Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-18-2010, 07:23 AM   #1
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
From one "no" to the next

Actually I hope many are finding that this is getting ridiculous..
Now pay attention this is from FOX....... wonder how it got through their censors
Oh they must be going pure tea-party now.....
As a financial reform bill starts to take shape in Washington, two key lawmakers came to New York City last week to explain what it means for Wall Street, and how financial executives might help prevent some of its least market-friendly aspects from becoming law by electing more Republicans, FOX Business Network has learned.................The undercurrent of the gathering, however, was undeniably political............The Senators explained they can’t just oppose the Dodd bill — they need to come up with a reform plan of their own, as they fight its least free-market components, such as the notion that the government can determine which banks are “too big to fail.”..............In the meantime, they need to increase numbers of Republicans in both the House and the Senate if they are going to make an impact on not just this bill, but other measures to increase Washington’s control of the financial business (???? edit). To do that they need the support of the financial community. At one point McConnell quoted something he attributed to Democrat Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee.
McConnell, according to a person who was present, said “Barney likes to say ‘Wall Street used to say we have Washington by the (neck), and we’re going to change that.’”
Spokespeople for McConnell and Cornyn didn’t return calls for comment.......But in order to assure those gains, and add even more, McConnell and Cornyn made it clear they need Wall Street's help. “There was no arm twisting but they did say that we should feel uncomfortable living in any country where one party has unfettered ability to pass anything including health care and anything else President Obama dreams up,” said another executive who was present.

In addition to Too Big To Fail, other parts of the bill that drew concern included what one executive from JP Morgan (JPM: 45.63, -2.2, -4.6%) said is a provision that would give authority to government to override bankruptcy laws, and determine which class of bondholders should get paid off first. During liquidation, bonds that have a higher priority and are considered “senior” are paid off first, thus they trade higher in the markets.

“I wouldn’t say this around the office,” said the executive, according to two people who were present, “but if that aspect survives, it will kill the market for distressed debt
Booo freaking hooo..........
McConnell's comments on financial reform riles critics - Politics AP - MiamiHerald.com
Critics alleged that there was a connection between a trip that McConnell and Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, the chairman of the Republican Senate campaign committee, took to New York City this month for meetings and fundraisers with Wall Street executives.
In one instance, the two met with hedge fund investors for about an hour, urged listeners to understand the GOP position on financial overhaul - and asked them to consider donating money. The senators also raised money at KKR, a major private equity firm............."He's raising money from investment bankers and hedge fund managers in return for policy," said Larry Forgy, a Lexington, Ky., political observer and attorney. "I have always felt these decisions of a major policy nature should not be combined with fundraising campaigns as he appears to be conducting in New York. I don't think the average person in Kentucky has a damn bit of sympathy for hedge fund managers.".(1)................"I've had concerns about this legislation for quite awhile," he said. "Democrats have had no conversation with these people?" To say he was influenced by these meetings, McConnell said, "is quite a stretch."(yeh riiiiight edit)
In a January memo, Luntz, a veteran Republican strategist, suggested a list of "words to use" when opposing financial overhaul legislation, including, on page 17, "big bank bailout bill."
Luntz couldn't be reached for comment.............
"Frank Luntz had no influence on my views. But Kentucky community bankers have a lot of influence my views," McConnell said, and they've expressed concern about the bill. (see 1 above)




Street Execs Give Pols Earful on Financial Reform - FOXBusiness.com
Senate Republicans Band Together in Opposing Financial Bill - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com
Updated: All 41 Senate Republicans have signed a letter urging the majority leader, Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, to adopt a more bipartisan approach in developing legislation to tighten regulation of the nation’s financial system.
The letter enraged Democrats, who noted that Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut and chairman of the banking committee, had spent months working with Republicans and trying to get their cooperation on the bill.
Mr. Corker, in an interview on Thursday, said that Republicans had withdrawn their amendments only on the promise that a bipartisan agreement would be reached before the bill was brought to the floor. But in a separate interview, Mr. Shelby said that Republicans had made the decision to withdraw the amendments on their own, without any assurances from Mr. Dodd or the Democrats........Senators on both sides say that an agreement will likely be reached. But the Republicans may be looking to prolong the process, using up time that Democrats might use for other issues. It is a strategy that Mr. McConnell has engaged in – with substantial success – since the Democrats won an expanded majority in 2008.

