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)
 
Old 07-18-2016, 09:20 PM
mm4 mm4 started this thread
 
5,711 posts, read 3,976,240 times
Reputation: 1941

Advertisements

Why do progressive leftists hate the Glass-Steagall Act so much that they want to keep it repealed?

Hillary Clinton, Wall Street's errand runner, wants to keep it repealed after her husband repealed it. And Bernie, who loves too-big-to-fail, endorses keeping it repealed.

 
Old 07-18-2016, 09:23 PM
 
2,464 posts, read 1,285,564 times
Reputation: 668
You do realize that Sanders lost a primary to Hillary, it is customary for the one who lost to endorse the one who won....now the better question, how many speeches and rallies has Sanders given for Hillary? How much as Sanders campaigned for Hillary? That is what you have to look at to see if a politician really supports someone they have endorsed.
 
Old 07-18-2016, 09:24 PM
 
2,248 posts, read 2,346,625 times
Reputation: 4234
We're screwed for the next four years either way if you ask me. I can't stand that pandering witch though.
 
Old 07-18-2016, 09:33 PM
mm4 mm4 started this thread
 
5,711 posts, read 3,976,240 times
Reputation: 1941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliftonpdx View Post
You do realize that Sanders lost a primary to Hillary, it is customary for the one who lost to endorse the one who won....now the better question, how many speeches and rallies has Sanders given for Hillary? How much as Sanders campaigned for Hillary? That is what you have to look at to see if a politician really supports someone they have endorsed.
You're admitting that Bernie can't speak truth to power. And you're proud that he can't.
 
Old 07-18-2016, 09:42 PM
 
2,464 posts, read 1,285,564 times
Reputation: 668
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm4 View Post
You're admitting that Bernie can't speak truth to power. And you're proud that he can't.
Sanders is no longer campaigning because he lost to Hillary, he simply endorsed her, which was less of an endorsement and more a speech about what he campaigned on.....not sure why you are so hung up on this, but you seem to be posting this same thread over and over each day since he ended his campaign.....
 
Old 07-18-2016, 10:29 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,707,495 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm4 View Post
Why do progressive leftists hate the Glass-Steagall Act so much that they want to keep it repealed?

Hillary Clinton, Wall Street's errand runner, wants to keep it repealed after her husband repealed it. And Bernie, who loves too-big-to-fail, endorses keeping it repealed.
Wall Street is non- partisan. They support and influence outcomes in their best interests.

A portion of Glass Steagall was repealed in 1999, as a part of the Financial Services Modernization Act aka the Gramm- Leach- Bliley Act.

The banking lobby began influencing FRB and Congress in the 80's. Greenspan supported the repeal.
He eventually tired of Congress dilly dallying and went ahead and gave the green light to the merger of Citibank and Travelers Insurance.

Gramm- Leach- Bliley were the sponsors and all are Republicans. With few exceptions, it was passed along party lines with Republicans holding the majority. Some of those who supported this legislation are still in Congress including Jeff Sessions and Mc Cain.

The US has historically bailed out banks, Savings &Loans, railroads and auto manufacturers regardless of Glass- Steagall.

Had Congress not gone along with TARP they would not have been able to avoid making good on the FDIC guarantee.

This legislation is now 17 years old. It has not mattered which party has held the majority or who sat the oval. There has been no serious attempt to repeal it.

Subsequent, the Dodd Frank legislation to increase regulation of Wall Street was a Democrat initiative substantially diluted to enable passage. Romney campaigned on repealing Dodd- Frank- the very regulations designed to mitigate the liklihood of another meltdown for similar reasons.

Elizabeth Warren is an advocate for consumer protection and increased transparency of the banking industry. Republican are not drinking the regulatory tea she is serving
 
Old 07-18-2016, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,707,495 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Railman96 View Post
We're screwed for the next four years either way if you ask me. I can't stand that pandering witch though.
I can't stand Trump or Hillary. 315 million people and this is the best we can do?

I take responsibility for myself. I do not attribute or blame my outcomes to /on any POTUS.
 
Old 07-18-2016, 10:34 PM
mm4 mm4 started this thread
 
5,711 posts, read 3,976,240 times
Reputation: 1941
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
Wall Street is non- partisan. They support and influence outcomes in their best interests.

A portion of Glass Steagall was repealed in 1999, as a part of the Financial Services Modernization Act aka the Gramm- Leach- Bliley Act.

The banking lobby began influencing FRB and Congress in the 80's. Greenspan supported the repeal.
He eventually tired of Congress dilly dallying and went ahead and gave the green light to the merger of Citibank and Travelers Insurance.

Gramm- Leach- Bliley were the sponsors and all are Republicans. With few exceptions, it was passed along party lines with Republicans holding the majority. Some of those who supported this legislation are still in Congress including Jeff Sessions and Mc Cain.

The US has historically bailed out banks, Savings &Loans, railroads and auto manufacturers regardless of Glass- Steagall.

Had Congress not gone along with TARP they would not have been able to avoid making good on the FDIC guarantee.

This legislation is now 17 years old. It has not mattered which party has held the majority or who sat the oval. There has been no serious attempt to repeal it.

Subsequent, the Dodd Frank legislation to increase regulation of Wall Street was a Democrat initiative substantially diluted to enable passage. Romney campaigned on repealing Dodd- Frank- the very regulations designed to mitigate the liklihood of another meltdown for similar reasons.

Elizabeth Warren is an advocate for consumer protection and increased transparency of the banking industry. Republican are not drinking the regulatory tea she is serving
Like Bernie, Elizabeth Warren endorses Hillary and her secret speeches to Wall Street, and her support of crony Wall Street banking and enabling banks to open up trading floors in their buildings and gamble on markets.

Do you want too-big-to-fail banks playing the stock market? Because that's what Glass-Steagall prevented before Bill Clinton repealed it.
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.


Closed Thread


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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:58 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