Downsized
July 1st, 2010 | Editorial Cartoons | 21 Comments
Tweet
The one most important thing that almost everyone agreed that financial reform HAD to do was to break up the “too big to fail” banks, so that we taxpayers wouldn’t be forced to bail them out again if Wall Street continued its reckless ways. So, of course, that was the one thing the financial reform bill nearing the vote in Congress fails to do. I keep thinking that the members of Congress cannot possibly care even less about the people they supposedly serve (us, not the banks), but they keep surprising me with how much sway the lobbyists have over them. One would have thought that the current recession, now in its 30th month with no sign of ending, would have emboldened our representatives in Washington sufficiently to actually break with their corporate masters on this one issue, but it wasn’t to be.
Topics: banks, cartoon, Congress, financial reform, opinion, too big to fail, Wall Street
E-mail
Facebook
RSS
Twitter
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ed Stein. Ed Stein said: New blog post: Downsized http://edsteinink.com/2010/07/01/downsized/ [...]
Ed,
Jerry Brammer has often accused me of being dense, so I don’t feel badly asking for clarification on this cartoon.
We have a growing government and a decreasing private sector and this cartoon portrays it exactly opposite. I don’t get it.
You’re right about the dense part, Don.
This has nothing to do with a growing government and a decreasing private sector.
This is about BIG BANKS and Congress and who has the power.
As they say, though, people see what they want to see.
The legislative and executive branches have the power, they just don’t have the spine.
“they just don’t have the spine” is a euphemism for something. What would that be?
The idea we have a “growing” government–after 30 -odd years of bad government beginning with Reagan and finished by the Worst, is a talking point figment of the imaginations of US Conservatives. It sounds good to the resentful and self-annointed persecuted whiners, I suppose, but after years of putting rightwing ideologues in place who had no intention of enforcing the laws (James Watt come to mind?), to the dismantling of good legislation like Glass-Steagall, to the spectacle of a nitwit graduate of Falwell’s Brainwashing school dispensing Executive Branch jobs in on the basis of personal pledges to the Worst , the idea that we have a growing government is simply nonsense. The real growth in the COST of government (a different thing entirely) is, of course, primarily the fault of the administration of George W. Bush and Ol’Deficits don’t matter” CXheney, with its unfunded wars, unfunded medicare mandates, and ill-advised tax cuts for the rich(in the time of war). But that reality, of course, doesn’t fit the fantasies of the resentful and self-annointed persecuted class, so they keep slapping their flippers and braying like loudmouth seals at the zoo, honking about “big gummint’.
I take it I won’t see you at the Tea Party today.
Well, I disagree that we need to break up “too big to fail” banks. Look at the Great Depression. We didn’t have huge banks back then, just small banks where one failure led to another. The problem is NOT the size of the banks, but rather needing a mechanism to take over such banks when necessary. And the funding of that mechanism should come from the banking industry itself, not from taxpayers.
Wanting small banks is just another yearning for the past. We can’t return to the past, but only work to improve the present and prepare for the future. And you can bet that, if America restricts itself to small banks, the rest of the world won’t. OK, we’ve already abandoned manufacturing, so now finance? What are we Americans going to do, grow turnips and pray for the Rapture?
No doubt the financial reform bill could be better, but if it couldn’t get through Congress, a perfect bill would be useless. And that’s almost entirely the fault of Republicans who are determined to oppose EVERYTHING, just as a political tactic. (It seems to be working, too.) So I have to laugh when liberals complain that bills don’t go far enough. Well, of course they don’t! They only go as far as possible.
In this case, I’d say that the financial reform bill is pretty darned good – NOT perfect, not at all, but not bad, either. I’d rather that money be accumulated from the financial industry BEFORE it is needed, but that had to go in order to pass the bill at all. So be it. There are no doubt a lot of ways it could be improved, but what good is that if it won’t pass a Republican filibuster?
And as I say, I don’t think that breaking up “too big to fail” banks is a good idea, anyway. That wouldn’t solve the problem, not at all.
I love the way you all change the current problems to be Republicans fault alone. NOT the case . It is the fault of the voters for electing the same crooks over and over again and The Democrates had 8 years of Clinton and the last 18 months of compliete control of both houses and the President to do lots of things good for the country. Instead they just found ways to fill the pockets of family , friends and Banks. It amazes me how quickly the banks could give out big bones if they were broke. AND WHEN CALLED OUT ON THAT THEY WANTED TO GIVE THE MONEY BACK SO THEY COULD KEEP THE BONUS. They are all paid way to much to begin with. We have become a nation of Greed and we will eat our young for another dollar.
Er, apparently you haven’t been on this planet long. Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, and the Republicans swept Congress only two years later. And if you haven’t seen how “complete control” of Congress has worked when the GOP filibuster EVERYTHING, I can only believe that you haven’t been paying attention.
I have a suggestion for a new Constitutional Amendment.
The Amendment should read: “Congress shall make no law respecting, supporting, or favoring any business establishment or corporation.” “Only Individual Persons shall have the unobstructed right of Free Speech and the Vote.” Additionally; “No business establishment or corporation shall be allowed to publicly support or oppose any political candidate.”
I believe if that amendment had been added to the Constitution a long time ago, we might not be in the mess we are in now.
WCG, You are right after two years people woke up, History will repeat itself again this next year. But if the Democrates could just get along then they could really do something, fortunitaly they can not agree on who gets to steal the most when in power so we have grid lock. Like I said if we would not reelect the same crooks over and over again we the taxpayer would have a better change at a better government. But history has shown that our form of govenment eats its self from within in a couple hundred years.
I’m really curious about a couple of examples that “history has shown that our form of govenment eats its self from within in a couple hundred years”.
I guess the alternative is a monarchy or dictatorship that last thousands of years?
They evolve over time. They become corrupt then weak then have been changed by outside or inside forces. Google it. I try to keep it simple.
Google what? Can’t come up with a single example?
If you can not type I can not help you.
I understand. Not much you can do when you just make stuff up and someone calls you on it.
Not much of a history buff are you. Look at the Greeks for starters and go forward from there. Have a nice day.
LOL, I never would have imagined that you were comparing our form of government with the acient Greek democracy. Actually, it wasn’t very democratic as women and slaves were excluded. Is that where we got that idea?
Anyway, the were conquered by Alexander the Great. That was soon followed by the rise of the Roman Empire. The 3-400 years that the Greek and Roman “democracies” lasted were pretty long for the times where folks were getting conquered on a pretty regular basis. I’m not sure where you get the “eats its self from within” business. Maybe you’ve been reading the new Texas history books.
Glad to see you are starting to read , Keep reading and your comp. will surely catch up. Roman Democarcy was a farce keep reading.
You having a good time thinking you’re sending me on a snipe hunt? Not likely that I’m spending any more time on this one. I still haven’t figured out whether you are putting us all on or if you’re just clueless. I know which way I’m leaning, though, and it’s becoming clear that trying to have a debate is simply a waste of time. So, I’m going to stop wasting it. Good hunting…..