Tell me why the banks aren't

[theaocp]

too big to fail right now? I know Clinton keeps talking about how she'll follow the process of Dodd-Frank, IF those banks are shown to pose a systemic risk to the economy, but this implies they're not already posing a such a risk. Who out there thinks everything in the banking industry is not posing this risk?

[metroins]

1. Everything poses a risk

Walmart goes down, economy goes down.
Large Oil goes down, economy goes down.
FANG (Facebook,Amazon,Netflix,Google) go down, everything goes down.

There will always be a risk; there just needs to be a backup plan.

[liberal_at_heart]

5. The tax payers are not supposed to be the back up plan. If corporations don't want to

pay taxes to pay for healthcare, education, SS, and other social services then they don't get our tax money when they fail. You can't or I should say shouldn't because they do but they shouldn't privatize profit and socialize loss. That is not the way it is supposed to work.

[KentuckyWoman]

7. Welcome to 1968.

I was born in 1951. My father was a Republican and would rather fall on his sword than face the fact his daughter was hanging on the words of civil rights leaders.

Although I'm wrong on that as well. For the rich it's always been a government bailouts. For the rest of us it's always been bootstraps. Roman tax collectors squeezing the people so the rich could live in luxury was old news at the time. Monarchies around the world have fallen because excessive greed at the top sucked the life out of the land. It's as old as money... maybe older.

Someday I hope the Bernie Sanders' of the world win.

[HooptieWagon]

2. The banks are bigger than in 2008.

If they were too big to fail then, they are ever moreso now.

[theaocp]

3. I imagine so and that's why

I feel her promise to follow through is nonsense. If you don't think they pose a systemic risk, you're either ignorant or deliberately obtuse. I'm open to opposing viewpoints.

[theaocp]

4. kick for more thoughts

especially tonight. who thinks the banks don't pose a systematic risk right the fuck now?!

[Recursion]

6. Quick: can you name the banks already broken up under Dodd-Frank?

No?

Did you know that banks judged to be "systemically important" have already failed stress tests and been broken up? Nobody mentioned that to you? That's kind of interesting, isn't it, that the law is doing what it said it would, and people seem to be going out of their way to avoid talking about it.

[theaocp]

8. No, I can't, which is the point of the post.

I'll infer by your response that you have the information you allude to and would be happy to provide it. I don't believe "systemically important" is the same thing as posing a "systemic risk" to our economy. Please enlighten me as to how you believe the banks are not too big to fail. I'll wait.

[Recursion]

9. "systemically important" is the only category recognized in Dodd-Frank

And AFAIK it's identical to "too big to fail".

For starters, look up Met Life's stress test, and why they were broken up.

[theaocp]

11. Did I misunderstand Clinton

when she has spoken about posing systemic risks to our economy? Further, do you believe there are banks right now that are too big to fail?

[mmonk]

10. It's an unnecessary sword hanging over us.

I cannot accept the status quo because it accepts money which sells out our safety and security. They are no friend to any citizen bottom line.

[Cheese Sandwich]

12. She is just using weasel words. Will say anything to get elected.