• Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

Discussion: Elizabeth Warren and the CFPB

She and this agency are simply trying to protect consumers from being screwed over by fine print and credit card abuse....and Wall Street and the GOP are fighting her like Trotsky has come to dismantle their industry. It is ridiculous. She is one of those few people who really just want to hold banks (i.e. Wall Street) accountable and this moderate agency is just meant to make the playing field safer for consumers. The vitriol the GOP have for and disdain from the banks is telling about what really matters to them and it is pathetic.
 
I was actually pretty sympathetic to Warren when I first started reading some of her stuff, but her rhetoric destroys her entire position in my eyes.

You want to clean up fine print? Fine.

You claim that the CFPB has "unprecedented" levels of oversight due to the fact the FSOC can override it's measures - when an override requires more than a 2/3rds vote (with the CFPB director having a vote - so it's actually more than a 2/3rds vote) with the critera being nothing short of "undermining the safety and security of the American economy". Sorry, that's a blatant lie.

Describing a bill that would turn the CFPB director into a three person commission (as she originally called for) as a "knife in the ribs" of consumer protection is absurd and turns her from credible advocate to simple demogage.
 
2/3 override is respectable because how many government agencies can be overridden by a combined vote of other agencies, departments and regulators?

As for her "demogaugery," she has to sell not only herself, but her agency which half of Congress is trying to defund simply because Wall Street donors tell them to. Their plan B is to take away its teeth and allow banking controlled institutions be able to override its power. When she sells the agency to the media or to the Capitol, she uses rhetoric that highlights its importance to people whose understanding of the financial system usually devolves down to phrases like "banksters" and "big government takeovers" depending on their political ideology. She has proven herself to be an exceptional voice for consumer rights and the reason she is vilified is because banks do not want consumers to have any rights.
 
It's not 2/3rds. It's 2/3rd INCLUDING the director of the CFPB. And the criteria isn't whether their ruling is "good or bad" it is whether "it is so bad it will destroy the entire economy or not". LOL.

She has proven to be an exceptional voice FOR HER BUREAU which is no more the same as being in the interest of consumer rights than the notion that the Department of Defense is in the interest of national defense.

Again, she has described a bill that would do nothing but restructure the CFPB to the exact same structure that passed the House (the wording is exactly the same), the same structure that SHE HERSELF ADVOCATED when calling for the CFPB to be strutured like the Consumer Protection Agency, as a "knife to the ribs" of consumer protection.

It's ridiculous. She claims to be a "political outsider" and yet engages in the same political dribble.

She is a demogage.

A charismatic demogage? Sure. A well intentioned demogage? I have no doubt. But a demogage none the less.

Now there are other issues I have with Elizabeth Warren, for example she doesn't know her economic history (indicating that the Fed was the first Central Bank in American history on the Daily Show for example), but her demogagory is the most troublesome to me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"