281 Comments

CNN BLOG: Tuesday, May 15th

JP Morgan Chase, the nation’s largest bank, first reported a $2 billion loss last Thursday, adding new fuel to the already fiery debate surrounding financial regulation and oversight, and prompted an SEC investigation into the firm’s practices.

The debate in Washington is: what to do with large banks that live and breathe risk.

Listen to Mr. Dimon (CEO JP MORGAN CHASE) describing those bad trades: “[They were] flawed, complex, poorly reviewed, poorly executed and badly monitored.” And again: “We should have been paying more attention to it.”

Many politicians believe large banks are both too complex to understand and too big to fail. The latter has become such an integral part of Wall Street’s conscience that it has its own acronym: TBTF.

Having overly complicated banks makes it all the more imperative to resolve the TBTF dilemma: how to wind down a large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail it out and destroying the financial system.

Meanwhile, the debacle also shines a light on the fact BIG BANKS  are a constant threat to tip over and crush the entire U.S. economy. That will lead to more calls to break up the big banks, to take away the government’s implied backing for them, or at least make regulators more determined to force them to hold more capital against future losses. All of that will make it harder and more expensive for the banks to do business.

Your question: Should federal regulators take over our nation’s largest bank JP MORGAN CHASE to wind down a large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail it out and destroying the financial system? Why or why not?

Advertisements

About Mr. Andrews

Professional Educator

281 comments on “CNN BLOG: Tuesday, May 15th

  1. No, I think that if the bank has got that far they should still be able to have control over their own bank. They need to be able to control and manage the money though.

  2. No,I think that government can figure it out what they can do about it,and made it.I don’t think government can kill the bank..:)

  3. no, i think the government has enough money to handle, the bank should keep the money, but maybe expand more or transfer it to another leading bank safely.Americans should be able to manage their own money, not give it to the government

  4. I don’t think that the government should take it over because that is just another way that we won’t get as much freedom. If the government keeps taking things over, then we won’t be that much of a free country. Even if tax payers might have to bail them out, the government should not take over the bank.

  5. I don’t think that the government should be able to take control of the banks, except if they go as far as going bankrupt. I do believe that the government should be allowed to put limited regulations on the bank to keep it from messing with the economy. I think that this is just one screw up though and for the most part the bank can control itself and doesn’t need the governments help.

  6. They should if it means that taxpayers bail out are going to stop bail outs. Bail outs are a bad thing because the company is out and the economy goes down the hole. Our economy is bad enough and it cannot keep going down. Chase is a strong bank and this shouldn’t have happened to them.

  7. Why would everyone fight for something we are going to pay for in the first place? Seriously, if the bank goes bankrupt then a lot of people are losing money they put in. I say just let the government have it. Let them pay for it, not us.

  8. I don’t think that federal regulators should take over our nation’s largest bank to wind down a large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail it out and destroy the financial system. I think this because the bank should be in charge of itself because the government doesn’t need to be in control of yet more things in our country. The bank should remain in the control of the people who created it and got it to where it is today.

  9. I guess that they should take it over if it is going to stop taxpayers from bailing it out and totally destroying the financial system. If it’s the best decision then why not do it. It doesn’t make sense to do something that isn’t as helpful. Plus I’m pretty sure taxpayers don’t want their money going to a bank that somehow lost 2 billion dollars.

  10. I don’t think that the government should take it over because that is just another way that they can control us. If the government keeps taking things over, then we won’t be that much of a free country. Even if tax payers might have to bail them out, the government should not take over the bank.

  11. No, the power should remain in the hands the own it. If they go bankrupt then they should give it up. Also this could hurt the company if they change owners right now.

  12. No, because that’s just one more way they can control people and whats the point of destroying our financial system its just dumb. Some might think that its a good idea because they can limit are spending and still leave are money to us, but what happens if we go bankrupt? Why do something so big now when they could have done this a long time ago.

  13. I’m not sure if they should take over or not. But I think the bank should figure it out themselves and not make the taxpayers bail them out. They got themselves in the mess they should get themselves out of it.

  14. No, i don’t think that the government should take over that bank. I think that if they do end up going downhill then it’s their own fault and the government shouldn’t have to deal with it.

