Orrin Hatch and bank bailouts

by
Advertisements

Tags: ,

3 Responses to “Orrin Hatch and bank bailouts”

  1. Ronald D. Hunt Says:

    Great video, some of the points are simplified to the point of being questionable, for example: ask the other 7000 or so banks who their depository banks are, and who they hold derivatives with, really their all interconnected in some fashion or another. AIG for example isn’t a bank their an insurance company, The 220 billion or so we spent bailing them out was for payouts on insurance policies held by the other 7000 banks, if those policies where defaulted on image how many of those 7000 banks would have gone under. And which of these banks hold your 401K, 403b, IRA, or retirement annuities?

    The bailout was gross but at the end of the day the lesser of two evils.

    The donation scheme outlined is just the natural of all politics and minus a constitutional amendment that makes it clear that money isn’t speech, as it is currently defined by the supreme court. We need a strong public campaign financing system and complete removal of corporate/union/pac/lobbiest money from campaigns entirely, I also think we should do what Briton does and ban political ads on television entirely.

  2. Jerome Borden Says:

    No, we don’t need public financing or unconstitutional controls on political donations. You got to see that ten layers video because political free speech is not hampered.

    Thank you, Holly for putting that You Tube video on and we’ll go to those caucus meetings next March.

  3. Ronald D. Hunt Says:

    Money isn’t speech, it makes it far to easy for the guy with a lot of it to drowned out the guy who doesn’t have money. And all to often the money is given on the basis of getting something in return, Those who are unwilling to play the lobbiest game or can’t self finance don’t get the money and are soon removed from politics. All on the basis of money, not the quality of their idea’s, or ideological stances, or listening to and responding to their constituents.

    And of those 30 banks, I wonder what their share holders think of their political donations, Wait they have no say what so ever. Campaign donations from publicly traded companies is little more then compelled speech for those that can not avoid being vested in them through their retirement accounts. Every time Exxon donates to a political without allowing me to opt out and have a percentage of that donate equal to my share ownership returned to me that are forcing me to speak against my self.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: