break them up, great idea

Glass-Steagall, anyone?

Even from Bernie, this one is political and a bad idea. He must have used a little too much maple syrup for breakfast.

Breaking up large financial institutions would be counter productive as no such suggestions or implementation prevail in the rest of the world - financial or real. It would leave everything here open to foreign interests and besides, how would this proposal deal with foreign interests like RBS and HSBC? It's like telling them to go home. Way back in time before the Civil war we had something similar and the results were very negative.

While it's nice to be critical, it's also good to have a secondary proposal. Why not just fire the idiots that are presently in charge? Of course, this is a free society in which the government would have no legal right to do so and this does pose a problem. I have a simple solution - Nationalize the banks. O boy, would there be a hoard screaming foul and mobilizing their legal staffs, but it remains a legal answer. The real unemployment figure is more like 17%, we have a financial mess - courtesy of bank leaders and a credit crunch courtesy of same. Government and Wall St. just have not reached a sound conclusion that, if this is not corrected, the potential to create depression status still exists. The whole of those in the know look at startling statistics and view the same as good news. I have nothing against business, profit or reasonable greed. The last round of figures look good, but business has now moved from squeezing water from a rock to that of blood - the blood of the employed who fear losing their jobs. What happens when the well runs dry?
NOTHING is going to move in a positive direction until the banking system problems are resolved - and this is not going to happen with the current batch of gremlins running them.
Anyone keeping up this mess has to know that it was loose credit that started it. You also have to know that the government and Fed bailed it out. (that's us). If you have a credit card you have seen your rates soar - even if you have perfect credit and a score over 800. Anyone trying to do a mortgage knows that jumbo loans are non-existent - even if you have great credit and the ability to pay. You also have to know that the same banks cannot fail as the government (that's us) is backing them up.
If you analyze the above you can only conclude that those in charge are not in touch with reality and therefore - incompetent at their job.

Great way to end capitalism,attack it on all fronts,dismantle it.Fact;the government has forced banks to make risky loans or contribute to ACORN or not be allowed to expand,this started in the Clinton administration and we are paying for it now,Bill Clinton started the mortgage crisis when he was in office it exploded last year,it wasnt Bush's fault.

Late to post but I've been busy.

What I think hte government should do is to take any bank with more than x billion in hlodings/loans/transactions however you want to break it down or measure their size, then deregulate them, remove thier investors from FDIC protections and announce that they no longer qualify as Official banks, this will leave their investors in an "Invest at your own risk" situation - any failures, discrepencies corruption whatever will not be the governments responsibility. Any bank that operates outside the US will also be barred from qualifying in the official US banking system, these banks also will be restricted from participating in SBA programs



Then you take the regional banks that are limited to less than x billion in accounts and have all their interests in domestic holdings, These will become the Official US banks, with all the protections and regulations that implies. These banks would also be protected/denied from any form of foreign investment - Give me my Bailey Building and Loan thank you very much

This way when a bank that is "too big to fail" inevitably does fail then it will be "Tough Shit!" to it's investors They were warned they chose to invest it is not my problem.

This would provide people with two options Risk or Regulation. I think the smarter investors would hold accounts in each group allowing investors to more properly asses their own risks rather then let the bank (mis)managers choose their risks for them