  15. I don’t think that federal regulators should take over the nation’s largest bank. I think the bank will find a way to fix it. If they do fix it then it will save the time of the federal regulators.

  16. No they shouldn’t. The company should stay how it is today and get rid of there old security that they had. They also need to not become separate and stay a whole like they are.

  17. No, I don’t think that the government should take it over. Technically they can’t because those people legally own the business, but I do think that the government should HELP them run it. This way they still own their business but the government can make it so we don’t have to pay for it.

    • I agree. I think that they need to stay a whole business like they are now. They don’t need to let anyone take it over.

  18. Yes i think they should take over JP MORGAN CHASE because they are loosing the money. because of this all of the tax payers are having to pay for the mistake they made. This way everyone will still have their money.

  19. No, the bank can figure it out themselves. They got to be the largest bank, so obviously they’re capable. The government doesn’t need to control everything. As long as they are more careful in the future everything should be fine.

  20. No we should not take out the bank because the power that the company has should stay with the people who founded it. Not just whoever wants to own it. If they had went broke then they should probably sell it and open up something new. But no bail should be paid by taxpayers. It’s unfair.

  21. I don’t think that federal regulators should take over the JP MORGAN CHASE BANK to help wind down that large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail out and destroy the financial system because this obviously would effect only the financial system, but it would affect us too. If the financial system were to be destroyed, it would heavily damage us if they’ll try to recover that $2 billion, which would mean much, much higher prices on everything we buy.

  22. The freedom to run a company lies in the people who run it. The government can’t run private companies. That sounds like a communist government.

  23. No, I don’t think they should shut down such a big bank just because it’s size. The bank handles a lot of money, and screwing up that big can happen. Surely after the screw up, they’re going to monitor the bank closer and assure that something like that doesn’t happen again. We should basically give them another chance is what I’m saying, because we all know that they’re going to better assure that they don’t lose large amounts of money again. The power also shouldn’t be handed over because it’s their bank, and since we learn form mistakes, perhaps the new bank owners would make a similar mistake to the one that was made. If the bank nearly loses that much money again, they should try and sell what they have left and leave it.

  24. I don’t think that federal regulators should take over our nations largest bank. The people who own it should be the ones to take care of it, not the government.
    They need to figure out how to fix the problem and make sure it doesn’t happen again. JP Morgan will find a way because they don’t want to go bankrupt.

  25. I think it should, because it would help the tax payers by alot of money. The country has alot of debt but to the trillions of dollars, 2 billion isn’t that bad. If not, the company can take a pay cut until it gets fixed.

  26. I think that they should just leave the problem to the JP MORGAN CHASE because it was there problem and they need to solve it rather than to give there serious problem to someone else to deal with. That is not very responsible for them to do that.

  27. i don’t think they should i think jp should just work through this and next quarter gain that money back that they loss

  28. I don’t think that the government should take more control over banks because the government already has enough control over basically everything else and it would screw over the people too. The bank should be left to its original owner as long as they meet the requirements of owning the bank. I think that it would suck either way though.

  29. I’m not sure because, the federal regulators could help the bank. Or it could go bad and they could make our country’s economy worse. And we wouldn’t want our economy worse because, it’s already in bad shape.

  30. No, I don’t think the government should take over the bank. This probably isn’t the only time the bank has lost a large amount of money. They are the nations largest bank because they know what they are doing. The bank will be able to recover from the loss of money on their own.

  31. I think that the government should not take over the banks. The government however should put regulations to prevent banks from becoming bankrupt and causing problems to the American people. I also think that the company should investigate and solve what happened.

  32. Yes, I think that they government should be able to take over the bank to wind it down instead of us having to bail it out. The economy is already ad enough. So we shouldn’t have to bail them out.

  33. NO, that would be like communism and this is free trade based economy. People deserve to own their own company unless they do something to harm others. If they go bankrupt then they deserve to not be in business anymore.

  34. No, because that’s is just another way for them to control people. If they go bankrupt sell it and move on.

  35. Certainly not. The government already tries to control everything. We are capitalist, not socialist. We should let the people who founded it control it. If we start controlling businesses, then we are only moving closer to being a communist/socialist country.

  36. No I think the government shouldnt step in at all or the regulators the company itself needs to take care of it.

  37. I think that they should make some more regulations that will keep them safer, but they shouldn’t run them. They should not make taxpayers have another thing to pay, and they shouldn’t destroy our financial system.

  38. I think that they could if they wanted to. But only until they get the company back on track. Then the company can take back over.

  39. Yea if its going to help out the country and cause less money loss then I think they should take control. This will make it a lot more stable and less like to lose all that money. I think other big companies struggling and/or losing money should have this done to them too.

  40. No, do not think the regulators should take over the JP Morgan Chase Bank. Because the bank is doing fine. When there is a real big problem then people should start being concerned.

  41. If they could run it better i’m all for it but if they can’t then let the people who created the company run it. But if the federal regulators would take control they would probably do the best.

  42. No, because that is just one more way that they can control people and i don’t understand why they would want to destroy our financial system. I think the power should remain in the hands of the founder and if they go bankrupt then just sell it and keep moving.

  43. No I don’t think that the regulators should be able to take over the JP Morgan Chase Bank. It’s the banks property and it wouldn’t be right to take it from them. The bank probably can recover itself and it doesn’t need any help from regulators. The people who founded the bank should be in charge of fixing the problem.

  44. No, I think the power should stay in the power of the bank. They are the ones who founded it and obviously know what they want to do with it. I trust them, everyone makes mistakes but we have to get over it.

  45. I don’t think that regulators should take over JP Morgan Chase. It may cause the company to not do as well as it should because the regulators don’t work for Morgan.

  46. no i think that the power should stay with the company owners. We dont want to pay for it but if we dont leave the power with them think about the repercussions.

  47. I don’t think that regulators should take over JP Morgan Chase. It may cause the company to not do as well as it should because the regulators don’t work for Morgan

  48. i think that we all should pay as much as we can and not just one group pays all. so no. I mean we are better than that.

  49. Yes the federal regulates should take over the largest national bank because if tax payers destroy the financial system a lot of us will lose our money and go bankrupt. Its better instead of the system being bailed out.

  50. No, the government shouldn’t take over the JP Morgan Chase bank. Its our nations biggest bank and taking it over could push the economic downfall even further. Even though the bank lost $2,000,000,000, the government shouldn’t shut it down, the government are making huge problems in our country as well.

  51. No, I think that we all sometimes make mistakes. And if every time we made a mistake the government stepped it, it’d be a mess. I think that the government needs to step back and let the owners of the business handle the situation.

  52. NO, I don’t think that the government should take over the bank because the government has all ready ruined a lot and we don’t need them to ruin this too. They didn’t lose a lot of money they have a ton of money left still. The bank will probably make up this money in no time.

  53. No. The company should have the power because it just gives the government more power.

  54. Yes federal regulators should take over our nation’s big banks. The government relied on the banks to be responsible for our economy. They had their chance but as JP Morgan Chase’s CEO Mr.Dimon he even said that their trades were “flawed, compex, poorly reviewed…” That not only is setting up, but the bank for failure and also the people who keep their money in that bank and the economy itself. Basically, the banks should have federal regulators there.

  55. No, I don’t think that the government should take it over. I’m sure JP Morgan has had some problems in the past, and they fixed it with out the help of the government. They don’t need other people to fix their own problems.

  56. No, I don’t think the government should take over that bank. I think the government should leave us to handle this situation until it becomes too much to handle. I think that bank has the ability to accomplish what they need to, they just need to put their minds to it, and make sure to finish off what they need to do.

  57. they should take over because yeah everyone makes mistakes but losing two billion dollars is a lot, and if they did then taxpayers wouldn’t have to bail it out and having the financial system ruined.

  58. No, I don’t think that the government should get involved because the bank is still doing fine. If there was another big problem that made them lose more than that, then they can step in a little, but I don’t think they should be able to just take all of the power from the people that own the company.

  59. Personally I think that the federal regulators should leave JP MORGAN CHASE to solve the problem. If federal regulators take over, it could cause more economic issues in the U.S which is already experiencing a recession. They should leave the issue to the company founders.

