3 commentsControl
I was talking with my Grandmother the other day about socialism and related things. Necessary background: she and I would have about the opposite reaction to watching 30 minutes of Glenn Beck. Anyway, in our conversation, we stumbled upon an interesting disagreement:
She believed that government control of the banks is a big problem, but I thought the opposite was a bigger problem: bank control of politicians.
The evidence that the banks have the power is quite clear to me: first, look which way the money has been going, the lack of meaningful financial reforms, and the precedent that bailouts may have established.
I can understand how someone would view the opposite, though, that the government has more financial control of the banks now, and there’s likely going to be more governmental control in the future.
Of course, I still think I’m right, but I found it interesting that the same facts could lead to almost the opposite conclusion.
3 comments
Well, my parents, who are rather conservative, believe that the government is trying to take over the banks and create a more “socialist” state…. the reasons they state on this issue are that the banks “don’t want” government support, and that the major banks are being “forced” to take the money with all of these “strings” attached. You wouldn’t believe how many times they yell at me that the government is “forcing” this money upon the banks.
Of course, I respond that this is ridiculous— who wouldn’t want billions of bailout money, particularly when these banks are failing?? But my parents assert that the banking industry doesn’t need help, that failing banks should be allowed to die as capitalism allows, and successful banks (they have a few examples— I think WellsFargo is one) should be allowed to capitalize on this opportunity. They would state that the government is just using this as an excuse, (and spinning the actions of a few bad apples) to thus take over the banking industry and create a more socialist state.
Anyway, this is the conservative perspective I hear, probably filtered from FoxNews.
Well, I agree that failing banks should be allowed to die, but that does not lend any credence to the absurd idea that the banks that took bailout money did not want it.
I would not single out banks specifically, but I agree that corporate control of governments is the larger problem, and has been a significant and growing problem since before we were born. That said, there may be an interesting feedback loop with government now having authority over the rescued companies.
Yeah, that really sounds like a conspiracy theory to me, Peyton. Why wouldn’t the banks be loudly complaining if they were forced to make money. I agree with Chad that wanting banks to fail is a separate thing, and I think that’s a reasonable position.
I didn’t mean to single out banks as far as control of the government is concerned, I completely agree that broader corporate control is the larger problem.
Leave a Comment