. But then again I'm speaking to someone who hides behind the handle "overdog". Seems like you worship the rich and powerful.
That's exactly what I have been thinking! I am dismayed at the extent to which poor/middle class go to defend and help the stratospherically wealthy become entrenched.
"Rich Germans Demand Higher Taxes"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8321967.stm
No wonder, the Republicans are convinced Obama is a Nazi!
Very funny. But it seems the Germans are outclassing us when it comes to recognizing what would really help the situation. After all, if only the rich can afford to buy anything and everyone else is just scraping by, there won't be much money to buy the things the rich people produce and they will go under as well.
However, I do have to say I did hear that some rich people in our country were asking for the same thing a few months ago. They didn't feel they had made a sufficient sacrifice considering so many of our service people had gone to war and all they did was get a tax break.
As a broad generality it's not too challenging to outclass our peasnt culture.
If actually caring about the less fortunate in one's nation makes someone a Nazi, then I think the wealthy capitalist pigs here in the US could use a lesson in the thrid reich!
The problem is the cuts to business and personal income tax rates since Kennedy. It has to do with an economic concept called the "tax shield."
When the max tax rate was 90%, a dollar invested in plan and equipment, or a raise in pay for workers, only cost the business owner ten cents. Income tax would have taken 90 cents of that dollar otherwise.
When tax rates fell from 90% to approximately 70% (Kennedy), the investor saw that 10 cents of profit after taxes triple to 30%....if it wasn't reinvested in P&E; or worker wages. That 30 cents profit after taxes has doubled again.
It is far better to move manufacturing to a country with near-slave labor, nonexistent pollution laws, etc., bcause that 10 cents profit after taxes has more than quintupled.So the profit of every dollar not spent on P&E; or labor today yields nearly six times what it did in 1960.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with