It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush Admin Considering Ownership Stakes In Banks

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Bush Admin Considering Ownership Stakes In Banks


www.huffingtonpost.com

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration is considering taking ownership stakes in a number of U.S. banks as one option it might use to deal with a serious credit crisis, an administration official said Wednesday.

This official, who spoke late Wednesday on condition of anonymity because no decision has been made, said the $700 billion rescue package passed by Congress last week allows the Treasury Department to inject fresh capital into financial institutions and get ownership shares in return.

This official said that all the new powers granted in the legislation were being considered as the administration seeks to deal with a serious credit crisis that has already caused the biggest upheavals on Wall Street in seven decades.

A decision to inject capital directly into financial institutions in return for ownership stakes would be similar to a plan announced earlier Wednesday by Britain.

Asked about the British approach, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson did not reject the idea but said he did not want to speculate on which of the new powers would be employed.

"We have a broad range of authorities and tools," Paulson told reporters. "We've emphasized the purchase of liquid assets, but we have a broad range of authorities. And I'm confident we have the authorities we need to work with going forward."

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   
The irony is almost unspeakable... the Republicans and the far right have been howling for years that the liberals and Democrats were socialists and wanted to nationalize things... and here is the most extreme administration ever now considering the exact same thing.

Now be personally I understand that socialism is not antithetical to capitalism or democracy... indeed most of the first world combines the two in one form or another... just look at Canada and Europe... that is exactly what they do and they thrive... so that is not an issue for me... indeed I believe that natural resourses should not be in the hands of private firms at all... especially those related to national security.

The question is should this be extended to the banking industry? One side I am certain will say that the government never does anything right so no... the other will probably say that the private sector has so obviously mismanaged everything that there are few options left.

Me personally, I don't know what to think about it other than with this administration's track record.... I would'nt put them in charge of watering my plants much less managing a bank or the economy.

www.huffingtonpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
I couldn't have said it better than this guy:


So let me understand this: nationalizing banks is ok, but nationalizing health care is not? We're going to float the very people that got us into this mess, but not help make health care affordable and universal? Education affordable and universal? I'd rather be healthy, smart and poor then rich, sick and dumb. Our priorities have to change, or they're going to change us.

— Josh, NY
community.nytimes.com...

Or this guy:


Maybe I'm preoccupied with a deck chair while the Titanic sinks, but I worry about government ownership in a different way.

If the feds own significant shares of banks and corporations and have significant representation on their boards, what's to keep them from politicizing them and having them serve government interests rather than those of the bank or corporation? I really truly don't want to see partisanship and all the boondoggles we see in national politics also built into private entities.

We've already had a demonstration of the wreckage politicalization can cause when Congress encouraged Freddie and Fanny to take on loans nobody else would buy. Not only did it worsen our current situation, but it sent a tacit message that imprudent risk was not only okay but encouraged.

I hope we take a long look down this road before we start down it.

Don

— Don, Philadelphia
community.nytimes.com...



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Another thing just occurred to me. If the government takes ownership in banks, will that then give it the right to view the financial transactions of depositors? Because, right now, if I'm not mistaken (who knows the limits of The Patriot Act) the US government needs a court order to access a person's bank account. By owning a significant stake in banks, that might enable the government to bypass the courts to have direct access to the financial information of depositors.

I don't know if I'm right about that. It seems like a legitimate concern. What worries me is the scope of authority that the Treasury Department already has. Providing the Fed and the Treasury Department with a bird's eye view of the financial details of corporations, banks, and the general public just doesn't make me feel too comfortable, or have confidence that the best interests of most US citizens are being looked after.

I've been in denial a little about it, but it seems as if we are truly in the midst of a coup. In fact, it happened when the bailout passed. Congress should have never yielded to that bailout bill. There's nothing in the past eight years that gives me confidence in what is going on now. Nothing at all.



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Areal51
 


The Fed is not the government. The Fed is the commercial banks foreign and domestic that backs our debit based currency. Having the Government bailout banks without ownership is like lending money to the banks that hold your loans and credit card debts. You lend them money and they lend it back to you!

Congress is endowed with the Constitutional right to coin money. They can then hold the coins (in gold and silver) and then print paper money that is not promissory notes, but certificates payable to the bearer on demand in gold or silver.

Yet, even that is still a stop gap measure, although a very good one. The real issue is that we live in a society that is driven by profits, which creates greed. If everyone had everything they needed, we would have less crime. The cause of the problems are not being addressed, only the symptoms.

Fix the cause and the symptoms will disappear. Technology is the answer. Allow technology to provide the means and ways to end dependence on fuels. Allow technology to provide the means to cure disease instead of treating symptoms. Allow agriculture to return to local communities and not agri-corporations. Allow technology to provide clean and rapid worldwide transportation that can deliver goods anywhere on earth within hours and not days or weeks.

Take away all the causes of crime and there is no need for arcane laws and penal institutions. We have plenty of resources to feed the entire world population and provide for the necessities of all humanity. The illusion of scarcity is created to feed the capitalist, credit/debit system, created by the banking barons for one purpose: World domination.

Create a New World Order, that gives the people the power and the means by which they can live in love and peace. And all the rest will go away as they will not have necessity in the NWO, not the NWO that the globalist bankers have been creating, but the one in which all humanity shares and cares for the planet



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Areal51
If the government takes ownership in banks, will that then give it the right to view the financial transactions of depositors?


A big story broke here a few months ago, or rather almost a year ago, when it was discovered that all bank in the country I currently live in send ALL private transaction to the US for terrorist funding screening. If they do that, without notice in the EU, I am pretty damn sure they do it in the US by default.

Kind regards.



posted on Oct, 9 2008 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Please redirect your replies to this thread already in progress:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks for your posts. Thread Closed.

-Badge01
Forum Moderator



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join