Thursday June 7, 2012, 11:07 am
The Republican notion of a well regulated economy is one in which Banksters are free to scam, insurance companies are free to rake it in without having to pay it out, and big energy is free to pollute at will with the poor and middle classes suffering the effects and paying for the clean up. Even when regulation is already the law, Republicans are fighting like hell to sabotage any regulation whatsoever on corporate criminals.
Thursday June 7, 2012, 11:26 am
The title is funny, given that Democrats have consistently resisted all responsible attempts to reform Social Security and Medicare, which are in their current form financially unsustainable. The longer it takes for us to address the problem the harder it will be to correct, but the Democrats see political advantage in pretending that the problem doesn't exist.
Thursday June 7, 2012, 11:43 am
They represent the very people they are being asked to regulate. It's like the the Goldman Sachs employees going back and forth between jobs there and at the Federal Reserve (a private bank) and the Government Regulatory (as in, Give Wall street what it wants) agencies. The foxes are not just in the hen-house, they are holding the keys.
Thursday June 7, 2012, 11:51 am
Love the 'toon,Tom. I am not going to comment on this one because I already addressed it in another of your threads. Besides......I have to remain civil, right? ....Can't dew that with TROLLS agitating....damn, I need to get out the industrial strength troll repellent again don't I......sigh.
Thursday June 7, 2012, 4:53 pm
Time to bring back and Reinstate Glass Steagall Act.
For 55 years from 1933 to 1988, the US suffered no major banking collapses or financial crisis. But in 1980, with the repeal of key provisions of the Glass Steagall regulation along with other regulations, savings and loans were once again able to take undue risks outside the long-term public interest. Peaking in 1988, the US Savings and Loans crisis was the first major collapse of US financial assets since the great depression. But damage done by deregulation wasn't finished. In 1999, another major provision of Glass Steagall, which prevented commercial banks from acting as investment banks, was removed. Nine years later, due to a massive demand for commoditized, high-interest, mortgage assets resulting from this deregulation, the US and world economy collapsed under the weight of the worst economic crisis since the great depression.
In short, we need a return to the kinds of regulations that protected our economy against the worst market excesses and manipulations. Dodd-Frank did not go far enough and we are open to further and worse collapses unless we re-establish sound banking and investment policy.
Thursday June 7, 2012, 5:19 pm
Okay, I get the Regulators' budgets are tiny & they have severely reduced manpower..BUT, they never broke up the "too-big-to-fail" banks, in fact those bailed out have bought MORE - so concentrate ALL that piddling budget on Busting the Crooks WE KNOW are there!!!!! The Usual Suspects are that way for a reason!!!! ..."Republicans have been making a concerted effort to undermine the Dodd-Frank financial reform law by denying regulators the funds needed to implement it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has even said, “the less we fund those agencies, the better America will be.”…"
Thursday June 7, 2012, 9:05 pm
Again, this all goes back to McConnell's original promise that he would spend the next four years seeing that Obama didn't get a second term. And, Paula Miller, you are just parroting what you have heard of Fox or from the Republicans about Social Security. It is not insolvent and would be in even better shape than it is if our government would pay back the money they took from it for other programs. Social Security is the only program the republicans really want to get rid of, but of course, they will have their nice pensions they have voted for themselves.
Thursday June 7, 2012, 11:43 pm
I can still hear Elizabeth Warren talking in one of her interviews --- a history of financial reform from the market failure of 1929 through the depression right up to the repeal of Glass-Stegall. What happened in 1929 is happening again, perhaps not quite as bad, but it is an indicatiion that reform and regulation are sorely needed. JP Morgan Chase just had a BIG boondoggle --- $3 billion initially, but the amount is thought to be higher --- yet these same banksters want less regulation! And they have their political whores, the Republican/Teabaggers to do their bidding!
Regulations are needed to ensure that the common good is maintained. Banksters and the Republican/Teabaggers are nothing more than thieves in 3 piece suits.
@ Paula Miller --- Try checking out the figures and information provided by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt). You'll find it far more accurate and informative than the non-sensical tainted pabulum you eat up at Faux Noise aka Fox News.
Friday June 8, 2012, 4:07 am
Seems to me the Democrats are as much of the problem here. bernanke and the Fed need to stop artificially regulating the economy and let us go back to the basic supply/demand curve. Folks are losing/have lost their retirement because savings rates are so so low. What kind of mesage does this Obama policy send to our youth? Spend, spend, spend. Glad I won't be around to see this country in 50 years!
Friday June 8, 2012, 6:35 am
Thanks Tom. SS is one program that does work but the thugs want to take it away so we can invest our money in stocks (large corporations). When the market took a down turn a few years back what would have happened if we were all investing by ourselves instead of saving in SS? Would the corporations have cared? Not as long as they keep up with their outrageous bonues.
Poor friendless Paula The Troll. No friends, no info on her page and no brain in her head! Keep watching faux noise Paula they are making a total fool out of you and others like you.
Friday June 8, 2012, 9:50 am
No reason to reward the GOP for bad behavior by voting for them. They've caused too much pain and suffering to Americans, just for their own political gain. Don't play into their hands. There can only be more pain, suffering and Hell on Earth if they come to power. As they scheme and SCAMpaign, that's great insight into how they will govern.
Friday June 8, 2012, 10:16 am
The Social Security Trust currently holds about 7 TRILLION of the national debt, our government 'borrowed' the 7 trillion during Clinton's times in office to help pay down debt held by other entities.... the reason the GOP wants to take Social Security away from us is that they can then claim they cut the national debt by 7 Trillion dollars.......................... Social Security is nowhere near bankrupt.... the GOP just wants to dissolve Social Security so it lowers the debt----------------- I have been forced by the government to pay into my social security insurance out of every paycheck for over 40 years, now they say I am not supposed to make a claim because that would take money out of the WAR fund.... why feed and house the old and infirm when it would be more fun to use the money to kill innocents in other countries????????
Friday June 8, 2012, 10:38 am
I am astonished by the number of people who seem to think that the problems with Social Security are some sort of Fox News fabrication. The Trustees who manage Medicare and Social Security have been warning us for years that these program will become insolvent, with the latest estimate being that its trust funds will run out of money by 2024 and 2033:
Perhaps those who are near retirement today will get their benefits before the system breaks down, but their children and grandchildren will pay the price for keeping this unsustainable system going those last few years. In the face of these certain facts, the willingness of Democrats to pretend that nothing needs to be done is wildly irresponsible.
Friday June 8, 2012, 11:01 am
Thanks for posting the informative article TomCat. Read and noted. The GOP and their T-party segment have gutted the financial regulatory system and wrecked our economy. These people need to be ousted from office so this country can get back to a sane and reasonable governance. Loved the cartoon TomCat
Friday June 8, 2012, 11:17 am
Thanks to Roseann, Catt and John B. Note how Republicans keep changing the subject: financial reform, but if we must discuss Social Security off topic, eliminate the income cap. Problem solved.
Friday June 8, 2012, 11:25 am
Thx Tom cat and nice pic. Now ed randell is calling for seniors to sacrifice. I have had it with my party. No spiine ne and sellouts. bad enough we got to stomach republicans and de-regulations that caused all the countries woes.. The big 3 is what these politicians want to get their hands on for their use. We know lies.
Mitt romney and his liars club. america doesn't deserve this. something will give. thx again tom...
Friday June 8, 2012, 12:58 pm
John, I suspect you know that the Federal government is growing at a slower rate under Obama that it did under Reagan. As TomCat pointed out the other day, domestic spending isn't even in the top 5 causes of the debt. Shame on you.
Friday June 8, 2012, 1:11 pm
Paula, just don't. People here know better. The SS withholding tax is just another regressive tax held on tightly by people with enough money to buy legislation. Prior to the recent decrease someone making $50,000 paid 6.2% to SS. Someone who made $500,000 paid 1.3%. Get rid of the income cap. Problem solved for at least 75 years. By then demograohics may change, especially if the GOP gets its wish to ban contraception.
Friday June 8, 2012, 2:31 pm
This one takes Misleading Title of the Month to the max. It's the libtard toadies of the Dummycrats who've been impeding financial reform, not the Repulsivans. At least some of the Repulsivans still believe in healthy capitalism, not the anemia and self-destructive paths of socialism or the deprivatory route of feudalism. Obama's a bum!
Friday June 8, 2012, 2:50 pm
Removing the income cap to Social Security would change the character of the program from a retirement program (in which participants receive benefits in proportion to their contributions) to an wealth redistribution scheme, something that Americans were always assured that Social Security was not and would never become.
But even if the income cap were removed it would save the program for about seven years, according to the Social Security Administration, and the program would still be unable to pay full benefits to people who are even now making payments into the program.
Saturday June 9, 2012, 1:13 am
noted//Yeah, age ant nothing but just a number. He is almost 11year older than me .i met him via ~~~ＡｇｅG a p L o v eＣｏＭ~~a nice place for younger women and oldermen, or older women and younger men, to interact with each other,maybe you wanna check it out or tell your friends something in one way or another all of us deeply desire to be a part of. Caring for each other, showing we care, sharing...