I moved this over from PB because it should be of interest here. This an illustration of the blatant lying Democrats and their willing accomplices in the mainstream media are doing in this campaign.
Oldtimer said:This was written by Robert Reich... He served as the twenty-second United States Secretary of Labor, serving under President Bill Clinton from 1993 to 1997... He is a former Harvard professor and is currently a professor at the University of California, Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy....
He is saying the exact same thing I've said for some time "If They're Too Big To Fail, They're Too Damn Big Period-- Where has all our anti-trust and monopoly regulation been :???: It fits perfectly with why JBS should not be able to buy up the Packing/Feeding industry...
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
If They're Too Big To Fail, They're Too Big Period
According to Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, the biggest Wall Street banks now getting money from the government are just "too big to fail.” Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke uses a different euphemism – he calls them “systemically critical.” The point is that if any of them goes down, it could take the whole financial system with it. So we taxpayers have to keep them up.
We’re hearing the same argument elsewhere in Washington for saving General Motors. It’s just “too big to fail.” So Congress is considering a bailout that would keep GM afloat and sweeten a merger between GM and Chrysler.
Pardon me for asking, but if a company is too big to fail, maybe – just maybe – it’s too big, period.
We used to have public policies to prevent companies from getting too big. Does anyone remember antitrust laws? Somewhere along the line policymakers decided that antitrust would only be used where there was evidence a company had so much market power it could keep prices higher than otherwise.
We seem to have forgotten that the original purpose of antitrust law was also to prevent companies from becoming too powerful. Too powerful in that so many other companies depended on them, so many jobs turned on them, and so many consumers or investors or depositors needed them – that the economy as a whole would be endangered if they failed. Too powerful in that they could wield inordinate political influence – of a sort that might gain them extra favors from Washington.
Maybe the biggest irony today is that Washington policymakers who are funneling taxpayer dollars to these too-big-to-fail companies are simultaneously pushing them to consolidate into even bigger companies. They’ve prodded Bank of America to take over Merrill-Lynch and Countrywide. JP Morgan to acquire Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns. And now they’re urging General Motors to absorb Chrysler.
So we’re ending up with even bigger giants, with even more power over the economy and politics, subsidized by taxpayers, and guaranteed never to fail because they’re just ... too big.
http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/10/if-theyre-too-big-to-fail-theyre-too.html
RobertMac said:You side step and ignore the point because I know you are smart enough to see it. There is a reason the law requires you to hear BOTH SIDES of a dispute in your court, but you only present one side in your politics!!!Oldtimer said:RobertMac said:This is a short blurb from an article I found on a quick search, but you can get the idea...
Reich was right in the middle of merger mania...in fact, he was King of Mergers at the time. Now in 2008, he is placing the blame on the Bush administration. This illustrates the blatant lie of this entire campaign by the Democrats...they are a big part of today's economic problem, if not the cause. Yet with help from the biased mainstream media, they have put all the blame on Republicans and brainwashed supposedly intelligent people into blindly believing this economy melt down was the results of the last 8 years.
How can you people be so stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!
Does this open your eyes at all Oldtimer???????????????
There is no doubt Bill Clinton supported the neocon philosophy...Alan Greenspan has even said that- along with saying he was actually more "fiscally conservative" than the late/current Republicans have been- which is also quite evident....And this neocon philosophy has been shown lately to be a totally disastrous failure....Its good to see folks realizing that....
But what your article does not say is how much MORE corporate mergers took off unchallenged even AFTER 2000.....
The point is that the Democrats(and you) are lying to the American people...the Democrats and their policies are as much or more the cause of our economic problem as "the last 8 years". The fact is that an Obama presidency and liberal Democrat control of Congress will make the economy worse and will move the Federal government away from the Constitution and toward socialism...Obama has said that is what he is going to do!!! I disagree with a lot of issues with McCain(and Bush), but McCain is one of the few in Washington that has actually tried to change Federal government spending habits...Obama will be more of the last 8 years, only worse.
Again, Democrats are lying about their involvement and what a future under them and Obama will be...and you are helping to perpetuate the lies!!!