Outrage

[Core Imposter]

Authorities are winding down their criminal investigation of the failed brokarage firm, MF Global, and despite the lack of oversight and the loss of more than $1 billion in customer funds, it now seems unlikely that anyone at the firm will face criminal charges.

http://news.yahoo.com/no-one-charged-crime-mf-global-collapse-111056124--finance.html?_esi=1

It might seem odd or partisan coming from me, but I just want to share my outrage over the lack of applicable law and/or effective efforcement of existing law that has failed in protecting the public from the sort of behavior that we have seen in the finance industry.

We need to broaden and strengthed state fraud laws to provide severe criminal penalties specifically aimed at white collars.

The primary fault for the lack of such laws is the political protection of the Republican party. We can't ever expect to create broad support for much needed regulatory relief for small business if we fail to address what is for all practical purposes a cartel of financial gangsters, global in scope and growing larger and more powerful by the day.

I hope everyone here can agree that attacking this problem is necessary and proper.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Hats off to MisterCooper.

Agreed 100%

And to be completely fair, when the Dem's had control of congress they did very little in the way of meaningful financial reform in the vehicle of the Dodd-Frank bill. Although some of this had to do with overcoming Republican obstructionism, they still should have been much tougher in the regulations they enforced on the big banks.

Not that regulation is always good and warranted, but these fat cats can literally torpedo an economy and only act in self interest. This is the way capitalism is supposed to work, but it's disasterous when so much money and economic power is held by so few with nothing but greed for motivation.

 

[Core Imposter]

On several occasions, Paul Ryan has suggested he supports breaking up the nation’s largest banks to prevent future bailouts for too-big-to-fail firms. But he’s never quite proposed a policy to get there.

Ryan seems to support breaking up big banks. But he’s never quite said that. (Photo: Washington Post)

“If you’re a bank and you want to operate like some nonbank entity like a hedge fund, then don’t be a bank. Don’t let banks use their customers’ money to do anything other than traditional banking,” Ryan told constituents at a town hall meeting in Mount Pleasant, Wisc., on May 4.

This implicit support of the Volcker rule— a key feature of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law that prohibits banks from making speculative bets for their own profits—is unlikely to sit well with the likes of JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup. Neither company would comment for this article.

Ryan reiterated his distaste for mega banks in a July interview on CNBC regarding former Citigroup chairman Sandy Weil’s support of breaking up big banks. The congressman, who voted against Dodd-Frank, said the law “will consolidate the system to very large interconnected firms that have political connections.”


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/15/would-paul-ryan-break-up-the-big-banks/

Exactly where does Paul Ryan stand?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

He voted against Dodd-Frank? But says he's against hedge-fund 'banks'?

And he hasn't put forth an alternate plan? Did he even offer ammendments or just vote against it?

This is what I meant by Republican obstructionism. It's more important to stop the dems and Obama at all costs than it is to pass laws that are desperately needed or even working to incoporate their own ideas into such laws.

 

[squadbroken]

Exactly where does Paul Ryan stand?

On a big pile of money

 

[Core Imposter]

He voted against Dodd-Frank? But says he's against hedge-fund 'banks'?

And he hasn't put forth an alternate plan? Did he even offer ammendments or just vote against it?

This is what I meant by Republican obstructionism. It's more important to stop the dems and Obama at all costs than it is to pass laws that are desperately needed or even working to incoporate their own ideas into such laws.

I don't exactly know what to make of it. The banking lobby is so powerful, even moreso in Republican circles, that they are more than capable of aborting political careers. Ryan might clarify his position as time goes forward but obviously now is not the time for a crusade against banks.

It is worth pointing out that the goal of Frank/Dodd reform in a Republican administration might not necessarily be a total rollover for the banks. Or it might. It just not clear to me.

Personally, I supported the bank bailouts as a necessity and I also supported mass hanging of bankers afterward, which I think was just as necessary and more tasteful.

 

[Core Imposter]

On a big pile of money

He is not as wealthy as Obama, and in fact, a large portion of his family income stems from assets his wife inherited from her family, her very, very rich, politically heavyweight, Democrat family.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I don't exactly know what to make of it. The banking lobby is so powerful, even moreso in Republican circles, that they are more than capable of aborting political careers. Ryan might clarify his position as time goes forward but obviously now is not the time for a crusade against banks.

