Home | About | Donate

In Fact, Sanders Has a Very Clear Plan on How to Break Up Too-Big-to Fail Banks


#1

In Fact, Sanders Has a Very Clear Plan on How to Break Up Too-Big-to Fail Banks

Andrea Germanos, staff writer

Following suggestions that he somehow "bungled" when asked about how he would, if elected president, break up Wall Street's largest and most dangerous institutions, the Bernie Sanders campaign on Tuesday offered a detailed explanation of how he would end "too-big-to-fail' banks."


#2

Here it comes, the demonizing of Bernie. But the good news; at least the MSM is starting to take Bernie seriously. You have to like the term: " IF BERNIE IS ELECTED PRESIDENT!"


#3

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#4

As an engineer for a regulatory agency who once got raked-over during a deposition by a sleazy lawyer representing a corporation that killed a worker due to their careless incompetence, I know exactly how these attacks on Bernie work. It goes way beyond just the political system - to our overarching capitalist, anti-solidaristic society. Such a society openly ridicules, attacks, and punishes all people of honesty and integrity. They deliberately corner an honest and straightforward person. The honest person is screwed if they provide an honest answer (especially if the answer has any complexity so that it takes longer than a single sentence) and the honest person is screwed if s/he attempts to reply to the lying accusers with a lie.


#5

This is a very tricky topic, which is why the corporate owned media asked the question. Breaking up the big banks and restoring Glass-Steagall would not change the power structure, just as breaking up the Standard Oil Trust did not change Rockefeller's control over the disparate pieces. The big banks would still own the "Federal" Reserve, which means the U.S. would remain a vassal of the international banking cartel, and would not be a sovereign nation. Bernie understands this, but he can only go far is explaining this, since every President who challenged a privately controlled central bank was assassinated (except Andrew Jackson, who survived more than a half dozen attempts on his life). But taken at face value, this does show that Sanders is a Social Democrat, who believes in capitalism, but wants better safety nets. The problem is, for openers, if you don't take the Fed out of private hands, nothing that Bernie wants will ever happen. The Fed, as the printing press, is the source of the cartel's power. http://coloradopublicbanking.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-view-from-top-of-power-pyramid.html


#6

A culture of bullying, dishonesty, and gangsterism, like a fractal, operating at every scale.


#7

Well, it is the US congress that must write and enact legislation - all the president can do is provide guidance on the legislation's wording and sign the final congressionally passed product.

(Maybe you didn't know this because you are Canadian (?) where the PM can simply order his majority "enact this!" and be done with it - a system I'd much prefer BTW - no gridlock)

Better that the president use existing rulemaking authority already given to the appropriate Cabinet Department by existing legislation. For example, the EPA can promulgate new and upcoming CO2 emission rules under the 1970 Clean Air Act because it was written broadly enough to allow CO2 to be regarded as a regulate-able pollutant even though nobody would ever have considered it such in 1970. The polluters tried to challenge it - going to the Supreme Court and they lost.

I'm a financial illiterate, but almost certainly the Treasury Department has existing authority to break up large banks if it is motivated to.


#9

This is what you get with our education system: presumably college educated journalists don't understand our government, or laws, or even basic grammar rules. So it's easy to write a hit piece for a bunch of other idiots who don't understand enough in the first place to have a valid opinion, let alone the education needed to articulate that opinion clearly.

Stay the Course. Feel the Bern. Ante Up for Wyoming, New York and Connecticut and let's put a nail in Witchy Poo's candidacy!


#10

Remember Gandhi's theory of organizing:

  1. First they ignore you
  2. Then they ridicule you
  3. Then they attack you
  4. Then (with enough work and organizing) you win.

It seems that we are finally past stage 1 and we are pretty much leapfrogging to stage 3...


#11

There's already been some demonizing, but they are going to raise it to a whole new level. He's become too big a threat to the status quo powers-that-be.


#12

What a bunch of B/S. What does a Leader do? He delegates. He says I want this done to those who's job it is to do whatever and he sees that it gets done. If not done correctly, it's do-over time until it is correct. To say he doesn't know what he's talking about shows that he really does know what he talking about and he has people scared S-Less. Rock-On Bernie, get 'em runnin'.


#13

The storm is coming, because the closer Bernie gets to the nomination, the more Bernie will be attacked by the opposition, you can be sure of that!

The political hit men will be relentless, but I do not expect it will work because of Bernie's integrity. But what is a little worrisome to me, is if Bernie wins New York, Oregon and California they may go to the next step like they did with RFK after he won the California primary and people like Edgar Hoover and the CIA were in a panic mode about RFK becoming President and taking revenge on them for assassinating his brother.


#14

SSSSHHHHHHH...not so fast, Please? Let's not go there yet, okay? Thanks


#15

Has Sanders yet endorsed the Bank Whistleblowers United plan? Jill Stein has:
Jill Stein endorses Bank Whistleblowers United plan to break stranglehold of big banks over our economy & democracy:
http://www.jill2016.com/jill_stein_endorses_bank_whistleblowers_plan_to_break_stranglehold_of_big_banks_over_our_economy_democracy


#16

It has NOTHING to do with the education system. Nice Koch-Brothers' style stealth attack on this public institution.

It has to do with the corporate control of mass media and newspapers. When content is controlled to produce specific results-in the form of manufacturing consensus--almost all journalists stay On Message. If they don't, they will be shown the door; and plenty of unemployed or yet-to-be employed writers & journalists would gladly take their jobs.

In other words, as in most things: it's about POWER.

Centralized ownership means that the majority of working journalists work for established entities. They are corporate and Conservative. They push memes favorable to their own agendas.


#17

There are laws on the books like RICO and when entities begin to set up monopolistic controls, that qualifies.

The laws used to prosecute felonious banksters during the days of the S & L Crisis are still on the books. The problem is there's no muscle through which to prosecute.

When the N.Y. State attorney was gunning for this very thing, a sudden exposure of his expensive time spent with a $1000 an hour call girl brought that to an immediate halt.

Surveillance works when it favors the objectives of those calling the shots.


#18

Well, the most interesting point is that Clinton had no idea how to do it and Bernie has some idea. That is the abstract I take from this. She will take millions, he will take $24.


#19

Besides breaking up the too big to fail banks, I hope Bernie also breaks up the monopoly that the media has.


#20

No one should take the Washington Post seriously. They have been putting out anti-Bernie schlock for some time.


#21

This is why it is VERY hard to even consider voting for Clinton. This is what the Clinton's do - twist the facts to their own personal gain. Pretty low of her.