Do we need a financial/banking commission equivalent to the 9/11 commission...

  • Thread starter Thread starter triviadude318
  • Start date Start date
T

triviadude318

Guest
...to establish the facts on what? went wrong in the banking blowup? I think I've got a pretty handle on who is to blame and who the bad actors were but I think that there are lot of people out there who are getting confused by all the accusations being thrown around. Considering all the money that is being poured into the banking system I think the public is entitled to a bipartisan commission to investigate every bank, insurance company, and financial institution that receives any money from the TARP program. This commission should establish for the public record exactly who made what decisions and who is responsible. Considering the enormous sums of money changing hands here any expectation that the banks might have to privacy regarding their business decisions should be gone.

How about we contact our Congressmen on this? A congressional inquiry is not sufficient because many Congressman are involved in the deregulation part of this and can't be trusted to investigate themselves. This needs to be an independent investigation outside the Oval Office and outside the Congress and blame needs to be assigned. Maybe even a special prosecutor to prosecute any crimes uncovered. Patrick Fitzgerald seems to be a well respected independent guy.
 
Sounds ok to me. I'd read the report, and it would probably be almost as depressing as the 9/11 phonebook was.

Write your senator/congressman. Go to his website, there's probably a web form to fill out to send him an email.

The problem with this is it's all subjective. Who's to say how much each of the many parties involved were responsible?
 
Well, I already requested my Congressman and Senators thank the oil execs next time they haul them in for questioning.

Seems after the criminal bankers, and incompetent politicians were finished, Mobile-Exxon and Shell were the only ones that kept our retirement funds, mutual fund investments, and 401K's from completely becoming totally worthless.
 
Like the 911 commission was really effective when it actually created more questions then it answered.

Like who at FBI HQ obstructed(for 4 weeks) the terrorism investigation which could have prevented 911.
 
At best, It wont mean much.

At worst, it will reach a conclusion that pushes existing propaganda (pushing blame away from government).

People ignored the 911 commission reports - that our bases in the middle east caused the problem of blowback and the attacks. We went and built MORE bases.

Deregulation means business must make proper moves to survive. Government intervention is the only thing that allows businesses to take unrealistic and dangerous risks, as the government removes all danger.

With no govenrment intervention, a business growing must ensure its moves are correct, to allow it to exist, and remain profitable - this benefits the business and its consumers alike. A business that makes bad moves, fails, allowing others to compete for the same customers - others who are likely to not make the same mistakes.

I fear regulation only serves to remove due diligence (on the consumer, and business side), and enrich corruption at the top of businesses with funds stolen by government from the taxpayers..
 
I think that would be great. But like you said, no government employees or even well connected people should apply. We need honesty, not palsy walsey.
 
In October, several weeks before the election, Harry and Nancy both insisted that hearings would be held and that they would find the causes and those responsible. But because they did not want to 'detract from the important election', they set the date for November 20th, after the election in which Obama held a solid lead over McCain. They set the date! November 20th came and went and still no hearings. We know what went wrong with the banking system. So do they. This is why no hearings were held. Now, what do you think would be the reason that Harry and Nancy would not hold hearings? Why aren't Barney Frank or Barack Obama calling for hearings? They call hearings for steroids in baseball for crying out loud, but this? The worse financial crisis in decades and no hearings? We all know why.
 
Back
Top