not tired of it yet........?
Mitch McConnell News - The New York Times
Before the health care fight, before the economic stimulus package, before President Obama even took office, Mr. McConnell had a strategy for his party: use his extensive knowledge of Senate procedure to slow things down, take advantage of the difficulties Democrats would have in governing and deny Democrats any Republican support on big legislation.
Mr. McConnell has come to embody a kind of oppositional politics that critics say has left voters cynical about Washington, the Senate all but dysfunctional and the Republican Party without a positive agenda or message. But in the short run at least, his approach has worked.
Even Mr. McConnell's fellow Republicans say somewhat admiringly that he can be a secretive and coldly calculating tactician with an eye for political openings, someone more consumed by political strategy than ideology or philosophy.

SIGH........

04-18-2010, 08:17 AM   #2
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,491
We need to start a fund for them.

Aid to Homeless Millionaires Foundation.

That has a nice sound to it.

Poor misunderstood bankers and bigwigs. They need to absorb that $200 account Grandma made for a grandchild.

We just don't understand how hard it is to make it on your last couple hundred million dollars.
04-18-2010, 09:15 AM   #3
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Original Poster
CLINTON on derivitives

I recommend you all read and watch all of it:
Bill Clinton on Rush Limbaugh, His Mistakes, the Supreme Court and Middle East Peace - ABC News


y extra protection and any extra transparency. The money they're putting up guarantees them transparency.

"The flaw in that argument," Clinton added, "was that first of all sometimes people with a lot of money make stupid decisions and make it without transparency."

The former president said he also was wrong in his understanding of what a collapse in the derivative market could do to the economy.

"The most important flaw," he said, "was even if less than 1 percent of the total investment community is involved in derivative exchanges, so much money was involved that if they went bad, they could affect 100 percent of the investments, and indeed 100 percent of the citizens in countries, not investors. And I was wrong about that."

He now wishes he had tried to regulate derivatives while in office, but he doesn't think he would have been successful."Now, I think if I had tried to regulate them, because the Republicans were the majority in the Congress, they would have stopped it," he said. "But I wish I should have been caught trying. I mean, that was a mistake I made." [/B]

On Health care:
"They'll have to keep working on it and putting more cost drivers in it to take the cost down," he said. "But it's a big, big step. And it's a wonderful thing for the country."
Just for fun.......
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/rulings/pants-fire/?page=1
And a request........
What "things" did Repub presidents do after their service as pres?
Seem Carter, Clinton are still proactive.......
What did Reagan/Bush/BabyBush do......?

Bush Sr..........
Since his 1992 election campaign, Bush has retired with his wife, Barbara, to their home in the exclusive neighborhood of Tanglewood in Houston, with a presidential office nearby. They spend the summer at Walker's Point in Kennebunkport, Maine. Bush holds his own fishing tournament in Islamorada, an island in the Florida Keys.
Carter......
Carter and his wife, Rosalynn, are also well-known for their work as volunteers with Habitat for Humanity, a Georgia-based philanthropy that helps low-income working people to build and buy their own homes.
He teaches Sunday school and is a deacon in the Maranatha Baptist Church in his hometown of Plains, Georgia


Baby bush.......
Since leaving office, Bush has kept a relatively low profile.[339] However, he has made appearances at various events throughout the Dallas/Fort Worth area, most notably when he conducted the opening coin toss at the Dallas Cowboys first game in the team's new Cowboys Stadium in Arlington.[340] An April 6, 2009, visit to a Texas Rangers game, where he gave a speech thanking the people of Dallas for helping them settle in (and specifically, the people of Arlington, where the game was held), was met with a standing ovation. I'm trying to regain a sense of anonymity. I didn't like it when a certain former president -- and it wasn't (George H.W. Bush) or (Bill Clinton) -- made my life miserable." Bush was referring to 39th President Jimmy Carter, who was an outspoken critic of President Bush throughout his presidency.


