Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Portland, OR
8,802 posts, read 8,896,332 times
Reputation: 4512

Advertisements

Do you think you can just assess fees on banks in the name of "financial reform" and think it doesn't have a cost?

Whether it's lower salaries for workers, less dividends, fees on account holders, etc. it all has a cost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:44 PM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,771,962 times
Reputation: 24863
Yes, everything the government does has a cost. This cost is less than the cost of monopolists and crooked financiers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:44 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,040,586 times
Reputation: 15038
To answer your question... yes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:50 PM
 
Location: Portland, OR
8,802 posts, read 8,896,332 times
Reputation: 4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
To answer your question... yes.
And you understand that this ALWAYS gets passed onto the consumer correct? And if a lot of people close their accounts, it will amount to massive layoffs, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:52 PM
 
Location: NC
9,984 posts, read 10,390,291 times
Reputation: 3086
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan View Post
Do you think you can just assess fees on banks in the name of "financial reform" and think it doesn't have a cost?

Whether it's lower salaries for workers, less dividends, fees on account holders, etc. it all has a cost.
Yup, but that cost is lower then the resultant fraud and abuse that occurs when banks and securities companies are free to "police themselves." Just look at the 1930s bank panics for costs passed onto consumers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:52 PM
 
3,457 posts, read 3,622,385 times
Reputation: 1544
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan View Post
And you understand that this ALWAYS gets passed onto the consumer correct?
Uh... no. That's right-wing propaganda. Firms make profits, with which they can sometimes absorb these costs. Other times they can just reduce their dividend, or cease planned stock repurchases.

In the case of a monopoly, for example, there may be a ton of room for them to lower prices and still make a profit; they simply don't, because they are a monopoly, there's limited competition, so they don't need to lower prices.

There are SOME firms that operate on such thin margins that they MUST pass costs onto their consumers, but to pretend that costs MUST be passed onto consumers is a big fat lie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:52 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,811,904 times
Reputation: 12341
There are costs to doing, undoing and not doing anything at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:53 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,989 posts, read 44,804,275 times
Reputation: 13693
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan View Post
Do liberals understand that everything the government does has a cost?
In a word... no. Witness the current state of affairs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:55 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,989 posts, read 44,804,275 times
Reputation: 13693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus View Post
Uh... no. That's right-wing propaganda. Firms make profits, with which they can sometimes absorb these costs.
Which means investors (401k's, pension funds, etc.) earn less money, screwing guess who?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2011, 12:57 PM
 
3,457 posts, read 3,622,385 times
Reputation: 1544
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Which means investors (401k's, pension funds, etc.) earn less money, screwing guess who?
Screwing the billionaires who own most of America's publicly traded firms. Boo-hoo.

And no, I don't want to see your tired right-wing propaganda about CalPERS, and how you erroneously believe that the equity markets are predominantly owned by Joe Sixpack. I've shot you down before and I will shoot you down again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:06 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top