Esto ya no tiene nombre. Ahora los ciudadanos seremos responsables por ley, de que empresas muy grandes no quiebren, hayan invertido como hayan invertido, hayan dado bonuses según les ha parecido, hayan repartido dinero según hayan querido, etc... Sin comentarios. Esto es puro corporativismo (empresas y gobierno todo uno).

Al menos parece que se está encontrando bastante oposición de Republicanos y Democratas por igual. ¿Cuanto tardarán en proponer algo parecido por aquí?

Editorial: Obama Administration Under Attack from All Quarters Over Attempt to Institutionalize ‘Too Big to Fail’ - American Banking News

Editorial: Obama Administration Under Attack from All Quarters Over Attempt to Institutionalize ‘Too Big to Fail’

Saying it would give the executive branch far too much “unprecedented power,” both Republicans and Democrats struck out at the bill introduced to battle against financial risk in the economy.

Responses were it would not only institutionalize “too big to fail,” but would also offer “permanent, unlimited bailout authority,” to the executive branch.

What it essentially does is take away the checks and balances of Congress and allow implementation of taxes and spending without congressional approval, a major reason for the increasing attacks from all quarters of the political spectrum. It would evidently, based on whatever an administration would want, allow the transfer of money to Wall Street from the Treasury whenever they wanted.

In other words, huge Wall Street firms could use the taxpayers’ money as their piggy bank whenever they went looking for a handout from the President and his people, based on any type of alleged or supposed crisis. We all know where that would go.

Embattled Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner tried to make a case for the proposed legislation saying, “Without the ability for the government to step in and manage the failure of a large firm and contain the risk of the fire spreading, we will be consigned to repeat the experience of last fall. It’s a really stark, simple thing.” He’s even saying that with a straight face.

Geithner attempted to blast the bankruptcy code as not being an “effective tool” for handling large, global financial institutions which fail, citing Lehman Brothers. He added that government interference would only apply to banks, while other financial firms could continue to go the bankruptcy route.

As usual, the executive branch’s response is to increase regulations and power, while attempting to limit the feedback and checks other branches of the government would provide so they don’t run amok like they have been even under the current economic conditions.

The bill even allows for increased powers for the Federal Reserve, which has been a major culprit in the the global economic crisis in the first place, and continues to be as it keeps on printing money at unprecedented levels.

New powers afforded the Federal Reserve would include restricting the pay and bonuses of executives, limiting credit exposure, forcing bankruptcies and blocking acquisitions. This of course is an agency which battles and refuses to allow its books to be audited by anyone. They only let out the information they choose to with the faux audits currently used.

As far as the FDIC, they would be allowed to offer more credit to solvent banks and other financial corporations in order to allegedly protect against the financial markets becoming unstable again.

Leaders of these governmental entities, like Sheila Bair at the FDIC, assert taxpayers won’t flip the bill for this but the financial companies will. But that’s far from the truth, as when money is extracted from banks and other financial institutions, it is passed on to consumers through higher prices for products and services they offer. It’s just a hidden consumer tax rather than one that is up front and easy to identify.

The idea that you can take all the risk out of life in general, and the financial sector in particular, is a messianic complex and not one based in reality. Lawmakers rightly oppose this as all of us should, and we need to go back to allowing the market to make these decisions and not megalomaniac members of this confused and socialist administration trying to take over the free market, which has only partially existed for some time as it is.

__________________

Ninguna respuesta?


Pues yo diré algo:

CHANGE !!!


Qué broma de "cambio histórico". Ni un año ha necesitado para decepcionar profundamente..

¿Te he hablado alguna vez de las hipoteticas corporaciones-estado que habria en el futuro? A ver si encuentro algun mensaje viejo mio que hable de ello...

Añado: Enlaces a mis pensamientos y preocupaciones sobre el tema

Peak Oil, Banca y Ladrilleros

Vale ,nos vamos ala mierda dentro de par de años...

Socialismo, pura cuestion de supervivencia

Julio Anguita: "Hace tiempo que renuncié a plantear el comunismo como alternativa"

Obviamente se nota cierta progresion en mis ideas, pero da una buena imagen de como veo el asunto.

__________________

Se crean además consecuencias insospechadas :

-los gigantes rejcatados tendrán indudablemente acceso al capital a un coste muy inferior al de sus competidores pequeños y medianos, pudiendo por tanto seguir absorbiendo competencia y hacerse todavía más grandes (y peligrosos)

-el subsidio que esto supone les permite ofrecer mejores productos en mercados externos, estando sujetos por tanto a demandas por competencia desleal:

Como dijeron los castellano manchegos tras la caída de CCM: Me quedo más tranquilo ahora llevando mi dinerito a Citibank

No estarás pensando en Freddie and Fannie por casualidad?

__________________