............
Back to the topic.....
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, said senators ought to go back to the drawing board and try to fix the bill. That's similar to the Republican message about Mr. Obama's health care legislation as it headed for Senate passage.
Sen. Mark Warner, Virginia Democrat, disagreed and said Mr. McConnell and other Republicans should offer specifics, not just "broad-brush critiques."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/apr/18/mcconnell-start-over-bank-reform/
.........
FLIP-FLOP Different issue.....
...................
As we indicated earlier, McConnell was not a co-sponsor of S. 2853. However, he is not only on record praising the measure just eight months earlier but is also on record saying that he had praised it on numerous occasions. We rate McConnell's stance on the Conrad-Gregg commission a Full Flop.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/feb/01/mitch-mcconne...egg-budget-co/

Last edited by jeffkrol; 04-18-2010 at 10:23 AM.
04-18-2010, 11:10 AM   #4
Veteran Member
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,123
It is the Republicans that have tried to hang the Bailouts and Wall Street greed and corruption around Obama's neck, but when it comes to correcting the problems, they are no different than they were on Healthcare...."Problem?...What Problem?"
I'll tell you for sure, if I could run the advertising campaign for the Democrats in November's election we wouldn't see a Republican elected from coast to coast. There is enough "No's" on record, and enough ties to crooked Fat Cats in Healthcare providers and on Wall Street to send their ship to the bottom faster than the Titanic.
It is my hope that the Democrats come out swinging, and Obama is leading the charge. Unfortunately, he seems to harbor this insane idea that he can "Play Nice" with cutthroat hard right wingers and get the job done. It won't happen.
Best Regards


Last edited by Rupert; 04-18-2010 at 05:06 PM. Reason: spell
04-18-2010, 02:28 PM   #5
Veteran Member
gokenin's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: lowell,ma
Posts: 1,899
QuoteOriginally posted by Rupert Quote
I'll tell you for sure, if I could run the advertising campaign for the Democrats in November's election we wouldn't see a Republican elected from coast to coast. There is enough "No's" on record, and enough ties to crooked Fat Cats in Healthcare providers and on Wall Street to send their ship to the bottom faster than the Titanic.
Yes because we know that all the Democrats in office are all as pure as the freshly fallen snow and they are all champions of the people and that none of them ever took any money from those evil people. Every memember of every political party is tainted with the filth of politics as usual in Washington, the only way to bring about radical change is to throw the entire lot out but that will never happen so the best we can do it point fingers at the other guy as if they caused the problem.
04-18-2010, 03:15 PM   #6
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Original Poster
As I see it

Repubs have 2 issues 1) 50 bil fund financed by the banks et. al. giving the "perception" of it's OK to fail. to be honest what they prefer (ie surprise well support you) is pointless
2)gov liquidation which wipes out everyone ("preferred" ie fat cat bonds and common stock treated equally) and is not a normal "bankruptcy ie "common shareholders" are at the bottom.........
Neither one is bad in my eyes. Care to tell me which one you prefer??
Lets talk facts..........
Repubs are just sucking air big time........
04-18-2010, 05:10 PM   #7
Veteran Member
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,123
QuoteOriginally posted by gokenin Quote
Yes because we know that all the Democrats in office are all as pure as the freshly fallen snow and they are all champions of the people and that none of them ever took any money from those evil people. Every memember of every political party is tainted with the filth of politics as usual in Washington, the only way to bring about radical change is to throw the entire lot out but that will never happen so the best we can do it point fingers at the other guy as if they caused the problem.
I won't argue your point, they are all crooked, but here is a Bill that offers some much needed regulation and "event preparation" and the right is saying "NO'....again. When Congress won't act we are dissatisfied, when they do we hear "NO"....sort it out, something is not working here, is it?
Regards!

04-18-2010, 05:24 PM   #8
Veteran Member
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,563
I have to say, Rupert, while, no, while the Dems aren't perfectly noble or all that great, generally and in effect, there's simply no comparison regarding what the GOP's been up to... and actually *done* in recent decades.