  60. No they should not the power of the company should remain in the hands of those whom founded it and made it what it is today. if they go completely bankrupt then they should sell it and move on.

  61. No, because the power should stay with the people who founded it. The bank can easily recover from their loss, so it’s no that big of a deal. Also the bank is probably doing something to prevent this from happening again.

  62. no because then your just screwing the company owner over and they would win in court

  63. No, Because that’s just one more way that they can control us. Why even destroy the financial system there’s just no point.

  64. I think the company will be fine without the government taking control from the owners. The bank made 5 billion dollars in the first month so losing 2 million in a quarter can’t be too bad to recover from. The bank has already taken full responsibly for their losses based on bad trades, investments and carelessness. JP Morgan Chase will be fine as long as they stay on top of the situation.

  65. No i don’t think the government has the right to take over such a large bank. If the bank needed help they would ask. The way i see it is that they need to fix the problem and move on they can make up that money easily.

  66. No i don’t think they should take over. but if it will help us then go for it.

  67. No i think the company should stay in power. I think they may need more regulations on the company though. Some jobs should be given to government workers to insure the company doesn’t fall apart.

  68. Nope, the company should remain with who ever is left next5 in charge. I think the government should not take part of their company unless they buy the name and business from them.

  69. I do not think that the government should get involved with large banks. I think that the people that own the bank need to make sure they don’t lose lots of profits. I think that the government should stay out of their businesses.

  70. I don’t know. Because it has it’s pros and cons on either side. The bank should see if it can fix its issues first, though.

  71. only if it becomes worse but for now the one who started should continue to have its power.i dont know much about big buessness or banks but maby the owner can get help from the people.if there almost bankrupt than sell it to someone els who can run it better.

  72. No i don’t think that the government should take over this company because i think that the owners have the right to keep their own business. the government ruins everything already so why does it matter?

  73. They should not take over the bank because they want to wind down a large institution. The people who founded the company should be able to have a decision. I believe that it is the owners choice to let federal regulators wind down the bank, not theirs.

  74. No, because it is not a federal issue. This should be solved by the company who messed up. It was their own fault for their downfall.

  75. I think that the government shouldn’t control the large banks because that is putting too much power into the hands of the government. The government already has enough to handle and having them handle big banks too would be not only a big waste of money but very stressful for everyone, especially government officials.

  76. No, the bank should be able to solve the problem itself, and make its own decisions, and the government should hop off. Give them time to try to solve the problem.

  77. I don’t think that the government should get involved. The bank can take care of themselves and handle their own problems. If in the end they can’t fix the problem, then maybe the government should get involved. But the bank should have a chance to be able to prove themselves and fix their mistakes.

  78. taxpayers shouldn’t have to bail out chase bank because if the company fails it shouldn’t be are job to clean up after their mess

  79. No the government shouldn’t get involved. It is not good to have the government try to control everything bad that is happening. People make mistakes, even the government does.

  80. i don’t think that the federal regulators should take over our the JP Morgan bank because if they take over it might be more money lost then just trying to figure out the problem the banks self.

  81. No, the government should not take over the banks. The government doesn’t have the right to take over destroying our economy. The power should go to the people who had founded it, and if something happens it’s in their hands to take care of.

  82. Federal regulators should not be able to take over our nations largest bank JP Morgan. The government already has enough control over the country we don’t want them to have control of everything. There should be limits. The banks do have to be manageable. So maybe the government could step in a little bit.

  83. No, I dont think the government should be able to take over. We all fail at something, and whenever we do we dont just have the government swoop in and start to “take care of things.” I think the bank can solve the problem, if they cant, sell the business and move on. If thats not what they want, then they could have the government take over.

  84. No, the federal government should not take over JP Morgan Chase because that could only cause more problems and slow it down. JP Morgan can take care of this themselves they don’t always need the government coming in to try to fix it.

  85. No, because the power of the company should still belong to the people who started the company not the government. That just gives the government more control. In all honesty, I don’t understand economics or taxes.

