Today on Left Wing Radio: Nationalize the Fed, Create State-Run Banks

Warfish · 11-28-2011, 11:07 PM

Heard this idea on the Thom Hartman show on the drive home.

What say you?

Nationalize the Fed by bringing it under one of the Dept.'s of the Treasury, and direct each State to form a State Bank to compete with (and as Hartmans says, defeat) the Private Banks.

Good idea?

Bonhomme Richard · 11-28-2011, 11:32 PM

lol wut?

War, here's two suggestions:

1) Stop reading CNN.com

2) Stop listening to left-wing radio

:D

southparkcpa · 11-29-2011, 06:07 AM

[QUOTE=Warfish;4256203]Heard this idea on the Thom Hartman show on the drive home.

What say you?

Nationalize the Fed by bringing it under one of the Dept.'s of the Treasury, and direct each State to form a State Bank to compete with (and as Hartmans says, defeat) the Private Banks.

Good idea?[/QUOTE]

So who were the 3 others listening? Fish and who else?

Warfish · 11-29-2011, 09:59 AM

[QUOTE=Bonhomme Richard;4256215]lol wut?

War, here's two suggestions:

1) Stop reading CNN.com

2) Stop listening to left-wing radio

:D[/QUOTE]

Insulating oneself away from what a meaningful percentage of people think is never a good idea.

Like most political ideas, this one has merit and has drawbacks. I thought the idea of State Owneed/Operated Banks (we have at least one state who does this as is, and is supposed quite successful with it) was worthy of discussion, given the frequency of talk of late about "Wall Street Bankers and the 1%".

If not, no worries.

palmetto defender · 11-29-2011, 11:02 AM

[QUOTE=Warfish;4256459]Insulating oneself away from what a meaningful percentage of people think is never a good idea.

Like most political ideas, this one has merit and has drawbacks. I thought the idea of State Owneed/Operated Banks (we have at least one state who does this as is, and is supposed quite successful with it) was worthy of discussion, given the frequency of talk of late about "Wall Street Bankers and the 1%".

If not, no worries.[/QUOTE]

The federal governmaent is not very good at running many things. They do fine with the military, FDA, USDA.
Banks - no way. What's next/ Have the Feds making soda and/or toothpaste. Pass.

Trades · 11-29-2011, 11:27 AM

[QUOTE=palmetto defender;4256553]The federal governmaent is not very good at running many things. They do fine with the military, FDA, USDA.
Banks - no way. What's next/ Have the Feds making soda and/or toothpaste. Pass.[/QUOTE]

I don't necessarily agree that the government does a good job of running the FDA. They take way too long to test\approve drugs and are beholden to big Pharma (who I work for). The bureacracy of the government makes it next to impossible for small companies to bring products to market and the try to insinuate themselves into every decision such as web based tools and e-Cigs (yes I know they are on the market now) which could save lives today if they could just be approved quicker.

palmetto defender · 11-29-2011, 11:33 AM

[QUOTE=Trades;4256601]I don't necessarily agree that the government does a good job of running the FDA. They take way too long to test\approve drugs and are beholden to big Pharma (who I work for). The bureacracy of the government makes it next to impossible for small companies to bring products to market and the try to insinuate themselves into every decision such as web based tools and e-Cigs (yes I know they are on the market now) which could save lives today if they could just be approved quicker.[/QUOTE]

I was in big Pharma once upon a time. I wish the gov felt beholden - LOL.
They do tend to be cautious (slow) BUT they do a decent job - safety.
Relative to small companies - it is tough in any industry. Look at food, defense, auto and a long list. Innovators tend to get bought up - not a bad thing.

bitonti · 11-29-2011, 11:33 AM

the fed is the lender of last resort it's a very different job than the 8 major bulge bracket banks.

[url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html[/url]

I'd rather they brought back glass-steagall regulations than nationalized the banks.

PlumberKhan · 11-29-2011, 11:34 AM

Use a gun to rob a bank.

Use a bank to rob the world.

