4 ms·
According to this guy, there are no downsides to a policy that will have the side effect of breaking up all of America's largest financial institutions. In his
by mnemonicsloth 17y ago
According to this guy, there are no downsides to a policy that will have the side effect of breaking up all of America's largest financial institutions.
In his closing he says that passing this measure will "usher in a productive explosion in America that we have not seen in the last 50 years."
The last 50 years have already seen the largest sustained economic expansion in all of human history. Is that not good enough somehow?
I want my ten minutes back.
- hristov 17y agoI know it is such a great thing that we have all these large financial institutions. You know because they are so large they become too large to fail, and then we get to subsidise them with out tax dollars. Who would want to end that?
- andylei 17y agoi seems like your beef with these companies is that we're subsidizing them. so is the problem the institutions that are asking for money? or our politicians that are giving them money?
- barrkel 17y agoWell, the institutions can hold the world economy to ransom, so not giving them money would be cutting off our nose to spite ourselves. Better not to have such powerful and important banks.
- mnemonicsloth 17y agoIf there's one thing the financial crisis has taught everyone, it's that we need less humility in the face of world-spanning systems no one person can possibly understand. Sarcasm is definitely the way to go if you want to foster a productive debate.
- dantheman 17y agoToo large to fail has always been bullshit; it really has no bearing on this. They got a handout, let's not pretend it was justified.