Stephen Colbert Asked Hillary Clinton If She'd Let Big Banks Fail: 'Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes'

[Purveyor]

Source: Business Insider

Hillary Clinton told late-night host Stephen Colbert on Tuesday that she would not bail out banks if confronted with another crisis caused by risky behaviour in the financial industry.

When asked by the “Late Show” host Colbert if she would allow banks to fail in the case of another financial industry meltdown, Clinton had an unequivocal answer.

“Yes,” Clinton said, nodding. “Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.”

The former secretary of state qualified her answer, saying that mandates included in the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial-reform package would safeguard against a situation like the 2008 collapse.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/hillary-clinton-stephen-colbert-big-banks-fail-2015-10

[virtualobserver]

1. letting them fail at their current size without breaking them up would crash the world economy

what an insane answer......it sounds like an bullshit answer that she imagines people want to hear

[Warpy]

6. Yes, allowing them to bankrupt and topple would be ruinous

The second part to allowing them to fail is nationalization but that's a word that none dare speak and the banksters know it. So they continue the fiction of "too big to fail, to important to jail" and hope nobody thinks about the situation too hard.

[99th_Monkey]

8. +10 nt

[riversedge]

14. Read the rest of the rest of the article...

....Clinton said if banks or other financial institutions become “too big to fail,” she would considering pushing to break them up.

“And they have to know — what their shareholders have to know is, yes, they will fail. And if they’re too big to fail, then, under my plan and others that have been proposed, they may have to be broken up,” Clinton said.

Citing praise from New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, Clinton said her financial-industry regulation plan, released earlier this month, is the most comprehensive plan of any candidate. She argued the plan does not just focus on major banks, instead ensuring that risky behaviour perpetrated by other large sectors of the finance industry — like insurance companies — don’t threaten to cause a systemic collapse.

[INdemo]

29. Bill Clinton and Paul Krugman has never agreed on anything

Hillary Clinton is just saying again,what Bernie Sanders has talked about with breaking up the Banks.
With Hillary saying she would allow banks to fail without bailing them out was not in the corporate Goldman Sachs script.
She will later say,I would be on it, that it was a joke...

[mcar]

33. What does Bill Clinton have to do with this?

Krugman has praised HRC's plan.

[Historic NY]

40. They projecting themselves again.

[Agschmid]

51. Nothing...

Clearly.

[virtualobserver]

36. I did read it...there is no "if"

They have been too big to fail for years.....

They need to be broken up yesterday.

And if they’re too big to fail, then, under my plan and others that have been proposed, they may have to be broken up,” Clinton said.



The only problem her plan is fixing is political. She is pretending to be committed to breaking up the banks to compete with Bernie.

Her most enthusiastic commitment is about letting "too big to fail" banks actually fail.....

When asked by the “Late Show” host Colbert if she would allow banks to fail in the case of another financial industry meltdown, Clinton had an unequivocal answer.

“Yes,” Clinton said, nodding. “Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.”

[cprise]

60. She has admitted it herself

IIRC it was during her 2008 run for office. She referred to the large banks as "too big to fail", using those exact words.

Of course, she didn't aim to fix that. By adding a box of bandaids to the situation, she is enshrining the big banks as permanent institutions.

[Android3.14]

39. Based on where she is receiving her backing, we can safely conclude this is unreliable

Come on, even you have enough sense to know she will not bite the hand that feeds her.

[frylock]

48. HILLARY 2016: Me Too!

[Half-Century Man]

2. A thousand times safer to reinstate Glass Steagal and break them into bite sized pieces.

But, that would damage the ability to get 100 million plus in donations.

[virtualobserver]

4. exactly, we already know that they are too big to fail

you have to break them up before they fail.....

that 'Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes' thing.......amazing

[840high]

3. Stupid pandering.

[riversedge]

12. Who is she pandering to -as you claim?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

17. Look in the mirror.

[Ed Suspicious]

35. +1

[McCamy Taylor]

5. I am sure the banksters don't like this answer but everyone else should.

[DJ13]

7. They dont mind

It just means they expect to be hit up for more campaign donations in the near future by Hillary's team.

[Jack Rabbit]

9. You're that the banksters don't mind

But that's because they know she doesn't mean a word of it.

This sounds like more finger-to-the-wind politics from Hillary.

[joshcryer]

16. Under her plan they have to pay fees if they can't show a "living will."

That is, if they can't prove that they're solvent and don't need breaking up or that they're not "too big to fail", they just have to pay a fine.

The banks will gladly pay these "fees" year after year. If anything it's banker insurance. It's actually not good in the long run if it's not managed correctly.

[frizzled]

20. Oh, so their bank fails. Big deal. They don't suffer.

Execute them. Seriously.

Just fucking kill every banker who launders money, falsifies accounts, double-dips, takes more risk than they are legally allowed to, etc. That's the point at which you'll see an improvement in behavior.

Same for politicians, too.

[redwitch]

44. Seriously?

Sorry, I don't support the death penalty. Prosecution is called for, not execution. We are not Saudi Arabia. Thank God.