Pretty typically when they get caught out or their policies just plain *fail* they start trying to say, "It's not our deregulation policies, it's 'Politicians!' We're all the same, they're just as bad, look at how bad the Democrats are, therefore, government is the problem! We must deregulate more and get less done! Damn 'big government' Democrats! "

See how that goes? Every damn time.
04-18-2010, 06:20 PM   #9
Veteran Member
gokenin's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: lowell,ma
Posts: 1,899
Again I have no answers about what should be done and I have not read the 1336 pages of Senator Dodd's bill in regards to financial reform but after a good old google search you come up with some tidbits

Dodd financial reform bill goes too far / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

"The government is to take over not only defaulting financial companies but those “in danger of default”. Five conditions are listed to define default and in-danger-of-default. Two are straightforward—the company will be filing for bankruptcy shortly or its board or shareholders agree to a government takeover.

The other three conditions allow the government to take over even when a company is not filing for bankruptcy and its board/shareholders do not consent. What it means is that the secretary of the Treasury can decide that a company is about to collapse even if it does not look that way to other people"

"Moreover, consider that if there is any public suspicion of what’s going on, the company is dead. Once the Treasury decides a company is doing down, this decision will become self-fulfilling. That company will go down. The way the bill is written, it vastly expands government power to make arbitrary choices—like liquidate bank x but let bank y stand. A preview of this happened in 2008, when the Treasury and Fed decided to backstop Bear Stearns but not Lehman Brothers"

If you need proof of that just remember what happened to Wachovia Bank, there were no were need going out of business until public hysteria created a run on the bank that resulted in the bank having to file bankruptcy and going out of business.

From Dodds Summary

http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/FinancialReformSummary231510FINAL.pdf

The Financial Stability Oversight Council
 Expert Members: A 9 member council of federal financial regulators and an independent member will be Chaired by the Treasury Secretary and made up of regulators including: Federal Reserve Board, SEC, CFTC, OCC, FDIC, FHFA, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The council will have the sole job to identify and respond to emerging risks throughout the financial system.
Tough to Get Too Big: Makes recommendations to the Federal Reserve for increasingly strict rules for capital, leverage, liquidity, risk management and other requirements as companies grow in size and complexity, with significant requirements on companies that pose risks to the financial system.
 Regulates Nonbank Financial Companies: Authorized to require, with a 2/3 vote, nonbank financial companies that would pose a risk to the financial stability of the US if they failed be regulated by the Federal Reserve. With this provision the next AIG would be regulated by the Federal Reserve.
 Break Up Large, Complex Companies: Able to approve, with a 2/3 vote, a Federal Reserve decision to require a large, complex company, to divest some of its holdings if it poses a grave threat to the financial stability of the United States – but only as a last resort.
 Technical Expertise: Creates a new Office of Financial Research within Treasury to be staffed with a highly sophisticated staff of economists, accountants, lawyers, former supervisors, and other specialists to support the council’s work by collecting financial data and conducting economic analysis.
 Make Risks Transparent: Through the Office of Financial Research and member agencies the council will collect and analyze data to identify and monitor emerging risks to the economy and make this information public in periodic reports and testimony to Congress every year.
 Oversight of Important Market Utilities: Identifies systemically important clearing, payments, and settlements systems to be regulated by the Federal Reserve.
 No Evasion: Large bank holding companies that have received TARP funds will not be able to avoid Federal Reserve supervision by simply dropping their banks. (the Hotel California Provision)


I may be wrong but I dont really want to give the government the ability to decide which companies can and can't exist and how big they can or can't get but thats just me.
04-18-2010, 06:24 PM   #10
Veteran Member
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,123
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
I have to say, Rupert, while, no, while the Dems aren't perfectly noble or all that great, generally and in effect, there's simply no comparison regarding what the GOP's been up to... and actually *done* in recent decades.

Pretty typically when they get caught out or their policies just plain *fail* they start trying to say, "It's not our deregulation policies, it's 'Politicians!' We're all the same, they're just as bad, look at how bad the Democrats are, therefore, government is the problem! We must deregulate more and get less done! Damn 'big government' Democrats! "

See how that goes? Every damn time.

