Discussion:A question worth asking

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> General Chat --> A question worth asking

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

20 September 2010

I suspect both Crow and Snowbird might agree with this premise.

Snowbird (talk|edits) said:

20 September 2010
Yes, I agree with the premise ... but probably from a different viewpoint than Crow. This is what "Too big to fail" was trying to address. There are some conservative economists who believe that the banks and GMC should have been allowed to fail. They argue the down turn would have been severer, but shorter lived. The deposits were protected and there were strong banks to pick up the pieces. Also,the same with GMC. Others suggest the risks were too great.

There is a Churchill quote I like to use about democracy that I believe applies to capitalism and the banking system. "No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." The same can be said about our banking system. It has it flaws, but it is better than the system of 100 + years ago and it is better than nationalized systems.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

20 September 2010
Wall Street is well on the way to burying this whole story. To the average American, Madoff was the banking crisis. I actually think they were holding Madoff for such a day as this. He gave his life for Wall Street. The ultimate red herring.

There's so much guilt to go around all you can say is that it shows all the signs of a corrupt and decadent society (decadent meaning in decline). A society on it's last legs.

Did any winners come out of this? Who were the winners? Most Americans never stop to think that long.

The only wealth most Americans had was the equity in their homes, and a lot of that was stolen outright before the crisis hit. That wealth was targeted on purpose. And both political parties let it happen, and enabled it to happen.

Even after the crisis hit, the banks were protected against the dwindling collateral (which they and the Fed. juiced up to begin with). But who got their hands on all the equity before the bell tolled? Or who benefited from the paper game of the false real estate market in general? Musical chairs. Oh well. The taxpayer to the rescue.... Some people can't lose, and they learn nothing because they don't have to learn.

To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.
Personal tools