Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Non toccate le balene finanziarie

Resteranno troppo grandi per fallire, ovvero dei mostri, quelli che
possono fare scherzetti tipo -9% a Wall Street in 5 minuti.
Un emendamento che voleva limitarne le dimensioni e' stato segato.
Non esiste spazio per la democrazia, quando delle istituzioni private
possono manipolare il mercato, decidere di farsi finanziare dai
contribuenti, manipolare i parlamentari.
The White House gets its way again.
They get their way on two measures that would have given the people at
least a little control of the “too big too fail” banking system.
But how they got it, well that might just be the REAL story of the
day.
“I mean this really sounds like market manipulation to me. This is
outrageous.”
The “HOPE” of real getting real banking reform under this
administration is dead.
Dead on arrival. What is left is the “Chris Dodd Big Banking Giveaway
Plan” which is to banking “reform” what Obamacare was to “healthcare
reform”.
Last night the Brown/Kaufman amendment was shot down by a vote of
61-33.
The amendment would have broken up the largest 6 banks and then set
limits on the size these institutions could become so their failure
could not threaten the entire system. Thus… “too big too fail” would
have been a thing of the past.
27 senate democrats voted with the large majority of republicans to
kill the amendment and for the most part, the 30 who voted for the
bill were either coming up on an election cycle this year, or they
switched their votes after seeing the bill was going to fail. A clever
little trick legislators use to end up on the “right side” of a voting
issue.
Though top Obama administration officials have not publicly opposed
the amendment, its leading economists have opposed ending Too Big To
Fail simply by breaking up the nation’s financial behemoths.
Austan Goolsbee and Larry Summers have both fought back against this
idea, as has Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
… Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Dodd of Connecticut spoke against the
amendment.
Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) was indignant. “I don’t understand this Brown-
Kaufman amendment. Basically, what it says is if you’re successful…
you’re going to break them up? I mean, where does this stop? Do we
take McDonald’s on?”  Huffpo
This took place yesterday while another popular piece of legislation
was being gutted by one of its authors.
Change.
Ron Paul is livid and he has pulled his support from the “Audit the
Fed” bill.
I know that sounds crazy… Ron Paul has been pushing for this kind of
accountability from the for-profit Federal Reserve Bank for decades.
But yesterday, when the bill looked as if it were going to be passed,
Ron Paul pulled his support and is actively campaigning against it.
He has good reason.
In a move frighteningly reminiscent of the now infamous Air Force One
flight where single-payer advocate and “Obamacare” opposition leader
Dennis Kucinich was brought before the anointed One, Barack Obama, for
a little position changing “chat”, Bernie Sanders was brought in to
the White House late yesterday to work out a “compromise” on the
“Audit the Fed” bill.
No one knows why the “compromise” was even needed with the Pro-Banking
Industry Obama White House since by all accounts, the bill had the
votes to pass in the Senate as it was.
But, Bernie Sanders was brought before “the man” and had a little pow-
wow in the White House.  Since Sanders is one of the authors of the
bill, he was authorized to change it, and “CHANGE” is what the White
House got…
Thursday afternoon, Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin voiced the
administration’s opposition to the audit proposal. But hours later,
following negotiations with Sanders, Wolin withdrew the opposition.
Raw Story
“Bernie Sanders has sold out and sided with Chris Dodd to gut Audit
the Fed in the Senate. His “compromise” is what the Adminstration and
banking interests want: they’ll allow the TARP and TALF to be audited,
but no transparency of the FOMC, discount window operations or
agreement with foreign central banks. We need to take aciton and stop
this!”  Ron Paul
The audit is only allowed back to December 2007, which leaves most of
the work of the Fed’s Open Markets Committee in the dark — they were
the ones who were supposed to be watching over Wall Street when they
were laying the groundwork for the collapse.  And according to Jay
Newton-Small of Time Magazine, there will only be one audit — it will
not be ongoing.

 Resteranno troppo grandi per fallire
Come Lehman Brothers.
PP


infatti LB era troppo grande, e fallendo ha creato un casino. Un
secolo fa negli USA crearono le leggi antitrust proprio per smembrare
le LB dell'epoca e il loro enorme potere. Addirittura il liberista
Reagan spezzò il monopolio dell'At&t, perchè anche i più idioti dei
liberisti di 30 anni fa sapevano benissimo che il libero mercato tende
naturalmente al monopolio, e quindi se non c'è il tanto deprecato
stato che ogni tanto fa a fettine i monopoli e i trust, il sistema
collasserebbe in 5 minuti perchè il monopolio è la fine della libera
concorrenza.
Oggi invece si sta "uscendo" dalla crisi creando istituzioni
finanziarie ANCORA PIU' GRANDI di quelle che c'erano 2 anni fa. Così
la prossima volta non ci sarà il dubbio se intervenire o meno, sarà
semplicemente impossibile farlo perchè GS and co saranno più grandi
del PIL USA. E il voto di cui si parla nell'articolo dimostra oltre
ogni ragionevole dubbio chi è che controlla chi, tra la politica e le
grandi banche. Un secolo fa lo Sherman Act passò all'unanimità, tanto
per fare un confronto. Oggi anche un solo passettino in tale direzione
viene stroncato sul nascere, e da entrambi i partiti.

 le LB dell'epoca e il loro enorme potere. 
Ma non dire troiate. LB era una delle *7* banche d'affari di WS.
Bombacci, non ti intendi di liberismo, di antitrust, di wall street, di 
banche d'affari, n� di cose grandi.
Tb (bieco illuminista)
-- 
Vamos a matar, companeros [cit]

 banche d'affari, né di cose grandi.
Quoto.
PP

 Ma non dire troiate. LB era una delle *7*
e ho scritto per caso da qualche parte che era l'unica banca al mondo?


Rileggi quello che hai scritto sull'antitrust.
Fatti delle domande. Datti delle risposte.
Poi accetta la sconfitta con dignit�.


 Vate a matar, companero [cit]

 Solo un idiota del tuo stampo puo' sostenere tesi tanto ottuse.
Nazial� deve avere problemi a contare, quando esaurisce le cinque dita 
della mano.


 Rileggi quello che hai scritto sull'antitrust.
dove ho scritto che l'antitrust lavora solo quando c'è UNA sola banca?

 dove ho scritto che l'antitrust lavora solo quando c'� UNA sola banca?
Non ti intendi di capire quello che scrivi.
Ok.


 Non so perdere.
eh....


Seri problemi a far stare in una mano le oltre 200 banche "normali"
fallite negli USA.
Le Big Bank oramai controllano oltre il 50% del mercato USA.
Spiegaci il TARP  somaro, invece di sgamare vigliaccamente come al
solito

 fallite negli USA.
E allora LB era grande o piccola?
Nazzial�, perdi sabbia e ti sgonfi da solo: non hai nemmeno il livello 
di un punching ball di terza mano.