  86. I think that government should not get involved. They should let the people who founded it run it. If they go out of business that is their fault and the government doesn’t need to step in.

  87. No the bank cannot go. The company has their own right to own it and with that right, they can figure out a way to bail themselves out. Life isn’t worth living if you do not do what you love and make a difference in doing it.

    #ЯƎVLUTÎN

  88. Yes federal regulators should take over our nation’s big banks. The government relied on the banks to be responsible for our economy. They had their chance but as JP Morgan Chase’s CEO Mr.Dimon he even said that their trades were “flawed, compex, poorly reviewed…” That not only is setting up the bank for failure but also the people who keep their money in that bank and the economy itself. Basically, the banks should have federal regulators there.

  89. No, the government should not take over. They don’t have a right to just take it and that is unfair the people who bank there. Destroying the economy anymore than it already is destroyed would just be an even bigger mess.

  90. I don’t think that government should be able to take over because that’s just another way they can control us with power. It should stay in the hands of the people who originally founded it. They put so much work into it and it wouldn’t be fair for the government to take that away from them.

  91. I think they shouldn’t take over the bank because it’s another way to control our money. The owners are experienced enough to know how to deal with these finical problems they are doing fine so let them be.

  92. No, I don’t think that they should do that the federal regulators should do that because that won’t be fair to the company. If the company is doing okay, then they should let it be. That’s my opinion.

  93. No, the company has the right to own it. This is not communism, so you cant just go around taking other peoples land or businesses. This is controlling the people in a constitutional government.

  94. No, because the company should stay in the hands of the original people who founded it. They shouldn’t do something so big now when they could have done it a long time ago. It’s just another way to control us with power.

  95. They should take over only until the problem is solved, then let the bank go back on there own. 😛 Then restrict what they do to prevent this.

    • That would make sense. Take control until they can get everything back together and then let them go back on their own.

  96. No I do not think the government should control it because the government already so much control.

  97. i think that it should be up to the CEO’s about everything that goes on and the head people like the executives.

  98. I think they should. It’s a lot quicker and it will save more money. But i don’t think you should be able to do so without the permission of the chase bank owner or person representing them.

  99. NO the company should stay with the founders. If they do need to file for bankruptcy they can sell it and start over i suppose!

  100. Well they shouldn’t be taking over the bank, maybe they can help the bank get out of this mess. But if they do take over, they should not charge us, the tax payers, more money to help bailout a bank when we pay enough on taxes as it is. Also they shouldn’t destroy the financial system, because then they would have to create a whole new system and who knows how long that could take.

  101. No, the power should remain in the CEO’s hands for he is the leader of the company. it is wrong to take a lifelong investment from someone when it is doing no harm at all. if they do go bankrupt then they can sell it.

  102. I think that federal regulators shouldn’t because it should be their responsibility not ours.

  103. I don not think the government should take over the bank. They should have control of what they’re doing. It’s their problem and I’m sure they can handle it.

  104. I don’t think they should take total control but help the bank and its decisions. I also don’t think taxpayers should have to bail it out. They were the ones who made the mistake and didn’t look and check and make sure they weren’t going to get in a bad spot with it.

  105. I don’t think they should take over the bank. It should stay with the original owners and not handed over to the federal regulators because it could be another way they could control our money. They also need to figure out there own problems on their own.

  106. I think federal regulators should take over JP Morgan Chase. i think they should because they made a mistake and taxpayers were forced to bail them out, if it happens again then eventual they’ll get mad. Taxpayers shouldn’t have to clean up other peoples messes.

  107. I think that the federal regulators should leave JP MORGAN CHASE to solve the problem. If federal regulators take it over, it could cause more economic issues in the U.S which is already experiencing a recession. They should leave the issue to the company founders.

  108. No, the government should not take over the bank. The bank can take care of it themselves, it was their mistake anyway.

  109. The government does not have the right to take over the bank. They don’t, unless there is a specific law that gives them the power to do so. Which there isn’t, so, they should not and can not take over the bank.

  110. I don’t think the government should take over the bank. Its the banks problem. I think they they should sell the company and move on.

  111. No, i don’t think that they should take over the bank. Because they should at least let the bank recover itself first. besides its those people’s bank and they should still own it.