Well, I was trying to be diplomatic Ratlady, but you know I am not much good at it......so yes, I agree with you, and you are absolutely correct. The Republicans are well known for causing disasters and shifting the blame. We could list the examples all night long and not even make a dent in the number of cases where this is well documented.
If I recall, the War in Iraq and Afghanistan is now the property of Obama alone......and New Orleans was a self inflicted disaster, caused by the victims themselves.....just for starters. Phil Gramm is a non-existent character out of a Fairy Tale, and Republicans never knew him.....on and on.....Timothy McVeigh was not right wing or spurred on by right wing radicals, he was just a "confused boy", most likely a Democrat "gone bad".....yes I hear the Garbage, smell it too, and it stinks to high heaven.
Best Regards!
04-19-2010, 06:49 AM   #11
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by gokenin Quote
Again I have no answers about what should be done and I have not read the 1336 pages of Senator Dodd's bill in regards to financial reform but after a good old google search you come up with some tidbits

Dodd financial reform bill goes too far / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

"The government is to take over not only defaulting financial companies but those “in danger of default”. Five conditions are listed to define default and in-danger-of-default. Two are straightforward—the company will be filing for bankruptcy shortly or its board or shareholders agree to a government takeover.

The other three conditions allow the government to take over even when a company is not filing for bankruptcy and its board/shareholders do not consent. What it means is that the secretary of the Treasury can decide that a company is about to collapse even if it does not look that way to other people"

"Moreover, consider that if there is any public suspicion of what’s going on, the company is dead. Once the Treasury decides a company is doing down, this decision will become self-fulfilling. That company will go down. The way the bill is written, it vastly expands government power to make arbitrary choices—like liquidate bank x but let bank y stand. A preview of this happened in 2008, when the Treasury and Fed decided to backstop Bear Stearns but not Lehman Brothers"

If you need proof of that just remember what happened to Wachovia Bank, there were no were need going out of business until public hysteria created a run on the bank that resulted in the bank having to file bankruptcy and going out of business.

From Dodds Summary

http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/FinancialReformSummary231510FINAL.pdf

The Financial Stability Oversight Council
 Expert Members: A 9 member council of federal financial regulators and an independent member will be Chaired by the Treasury Secretary and made up of regulators including: Federal Reserve Board, SEC, CFTC, OCC, FDIC, FHFA, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The council will have the sole job to identify and respond to emerging risks throughout the financial system.
Tough to Get Too Big: Makes recommendations to the Federal Reserve for increasingly strict rules for capital, leverage, liquidity, risk management and other requirements as companies grow in size and complexity, with significant requirements on companies that pose risks to the financial system.
 Regulates Nonbank Financial Companies: Authorized to require, with a 2/3 vote, nonbank financial companies that would pose a risk to the financial stability of the US if they failed be regulated by the Federal Reserve. With this provision the next AIG would be regulated by the Federal Reserve.
 Break Up Large, Complex Companies: Able to approve, with a 2/3 vote, a Federal Reserve decision to require a large, complex company, to divest some of its holdings if it poses a grave threat to the financial stability of the United States – but only as a last resort.
 Technical Expertise: Creates a new Office of Financial Research within Treasury to be staffed with a highly sophisticated staff of economists, accountants, lawyers, former supervisors, and other specialists to support the council’s work by collecting financial data and conducting economic analysis.
 Make Risks Transparent: Through the Office of Financial Research and member agencies the council will collect and analyze data to identify and monitor emerging risks to the economy and make this information public in periodic reports and testimony to Congress every year.
 Oversight of Important Market Utilities: Identifies systemically important clearing, payments, and settlements systems to be regulated by the Federal Reserve.
 No Evasion: Large bank holding companies that have received TARP funds will not be able to avoid Federal Reserve supervision by simply dropping their banks. (the Hotel California Provision)


I may be wrong but I dont really want to give the government the ability to decide which companies can and can't exist and how big they can or can't get but thats just me.
So you will ignore the "history" that what we have now is broke but don't fix it.

You got a solution?

