Thursday, April 07, 2016

Sanders Digs In, Clinton Calls for Unity in Spat Over Qualifications

Good for her. She's what one calls in Yiddish a MENCH! Bernie is a scold and he just lost whatever chance he might have had to take the oval. He NEVER will because he stooped to Republican speak and refuses to ameliorate things which she is doing. It is in her interest and OURS, of course, to keep the Democratic Party in tact. For his sour punishing with no regret comments he just lost whatever chance he had to be president. Personally, although I like his views, I thought he had zero chance and now even more so.

IF there is a candidate who is more qualified than the Secretary of State Clinton I do NOT know who it is. Sanders is living in dream world much like Trump. As president one cannot waive a magic wand and wish things to be so. One has to be able to walk a line and negotiate. Am I telling Senator Sanders anything he does not know? I think I may be and THAT is reason number one he is not going to walk into the oval. I am voting Hillary and wish I could twice because she is so very experienced and pragmatic. One must be to get things done. Senator Sanders stop scolding and start exuding the humanity you say you have in policy but I do not see in reality. Do not alienate Democrats UNITE them!

My finance professor relative says this: "Bernie Sanders should not be President, he is too old and he is also not entirely correct; in a way, his mantra about breaking up banks is just as stupid as Trump demanding the Mexicans pay for a wall; unintended consequences. Banks will break themselves up- it is called divesting, or spinoffs, when market forces and regulations make it advantageous to do so. In the same way that Treasury just prevented a huge tax inveersion by changing the rules. You did not need Congress for that. Look up the Pfizer-Allergan deal that was just blown up; they planned to merge, move the HQ to Ireland (where Allergan is) and thus avoid paying US taxes, Treasury got serious and made, or enforced rules that require US Corporations to not do that. They could have done this earlier for other companies, too, and maybe they will in retrospect.

Now the M & A (mergers and acquisitions) guys will work on other deals, like breaking up Pfizer instead of merging it. Pfizer shares went up yesterday. The company will still do what it can to maximize profits, which is their job. Same thing with banks. Change the rules a bit and they will diversify all by themselves; no need the “break them up”, whatever that means- this was done to ATT in the old days BTW.

The size of the bank is not the main problem, it is what they might do to embrace too much risk that is."

NOT ANYMORE

  I wrote this last week and for the most part sat on it because I did not want my writing to imply anything against Israel. As stated agai...