Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
The issue is that these two sets of people - bankers and those supposedly regulating and enforcing the regulations on banks - have a large amount of overlap. Not seeing that this is a ongoing and massive problem is the true disconnection from reality.
To press your analogy further, it's more like Iginla was in charge of amending the rules of hockey and made it so that just taking a shot that hits the goalie counts as a goal as long as your jersey number is 12. That's great for all the #12s in the league, and somewhat less than great for everybody else.
And as long as we're talking about "reality", politicians aren't (in general) experts on regulation and the economy. They take the advice of the people that are supposed to know what they are doing, but those people are too blinded by their ideology of "what's good for business is good for America" to do anything other than screw over the middle class in favour of the oligarchs and their acolytes.
It's all part of a system that needs to be reformed - the idea that changing the people at the top has more than cosmetic effect is laughable. THAT is what people are protesting - the inordinate amount of power that corporations and governments have and use against the better interests of the common person, despite the supposedly overarching authority of the democratic will.
|
I don't disagree at all, but it's not up to banks and the people in charge of them to change that (part of any industry is lobbying to government and attempting to influence change, to stick with the hockey analogy we've seen that with Lemieux going after the clutch and grab style and recently with Crosby and hits to the head), it's up to government and regulators to insulate themselves from undue influence.