Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

WillyT

(72,631 posts)
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 06:31 PM Jan 2016

Heads-Up !!! - The Clinton Team Is Writing 'Too Big To Fail' Out Of The Financial Crisis - HuffPo

The Clinton Team Is Writing 'Too Big To Fail' Out Of The Financial Crisis
Why grapple with history when you can just rewrite it?

Zach Carter, Jason Linkins, & Shahien Nasiripour - HuffPo
01/20/2016 04:55 pm ET


Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has lately been talking about "too big to fail" banks like they didn't play a central role in cratering the economy a few years ago.
Lance Iversen/ASSOCIATED PRESS


<snip>

Here’s a term you may remember from 2008: "too big to fail." It was the title of a best-selling book and an Emmy-nominated movie, and ultimately the foundation for a pretty terrible time in U.S. history when financial titans sent countless jobs, homes and taxpayer wealth into the economic afterlife.

That's not the kind of thing you just forget about -- unless you're really trying to. Somewhat disconcertingly, it seems that a lot of participants and observers of the 2016 Democratic Party primary are trying to forget, thanks to the efforts of Hillary Clinton's banking brain trust.

This week, Paul Krugman claimed that “too big to fail was at best marginal" to the crash of 2008. Earlier this month, the economist Austan Goolsbee said on Twitter that "BIG wasn't what made Bear or Lehman dangerous. it was the ability to spill damage onto others." Former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) even said Lehman was "very small" when it failed.

This has accompanied a broader barrage of Clinton rhetoric suggesting that Bernie Sanders' plan to break up big banks is a weak proposal that ignores her tough-as-nails shadow banking plan. Basically, the argument goes, "too big to fail" was never a serious problem, or at least the “big” part of it wasn’t really a problem, and anyhow, Lehman Brothers wasn’t very big.

Here's the problem: This is preposterous. In the Obama era, we've grown accustomed to evidence-blind nonsense from Republican politicians looking to protect big banks' profits. But it's a new level of sad when respected liberals start echoing the arguments proffered by Hamilton Place Strategies, a PR shop run by former George W. Bush Treasury spokesman Tony Fratto, who works on behalf of big banks. Krugman, Goolsbee et al. are essentially placing a Democratic Party seal of approval on corporate GOP rhetoric.

The Clinton camp's “too big to fail” denialism runs against the official conclusion of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, as well as the views of other top finance scholars. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), former Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, former IMF chief economist Simon Johnson, former Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chair Sheila Bair, former bank bailout Inspector General Neil Barofsky and FDIC Vice Chairman Thomas Hoenig have all maintained that "too big to fail" was, in fact, central to the crisis.

Every official who authorized the bailouts of 2008 and 2009 said they had no choice. They argued that letting big institutions fail would have ravaged the broader economy. The havoc that followed Lehman Brothers' 2008 bankruptcy demonstrates that this fear was legitimate.

"Everyone, including the administration, agrees...


<snip>

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-too-big-to-fail_us_569fd359e4b0875553c2a298





36 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Heads-Up !!! - The Clinton Team Is Writing 'Too Big To Fail' Out Of The Financial Crisis - HuffPo (Original Post) WillyT Jan 2016 OP
Just another reason not to vote for this establishment candidate ViseGrip Jan 2016 #1
These guys make themselves more transparent every day. HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #2
Most of the old timers knew what was what. draa Jan 2016 #5
God bless her clueless supporters. floriduck Jan 2016 #20
Lol draa Jan 2016 #21
Would love to know what Hillary supporters actually believe in other than Hillary, first woman POTUS debunction.junction Jan 2016 #22
IF you could pin them down with those questions Plucketeer Jan 2016 #30
And this runs counter to what Wall Street wants. draa Jan 2016 #3
But OTHER than being preposterous, their argument's not too bad, right? Qutzupalotl Jan 2016 #4
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jan 2016 #6
There is a lot of history they're trying to rewrite. Reframe by reframe. RiverLover Jan 2016 #7
Clinton's Logo: Fighting for Us. Do you have any doubt who the Us is? I never have. n/t Skwmom Jan 2016 #8
US banks, US corporations, US insurance companies, US military contractors,... Still In Wisconsin Jan 2016 #18
Ugh. AzDar Jan 2016 #9
Kick azmom Jan 2016 #10
Bernie says, "Break em up, break em up!" retrowire Jan 2016 #11
Because "Cut it out, cut it out" didn't pan out so well. n/t Joe Shlabotnik Jan 2016 #24
Packing the Golden Parachute? Motown_Johnny Jan 2016 #12
Calling Cali-fornia Demo-crats elias49 Jan 2016 #13
Wait, woah, what? Paul Krugman? Who spiked his latte'? Blue State Bandit Jan 2016 #14
A picture is worth a thousand words.... Armstead Jan 2016 #15
Thaks For That Reminder !!! WillyT Jan 2016 #26
Hmmmm. Maybe she can blame the financial crisis on encrypted iphones. Warren DeMontague Jan 2016 #16
Historical revisionism is not the answer to Mrs. Clinton's problems Jack Rabbit Jan 2016 #17
"Legs Dimon and Pretty Boy Lloyd" - You've Alaways Had A Way With Words, Jack Rabbit !!! WillyT Jan 2016 #27
Hillary for President of Wall Street!n/t silenttigersong Jan 2016 #19
Well no shit SHRED Jan 2016 #23
Look who's leading her campaign. malokvale77 Jan 2016 #32
How dare you speak ill of HRC. This post is rude and disruptive.... Hotler Jan 2016 #25
Starting to worry about revisionist history... EndElectoral Jan 2016 #28
What a bunch of creeps.....ALL of them. nt nc4bo Jan 2016 #29
Hillary and Bill BOGO silenttigersong Jan 2016 #31
A kick, a rec... malokvale77 Jan 2016 #33
Bed Time Kick !!! WillyT Jan 2016 #34
Rise And Shine Kick !!! WillyT Jan 2016 #35
Krugman has lost all credibility FlatBaroque Jan 2016 #36
 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
2. These guys make themselves more transparent every day.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 06:37 PM
Jan 2016

