This thought provoking article explains why the out rage against banks and Wall Street http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216?print=true
Why isn't Wall Street in Jail
- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (30)
In answer to the title question, I believe that these guys are not in jail because Bush and the whitehouse would look very bad if people found out how all this was handled.
It's a national embarassment.
Paulson (ex goldman guy) was in the whitehouse advising president Bush on what to do. I'm sure before he was allowed to act, Paulson was given a "get out of jail free" card. What I cannot believe, is just how many ex-goldman people were involved in the decision making and how many ex-goldman people (Geitner) still have positions of power. How this is not a huge conflict of interest is beyond me.
The above mentioned article is the best one I've read on the whole fiasco. Taibbi does a great job of explaining, in laymen terms, what went on.
I am a former derivatives trader, and amongst people in the trading community, we are stunned with what these people got away with.
- 5 votes
Unfortunately it is time for my fellow card carrying Liberals to accept that the Democratic Party, while still the lesser of two evils, has a horrible track record on this issue. They are accepting cash from Wall Street as fast as they can stuff it into their pockets right beside the Republicans. This is no longer about "party", if it ever was; this is about economic class and the war that has been very quietly waged for the past several decades by the wealthy against the middle class. And when I say wealthy, I don't mean the $200,000 a year crowd. That's not wealthy anymore. I'm talking about the Super-Rich; those making more millions a year than you are thousands. You suggest taxing the wealthy, or even oppose a tax cut for them, and you are derided as engaging in class warfare and being divisive. They, on the other hand, don't talk about it at all. They simply and quietly wage it. And right now they are winning BIG!
- 1 vote
They have all the time in the world,all the money in the world and all the lawyers in the world which even the government can't compete with especially since o many of the government are owned by the banks,brokers and lobbyists as well as th right wing lie machine to guarantee these guys won't get what they deserve.
- 6 votes
That is right Overlord, they, in fact , are the government.
- 2 votes
I have been asking that same question, I was disappointed there were no Congressional hearing on banks when the Democrats held the majority. The Republicans and some Democrats protect the banks, because they don't want the public to know their personal involvement. All we need to do in re-install the Glass - Steagall Act and make a bank a bank, and investment company an investment company, and an insurance company an insurance company with no collusion between the three.
- 5 votes
In addition to what you stated, we need to break up corporate monopolies! Not just banks and investment firms, all that have become "too big to fail"
- 4 votes
I agree Becks, but I also think the the recent supreme court ruling, Citizens United, giving corporations person-hood will prove to be far more detrimental to the average American. Someone pointed out recently, on the Vine, that there are plenty of regulatory laws on the books but if they are not enforced-------well, you have the situation we are now caught up in in this country. Greed rules everything now.
- 3 votes
Unfortunately folks, this isn't "recent. The Supreme Court ruled in the 1886 case, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, that Corporations have 14th Amendment rights. The wealthy actually used the Constitutional Amendment passed to protect the right of the newly freed slaves to line their own pockets. The "Citizens" ruling just relied on that one and combined it with an expansion of the 1976 Buckley v. Valeo case that ruled that money was free speech to eliminate any restraints and open the floodgates entirely for the rich.
It is now officially the position of the United States Supreme Court that anyone with sufficient funds has a Constitutionally protected right, under the 1st and 14th Amendments, to bribe the United States Congress and the President of the United States.
- 2 votes
And bribe any Judge, Court wives of Judges and wives of Politicians that about covers it also girlfriends like lobbyist for chineese paper companies. Ohio Republican Lobbyist hero. Just ask bonner she is bonefied.
But steal some aluminum siding and go to jail. I read about poor people trying to steal so they can pay the rent and off they go to jail.
- 2 votes
Tried to turn one in called police in Dayton vicinity on man stealing a Central air unit carrying down the street on a heavy duty two wheeler. police never showed up. Go figure they arrest occupy protesters fast enough and thats legal.
- 1 vote
Until and unless we take the money out of politics there is no chance of reform. The current system that allows any special interest to donate obscene amounts of money to either (or both) side(s) of the aisle while pretending that it won't influence their decision-making is insulting to the intelligence of a 1st grader. A Constitutional Amendment that 1) Revokes Corporate "personhood", and 2) Stipulates that money is NOT speech and that political contributions may be restricted to any degree desirable would be a wonderful start. Personally I would love to see a system of publicly funded elections put in place with every candidate provided with, and restricted to, the exact same amount of funding. All the special interest group advertising should be prohibited within "X" months of an election. Then you would have much more balanced and fair elections where, God forbid, the issues and candidates matter more than just who can outspend the other.
- 2 votes
I would love to see a system of publicly funded elections put in place with every candidate provided with, and restricted to, the exact same amount of funding.
I have proposed a system in the past where a 1% tax is added to all advertising with the funds placed into a special account and divided equally among the candidates. I would even go so far as to give it all to them up front at the time of registering to run. What better way to see just how good they are at budgeting for a long haul?
- 1 vote
Damned good question but we know the Supreme Court is on the take, Congress is on the take and Senate as well. Will the honest politician please stand up. Ok OK stand up. Well well I didn't think there was any left. Cleanse the politicaians in November if nothing else it will give some one new a chance to get filthy rich.
- 1 vote
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |



