I see, so you just want to talk about the bailout. You don’t really want to have a discussion about Obama’s Presidency. Your thread your rules I just want to make sure I understand.
And by the way, I don’t blame you for not wanting to talk about Obama’s Presidency because it was a total train wreck. Since you are forbidding me to list the many. many reasons why this is a fact I will end it here and wish you all the best with your very limited thread on the bailout.
Oh one more thing, if you ever want to get into a real discussion of the Obama Presidency my offer still stands.
Naw…I think most on this site know that Obama was a raging failure as POTUS. I am not going to beat a dead horse. Like I said I had hoped that you were launching a full scale defense of his Presidency but that is not the case…so be it.
Once again have fun in your thread and I will stay out.
The banks should have been allowed to fail. Instead, the bailout of Goldman was a ruse to justify the codification of SIFIs in Dodd-Frank. Regulating trades among the big boys is a wet dream to the far left and they got it.
Not surprised you live in a poor area by any means. Look at any voting map. There is no debate. The south is monolithic only to people with little to no familiarity with it. “Deep South”? What is that, Mississippi?
I walk the UES with the same people I walk Buckhead and Palm Beach with.
Heightened regulation was part of the Faustian bargain banks struck in exchange for a helpful bailout - but when it came time to write the law and regulations, the banks became Mephistopheles, especially Goldman Sachs. Forget the far left - the big banks are glad Dodd Frank is in place…it’s helped them consolidate the industry and erect barriers to entry.
Democrats were once famous anti-monopolists, but they sold their populist souls. Doing so was one of the biggest mistakes of Obama and the gentry liberal wing of the party that rose to dominance under Obama.
Neither helps a free market or protects new business. Totalitarian states depend on oligopolies because they’re easier to control. I assume by “the banks” you mean Goldman. And yes, they love the SIFI designation. Lehman and others failed and numerous smaller banks have been swallowed up. The far left and Goldman make strange bedfellows, but money and power aren’t driven by ideology.
Doubtful. You still haven’t traveled outside of the trailer park to meet southerners who aren’t poor or right wing, or looked at a voting map. I’m not going to sit you down and guide the crayon.
I could write a book. Just a few limited examples off the top of my head.
Through Obama’s “clean power plan” coal fired powered plants that couldnt afford the multi million dollar retrofit were shuttered. As you know with any plant there’s thousands of little jobs and products that go to support that plant (boots, uniforms, parts, contractors, coal mines etc…). This drove up energy costs for consumers. This was by design and was done by executive fiat.
The Keystone Pipeline was delayed for Obama’s entire presidency. Because Warren’s Trains are somehow safer than a pipeline.
The National Labor Relations Board (executive agency) sued to stop boeing from building a plant in South Carolina. That delayed the project considerably.
Even though it’s Congress that controls taxation a President can influence their agenda. Our repatriation rules are the most draconian and punishing on earth. Our government is literally telling businesses “we don’t want you to bring your trillions in cash back to the US” It wpuldn’t matter if they paid dividends, invested, bought companies. There’s so much wealth bringing that cash into the US could build.
Hardly, my undereducated friend. Did you ever go back and read your ignorance to which I responded?
pfury wrote: “People like to think that socialized HC benefits mostly the left and rarely the right. Those people have also clearly never lived in a poor right leaning area.”
you responded:,“E.g., the entire South.”
My counterexamples went over your head. Trailer park. Get out of it and explore.