Of course, the “bailout fund” is no “bailout fund.” The idea is that banks would fund a $50 billion pool; were any to get into trouble, regulators would fire every member of management, wipe out shareholders, split the company up and sell the pieces, and tap the $50 billion fund to pay for the process and ensure the orderly dissolution of the firm. Companies like Citigroup were given bailouts during the crisis. This would be an execution (or, as Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) likes to say, a “death panel“)
Even if I was a shareholder... this would seem fair to me....... If your worried of "bank witch hunts" I doubt it. By the time the public smells "trouble" I can almost guarantee that apple will be rotten to the core.... business is quite adept at hiding their skeletons...
The regulations are a "stick", one that is clearly needed.. point was to make it soooo ugly that they behave. Much like ANY law..
Corporations are "entities" ie they are "people", and their goal is to "live". That's the basic structure..

Last edited by jeffkrol; 04-19-2010 at 06:56 AM.
04-19-2010, 07:52 AM   #12
graphicgr8s
Guest




Of course Dodd wants to correct this now. He, Ffrank, and the Obama got their money out of it already.
04-19-2010, 08:03 AM   #13
Veteran Member
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,123
QuoteOriginally posted by graphicgr8s Quote
Of course Dodd wants to correct this now. He, Ffrank, and the Obama got their money out of it already.

Yep, here we go again.....it was really Barney that ran the Govt for eight years while Jesus George was busy picking his nose....right? George, don't ever let them give you an enema...we would dearly miss your ridiculous posts here! Where do you come up with this garbage? Do you wear those Video Glasses 24/7, tuned to your real brain...FAUX News?
Beast Regards!
04-19-2010, 08:08 AM   #14
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,491
No Rupert.
It was Carter.
Not Wallstreet. Just innocent rich guys scamming the system.
Don't you know? Republicans are never guilty.
Just dig up Nixon and ask him.
04-19-2010, 08:15 AM   #15
Veteran Member
gokenin's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: lowell,ma
Posts: 1,899
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkrol Quote
So you will ignore the "history" that what we have now is broke but don't fix it.

You got a solution?

Of course, the “bailout fund” is no “bailout fund.” The idea is that banks would fund a $50 billion pool; were any to get into trouble, regulators would fire every member of management, wipe out shareholders, split the company up and sell the pieces, and tap the $50 billion fund to pay for the process and ensure the orderly dissolution of the firm. Companies like Citigroup were given bailouts during the crisis. This would be an execution (or, as Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) likes to say, a “death panel“)
Even if I was a shareholder... this would seem fair to me....... If your worried of "bank witch hunts" I doubt it. By the time the public smells "trouble" I can almost guarantee that apple will be rotten to the core.... business is quite adept at hiding their skeletons...
The regulations are a "stick", one that is clearly needed.. point was to make it soooo ugly that they behave. Much like ANY law..
Corporations are "entities" ie they are "people", and their goal is to "live". That's the basic structure..
I have never said that I don't think that a structure needs to be created to monitor the business worlds but I can't see why there has to be the creation of whole new departments why can the existing government departments not be used for these purposes? When it comes to the government having a "big stick" to wield around I worry that once you give them it that it will be used because no one fears a stick until it is used to bloody a few people in order to show the person holding it will use it.
In regards to the average shareholders being looked out for how did that go when the government took over GM. The average stockholder got like .30 to the dollar where the Unions got 1.00 to the dollar for their shares. You know that large contributors to election funds will get looked after first and the average person will get the left overs. ok thats my rant for now
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bill, committee, democrats, legislation, mcconnell, reform, senate, street, york
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sports "Highside Exit" took 1st Place in DPReview "Missed It by THAT much, Part 1" Challenge MRRiley Post Your Photos! 27 02-21-2010 08:26 PM
K1000 body "ding" - defect, accident, or "feature"? dannywho Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras 6 10-08-2009 06:11 PM
K20d-Frame Count on panals..works w/"M" & "P" mode only? arbib Pentax DSLR Discussion 1 08-28-2009 05:47 PM
"Hunger for a DA*50-135?" or "The DA*50-135 as a bird lens!" or "Iron age birds?" Douglas_of_Sweden Post Your Photos! 4 08-13-2008 06:09 AM
Anyone bring "E2" fluid or the "Digital Survival Kit" on a plane? m8o Photographic Technique 2 07-31-2007 06:20 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:26 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top