http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/b...another-bank-bailout.html?smid=tw-share&_r=2&
This shit needs to stop.
This shit needs to stop.
Continued bank bailouts prove one thing and one thing only and that is the lesson of failure is never taught by the markets to the banking industry.
Any lesson is automatically muted and vaporized by the actions of central banks in order to help government prop up its own spending and debt addiction being provided and fueled by those who run the banking industry and who head and chair central bank committees.
I didnt read that BofA is getting another bailout, but rather the NY Fed is shielding BofA from lawsuits stemming from toxic mortgages? Im not saying thats any better, but Im not reading a direct bailout. Did I miss it?
Money is just paper and banks control the printing. That's the truth. (only now the printing is mostly digital and the money is digital too).Banks don't need deposits to lend money! Or... any money at all! LOL all you can do is laugh honestly.
Seems appropriate
![]()
Money is just paper and banks control the printing. That's the truth. (only now the printing is mostly digital and the money is digital too).
LOLWUT? You really think this man introduced the policies that fucked us over in the first place? You should really study up on the repeal of Glass-Steagall and also concentrate on the Party which first pushed for the repeal.![]()
Wait...are we talking about the repeal of glass steagall under Clinton's watch or the OP's article about how the fed last July, under Obama's watch, exempted BofA from " from all legal claims arising from losses in some mortgage-backed securities the Fed received when the government bailed out the American International Group in 2008"?
What are we talking about here?
edit: Dont misunderstand me. Bush had a hand in the collapse of the market as well, but the ball was put in motion by the Clinton administration, To deny that is, well, simply blindness on your part. And to deny Obama's continuation of big bank protection is also blindness. I suggest you read this article McCain get's it, Obama doesn't.
But, thats not what the OP is about.
Actually, to deny that the Reagan admininstration started the assault on the Glass-Steagall is, simply put, pure blindness on your part.
Beginning in 1982, with "policy statements" from the FDIC that began allowing state chartered non-Federal Reserve member banks to establish subsidiaries to underwrite and deal in securities, and the simultaneous allowance by the OCC to allow Dreyfus Corp. and Sears to establish nonbank bank subsidiaries that were not covered by the Bank Holding Company Act were the first major shots across the bow of Glass-Steagall.
Then the Fed. in 1987, under Volker, approved several bank holding companies to underwrite and deal in residential mortgage-backed securities, municipal revenue bonds, and commercial paper. By 1991, under Geo. Bush, the dismantling of Glass-Steagall was well underway.
Clinton's action was just the end of what Congress had put into motion during the 1980's. Poor decision in retrospect, but it had so much momentum by that point that it was hard to stop.
Hell, even Volker stated repealing Glass-Steagall wouldn't have been bad if Congress had thought about what they replaced it with. Volckers criticism was that Congress didnt replace it with other restrictions, creating the 1920's all over again.