2016 Postmortem

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)

4. Why do you insist on defending Wall Street Investment Banks? I don't really understand that.

Tue Mar 8, 2016, 10:26 AM

Mar 2016

In 2008 when it became clear that the housing market was going south, and the CDOs and Synthetic CDOs were going to be worthless, Wall Street Banks suddenly became unable to set a value on those securities, until they had protected themselves as much as possible, while continuing to pretend that such investments were solid. They got to keep most of their money, and those who took shots got bailed out.

In the meantime, the entities to whom they had marketed these products, state and local governments, retirement plans, school boards and the like, finally woke up one day to the fact that these AAA rated securities were suddenly worthless. So we paid for it coming and going.

Now breaking up the banks may not have been the best idea; but don't you want to hold them responsible at all for the genuine harm they did to our country? Don't you want to see such practices curtailed and regulated?

Bryant

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Who here can name the banks broken up under Frank Dodd as "too big to fail"? [View all] Recursion Mar 2016 OP

Crickets...... monicaangela Mar 2016 #1

That's a joke pdsimdars Mar 2016 #2

I can kind of answer JustAnotherGen Mar 2016 #3

Bingo Recursion Mar 2016 #5

Thanks for the post, JAG. Enjoyed reading. Hortensis Mar 2016 #14

Why do you insist on defending Wall Street Investment Banks? I don't really understand that. el_bryanto Mar 2016 #4

Yeah, why are you so intent on defending them? Recursion Mar 2016 #6

Good comeback. You really shut me down. nt el_bryanto Mar 2016 #7

Well you seem to oppose the government taking their money when they get into trouble Recursion Mar 2016 #8

You can't just make up stuff - well obviously you can. But that's total bullshit to suggest el_bryanto Mar 2016 #10

You are arguing against a program that involved the government taking money from banks Recursion Mar 2016 #12

Jesus - you'll say anything won't you? el_bryanto Mar 2016 #16

It cost the banks money and made the government money Recursion Mar 2016 #18

Whatever. I think it's clear who wants to hold Wall Street accountable, your deceptions el_bryanto Mar 2016 #22

neither of those two entities were the ones who paid for the bailout... islandmkl Mar 2016 #27

Here's what I think. I think you should say what you mean instead of playing passive aggressive Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #11

I think the US Government took billions from the banks through TARP Recursion Mar 2016 #13

I think that last line is your entire reason for writing which is why you can't make a full and Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #17

Sure, whatever Recursion Mar 2016 #28

It made me realize I no longer could answer. Hortensis Mar 2016 #15

You fail to understand my point. But that's ok. You have an agenda same as the OP has..... Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #20

Did you know that Sen. Barney Frank was named Hortensis Mar 2016 #23

It's a HRC supporter backing a "I support Bernie but..." poster. delrem Mar 2016 #24

I will answer JustAnotherGen Mar 2016 #9

Wow, that's radical Recursion Mar 2016 #21

Great op. NCTraveler Mar 2016 #19

Dodd-Frank has no teeth. The fact she props it up tells me she has no intention to fix the banking. JRLeft Mar 2016 #25

So can you name the banks broken up under its auspices? Recursion Mar 2016 #26