Why are banks that are too big to fail (still) allowed to exist?
I'm sure republicans will just bail them out again. Exactly like they did
last time. Time for for this nation to endorse Bernie and break up these banks.
Isn't it time we regulate them too?
Clearly they won't do it on their own. They're going to need
regulation to protect us from them. Banking should be truly the most
conservative endeavour there is. It should be boring and stodgy, as if run by
old Scotsmen. It should never make money wildly during good times, and it should
be sufficiently self buttressed to weather bad times. It should act as if a loan
or mortgage establishes a close personal relationship with the borrower for the
life of the loan. American banks these days always feel like they're being
run by Martin Shkreli. They're in it for themselves and any harm that they
may cause to anyone, up to and including the world economy, is inconsequential.
Remember. They are too big to fail and they have the taxpayers to bail them out
so why worry. None of their bosses will serve hard time should they destroy the
economy again. They have the politicians right where they want them.
If history repeats, Austria failed. We're next.
you wonder with all the money banks have given to hilary why they were not
broken up during the crisis when there was the political will to do so?
actually, you do NOT wonder.dudd-frank further enhanced too big to
fail, it did not prevent it or end it. hilary talks about breaking them up, but
I doubt she really means it. washington post reports they have given her and her
husband over $80 MILLION over the years.
Why should they? Change is inconvenient, even costly. Sanders wants banks to be
smaller and more responsible. It is clear that the banks' current
representatives in politics are willing to bail them out in a crisis. Whose
political campaigns have Wall Street and the banking industry supported most?
It's not Sanders.