[Doctor_J]

68. except that she is lying

The big banks give a ton of money to her campaign. They wouldn't be doing this if she would let them sink.

[imthevicar]

10. This Politition Will Lie Like anything!

HRC is fully in the pockets of Big banks and Has the Gaul to Say she would break them Up!? GIVE ME A BREAK!

[riversedge]

13. Have you read her plan....

which is embedded in this part??

...“Under Dodd-Frank, that is what will happen because we now have stress tests,” Clinton said, before mentioning a proposal from her own plan to more heavily regulate Wall Street. “And I’m going to impose a risk fee on the big bank if they engage in risky investor.”

Clinton said if banks or other financial institutions become “too big to fail,” she would considering pushing to break them up.

“And they have to know — what their shareholders have to know is, yes, they will fail. And if they’re too big to fail, then, under my plan and others that have been proposed, they may have to be broken up,” Clinton said.


Citing praise from New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, Clinton said her financial-industry regulation plan, released earlier this month, is the most comprehensive plan of any candidate. She argued the plan does not just focus on major banks, instead ensuring that risky behaviour perpetrated by other large sectors of the finance industry — like insurance companies — don’t threaten to cause a systemic collapse.


http://www.businessinsider.com.au/hillary-clinton-stephen-colbert-big-banks-fail-2015-10

[smiley]

21. just because we read it....

doesn't mean we believe it. I for one have a hard time believing a single word that comes out of any Clinton's mouth. Typical politicians if you ask me. Say one thing.... do another.

Have a great day! It''s going to be beautiful!

[SmittynMo]

28. "If banks or other financial institutions become “too big to fail,” she would considering to ....."

How does one monitor this? Enforce it? And then she would "consider" "pushing" to break them up? There should be no considering. It should be implemented, no questions asked. My main question is how can you determine that a bank has become "too big to fail"?

Sorry, but I don't buy her bullshit for 1 second. It's all political fluff to please the masses.

[Bohunk68]

34. "CONSIDER" Where have I heard this, recently?

Oh, yes. It was 2 years ago when my then congregation told me when I asked them to become an RIC congregation, I was told, "Well, if you bring in a couple more GLBT members, we will take it under CONSIDERATION." I didn't buy that insult then and I don't buy it from anyone else,either. Whenever one hears that word, consider, that means, not a thing is going to happen. Their minds are already made up and it is not in your favor. Hillary knows from whence comes her campaign cash.

[NorthCarolina]

59. The action word of course being

"they have to be broken up"

Which can always be used post election to refute the claim that she said she "WOULD" break them up. It's all in the semantics. Glad for her cash flow potential she didn't forget to add the "MAY". Can you imagine? Whew, would that be ugly.

[imthevicar]

63. Too Late!

They are already to big to fail! and we the taxpayer are the golden Parachute.

[cantbeserious]

27. ^^^ This ^^^

eom

[Geronimoe]

11. Ca-ching

Bill is going to get more speaking engagements at big banks.

[joshcryer]

15. The fees (fines) thing in her economic thing suggested this.

But only if they failed to pay the fines (she calls them "fees&quot afaik. And the big banks have never failed to pay their fines (fees). So it's an easy out, imo. The big banks would undoubtedly consider it more useful to pay the fines (fees) from a cost-benefit scenario than they would break themselves up.

But as Warren said, breaking up the banks makes them more valuable, so that's the eventuality in the long run.

[davidpdx]

22. Yep, it's all about perception

We already got fleeced once by the big banks and a good portion of the money wasn't recovered.

It's the same thing as the bean counters and the recalls of cars. It's cheaper to pay the fines then to recall the product. The company's will worry about their bottom line and screw the taxpayers.

[YOHABLO]

18. Even if she's sincere about this, won't it take more than just her wish at doing so?

committees, hearings, wheels and deals, legislation and votes cast by a majority of congressmen /women who are virtually tied to big banks anyway, just as she is?

[riversedge]

64. Same applies to anything Bernie puts forth requiring legislation

[frizzled]

19. The Democrats should propose: death penalty for corrupt bankers.

It's used already in the world, and the deterrence effect for bankers and politicians should be pretty good. Apply it to everyone who embezzles or swindles more than, say, $1000.

[underpants]

23. They won't have to, the banks can now pull money out of their member accounts

Why do you think so many people bailed ON the banks and went to credit unions?

[Sunlei]

32. Never could find a credit union in sw houston area that was any better than the 'big5'

yes, there are a few 'credit unions' that give better rates (slightly) but they limit to police officers, military or government workers. And I don't consider 1% interest on a CD such a great 'investment' anyway.

[Enrique]

24. Obama wanted to break up the banks

he told Geithner to do it and Geithner didn't do it, so oh well.

I guess the lesson is we need to look at who Hillary would put as Treasury Secretary.

[raouldukelives]

30. +1 nt

[GoneFishin]

25. Words are cheap. Her track record says otherwise.

[cantbeserious]

26. The Flip Flopper Has Just Flopped And Flipped Again

eom

[Sunlei]

31. How about the USA opens the Post Office banks, like warren/obama mentioned 2 yrs ago &

and allow more small banks open to give those big five banks some competition for customers?

Those "big5" Banks cut 2% off the top of every debit card transaction across America as pure profit. They can afford to treat small bank account consumers a lot better.

[Ed Suspicious]

37. Just give people a choice. If you like your bank, keep your bank, but if you want to try postal

bank, well shit, let the market sort it out.

[Sunlei]

38. exactly, the banks need real competition. Now they collude with each other like gasoline does.

[jwirr]

54. There are a lot people who have housing or car loans from

the big banks. How do they opt out?

[Ed Suspicious]

55. Get their next loan from the people instead of the crooks.

[jwirr]

58. Well I can see that with a car loan but housing, that is a

long term loan.

[harun]

67. Great idea but they'd never let that happen.

[jtuck004]

41. “Yes,” Clinton said, nodding. “Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.” < Same thing she said when she got the

donations as $200,000 a page "speaking fees" from the bank$ter/donors....

[Javaman]

42. it's easy to say yes on a talk show while campaigning infront of a national audience.

she knows the temperature of the nation, what else would she say?

however, since most of those "too big to fail" banks are giving her copious amounts of money to her campaign, I honestly doubt she would allow any of them to "fail".

but then again, in wall street/banking terms, "fail" means getting a golden parachute before you are shown the door.

so to them, fail is win/win as they go and peddle their bullshit into another CEO position at another bank.

And allowing them to fail would crash the economy.

How about just breaking them up and jailing the violators? I know, novel idea.

her sound bite plays well to the people who don't know better, but to the rest of us who pay attention, it's just more pandering.

she knows her sound bites.

[restorefreedom]

43. its aimed at the mass audience low info voter

to them, it sounds great and gee, kinda like bernie, except that they won't notice the difference that Bernie wants to break the banks up now. Hillary knows that if the banks collapse at their current size the economy is over. But she knows it makes a good sound bite and to the low info voter, they'll think she's copying Bernie again.

[NorthCarolina]

45. ANything to get elected! I don't believe her for an instant though.

You don't suck up their cash like a Hoover and then turn around and play hard ball with them. If you believe her words in that instance...I have a bridge you might be interested in buying. It's not a bridge in America so you won't have to worry about repair costs.

[sammythecat]

49. Agree. This is bullshit for votes.

This is what I think her thinking is:

1) The banks aren't going to fail again in the next 8 years anyway. So there's that.

2) If they do, it would be years down the road and I can say "I know what I said on Colbert and I meant every word of it, but that was in 2015 and, as we all know, a lot of things have changed since then. I have more information, there's this, and there's that, and blah, blah, blah, BLAH!"

Her friends and benefactors will get whatever they need.

[NorthCarolina]

50. I heard her speak the "out" during the interview

but i can't exactly remember what the words were, but she dropped it for later "plausible deniability", just in case. She sucks Bank money up like an Industrial Hoover, she can never, nor would she ever, break up the banks.

[L0oniX]

46. ...and she has a bridge for sale too.

[SoapBox]

52. Oh barfo...does the Weathervane ever stop pandering?

What a load of baloney.

She loves Big Money, being a Proud Capitalist!

[tularetom]

53. Iceland, Where Bankers Actually Go To Jail For Committing White-Collar Crimes

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/10/23/3715775/iceland-jails-bankers-and-survives/

The problem is not letting them "fail". There have to be consequences for the people that caused the problem in the first place.

[closeupready]

56. She would DEFINITELY let them fail, oh yes. Except, of course, when she wouldn't.

Which would be any time any one of her sponsors tell her NOT to let them fail.

[jwirr]

57. Oh, yes, yes.....The problem is that as they set now should

a big bank fail they take everything else with them. Everything they are involved with.

In breaking up the banks we can afford to have a smaller bank fail because it does not touch everything else. It is safer to have all kinds of small banks.

She said Dodd-Frank would keep them from failing? I thought that the only thing that did was make sure we the taxpayers would never have to bail them out again.

[ozone_man]

61. Unlikely.

I do think we will be revisiting this scenario soon. Better bookmark this.

[LiberalElite]

62. Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah Sure she would. nt

[ileus]

65. When we all know the answer is NO.

No one would...

[Calista241]

66. Sure she would.

If Bank of America were to fail, that's 200,000 people out of a job on day 1. That doesn't even include all the satellite companies and other businesses that have deep relationships with BofA that will lay off a shit-ton of people due to loss of business.

It's easy to say "sure I'll let them fail" on late night tv, and when you're not responsible for anything. It's much harder to do when shit is actually going down.

[yurbud]

69. what evidence is there she'd do that? talk is cheap

Her record implies she'd do nothing of the sort.

[Bradical79]

70. More like maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe

Plenty of qualifiers, which makes sense. Obviously, the financial reforms have to be passed and implemented first that make sure the collapse of a big bank doesn't completely wreck the economy. "Too big to fail" needs to be an impossibility.