By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 03 April 2013
Edit Thread
easyrider said:
Kasz216 said:
easyrider said:

Obama is a corporatist and so are Republicans if not worse.  Republicans haven't balanced a budget in 50 years and are completely owned by the banks. I find it funny you got a problem with this. Republicans love this corporate take over and no regulation. I think  you not sure what side stands for.

Elizabeth Warren most likely will run for pres. Now don't stand their and act like you like regulation. MY GOD>  

 


Actually bank lobby support has been largely more a democratic thing.  Heck even 3 of the Keating 5 were Democrats.   Banks are mostly situated in democratic states.

The ironic thing about Dodd-Frank was that Chris Dodd and Barney Frank were the two biggest bank schill's in congress.  Hence why Dodd-Frank is essentially set up to destroy small banks, and allow big banks to get bigger.  (which is why the to big to fail banks have gotten even bigger.)

 

Also... Elizabeth Warren has about as much chance fo winning a Democratic primary for Presient as Ron Paul did for the Republicans.  (I'm assuming he's done running anyway.)

LOL did you read what I said? No you didn't . I said that there where not many but there are more. Some regulation, is better then known. You are just like the people on this site and their systems. You never will down your side. If you can't see the massive proof in front of you, I'm not sure you see anything. Sorry but this remark is the same thing I see all over this site. Biased and basically trying to  lesson the story by using comparisons that don't matter at all.

both sides are corrupt. You love chant for your team and you use a lot of bad data.

First off... I don't have a team... and all of the data i use is... well data collected normally.

Secondly, the main problem with the GFC was the banks who fucked up were too big to fail... correct? 

Name something in Dodd Frank that limits bank size?  Also, explain the the big banks are now a bigger part of the banking system despite Dodd Frank.

Regulations, like taxations are a cost.  Therefore, just like a flat tax.  Flat regulations hit poorer small banks harder.

Therefore increased regulations are going to hit poorer buisness harder, which means smaller buisnesses are going to be put out of buisness/bought by bigger conglomerates who can deal with regulations more effectivly.


I'm curious which part you actually disagree with there.  I've got no issue with regulations.  However just like taxation.  Regulations should be progressive and get stricter as companies get larger.