Nationalization of Citibank and Bank of America

[0ni0n]

There's a lot of speculation out there that the federal government will inevitably nationalize Citibank and Bank of America in the process of getting us out of this crisis. Already nationalization is accepted by some as the the next logical evolution of american capitalism. Followed that with healthcare reform stipulating supposedly universal healthcare mandate, we are becoming what we loath the most, socialists. (though personally I see nothing wrong with socialism) All the ridicules we threw at the French on their socialistic ideals are now applicable at home, albeit "under a set of unusual circumstances". Have we been wrong all along in the sense that the socialization of healthcare, college education, financial system in EU is actually right and necessary?

What do you guys think and how far do we have to go?

[Zosi]

Oh god, this is going to be a can of worms... will post something when I get back from lunch, although I'm sure we'll be past rational discussion by then.

[Tyche]

Well, my mortgage company is Countrywide, which is now owned by Bank of America...so, that means the US Government would be responsible for my mortgage. I honestly don't know how I'd feel about that

[Fhqwghads]

I have no idea. Maybe if someone can put in a nutshell what the main differences are between socialism and capitalism that would help. I'm only casually familiar with capitalism since that's what the country is based on. From what I've seen so far, a system with mostly hands-off capitalism is susceptible to those who have, and those who don't, with the wealthy having more of a voice in the direction the government takes, which is not always in the best interests of the public (in my opinion.) Not having a capitalist system, on the other hand, doesn't really give people much of an incentive to aggressively grow markets, and off the top of my head sounds like it lacks a golden carrot dangling in front of people to entice them to achieve financial success.

Again, all this is based off my own observations, and has no basis in any sort of research, and no education at all in economics. My interest in the subject is piqued due to recent events and getting more edified, even if it's just via BG, is fine.

[Eaglestrike]

I'm very against socialization. I'm very against universal health care. While people cite the more extreme cases on one side, you should look at the most common case when involved in this. On the health care front: Fat lazy america will get free health care. There is no expectation of responsibility anymore. If you have to pay for your own stuff, you have to deal with the consequences of your own actions. Now 1 person fucking up their life costs 300million people to deal with the consequences of their actions and lifestyle. Now, how many people in america are fat and lazy and don't make any real effort to be healthy?

I highly doubt they'll exempt obese people from universal health care. They *might* do so with smokers, but if not...everyone who doesn't smoke has to pay medical bills for people who do smoke.

I personally am on both sides of this issue, I am very anti-smoking and will never do it, but I'm fat and lazy. But if I have health issues and die because of it that's my deal, while I'd take advantage of government hand outs, I'd rather they not be given at all.

As for capitalism vs socialism...Fhg got the general basis. The only thing though is that in a capitalist country the rich don't need to have a bigger voice with the government, we just have a corrupt government that listens to the rich companies. The main negative about socialism is that it takes away individuality and creativeness, as there aren't as big of benefits to thinking up something new and doing what no one else has done.

[Vuitton]

I have nothing against socialism. The Kingdom of Sweden is "Socially Democratic" or whatever. They have the highest standard of living in the world, free (or extremely low priced) university tuition, free health care, ect. France has the same things.

So whats the big deal? Rather than having huge student loan payments and healthcare costs (health, mental, dental, vision, ect), we have much larger taxes taken out of our paychecks.

Personally, I don't mind that trade of expensive bills for a smaller paycheck. It will save me a ton of worrying and anxiety. Plus, it means not only the financially able go to school or receive medical treatment.

[kuronosan]

No, no, no, you don't get it - why should I have to have large amounts of money taken out of my check so that fatso over there can get treated for free while he sits on his ass and collects unemployment??

TOTALLY UNFAIR, AMIRITE?!

I mean, I busted my ass for education, so everyone else should have to as well! AMIRITE?!

Come on people. Socialism != Communism.

[Vuitton]

No, no, no, you don't get it - why should I have to have large amounts of money taken out of my check so that fatso over there can get treated for free while he sits on his ass and collects unemployment??

TOTALLY UNFAIR, AMIRITE?!

I mean, I busted my ass for education, so everyone else should have to as well! AMIRITE?!

Come on people. Socialism != Communism.

Thank you for that explanation. Very articulate. It is so clear now.

[Day]

I mean it's name is Bank of America!

[Eaglestrike]

No, no, no, you don't get it - why should I have to have large amounts of money taken out of my check so that fatso over there can get treated for free while he sits on his ass and collects unemployment??

TOTALLY UNFAIR, AMIRITE?!

I mean, I busted my ass for education, so everyone else should have to as well! AMIRITE?!

Come on people. Socialism != Communism.

According to Marx, going from Capitalism -> Socialism will eventually get you to communism. And the way people talk about these issues a number of people do wish to move towards communism.

I looked up a better definition of socialism and it basically means the government owns looooots of shit. Which we're already starting to see happen more with the government becoming bigger and bigger. I dislike that, it's getting so big and there will need to be middle men to supervise the middle men supervising the middle men. It's just a waste of efficiency. A company attempting to make a profit will be far more efficient than the government, always.

[Kiro]

I could give two shits. I'm not gonna be in this country in the next 10 years. Good luck, fuckers.

[Headspace]

I could give two shits. I'm not gonna be in this country in the next 10 years. Good luck, fuckers.

Hope you don't die of starvation before then.

[Day]

He's not starving. He said he "could give two shits" so he's obviously eaten recently.

[Headspace]

Well when the looting starts and there's no more food, he'll be sorry he was so wasteful!

[recuperi]

According to Marx, going from Capitalism -> Socialism will eventually get you to communism. And the way people talk about these issues a number of people do wish to move towards communism.

I looked up a better definition of socialism and it basically means the government owns looooots of shit. Which we're already starting to see happen more with the government becoming bigger and bigger. I dislike that, it's getting so big and there will need to be middle men to supervise the middle men supervising the middle men. It's just a waste of efficiency. A company attempting to make a profit will be far more efficient than the government, always.

That's basically what a true socialistic economy would look like, but I think we're far from that honestly. For one, the nationalization of a bank doesn't necessarily mean the nationalization of everything. It would be more of a compromised socialism if anything. True socialism is, basically, the government controlling how much each person earns, and how much of the profits goes into each household.

I don't really think we'll ever turn into a fully socialist state though, because those are just doomed to fail anyway.

[Kiro]

Well when the looting starts and there's no more food, he'll be sorry he was so wasteful!

Lmfao.

[Deejay]

How close are we to having the government growing and selling their own weed?

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

No, no, no, you don't get it - why should I have to have large amounts of money taken out of my check so that fatso over there can get treated for free while he sits on his ass and collects unemployment??

TOTALLY UNFAIR, AMIRITE?!

I mean, I busted my ass for education, so everyone else should have to as well! AMIRITE?!

Come on people. Socialism != Communism.

If this is isn't sarcasm, I'm sorry for your illness. Hopefully your parents will find a decent home for you when they pass away.

Moving on, and this is a response to multiple posts; there is nothing wrong with socialism. And you can have a democratic social country as evidenced by Sweden, France, the UK ( and posted about earlier ).

When the citizens have the right to elect representatives to vote for them on social measures this is democratic. By this dipshits logic above, we shouldn't have our socialized police force paid for by taxpayers because some slut decided to wear a skirt and got raped, or some anti-gun prick didn't buy a gun and was robbed.

There is a vast misconception on the differences of socialism and communism, and even capitalism and free trade. What we live in right now is a highly regulated capitalist society that benefits the rich. Most regulation we have doesn't work against the corporations and the rich, they work for them.

Ideally, what the libertarian will say, is that with zero regulation the market will correct itself in times of stress. Meaning zero regulation for the consumer, and zero for the corporation. The consumers will weed out the bad products and services, prices will comes down, and bad companies with bad practices will ultimately fail due to consumer backlash.
The problem with this is it has failed over and over again, because with zero regulation the richest banks and companies will absorb or chase out competition making an unfair marketplace.

Right now normal, hardworking, Americans are without healthcare and cannot put their children through college. This misconception that it's all fatass, lazy, smoking, drug addicts is the same ridiculous paranoia that oh you know brought us into places like Vietnam and Iraq to fight "kommunusm and terrists."

The irony is we can't rely on average Americans to weigh in these topics because of the ignorance of the post above and people having no idea of what social concepts are other than Fox News tells them Russia is bad, buy Amurrrrrrrikkkan.

Do you all realize the same shit is spouted in China and Russia about American-style capitalism and democracy? That elections are rigged and we are trying to spread a wealth-based pyramid empire? Why the fuck would anyone think that?

The further irony is that if we paid taxes into a socialized healthcare and higher education fund, we would ultimately pay less than we do for healthcare out pf our paychecks and per visit, as well as corporations and small businesses would pay less to cover employees ( read: job creation ), and there would be such a massive reduction in debt to those who chose to go to state and federally funded colleges ( read: more consumerism ).

It's really shitty we have backwards fucks voicing opinions on shit they know nothing about because of talking points they heard from talking heads.

Oh and this whole crisis was brought onto the taxpayer by greedy fucks who approved predatory lending among other shitty credit policies. A nationalized bank ( along with a few jailed bankers ) would give people running these institutions no motive to profit from bad practice since they would be on a fixed salary and have fear of the law, which they have no healthy respect of to begin with.


tl;dr : socialized healthcare, socialized college, and nationalized banks = more money in the taxpayers pocket, less worries of a financial crisis. People who are vehemently opposed to this are only able to parrot talking heads and not research the topic.



ps - I hope you are in a car accident and seriously injured, and no one stops to help you because of a shitty, baseless misconception.

[MF Perm tha Fineass]

According to Marx, going from Capitalism -> Socialism will eventually get you to communism. And the way people talk about these issues a number of people do wish to move towards communism.

I looked up a better definition of socialism and it basically means the government owns looooots of shit. Which we're already starting to see happen more with the government becoming bigger and bigger. I dislike that, it's getting so big and there will need to be middle men to supervise the middle men supervising the middle men. It's just a waste of efficiency. A company attempting to make a profit will be far more efficient than the government, always.

Yes, your economic theories are astounding. This same theory has brought us two depressions in less than a century. You're so money and you don't even know it!

[sephir]

Sometimes nationalized programs can be better than their free market counterparts but only in a few cases.

I personally think Health care can be one of them, as nationalized health care is constantly under pressure to cut costs where as two tiered systems are seeking the highest contribution margin available, not to mention they focus on treatment instead of cures.

Banks are funny as they are central to any economy. If the banking industry falls apart so does the entire economy. The Canadian government for example doesn't have 'nationalized' banks but instead holds them to extremely strict regulations that would have many people on Wall Street or in London crying foul. As a result of this strict regulation our banking system is one of the healthiest in the entire world and our economy is only being pulled under as a result of a fall in Exports (mainly to USA) and not of tight credit and incredible loses as a result of Option ARs or Sub Prime mortgages.

As far as drifting from Capitalism to Socialism, its complicated. What do you define as 'pure capitalism'? Someone such as Adam Smith might consider any regulation in an economy as interference, but time and time again we learn that some regulation in an economy is indeed necessary, and sometimes government does need to get involved at some level to restrict certain practices, how much so is always being debated.

If you are concerned about the fact that your mortgage could now be owned by the government, I don't think its anything to be concerned about. You signed a contract and therefore any purchase of that company must honor the contract until it expires.