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.

 

Obama Calls for Limiting Size, Risk-Taking of Financial Firms

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   
www.bloomberg.com...


Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama, tapping into voter anger over bank bailouts, called for limits on the size and trading activities of financial institutions in order to reduce risk-taking and prevent another financial crisis.


How is the administration managing to recognize this source of anger, while failing to hear the equally loud calls for "limits on the size" of government and "reduce risk-taking" by government?


“While the financial system is far stronger today than it was one year ago, it’s still operating under the same rules that led to its near collapse,” Obama said yesterday at the White House after meeting with former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, who has been an advocate of taking such steps. “Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by a bank that is too big to fail.”


Now, I could not have been any more opposed to the government bailouts, but, wasn't the idea, as presented by both administrations, to aid in returning the financial industry to the black? So, why is the industry now being vilified for accomplishing exactly what was intended? Unless, that wasn't really what was hoped for. Maybe, the hope was to have another excuse to expand government, by using the attempted, but failed, bailout to bolster support against capitalism? "Stronger today than it was one year ago..." BUT...

The last line of that paragraph really blows my mind. "...too big to fail" is a myth. It is just a sound byte intended to garner support for the expansion of government. Have you stopped to consider how that could even be measured? In 2009, 140 banks failed, as opposed to 25 in 2008. One of the largest was Washington Mutual. Are not the 140 at least as important and, potentially as damaging to the financial system, as any one deemed "too big to fail"?


“When banks benefit from the safety net that taxpayers provide,” Obama said, “it is not appropriate for them to turn around and use that cheap money to trade for profit.”


Again...Huh? Wasn't the whole idea for "them" to "...use that cheap money to trade for profit"? They were "too big to fail" so they were given "cheap money" to increase profits.

Paraphrasing the title 'The People Call for Limiting Size, Risk-Taking of Government". Washington needs to stop distorting the truth into reflecting their agenda.




posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Just found this thread www.abovetopsecret.com... which adds to the list of 140 failed banks of 2009.

And another here www.abovetopsecret.com...&addstar=1&on=7961729#pid7961729

[edit on 23-1-2010 by WTFover]



new topics
 
3

log in

join