patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,199,255 comments by 14,165 users - UkraineIsTotallyFucked online now
invite responseComments 1 - 5 of 5 Search these comments
That's why they should have another shutdown. Bring it on and save some taxpayer money.
"Last year, Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) introduced the same provision under debate in the current budget talks. The legislative text was written by a Citigroup lobbyist, according to The New York Times. The bill passed the House by a vote of 292 to 122 in October 2013, 122 Democrats opposed, and 70 in favor. All but three House Republicans supported the bill."
Looks like quite a few Democrats were opposed back then, so why is this so hard to deny now? Obama could gain a few points back by vetoing it. What's the fat chance that's going to happen? Just shut that shit down.
HydroCabron
2014 Dec 9, 11:00am
That's why they should have another shutdown. Bring it on and save some taxpayer money.
Shutdowns cost the taxpayer money.
That's why they should have another shutdown. Bring it on and save some taxpayer money.
Shutdowns cost the taxpayer money.
No they don't.
'Cause We Can, That's Why.
"Wall Street lobbyists are trying to secure taxpayer backing for many derivatives trades as part of budget talks to avert a government shutdown.
According to multiple Democratic sources, banks are pushing hard to include the controversial provision in funding legislation that would keep the government operating after Dec. 11. Top negotiators in the House are taking the derivatives provision seriously, and may include it in the final bill, the sources said.
The bank perks are not a traditional budget item. They would allow financial institutions to trade certain financial derivatives from subsidiaries that are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. -- potentially putting taxpayers on the hook for losses caused by the risky contracts."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/04/wall-street-government-shutdown_n_6272776.html
#politics