JetPotato · 11-29-2011, 12:13 PM

[QUOTE=palmetto defender;4256613]I was in big Pharma once upon a time. I wish the gov felt beholden - LOL.
They do tend to be cautious (slow) BUT they do a decent job - safety.
Relative to small companies - it is tough in any industry. Look at food, defense, auto and a long list. Innovators tend to get bought up - not a bad thing.[/QUOTE]

My experience in Big Pharma has been that the government is beholden, depending on [I]which[/I] (i.e. best greaser) Big Pharma you work for.

The FDA is without a doubt essential, but needs to change its approach to how it operates.
1) Hire more scientists who understand the industry and less lawyers who haven't a clue how science operates trying to dictate it
2) Evaluate drugs on a risk-based approach, rather than an all-or-nothing approval process. Like any surgery, there can be identified risk that patients and doctors can agree to pursue or not pursue (provided accepting that risk removes liability attached directly to known risk factors). This will get far more needed medicines on the market, lower overall costs of patient care, and save lives.
3) Patent reform. The general public hasn't a clue how much money it costs to discover, develop and test a drug before it gets to market, then they bytch about how much the pills cost. Again, these companies need to recoup their development costs and make [I]some[/I] profits. Extending patent life will lower costs and again get more drugs on the market

palmetto defender · 11-29-2011, 12:33 PM

[QUOTE=JetPotato;4256702]My experience in Big Pharma has been that the government is beholden, depending on [I]which[/I] (i.e. best greaser) Big Pharma you work for.

The FDA is without a doubt essential, but needs to change its approach to how it operates.
1) Hire more scientists who understand the industry and less lawyers who haven't a clue how science operates trying to dictate it
2) Evaluate drugs on a risk-based approach, rather than an all-or-nothing approval process. Like any surgery, there can be identified risk that patients and doctors can agree to persue or not persue (provided accepting that risk removes liability attacked directly to know risk factors). This will get far more needed medicines on the market, lower overall costs of patient care, and save lives.
3) Patent reform. The general public hasn't a clue how much money it costs to discover, develop and test a drug before it gets to market, then they bytch about how much the pills cost. Again, these companies need to recoup thier development costs and make some profits. Extending patent life will lower costs and again get more drugs on the market[/QUOTE]

Your points 1-3 are valid. Hard to disagree. Length of patent is a question. But valid.
Anything the federal gov does is subject to improvement, including the military, which is, I believe in a sad state of affairs.

JetPotato · 11-29-2011, 01:18 PM

[QUOTE=palmetto defender;4256754]Your points 1-3 are valid. Hard to disagree. Length of patent is a question. But valid.
Anything the federal gov does is subject to improvement, including the military, which is, I believe in a sad state of affairs.[/QUOTE]

It's so sad to see how many drugs never make it to market that could have saved so much pain and loss in this world (which pales in comparison to the reduction in costs that they would also affect) due to over-regulation by the FDA.

quantum · 11-29-2011, 04:11 PM

[QUOTE=Warfish;4256203]Heard this idea on the Thom Hartman show on the drive home.

What say you?

Nationalize the Fed by bringing it under one of the Dept.'s of the Treasury, and direct each State to form a State Bank to compete with (and as Hartmans says, defeat) the Private Banks.

Good idea?[/QUOTE]

Crony jobs at these banks? Check
Rampant incompetence? Check
Major fustercluck? Check!

Pass.

parafly · 11-29-2011, 04:52 PM

In my view, the exact opposite strategy should be implemented: break up the oligopoly of national mega-banks into smaller, more localized private banks.

southparkcpa · 11-29-2011, 04:59 PM

[QUOTE=parafly;4257160]In my view, the exact opposite strategy should be implemented: break up the oligopoly of national mega-banks into smaller, more localized private banks.[/QUOTE]

Great in theory...... try getting an LC open on a container from Eurpoe at a small bank.

Big banks are absolutely needed. The collapse of Glass Steagal (By Clinton BTW) was almost entirely the linch pin to this debacle. Then again, Barney kept asuring us Fanny and Freddy were fine too.

parafly · 11-29-2011, 05:21 PM

[QUOTE=southparkcpa;4257175]Great in theory...... try getting an LC open on a container from Eurpoe at a small bank. Big banks are absolutely needed.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I don't buy it. In this day and age, these processes can easily be streamlined and implemented electronically.

The Federal Reserve, World Bank, IMF, WTO, etc have their place. No reason why the BOA's of the world can't realistically be broken up.

PlumberKhan · 11-29-2011, 05:26 PM

[QUOTE=parafly;4257211]Sorry, I don't buy it. In this day and age, these processes can easily be streamlined and implemented electronically...[/QUOTE]

Banks. Charging you to use your own money.

southparkcpa · 11-29-2011, 05:32 PM

[QUOTE=parafly;4257211]Sorry, I don't buy it. In this day and age, these processes can easily be streamlined and implemented electronically.

The Federal Reserve, World Bank, IMF, WTO, etc have their place. No reason why the BOA's of the world can't realistically be broken up.[/QUOTE]

When you work in business a little longer, you will see. Smaller banks do not have the resources to bank internationally where LC's (just one example) are used.

quantum · 11-30-2011, 08:44 AM

[QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4257222]Banks. Charging you to use your own money.[/QUOTE]

Simplistic, yet factually incorrect. You should write slogans for North Korea. :P

PlumberKhan · 11-30-2011, 09:13 AM

[QUOTE=quantum;4257769]Simplistic, yet factually incorrect. You should write slogans for North Korea. :P[/QUOTE]

Hey.

You wanna buy what I owe on my truck? I sell you my debt really cheap...and then you can sell the money I owe to someone else with some money other people owe for stuff.

It'll be awesome. :yes:

11-28-2011, 11:07 PM	#1
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	Today on Left Wing Radio: Nationalize the Fed, Create State-Run Banks Heard this idea on the Thom Hartman show on the drive home. What say you? Nationalize the Fed by bringing it under one of the Dept.'s of the Treasury, and direct each State to form a State Bank to compete with (and as Hartmans says, defeat) the Private Banks. Good idea?

11-29-2011, 12:13 PM	#10
JetPotato fermenting Hall Of Fame Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: New York, NY Posts: 12,142	[QUOTE=palmetto defender;4256613]I was in big Pharma once upon a time. I wish the gov felt beholden - LOL. They do tend to be cautious (slow) BUT they do a decent job - safety. Relative to small companies - it is tough in any industry. Look at food, defense, auto and a long list. Innovators tend to get bought up - not a bad thing.[/QUOTE] My experience in Big Pharma has been that the government is beholden, depending on [I]which[/I] (i.e. best greaser) Big Pharma you work for. The FDA is without a doubt essential, but needs to change its approach to how it operates. 1) Hire more scientists who understand the industry and less lawyers who haven't a clue how science operates trying to dictate it 2) Evaluate drugs on a risk-based approach, rather than an all-or-nothing approval process. Like any surgery, there can be identified risk that patients and doctors can agree to pursue or not pursue (provided accepting that risk removes liability attached directly to known risk factors). This will get far more needed medicines on the market, lower overall costs of patient care, and save lives. 3) Patent reform. The general public hasn't a clue how much money it costs to discover, develop and test a drug before it gets to market, then they bytch about how much the pills cost. Again, these companies need to recoup their development costs and make [I]some[/I] profits. Extending patent life will lower costs and again get more drugs on the market Last edited by JetPotato; 11-29-2011 at 01:14 PM.

11-29-2011, 05:32 PM	#18
southparkcpa I see the 88 to 97 period all over again. Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: NC Posts: 15,755	[QUOTE=parafly;4257211]Sorry, I don't buy it. In this day and age, these processes can easily be streamlined and implemented electronically. The Federal Reserve, World Bank, IMF, WTO, etc have their place. No reason why the BOA's of the world can't realistically be broken up.[/QUOTE] When you work in business a little longer, you will see. Smaller banks do not have the resources to bank internationally where LC's (just one example) are used. Last edited by southparkcpa; 11-29-2011 at 05:36 PM.

11-28-2011, 11:32 PM	#2
Bonhomme Richard Board Moderator Jets Insider VIP Charter JI Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 4,103	lol wut? War, here's two suggestions: 1) Stop reading CNN.com 2) Stop listening to left-wing radio :D

11-29-2011, 06:07 AM	#3
southparkcpa I see the 88 to 97 period all over again. Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: NC Posts: 15,755	[QUOTE=Warfish;4256203]Heard this idea on the Thom Hartman show on the drive home. What say you? Nationalize the Fed by bringing it under one of the Dept.'s of the Treasury, and direct each State to form a State Bank to compete with (and as Hartmans says, defeat) the Private Banks. Good idea?[/QUOTE] So who were the 3 others listening? Fish and who else?

11-29-2011, 09:59 AM	#4
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	[QUOTE=Bonhomme Richard;4256215]lol wut? War, here's two suggestions: 1) Stop reading CNN.com 2) Stop listening to left-wing radio :D[/QUOTE] Insulating oneself away from what a meaningful percentage of people think is never a good idea. Like most political ideas, this one has merit and has drawbacks. I thought the idea of State Owneed/Operated Banks (we have at least one state who does this as is, and is supposed quite successful with it) was worthy of discussion, given the frequency of talk of late about "Wall Street Bankers and the 1%". If not, no worries.

11-29-2011, 11:02 AM	#5
palmetto defender All League Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 4,683	[QUOTE=Warfish;4256459]Insulating oneself away from what a meaningful percentage of people think is never a good idea. Like most political ideas, this one has merit and has drawbacks. I thought the idea of State Owneed/Operated Banks (we have at least one state who does this as is, and is supposed quite successful with it) was worthy of discussion, given the frequency of talk of late about "Wall Street Bankers and the 1%". If not, no worries.[/QUOTE] The federal governmaent is not very good at running many things. They do fine with the military, FDA, USDA. Banks - no way. What's next/ Have the Feds making soda and/or toothpaste. Pass.

11-29-2011, 11:27 AM	#6
Trades Jets Insider VIP Join Date: May 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 5,558	[QUOTE=palmetto defender;4256553]The federal governmaent is not very good at running many things. They do fine with the military, FDA, USDA. Banks - no way. What's next/ Have the Feds making soda and/or toothpaste. Pass.[/QUOTE] I don't necessarily agree that the government does a good job of running the FDA. They take way too long to test\approve drugs and are beholden to big Pharma (who I work for). The bureacracy of the government makes it next to impossible for small companies to bring products to market and the try to insinuate themselves into every decision such as web based tools and e-Cigs (yes I know they are on the market now) which could save lives today if they could just be approved quicker.

11-29-2011, 11:33 AM	#7
palmetto defender All League Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 4,683	[QUOTE=Trades;4256601]I don't necessarily agree that the government does a good job of running the FDA. They take way too long to test\approve drugs and are beholden to big Pharma (who I work for). The bureacracy of the government makes it next to impossible for small companies to bring products to market and the try to insinuate themselves into every decision such as web based tools and e-Cigs (yes I know they are on the market now) which could save lives today if they could just be approved quicker.[/QUOTE] I was in big Pharma once upon a time. I wish the gov felt beholden - LOL. They do tend to be cautious (slow) BUT they do a decent job - safety. Relative to small companies - it is tough in any industry. Look at food, defense, auto and a long list. Innovators tend to get bought up - not a bad thing.

11-29-2011, 11:33 AM	#8
bitonti searching Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Philly Posts: 38,786	the fed is the lender of last resort it's a very different job than the 8 major bulge bracket banks. [url]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html[/url] I'd rather they brought back glass-steagall regulations than nationalized the banks.

11-29-2011, 11:34 AM	#9
PlumberKhan BRACE YOURSELVES FOR 12... Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Van down by the river Posts: 21,029	Use a gun to rob a bank. Use a bank to rob the world.