It is worth pointing out that the goal of Frank/Dodd reform in a Republican administration might not necessarily be a total rollover for the banks. Or it might. It just not clear to me.

Personally, I supported the bank bailouts as a necessity and I also supported mass hanging of bankers afterward, which I think was just as necessary and more tasteful.

Stop it, before I fall in love with you.

 

[Formaldehyde]

It might seem odd or partisan coming from me, but I just want to share my outrage over the lack of applicable law and/or effective efforcement of existing law that has failed in protecting the public from the sort of behavior that we have seen in the finance industry.

We need to broaden and strengthed state fraud laws to provide severe criminal penalties specifically aimed at white collars.

The primary fault for the lack of such laws is the political protection of the Republican party. We can't ever expect to create broad support for much needed regulatory relief for small business if we fail to address what is for all practical purposes a cartel of financial gangsters, global in scope and growing larger and more powerful by the day.

I hope everyone here can agree that attacking this problem is necessary and proper.

Being partisan? Unless you are a closet "liberal" who has been deceiving us all for months, this isn't partisan in the least.

And don't expect many of the actually partisan Republicans / conservatives in this forum to agree with you.

 

[AlpsStranger]

What about the job creators?

Won't someone think of the job creators?

 

[utgotye]

Don't hang Ryan for voting against it if we don't know the reasoning behind his vote. I don't support Obamacare despite agreeing with some of the things in it.

 

[dirtyparrot]

Politicians like to speak from both sides of their mouth. Like Yoda said, "do or do not. There is no try."

 

[Cutlass]

Don't hang Ryan for voting against it if we don't know the reasoning behind his vote. I don't support Obamacare despite agreeing with some of the things in it.

There was no reasoning to vote against it. It was purely a situation of putting partisanship ahead of patriotism.

 

[peter grimes]

This is magical - a thread where we're all agreeing with MisterCooper!

@MC: Seriously and honestly, I agree 100% with everything you've said here, but I'd fling more monkey-poo at the Democratic Party than you have. There's more than enough blame to go around. Don't keep it all for the Republicans!

 

[Core Imposter]

This is magical - a thread where we're all agreeing with MisterCooper!

@MC: Seriously and honestly, I agree 100% with everything you've said here, but I'd fling more monkey-poo at the Democratic Party than you have. There's more than enough blame to go around. Don't keep it all for the Republicans!

Not my house. I'll stick to RINO hunting.

 

[utgotye]

There was no reasoning to vote against it. It was purely a situation of putting partisanship ahead of patriotism.

Other than it's questionable Constitutionality?

[/quote]

Please don't start saying that Obama is in some way morally superior or more patriotic because he paid 26% to Romney's 14%.

 

[Rashiminos]

Bear in mind that 2008 has come and gone, and both sides seem unwilling to do much of anything about it.

 

[Cutlass]

Other than it's questionable Constitutionality?



Please don't start saying that Obama is in some way morally superior or more patriotic because he paid 26% to Romney's 14%.

That's not the issue. The issue is that health care is broken. It has become a major drag on the nation's economy. And Americans are dying for no reason other than that the system denies them access. Obamacare is not the best of all possible reforms. But there absolutely had to be some reform. And it would have been a better one if Republicans had been willing to participate in it. By trying to block everything, no matter what,they were rejecting doing their jobs for no reason other than that they wanted to cripple a president they didn't like.

The Republicans were, and are, acting directly hostile to the needs of the US for no reason other than partisan advantage.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Please don't start saying that Obama is in some way morally superior or more patriotic because he paid 26% to Romney's 14%.

Nope. That just makes him a fool for not taking advantage of all the tax loopholes that Congress has created so that the rich don't have to pay their fair share of taxes. There isn't anything "morally superior" about that at all.

You should create a Super-PAC with the sole intent of making TV ads to inform America of exactly how foolish Obama is in this regard when compared to Rmoney. You can even point out that Rmoney doesn't want to divulge any more of his tax returns made before he decided to run for president because he wants to spare Obama from looking even more foolish.

 

[Cutlass]

The difference is also that most of Romney's income comes from capital gains and most of Obama's income comes from book royalties. Different tax treatment.