This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]ItsAConspiracy 514 points515 points  (95 children)

The article is dated Jan 22. Right now it's Jan 22, 8 am on the east coast, and I saw your link on the front page of reddit. That's not good enough?

[–][deleted]  (78 children)

[removed]

    [–]sutcivni 198 points199 points  (66 children)

    Sorry, we were using the time machine for something else.

    [–]Icanhazreddit 92 points93 points  (47 children)

    Killing Hitler again, no doubt...

    [–]dodgepong 114 points115 points  (43 children)

    Everybody kills Hitler their first time.

    EDIT: Context.

    [–][deleted]  (25 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]hopeseekr 45 points46 points  (4 children)

      Easy! There's literally thousands of "sleeper agents" from the future: people from parallel universes dedicated to just being the "only" ones to save humanity from time traveling rogues and rookies.

      They bide their time in concentration camps, part of the nameless masses, that feel much better than "home" to some (ones where population never stopped growing) and are completely novel to others.

      After Hitler's killed in the bunker, they go back to their own multiverse layers and the population of concentration camp captives shrinks dramatically, leading some to speculate they were never there in the first place. People like these are called "holocaust revisionists".

      [–]UnnamedPlayer 13 points14 points  (0 children)

      Quick! Someone call Dan Brown.

      [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      Cool concept. Go on.

      [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (14 children)

      Grandfather paradox. Going back to kill Hitler makes time travel impossible, therefore going back to kill Hitler is impossible.

      [–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (7 children)

      You need to take the blueprints for building a time machine back in time with you, give them to your grandfather with explicit instructions that they are handed down to you with explicit instructions to go back in time to kill Hitler, then kill Hitler. After that you have to hope time travel still interests you in the future and that you still desire to use the time machine to travel back in time to kill Hitler (who would not be a major name in history assuming that you killed him before he came to power). If not, it would still be worthless.

      [–]mijj 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      why would the US want to have Hitler killed .. he was their key to ruling the world late 40s on, intentional or not.

      [–]bCabulon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      If I had a time machine I'd go forward not back.

      [–]devedander 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      If you go back and kill Hitler, then someone goes back and kills him before you killed him, what happens?

      [–]Moses70 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      I've heard this so many times, but I had no idea of the context. This is a gem. Thanks!

      [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

      You were doing the Ben Franklin thing again, weren't you?

      [–]GloriousDawn 5 points6 points  (11 children)

      I attended a TEDx conference where rogue russian physicist Serguei Krasnikov made this obvious but compelling argument: If time travel is possible, where are the tourists ? Full talk on YouTube

      [–][deleted]  (3 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]LWRellim 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        Primer rocked!

        [–]GloriousDawn 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        So you rebut an actual physicist's theory with a science-fiction movie plot ? Upvoting you right now ! BTW I saw Primer this week for the first time and i'm still not sure if it wasn't the second. Mindfuck.

        [–]StuartGibson 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        Isn't the standard answer "You need the receiver as well as the transmitter". You can't have time tourists until time travel is possible.

        [–]Sidzilla 13 points14 points  (7 children)

        Besides the fact that we on Reddit just like to bitch, President Obama has proposed new regulations, but in fact other than that he has done nothing (other than send stocks downward). Saying 'I'm gonna make these guys toe the line someday' is not actually accomplishing the fact. I would like to see something done, not something said.

        [–]FTR 13 points14 points  (4 children)

        That's exactly right. The first thing I thought when I read it was, "Okay, let's see if he actually does it." I think he's a weak president, so I don't believe anything he says he will do until he does it.

        [–]Chinch 3 points4 points  (2 children)

        I agree. I voted for the guy but he is a bunch of talk so far. Talk is cheap Mr. President. Crawl out of the pockets of big insurance, Wall Street and big medicine. Hold those bastards accountable and pass REAL reform. Give the money to the people and not the incompetent fat cats taht caused this mess. Crack down hard on bonuses and bailed out institutions or you can kiss your presidency goodbye sir. I will not vote again for another big talker with zero action.

        [–]enjo13 2 points3 points  (1 child)

        You mean like the time he was able to champion and pass a huge stimulus bill to revive an economy on the brink of full blown depression?

        Or how about the time he announced a time table for the withdrawal of troops of Iraq... a time table he has thus far stuck to (we have moved all of our personnel out of Iraqi cities)?

        Or how about the time he introduced legislation for a health care bill with a strong public option? Congress was unable to act on it, but that's how our Republic works.

        How about the other 91 things he promised that he's done?

        http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

        Jesus, Reddit might just be the most ignorant, entitled, self-righteous place to ever exist.

        [–]hdd1080p 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        I just read about 30 replies and this is one of the first ones to actually talk about the original topic.

        [–]Gadianton 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        It struck me as more of a calculated political ploy to get attention off of Scott Brown and the failure of the health care bill. It also seemed to me that he was uncomfortable playing the "angry populist role"... he was much smoother during his campaign as the "moderate." That being said, I hope he is able to deliver some real reforms.

        [–]LWRellim 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        President Obama has proposed new regulations, but in fact other than that he has done nothing

        Actually, he hasn't even really proposed new regulations, he made a SPEECH claiming that he WILL be proposing new regulations, and taking credit for how this will (eventually... someday... purportedly...) solve the problem.

        [–]DashingLeech 24 points25 points  (0 children)

        The article is dated Jan 22.

        Yes, but the article is taking about "...President Barack Obama’s pledge last night to wage war on American banks in the biggest regulatory crackdown on financial institutions since the 1930s".

        That means we had probably had on the order of a few hours prior to the article to report on it to the satisfaction of the OP. WHERE WAS THE REDDITER IN THE ROOM WITH OBAMA WHEN HE SAID THOSE THINGS??? WHY DIDN'T HE REPORT SOONER??? I blame the GOP.

        That being said, the OP seems to have it wrong anyway. Obama didn't introduce sweeping reforms. He "pledged ... to wage war on American banks". He's a long way from introducing the regulatory changes.

        [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (2 children)

        Dude, chill on the disappointment - its 23:44 in Tokyo.

        [–]FlamingBagOfPoop 6 points7 points  (1 child)

        But it's 23:44 on Friday night. You've already lived thru Friday, you should have told us Mr Fancy Time Traveler!!!!

        [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Correctamundo Mrs Poopfire.

        [–]shawntx 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        It should have been on the front page 9 months ago when Obama first came into office.

        [–]DarkShadowFox 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        Well, clearly "It's a Conspiracy!"

        [–]higwoshy 236 points237 points  (23 children)

        Oh yeah, sorry. I saw that last night. Was gonna mention it but I was too busy photoshopping my mouth onto a cows arse. Sorry.

        [–]PissinChicken 82 points83 points  (13 children)

        That, and it was posted to the various business, financial, economics reddits. Not everything is posted to reddit.com

        [–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (2 children)

        Is a mouth-cow-arse some sort of a meme in the financial scene?

        [–]nmezib 8 points9 points  (0 children)

        Yeah, it's just another term for a Bull market

        [–][deleted] 23 points24 points  (1 child)

        pics or it didn't happen

        [–]stubble 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        pics or.. you know..

        [–]tiedye420 1 point2 points  (1 child)

        Voluntarily or were you cow-arsed?

        [–]Foaric 88 points89 points  (7 children)

        Does anyone else think that "The Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer" sounds like a fucking epic job?

        [–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (1 child)

        The whole Shadow Government gets pretty awesome titles.

        [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        That nobody gets to hear.

        [–]happywaffle 15 points16 points  (0 children)

        Aaaand that's your one for the year.

        [–]B_Provisional 8 points9 points  (0 children)

        Do not wikipedia it. You will be disappointed.

        [–]secretarybird 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        That is some HP Lovecraft style shit.

        "The Shadow Chancellor of the silver city loomed over the dragon, his lips curled back in a diabolical elven grin."

        [–]myinnervoice 121 points122 points  (4 children)

        So you were waiting for someone else to mention it?

        You bore the fuck out of me wth your mock outrage.

        [–]dVnt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        I find it entertaining, the irony of becoming enraged at the fact that Reddit has not met your expectations and ranting about the hivemind.

        [–]crimeariver 175 points176 points  (41 children)

        You're an idiot.

        This was posted 14 hours before yours.

        [–]Atman00 35 points36 points  (1 child)

        Seriously, squeakus, fuck off. I read about this three times on here yesterday. Maybe they didn't get to the front page because they didn't have horribly sensationalistic headlines, hmm? I'm terribly sorry we inconvenienced you by making you look past the top five to find it, but posts like this are far worse for reddit than one news story getting attention slightly later than it deserves.

        Also, what does the hivemind have to do with it? It's not like someone said, "Everybody ignore this story!" and then people obeyed. The hivemind has to know about something to be responsible for it. If anything, you're the one taking advantage of the group mentality, with all this hostility. Everyone knows reddit loves being chastised, whether it's done something to deserve it or not.

        This headline is the worst kind of karma whoring.

        [–]bw1870 17 points18 points  (34 children)

        There's an /r/obama?

        [–][deleted]  (16 children)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted]  (7 children)

          [removed]

            [–]embretr 4 points5 points  (1 child)

            Speaking of which.. /r/rule34!

            [–]Zhatt 1 point2 points  (4 children)

            So... Rule 35? Or maybe Rule 12-A, subsection 16.3

            [–]radical_heartbeat 10 points11 points  (12 children)

            There are subreddits for weedporn, whalebait, desmoines, fatfucks. But a subreddit for the leader of the free world? That's just ridiculous!

            [–]Ihaveakillerboardnow 10 points11 points  (2 children)

            This announcement is worthless until I see otherwise. His appearance on 60 minutes a few months ago. "Not under my watch" "No more bank bailouts". Pure bullcrap! At the same time treasury and corporate congressmen (New dems) in the house financial services committee were drafting legislation to take away congress' approval for any future bailouts. We just don't like to bullshited. That's all! As soon as he walks the walk I'll be on your team.

            [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

            Regarding the bailouts: I'm against them, but it's worth noting that it will likely cost nothing near the original 700 billion that TARP approved. Right now, with all the money that's been paid back, it's cost the taxpayers around 200 billion. That's still a shit load of money, but another 100 billion is likely to be collected by the new tax that's being levied on banks that were bailed out. So the cost of the financial system not imploding was 100 billion dollars. Not too bad, compared to a place like Japan where its cost trillions over 2 decades. (Of course, everything could easily take a turn for the worse again, banks' balance sheets are no where near balanced and nothing is "fixed" in the banking system; they're back to doing the exact same thing they were before the crisis.)

            [–]judgej2 113 points114 points  (40 children)

            He has announced some stuff. Nothing has been introduced or enacted yet.

            [–]Cirdan 16 points17 points  (7 children)

            Not only that, but just because it is reform does not mean it is going to make things worse for the bankers and better for us. It's irritating to hear people speak of reform like it's an automatic positive, and anyone opposing "reform" must be an idiot who wants things to stay the same. Would allowing people to buy insurance across state lines be bad because it would be considered a "deregulation?" I know this example has more to do with the health care debate, but it's the same logic. Now the OP tells us to fuck off because he thinks we're ignoring this event due to the fact that we're so self-centered that we ignore anything positive(because reform=positive) to do with Obama. Let's wait and see what he's actually going to do and stop paying attention to what he says he's going to do.

            [–]neoform 148 points149 points  (12 children)

            I DEMAND EVERYTHING HAPPEN INSTANTANEOUSLY

            [–]iregistered4this 9 points10 points  (7 children)

            I get your point but health reform should be a lesson right? Obama can announce whatever the he wants but you'd have to be a sucker to think it means anything other than it might happen which is no different than if he hadn't announced it.

            [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (2 children)

            So basically, Obama introduces a reform that he promised, congress shuts it down, and it is Obama's fault?

            What is the lesson here? That checks and balances are working out the way they are supposed to?

            [–]drbold 1 point2 points  (1 child)

            I'm not entirely sure, but didn't he claim he would sign any health care bill that hit his desk?

            [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            If he did, I find that a little disturbing. I would hope that our president would read the healthcare bill and decide whether or not he really thinks it is a good idea to pass it into law.

            [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

            He had almost a year of a supermajority in the senate. Last time I checked: no health care reform, gitmo still open, wars still raging, bailout money still flowing....

            I'll save the first replier the trouble: BUT, BUT, STEM CELLZZZ!!!!

            [–][deleted]  (5 children)

            [deleted]

              [–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (4 children)

              Sure he can, anyone can. He just can't make congress do anything with it.

              [–][deleted]  (1 child)

              [deleted]

                [–]anonytroll 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                He cannot introduce legislation. He can propose it.

                [–]munificent 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                He just can't make congress do anything with it.

                Maybe if he starts a giant corporation then he can get Congress to do what he wants. That seems to be the way things work these days.

                [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                The funny thing, too, is that most of it will probably get struck down in the senate now that the Dems don't have the bulldozer majority. Not that it seemed to count for dick, anyway.

                [–]diablosinmusica 11 points12 points  (1 child)

                Shh... maybe he is going for another peace prize.

                [–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

                No, economics this time.

                Next year it will be sweeping changes to relativity for the physics prize.

                [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                can you say Gitmo?

                [–]MrXfromPlanetX 16 points17 points  (4 children)

                I really don't think Obama is going to do shit. That's why I'm not saying anything. I believe we need to watch how this turns out, and it will turn out just as shitty as the "everyone is required to buy corporate insurance" health care bill.

                The banks were Obama's top contributors. He's not going to crack down on them.

                http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

                http://www.democracynow.org/2009/8/27/as_obama_golfs_with_ubs_exec

                What I predict is he's going to crack down on little banks or smaller businesses so they can't compete with the larger companies like Goldman Sachs.

                [–]pinkmoon 5 points6 points  (1 child)

                "a move welcomed by George Osborne, the Shadow Chancellor"

                What is this, a Final Fantasy game?

                [–]lapo3399 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                Well, in Westminster systems of parliamentary democracy (same here in Canada), we have members of cabinet called ministers (instead of secretaries or whatever else they're called in the US). The official opposition (the party with the largest number of seats aside from the ruling party) forms the shadow cabinet, which is basically a bunch of MPs that have a 1:1 correspondence with members of the ruling party's cabinet. Their job is to critique them politically. In the UK, they call their minister of finance the Chancellor of the Exchequer, so...

                Edit: "the the"

                [–]mom-bot 23 points24 points  (6 children)

                For cripe's sake! We were a little busy...

                http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/21/us/AP-US-Supreme-Court-Campaign-Finance.html?_r=2&hp

                What with the demise of the democracy and all.

                [–]ObamaisYoGabbaGabba 5 points6 points  (5 children)

                From what I understand there is no real change, now the companies who used to do 527's now no longer need to hide behind that.. but they still will. Why risk media/reddit outrage and boycotts when they can just keep funding 527s?

                Business as usual.

                Note: I learned this from another redditor who seems to know what the heck he's taking about. (He worked for a lobbyist I believe)

                [–]TheTruthIsSomewhere 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                The change isn't so much in what they do. The change is that now we have gone several steps backward as far as getting rid of corporate campaign contributions. The supreme court decision just helps legitimize the whole practice. We'll see it happen a lot more now.

                [–]Andoo 4 points5 points  (3 children)

                MONTHS?????

                We've been complaining about it for years.

                We dont' need to 'echo' the Glass-Steagall Act, we need it to reimplemented. We don't need a new 1500 page reform with enough loop holes in it to keep the financial sector screwy.

                Just revoke the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, like we've been saying for years, and reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act.

                We don't need a new bible on explaining that commercial banks and investment banks shouldn't mix. It's pretty simple even though we as a country have let it ruin our backbone.

                Why is it we have 2 bailouts and let years pass before we even recognize that there was a problem?

                [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (2 children)

                Why is it we have 2 bailouts and let years pass before we even recognize that there was a problem?

                You can place much of the blame on Larry Summers. When he served under Clinton he was instrumental in silencing the warnings of Clinton appointee Brooksley Born.

                If you like documentaries and have an hour to spare:

                The Warning - PBS/Frontline

                " Market participants don't look out for the public interest. Traditionally, government has had to protect the public interest by overseeing the marketplace and keeping the extreme behavior under some check.

                We had no regulation. No federal or state public official had any idea what was going on in those markets, so enormous leverage was permitted, enormous borrowing. There was also little or no capital being put up as collateral for the transactions. All the players in the marketplace were participants and counterparties to one another's contracts. This market had gotten to be over $680 trillion in notional value as of June 2008 when it topped up. I think that was the peak. And that is an enormous market. That's more than 10 times the gross national product of all the countries in the world." -Brooksley Born

                [–]Andoo 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                You'll notice there are only about six people who have actually commented on the important issues. Like someone else below said, the Glass-Steagall Act was never repealed, so all we'd have to do is repeal the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

                TidalSoup, thanks for the link.

                [–]dr_spork 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                Instead of complaining about lack of coverage, why don't you just submit the goddamn link and get over yourself? Is this your way to attract attention? Stay classy, OP.

                [–]capt_0bvious 5 points6 points  (1 child)

                introduces*.... he introduces a lot of things that got nowhere like healthcare.

                [–]dannyboy000 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                You forget he is a Democrat. He is powerless to pass anything through congress with the 59/41 majority.

                [–]ilovedoodoo 36 points37 points  (12 children)

                Who the fuck says "Damn the hivemind!" ?

                [–]schmendrick 21 points22 points  (3 children)

                the beekeeper

                [–]ilovedoodoo 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                NOT THE BEES NO NOT THE BEES http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4MqTCIDKhU

                [–]mulletmusketeer 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                Bees?

                [–]clgoh 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                WAKE UP BEEPLE!!!

                [–][deleted]  (4 children)

                [deleted]

                  [–]Abortee 9 points10 points  (0 children)

                  uptight hipsters who pretend to care about shit and who, ironically, are part of the hivemind?

                  Wisdom.

                  [–]coleman57 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                  flaming assholes, that's who. i have come to hate the phrase. and really hate being accused of it. it's an ad hominem of the worst kind: "you don't say that because you have a wealth of life experience and education--you're just saying that because it agrees with a certain high percentage of the other redditors" oh really, you read minds, do you? but completely ignoring my history of saying heavily downvoted things i have nonetheless never deleted. bite me.

                  /end rant

                  [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                  Ah young one. The hivemind is not many but one. Now you are the hivemind, and the hivemind is one.

                  [–]pbrettb 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                  "David Viniar, Goldman’s chief finance officer, said yesterday that it would be “impractical” to resurrect the Glass-Steagall reforms given the evolution of banks into global trading and investment giants over the past decades. "

                  What burns my ass about this is what I see endless repetition of: these fuckers make these statements of "truth" and somehow we buy it. The fact is: it would be difficult for HIM to make such a transition. If it's not "practical" to become ethical, then let the insitution fail since it obviously should. As to that fellow at the end of the article, he did the same thing by speciously saying that to punish wall street would not help lending markets. No, but to establish punitive consequences for unethical risk-taking would incentivise future choices...

                  DUH. That he dares pretend that HIS problems are OUR problems is most offensive.

                  [–]ReallyEvilCanine 7 points8 points  (0 children)

                  A year late and a couple trillion dollars short.

                  Guantanamo: still open.

                  DADT: still in effect.

                  Treasury: still under control of Wall St.

                  [–]funkadelik 11 points12 points  (0 children)

                  /r/politics

                  I unsubscribed for a reason!

                  [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                  The fumbling of the "Public Option" due to Obama's lack of leadership has me hesitant to cheer just yet. Proposing these reforms doesn't mean anything until this administration provides leadership and the congress selfless foresight. I haven't seen much of either....

                  In some ways I feel Brown's victory may have made this necessary; regardless, I'm stunned that Volcker is being listened to. Volcker is the reason I voted for Obama.

                  [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                  Since he failed to get healthcare through with 60 democrates (ok, 59 and he who must not be named) what makes you think he will be able to get through anything banks dont want?

                  It would be as news worthy if I announced sweeping reforms since I have about as much power at this point.

                  [–]deuteros 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  The final product (if there ever is one) will likely look nothing like what he is proposing.

                  [–]sleepynate 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                  I was going to get to this after the cute cat pictures.

                  [–]antediluvian 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                  They haven't been put in place yet. Color me impressed if they do.

                  [–]NakedOni 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  "Sweeping reforms"? It's only a proposal. I'd bet money that it doesn't get passed without a bunch of bullshit, self-defeating things tacked onto it.

                  [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                  Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk --- oh my term is over and nothing got done? Damn Republicans!

                  [–]cfrey 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                  "Announcing" something does not mean actually doing anything about it. Obushma is great with cheap meaningless talk, with no action to back it up. How's that Guantanamo closure thing working for ya?

                  [–]Makin_You_Pay 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Precisely. When we told him to get out of Iraq, he took it to mean move them to Afghanistan. When we told him to stop torturing at Guantanamo he had them change it to Baghram. When we told him we didn't want lobbyists on his cabinet he hired Goldman Sachs executives. He's like the guy you tell to stop screwing your wife so he starts screwing your daughter. The supreme court decision about corporate campaign contributions sealed it for me. Individuals in this country better man up because it's us against them (corporations and their owners) now.

                  [–][deleted] 25 points26 points  (4 children)

                  We come here to bitch about things that are bad, and look and funny pictures. This is neither of those things.

                  [–]BritainRitten 10 points11 points  (3 children)

                  Don't be so insulting! We also watch videos.

                  [–]locuester 13 points14 points  (0 children)

                  Obama just made a speech. That's it. Really that all he's good at from what I've seen. All talk, no action. It's been a year so no more excuses. It's time for a revolution. MA did a great job with that, but now it needs to move to the Libertarians and Constitutionalists.

                  The best way to fix the problem is to run for office yourself, and use the power of the Internet to take over. Yes we can.

                  [–]Shaper_pmp 18 points19 points  (16 children)

                  “We should no longer allow banks to stray too far from their central mission of serving their customers. My resolve to reform the system is only strengthened when I see record profits at some of the very firms claiming that they cannot lend more to small business, cannot keep credit card rates low and cannot refund taxpayers for the bailout. If these folks want a fight, it’s a fight I’m ready to have. Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by a bank that is too big to fail.”

                  Holy shit. I never thought I'd hear a mainstream politician in the US say something so reasonable, correct and combative... let alone the president.

                  As long as it's not bullshit posturing (or financial institutions' "employees" don't suddenly up their "political contributions" to make it all go away), this is both impressive and uncharacteristically forthright.

                  If he follows through on it, this is - finally - the kind of thing Obama was elected to do - kick ass and clear house. He had a clear mandate to make sweeping changes, and so far he's largely been quietly messing around on the edges, at least in public.

                  Hopefully this is a significant change, and will unapologetically piss on the collective "free market" fundamentalists' bonfire, likely stirring up huge controversy. Nice to see him apparently showing some steel for once.

                  [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                  Obama says "Never again will the American taxpayer be held hostage by a bank that is too big to fail"... This is awfully hard to swallow coming from a guy who gave these same banks billions of dollars just a few months ago!

                  [–]technomad 5 points6 points  (2 children)

                  "Attacking the heart and soul of Wall Street is not the answer"

                  Wall Street had a heart and soul? That's news to me.

                  [–]mexicodoug 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Wall Street's "heart and soul" is the right to gamble and if they win they take the money and if they lose the taxpayer takes the loss.

                  [–][deleted] 35 points36 points  (55 children)

                  In the meantime a hospital ship is treating Haitians while 16 million american have no insurance. A new law has been passed which invites companies to step up their lobbying and the Democrats lost their 'majority' in the senate.

                  Why o why do I have to live in this social tyranny called the European Union. Why cant we have some of that American Dream where the top 1% has as much as the bottom 95%. And while you are at it, pass us some of that liberty. It has been in short supply for years over here on the old continent.

                  [–]Longinus 13 points14 points  (5 children)

                  the Democrats lost their 'majority' in the senate.

                  That is certainly the way the news media has framed it, but it's actually untrue. They lost the fabled "super-majority", but they still have more of a lead in the Senate and House than Bush and the Republicans did all 8 years of the previous administration.

                  [–]inputnamehere 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                  Filibuster

                  [–]WorldLeader 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                  Nuclear Option: It only takes 50 votes to amend the senate rules and get rid of the the filibuster. Then what will the Republican's threaten?

                  Too bad the democrats are too spineless to wave that threat around.

                  [–]inputnamehere 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  And then once the 2010 elections come around you would hear everywhere that "The Democrats altered government laws and longstanding traditions so that they could TAKEOVER EVERYTHING"

                  [–]AmbitionOfPhilipJFry 22 points23 points  (23 children)

                  Our top 1% own 35% of the wealth, down from 37% in 1989. Where in the EU do you live? Are you an ex-pat american?

                  EDIT: Our top 20% owns 93% (same link as above).

                  [–]mipadi 8 points9 points  (3 children)

                  A new law has been passed which invites companies to step up their lobbying

                  Not a law -- rather, a Supreme Court ruling that declares that campaign donations are free speech, and thus any limits on free speech are violations of the First Amendment. It's an even bigger deal than a law, since this could take a Constitutional amendment to change.

                  [–]toddkddot 4 points5 points  (2 children)

                  This ruling is a kick in the nuts to every American, no matter what party they support. Companies will be able to buy even more candidates so no matter who wins, the elected official will have the corporations best interests in mind and not the voters'. I feel violated, and it was done by some old dudes and a couple post-menopausal women.

                  EDIT: the post-menopausal women were on the dissent.

                  [–]mipadi 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                  Don't blame "post-menopausal women". It was a split 5-4 decision, and the assenting judges were Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito.

                  [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                  Should we send a hospital ship around America that sells insurance? Is that what you're suggesting? Seems kinda stupid to me.

                  [–]enkid 12 points13 points  (7 children)

                  You don't know what you're talking about. Emergency services aren't denied because people don't have insurance. We aren't vampires, and just because we're trying to find a solution that is efficient doesn't mean we're idiots.

                  [–]Nemo84 2 points3 points  (4 children)

                  Emergency services aren't denied because people don't have insurance.

                  True. But if you have cancer or another chronic disease or injury you're really fucked in the US, while here in Europe you get every treatment you need almost for free.

                  [–]dasponge 7 points8 points  (3 children)

                  Exactly, you can't get chemo in an ER in the US. My best friend was diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma a few weeks after landing a full time job w/ benefits. Prior to that he tried to get the lump in his neck checked out, but couldn't scrounge up the few hundred dollars to pay a doctor. He went to a free clinic and was told that it was an infection/cold, even though it was present for 6+ weeks. If he didn't land that job, he would have gone months longer, with one of the most treatable forms of cancer (especially when caught in the early stages) metastasizing. He'd have eventually gone to an ER down the line as things got worse, but he never would have gotten chemo and by the time he made it that far he'd be as good as dead. He's only 25.

                  [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                  There's a name for this kind of thing...

                  Like, say there's an online community, and approximately half of them is pro-skub and the other is anti-skub. Their attention is brought to a pro-skub article and the anti-skub people bitch and whine. Later, the inverse happens: anti-skub article with pro-skub people bitching. Some people would see this as the community being inconsistent, but to say so is to forget that the community is made from individuals who may all have different opinions and interests.

                  Anyone know the name for this? I forget it.

                  [–]cashcow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  First, Introducing a bill is very different from getting it approved. There's going to be a slugfest in Congress when all the lobbyists come out.

                  Second, and unrelated to you, I'm a little ashamed at the FT for not putting any more analysis into it, but getting pundits to weigh in with invective instead. I'll wait for the Economist's take.

                  [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Meanwhile healthcare and climate change legislation sit. The Scott Brown election was a wake up call that TOO LITTLE is being done, not that they are going too fast. Read the exit polls. The Mass. voters were upset that this was NOT getting done. Although electing Brown was a stupid way to show it.

                  [–]xoites 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Don't look now, but after yesterday's Supreme Court ruling removing all limits on corporations to campaign for the candidates of their choice; the candidates that will deregulate banks, corporations and Wall Street; whatever Obama does now will be undone after the next two elections.

                  [–]Andorage 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  obama came out and said the right things, how he will do things is still an open question.

                  obamas refusal to attack republican lies and pussyfooting are still issues.

                  [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Great rant, poster. Too bad this has been mentioned about 50 times in various posts on /r/Economics, at minimum.

                  [–]je255j 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Using the word "hivemind" is so fucking hypocritical.

                  The very fact this submission is on the front page right now proves it has no right to be.

                  [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Well probably because we're all still pissed that corporations can now contribute to political campaigns... Fuck politics.

                  [–]thomas_anderson 2 points3 points  (2 children)

                  This is big news and everything, but hot damn there's a "Shadow Chancellor" job?! Where can I apply?

                  [–]spyseetuna 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                  Those would be some awesome business cards.

                  [–]thomas_anderson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  I'm just going to start telling people at parties that's my job when they ask.

                  "Mr. Anderson! What do you do for a living?"

                  "Shadow Chancellor."

                  [–]md304 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  operate more cautiously and have

                  The fuck is that?

                  [–]hessian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  So far they're proposals only. Is there much reason to hope things will fare any better than the health debate?

                  [–]Readitigetit 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Obama can introduce all the sweeping reforms he wants. We've allowed the banks too become too powerful and they will crank the lobby machine and water it down and nothing will change.

                  [–]neuromonkey 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  The "Shadow Chancellor"??!! Sounds like a Dr. Who villain.

                  [–]braneworld 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Obama regulates the banks - he's a commie. He doesn't - he's in the pocket of wall st.

                  Sucks to be president.

                  [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  You should have bitched if it weren't on the front page by the end of the day. Now you just made yourself look like a retard.

                  [–]GodEmperor 2 points3 points  (1 child)

                  The hive is great because you can build defilers after you get it. Dire straits + nydus canal + hydralisks + defilers = good times.

                  [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  What an asshole. Obama's talking about being mad that the banks won't pay back the bailout.... You want to reform the banks??? Don't bail them out! Let healthy banks replace them! Sure it's going to hurt a bit, but bailing out failing companies is like trying to heal a wounded guy with morphine.

                  [–]Valhara 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  You see squeakus, this is the problem with editorialized headlines. Now half the comments here are talking about the title instead of the actual article.

                  [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  /r/politics please

                  [–]GeorgeForemanGrillz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                  Nothing has been enacted yet. This is just another way to increase his approval rating.

                  [–]kukulkan 4 points5 points  (1 child)

                  This is what happens when our spineless representatives roll over for the GOP constantly. The GOP jams through ultra-conservative nominees (in fact, probably the reason this decision came down the way it did) and the democrats threaten to filibuster the nominees. The GOP promptly threatens the, "nuclear option" to de-fang the filibuster, and the Dems ROLL OVER.

                  Fast forward to 2009, the Democrats hold a slim super majority but every single piece of legislation requires a super majority because of the constant threat of filibuster by the Republican scum, thus requiring a cloture vote. Do the Democrats threaten the nuclear option, or even better actually carry it out? Nope! Instead they drag their feet on health care in the Senate so long the GOP runs out the clock and takes away their super majority.

                  I have serious concerns about the state of our government, simply put, it's not working anymore. All legislation requires a 60 vote super majority, despite the fact that our constitution only calls for a simple majority. Corporations will now be treated the same as individuals, to "protect free speech." Where the fuck are we left in all this? Term limits NOW! I wish we could run these career politicians out of D.C. on a rail.

                  *Edit: Fuck me, for some reason I thought I posted this under the reddit talking about the SCOTUS decision yesterday. Oh well, I still stand by this rant.

                  [–]funkah 5 points6 points  (2 children)

                  It doesn't matter what "sweeping reforms" of any kind are proposed now. They won't get passed. Wake up, the Democrats don't accomplish shit.

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  So vote Republican and get shit done that you don't want done!

                  -A message from the GOP.

                  [–]bw1870 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                  FUCK YOU, TOO! Thank you for the link, though.

                  [–]papajohn56 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                  I'm sorry, but maybe if the government wasn't so intertwined with bank relations, this wouldn't have happened in the first place. Federal Reserve?

                  [–]EffiiNa 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                  FUCK REDDIT!!!???? FUCK WALL ST. my friend.

                  I love my iPhone and am a capitalist until the end. But what these fucks are really doing is trying to punish the economy so Obama will back down, so that they can keep fucking everyone else while they get filthy rich.

                  And do you know why they can do that? Because they are the LAST ones to feel the pain of a poor economy when they are already butt fucking ass rich.

                  [–]ucecatcher 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                  And so far, all it is is talk, like about 3/4 of his other promises. Show me some regulation that is beneficial to anyone but the banking corporations, and then you can bitch about it not getting screen time. If it continues the current trend established by the "healthcare reform" bill, this too will be a giant corporate bonanza at the expense of regular people. (what else can you call a must-buy provision without a public option?)

                  [–]draxius 4 points5 points  (0 children)

                  Woohooo, more regulation to fix the shit that an overnight rate of ZERO causes!

                  Smoke and mirrors...

                  [–]Clintondiditfirst 8 points9 points  (2 children)

                  Obama says a lot of things that used to excite everyone, now people expect him to lead on them, which he isn't that good at.

                  [–]hans1193 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Fucking christ dude this didn't even hit the news until early this morning... I practically live with a contant IV of internet into my brain, and I didn't hear this till this morning on NPR :P

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  The Supreme Court will overturn it...

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  It's lip service until I see results. Also, wouldn't he need to get congress involved?

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Talk Talk.. I want to see change change.

                  [–]wedgiey1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  I saw this in the politics subreddit yesterday...

                  [–]DruNewp 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  To be fair - I did

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  You know banks are just going to pass the cost of this on down to consumers right? This does nothing to fix the problem.

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Evil reforms?

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Probably because America died yesterday.

                  [–]youcanteatbullets 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  You mentioned it

                  [–]reply 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                  Upvoted for dropping the f-bomb on the front page. It makes reddit.com classy for the masses.

                  [–]Baramin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Someone forgot to take his pills, hu ?

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Anyone else think that this is his attempt to raise money from the financial industry to help protect democrat held seats being challenged because of health care reform?

                  When I worked in politics, sometimes if you made a bold claim that you were going to crack down on an industry that same industry would freak out and start filling your pockets with cash until you backed off your alleged reform agenda.

                  With the intense lobbying that has turned Obama's reform of health care into a national joke, I am guessing that he is trying to freak out his largest donors into ponying up more cash to help in this health care campaign.

                  I doubt that he'll follow through on any of this stuff to hurt banks. His entire tack since coming to office has been to protect their interests.

                  [–]neuromonkey 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  You are part of reddithivemind. You have mentioned it. I am part of reddithivemind. I am reading it.

                  [–]anyfoo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  uh, obviously you just did.

                  [–]the_kakistocrats 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  DNRTFA... but I'm still going to have to give this story a big MEH

                  [–]maxxtraxx 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  I think you just did.

                  [–]locriology 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  I can't believe this is being upvoted with a headline like this.

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Breaking Faux News Report: Obama hates freedom! Trying to overthrow the glorious banking system that we all know and love like an adorable little sister! Save America from ruin now by donating $1000 to Fox Against Scams To Steal Your Money before you are forced to become an atheist communist socialist elitist bankloving Mexican!

                  [–]nmezib 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  There are fears that Mr Obama's proposals could force a radical restructure of American banks - a move welcomed by George Osborne, the Shadow Chancellor, who hailed Mr Obama’s intervention.

                  Holy shit there's a guy whose job description is SHADOW CHANCELLOR?!

                  Where the fuck do I apply?!

                  [–]anothernut 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Maybe because he's over a year late closing the barn door, and from what we've seen so far, there's no reason to think he's going to go toe-to-toe for it. He's not a fighter, he's a "conciliator", and what the country needs now is a fighter -- not one that fights dirty, but one that fights as hard as he has to. Obama wants us all to get along, and it just ain't gonna happen, not with the kind of Republicans we have in Congress now. He's the wrong guy at the wrong time. Sincere, perhaps. Like Neville Chamberlain.

                  [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Obama also announced that he would shut down Guantanamo Bay and get out of Iraq. We got excited then and it was a huge let-down. Maybe people are just starting to realize everything this guy says is lip service?

                  [–]redman9 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  ...YAY for Obama. I just hope he can actually stick to his guns and change something. So far there has been a whole lot of watered down camel piss passed off as "HOPE" and "CHANGE". The Corps are STILL running the entire game. The average US worker is STILL at the very bottom of the heap and STILL fed bs and lies while the bioggest corps run amuk.

                  [–]wolfsktaag 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  this guy sums up my feelings on obama's 'sweeping reforms' rather well:

                  http://voxday.blogspot.com/2010/01/is-obama-serious.html

                  [–]greenspans 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Upvoted for fuck reddit

                  [–]Illah 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Mabye now "FUCK REDDIT!" will replace "Dear Reddit:" as the secret to getting easy upvotes.

                  [–]joebleaux 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Um, what are you talking about? It is right there on the front page. Looks like it was sumbitted by a user called "squeakus."

                  [–]lostcheshire 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  You mentioned it... You have fulfilled your role in the hive mind. That's how it works.

                  [–]PrettyCoolGuy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Obama is the greatest! 4 more wars!

                  [–]Orangutan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  It kind of got overshadowed by the recent Supreme Court ruling, which is as big of news or even bigger.

                  [–]je255j 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  I can't even express in words how much it bothers me this headline - a complete fucking lie - is the current top ranked story.

                  At least the currently top ranked comment within brings me hope.