Monte wrote:
Again with the godwins.
Just to get this straight -
Companies get bailed out because they were idiots and created a bunch of financial products that didnt hold water in order to get very very rich, quickly.
Securitized debt surely holds water; it has for decades and will continue to do so.
Monte wrote:
These irresponsible decisions led directly to a massive market crash that affected every person in this country, and had dire consequences around the world.
I'm sure that the irresponsible decisions that actually caused failures aren't the ones you're thinking of, here's a hint: Those decisions had more to do with political power and the racism of low expectations than getting "rich very very quickly".
Monte wrote:
Sick as it made us, we bailed them out because letting them crash would have caused an economic depression that would have done significantly *more* harm.
The congresspeople who voted for the bailouts and the people who
actually pay taxes bailed them out the "we" you're using doesn't apply as you intend.
Monte wrote:
And now, it's facism to not allow the executives of the companies that *haven't* paid us back to obscenely compensate themselves.
The fact that the Federal Government is unilaterally disregarding contract law, imposing economic regimentation, and suppressing dissent surely makes it fascism, whether you understand that or not.
Monte wrote:
They are on our life support system.
Your use of "our" is the same as your use of "we" above - incorrect.
Monte wrote:
If one of their clients had not paid their bills, they would garnish their wages and go after them tooth and claw until they got paid.
That may very well be true, but the accuracy of your analogy ends there.
"They" wouldn't have forced "them" to take their money.
"They" wouldn't have refused to accept attempted repayment of "their" money.
The payment of bills implies a due date that has passed, otherwise there would be nothing due for "they" to go after "them"; no due date has passed for the TARP funds.
The methods of collection would be directly related to payment of money owed, "they" would have to do so under the law, no in direct contraversion of established law.
Monte wrote:
Because frankly, when people bring up facism, they are bringing up the Nazis even if they don't intend to.
See, statements like the above make it clear that you would benefit from the knowledge you obviously lack. People with a passing knowledge of history have long list of things, people, and places that come to mind when someone mentions Fascism. I, for one think of Italy post WWI. Since that's where the word is derived, and that's what Mussolini named his organization:
Fasci italiani di combattimento, which, in turn, became his party:
Partito Nazionale Fascista. See the words there?
Simply because
a person, or a certain
group of like minded people think as you assert, doesn't make it so.
You'll notice I use a capital "F"? You used a lower-case "f" which doesn't make me even think of all-encompassing political movements, but of incremental steps toward a state of governmental being; which would lead a person of intelligence to believe that Nazi's are not even in the same room as the poster's intent.
Monte wrote:
Just like the confederate flag is rightly associated with slavery, facism and Nazi germany are inextricably bound.
To reiterate: Simply because
a person, or a certain
group of like minded people think as you assert, doesn't make it so.
Consider the "meat" of your post, as well as the ignorance inherent in your ridiculous assertion (it is obvious that you are doing what Godwin attempted to reign in with his counter-meme), addressed.
_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko