Discussion in 'Stocks' started by omegapoint, Apr 16, 2010.
Not so much Moyers as Baseline. Nails it.
Can the government set up a regulatory system that won't end up controlled by Wall Street? Why or why not?
I think this is a pointless question going forward.
Maybe a better question is: Can we have a Wall Street that the gov't won't bail out?
Will it matter how many regulations we have if in the end, you break the rules, the fed will back stop anything and everything?
It is a conundrum, but the two are related and insolvable without consideration of each. Some conservatives have no problem limiting the size of big government, but are very reluctant to limit the size of big corporations. The authors interviewed by Moyers clearly suggested that the way to solve this problem is to limit the size of corporations (in the present context, banks), by law, to about 10% of what they are now. They cited examples of how Andrew Jackson and Theodore Roosevelt had done in limiting the size of big banks and big trusts in their era, respectively.
It could be done, as long as the big corporations are not allowed to have unlimited and unfettered access to influence democratically elected officials.
Separate names with a comma.