11-29-2011, 12:33 PM	#11
palmetto defender All League Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 4,683	[QUOTE=JetPotato;4256702]My experience in Big Pharma has been that the government is beholden, depending on [I]which[/I] (i.e. best greaser) Big Pharma you work for. The FDA is without a doubt essential, but needs to change its approach to how it operates. 1) Hire more scientists who understand the industry and less lawyers who haven't a clue how science operates trying to dictate it 2) Evaluate drugs on a risk-based approach, rather than an all-or-nothing approval process. Like any surgery, there can be identified risk that patients and doctors can agree to persue or not persue (provided accepting that risk removes liability attacked directly to know risk factors). This will get far more needed medicines on the market, lower overall costs of patient care, and save lives. 3) Patent reform. The general public hasn't a clue how much money it costs to discover, develop and test a drug before it gets to market, then they bytch about how much the pills cost. Again, these companies need to recoup thier development costs and make some profits. Extending patent life will lower costs and again get more drugs on the market[/QUOTE] Your points 1-3 are valid. Hard to disagree. Length of patent is a question. But valid. Anything the federal gov does is subject to improvement, including the military, which is, I believe in a sad state of affairs.

11-29-2011, 01:18 PM	#12
JetPotato fermenting Hall Of Fame Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: New York, NY Posts: 12,142	[QUOTE=palmetto defender;4256754]Your points 1-3 are valid. Hard to disagree. Length of patent is a question. But valid. Anything the federal gov does is subject to improvement, including the military, which is, I believe in a sad state of affairs.[/QUOTE] It's so sad to see how many drugs never make it to market that could have saved so much pain and loss in this world (which pales in comparison to the reduction in costs that they would also affect) due to over-regulation by the FDA.

11-29-2011, 04:11 PM	#13
quantum GFY Snatchez! Hall Of Fame Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: LI Posts: 17,905	[QUOTE=Warfish;4256203]Heard this idea on the Thom Hartman show on the drive home. What say you? Nationalize the Fed by bringing it under one of the Dept.'s of the Treasury, and direct each State to form a State Bank to compete with (and as Hartmans says, defeat) the Private Banks. Good idea?[/QUOTE] Crony jobs at these banks? Check Rampant incompetence? Check Major fustercluck? Check! Pass.

11-29-2011, 04:52 PM	#14
parafly so why side with anything? All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 6,301	In my view, the exact opposite strategy should be implemented: break up the oligopoly of national mega-banks into smaller, more localized private banks.

11-29-2011, 04:59 PM	#15
southparkcpa I see the 88 to 97 period all over again. Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: NC Posts: 15,755	[QUOTE=parafly;4257160]In my view, the exact opposite strategy should be implemented: break up the oligopoly of national mega-banks into smaller, more localized private banks.[/QUOTE] Great in theory...... try getting an LC open on a container from Eurpoe at a small bank. Big banks are absolutely needed. The collapse of Glass Steagal (By Clinton BTW) was almost entirely the linch pin to this debacle. Then again, Barney kept asuring us Fanny and Freddy were fine too.

11-29-2011, 05:21 PM	#16
parafly so why side with anything? All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 6,301	[QUOTE=southparkcpa;4257175]Great in theory...... try getting an LC open on a container from Eurpoe at a small bank. Big banks are absolutely needed.[/QUOTE] Sorry, I don't buy it. In this day and age, these processes can easily be streamlined and implemented electronically. The Federal Reserve, World Bank, IMF, WTO, etc have their place. No reason why the BOA's of the world can't realistically be broken up.

11-29-2011, 05:26 PM	#17
PlumberKhan BRACE YOURSELVES FOR 12... Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Van down by the river Posts: 21,029	[QUOTE=parafly;4257211]Sorry, I don't buy it. In this day and age, these processes can easily be streamlined and implemented electronically...[/QUOTE] Banks. Charging you to use your own money.

11-30-2011, 08:44 AM	#19
quantum GFY Snatchez! Hall Of Fame Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: LI Posts: 17,905	[QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4257222]Banks. Charging you to use your own money.[/QUOTE] Simplistic, yet factually incorrect. You should write slogans for North Korea. :P

11-30-2011, 09:13 AM	#20
PlumberKhan BRACE YOURSELVES FOR 12... Hall Of Fame Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Van down by the river Posts: 21,029	[QUOTE=quantum;4257769]Simplistic, yet factually incorrect. You should write slogans for North Korea. :P[/QUOTE] Hey. You wanna buy what I owe on my truck? I sell you my debt really cheap...and then you can sell the money I owe to someone else with some money other people owe for stuff. It'll be awesome. :yes: