YES! There should be more than a handful of banks in the U.S.
44%
YES! The big banks are now bigger than they were before the crash.
56%
Comments
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
Images of Thom
At Mondragon - both the mountain and the cooperative city - in Spain (written about in "Threshold" book)
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"If you wonder why and when giant corporations got the power to reign supreme over us, here’s the story."
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Hartmann combines a remarkable piece of historical research with a brilliant literary style to tell the grand story of corporate corruption and its consequences for society with the force and readability of a great novel."
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Thom Hartmann is a literary descendent of Ben Franklin and Tom Paine. His unflinching observations and deep passion inspire us to explore contemporary culture, politics, and economics; challenge us to face the facts of the societies we are creating; and empower us to demand a better world for our children and grandchildren."
In two debates, Hillary Clinton stated she will break up the big banks if they pose a threat. In her mind, what do they have to do to pose a treat? The meltdown of the economy and taxpayer bailouts of the past were not enough? What do the largest banks have to do to be a threat in her mind? If (and perhaps when) the largest banks create another economic crisis and need to be bailed out AGAIN, will Clinton then, after the fact, decide they need to be broken up (when its too late)?
Bernie Sanders already knows the largest banks are a threat to the economy and knows they need to be broken up. Local and state banks will be created again. Local community members will be allowed to borrow money from local banks, creating stonger local communities and a stronger overall economy.
And Sanders is right with his implication that certain Wall Street banks will control Clinton. Under Clinton, it is very fair to assume a few banks will become even stronger and more powerful.
Both are right answers actually, the banks should never have been allowed ot get that big, and should be broken up, and the bankers who ripped people off, and did things that led to the crash should be in prison.