It's amazing what can be learned once the establishment becomes threatened.

draa

(975 posts)
5. Most of the old timers knew what was what.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 06:46 PM
Jan 2016

We've been saying for years our party is corrupt and a mirror image of the GOP. We were ignored and eventually marginalized.

The supporters today are mostly ass kissers who can't think for themselves. That's why you'll see the same meme or quip a million times a day on Democratic sites. It's gotten to where no one can do anything because you don't want to be the "odd" one in the crowd. Just follow each other like lemmings over a cliff (yes, I know they don't do that).

No free will is allowed in The New Democratic Party.

 

floriduck

(2,262 posts)
20. God bless her clueless supporters.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 08:20 PM
Jan 2016

Shouldn't we just recognize that they are not capable of connecting any dots? Excuses are in their food pyramids. Protein, milk, fruits/veggies, grains, excuses.

22. Would love to know what Hillary supporters actually believe in other than Hillary, first woman POTUS
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 08:47 PM
Jan 2016

I am all for a woman for President as long as her name is Elizabeth Warren. I never see Hillary supporters on Du actually speak to the issues when defending Hillary. Have no idea what they are actually for or against. Do they believe in private prisons? Do they believe in equal pay for women? Do they believe in a $15 minimum, which in my mind is still poverty wages? Do they believe that corporations are people? Do they believe in public funding of elections? Do they believe that money is free speech? Inquiring minds want to know.

 

Plucketeer

(12,882 posts)
30. IF you could pin them down with those questions
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 09:35 PM
Jan 2016

You'd get the same deflective non-answer nonsense Hillary would barf up. She HAS TO be cautious with what she says because her big bucks backers have their ears finely tuned to every utterance.

Welcome to DU, BTW.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
7. There is a lot of history they're trying to rewrite. Reframe by reframe.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 07:29 PM
Jan 2016

So many sheeple will fall for it too. Its not only bad for our country, its downright embarrassing as well.

Skwmom

(12,685 posts)
8. Clinton's Logo: Fighting for Us. Do you have any doubt who the Us is? I never have. n/t
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 07:30 PM
Jan 2016
 

Still In Wisconsin

(4,450 posts)
18. US banks, US corporations, US insurance companies, US military contractors,...
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 08:05 PM
Jan 2016

All on the list of "Us's" that Pantsuit will fight for.

 

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)
12. Packing the Golden Parachute?
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 07:48 PM
Jan 2016

I guess she wants to make sure those Big Bank speaking fees will be rolling in after her political career ends.


Their internal polling must be even worse than what we are seeing.



Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
16. Hmmmm. Maybe she can blame the financial crisis on encrypted iphones.
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 07:55 PM
Jan 2016

You laugh, but I suspect her advisers are working on it right now.

Jack Rabbit

(45,984 posts)
17. Historical revisionism is not the answer to Mrs. Clinton's problems
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 07:56 PM
Jan 2016

Legs Dimon and Pretty Boy Lloyd belong in the slammer and everyone except apologists from the banksters know that (of course, they do, too, but an occupational liar gotta lie).

Maybe next her team will argue that she was there when the slaves were freed on Juneteenth? You know, kinda like this . . .
[center]


[/center]
No, it wouldn't work that way. The historical revisionists who work for the American oligarchy will put the banksters in Baghdad (claiming the Iraq War was won by them).
 

WillyT

(72,631 posts)
27. "Legs Dimon and Pretty Boy Lloyd" - You've Alaways Had A Way With Words, Jack Rabbit !!!
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 09:20 PM
Jan 2016







Hotler

(13,747 posts)
25. How dare you speak ill of HRC. This post is rude and disruptive....
Wed Jan 20, 2016, 09:16 PM
Jan 2016

and needs to be locked. Come on administration lock this thread and ban the poster.


Come on, really? Did you folks exspect any different? HRC is bought and paid for by the banksters.

FlatBaroque

(3,160 posts)
36. Krugman has lost all credibility
Thu Jan 21, 2016, 12:03 PM
Jan 2016

he has shown himself to be a political hack, economics is just his cover now.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Heads-Up !!! - The Clinto...