  112. No, I think that the company should bail it out themselves. Because they are the ones that made it. If they go bankrupt they should handle it on there own.

  113. I don’t think that the government should get involved. They said that they lost two billion dollars but they have made allot more then that on the last three months. I think that they should be fine without the government getting involved.

  114. No they should not take over the biggest bank. This could lead to bigger financial problems for the whole country. Also its their own company so why should they let anyone else take it from them, they made it, they get it. They could start to control the country too which is defiantly not fair.

  115. I think that the federal government should take over the bank system. It is unfair that the tax payers have to bail the bank out of debt when it wasn’t even their fault. I don’t really understand the whole banking system so I am not positive that would be the best way to do it.

  116. I do not think that the government should shut down the bank. One of the reasons being why would they want to destroy the bank from having a lot of power. And It just wouldn’t be fair to the bank owners if they just go and shut down the to force them to bail out.

  117. No, because if they took it over, they would have that much more power to control people and their money. I think they should just leave the bank in the hands of the founders because that would be easier for bankers and it’s just common sense to have power of what you own.

  118. I don’t think that they should take over the bank. That JP Morgan guy probably worked very hard to get to that point. Besides the government doesn’t always do the best either…

  119. No, I think that the bank can solve their own problems with out the government telling them what to do. If something goes wrong they should try to fix it and if they can’t then they should try to make a new business.

  120. No, the company should be able to decide whether or not they want to give it to the government. They built it to where it is today and they should be able to bring it down or sell it. Besides why give it to the government now after so many years.

  121. No, the power of the company should stay with the founder and owner. It depends on how they do in the future to decide what to do with the company.

  122. I don’t think that tax payers should have to bail out the JP Morgan Company because it could go to a better cause. I think they can find a better way to fix what they did wrong. They could try raising money to try and save the bank or they could just give up and let the bank go.

  123. I think that the federal regulators should take over our nation’s largest bank JP Morgan Chase. But I think that they should only do it until every thing is under control but still watch them after that. They made a big mistake and they obviously need help.

    • I don’t think they should. All they did was loose two billion dollars.

    • Well I don’t think that should be right. I think if they got themselves into the problem they should be able to get themselves out of it. I thought they could raise money for themselves to get control of the bank back and not have to rely on other people.

  124. Well I don’t know enough about this kind of thing to say much but it seems that it may be catastrophic if the government should make regulations for the banks.

  125. No, the federal regulators should NOT take over JP Morgan bank because I think this would just make the financial issue even bigger. I think they should deal with their problem by themselves. JP Morgan is big enough to solve their own issues. This will also just make it harder for banks to do business and also more expensive.

  126. No, i don’t think the government should take over this bank. It’s the banks issue and i’m sure they can handle it.

  127. no they shouldnt because its not their company and they shouldnt have control over something they dont even know.

  128. No because that’s just one more way they can control people and it just destroys our financial system, that’s just wrong. They could have done this a long time ago.

  129. I think that the government should have partial control over the worlds largest bank because it is a lot of responsibility. The worlds largest bank shouldn’t be making dumb mistakes and loosing that much money. But only for the banks loosing a lot of money i think we should have one or two bigger banks.

  130. No, the federal regulators should NOT take over JP Morgan bank because I think this would just make the financial issue even bigger. I think they should deal with their problem by themselves. JP Morgan is big enough to solve their own issues. This will also just make it harder for banks to do business and also more expensive.

  131. I don’t think they should hand the company over just yet, I think that they should let the bank try and rebuild itself and if it doesn’t get any better, then they should hand the company over to the federal government.

  132. Should federal regulators take over our nation’s largest bank JP MORGAN CHASE to wind down a large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail it out and destroying the financial system? Why or why not? I think we should follow the example of Gringotts because its a very secure bank and its also very stable. I think we should start building banks underground and purchase some dragons in case of an attack by a wizard, which would be extremely unlikely because the only one to break in is He Who Shall Not Be Named, But he didn’t steal anything because Hagrid had got the stone the day before the break in which was harry’s birthday. But in our situation were out of luck?

  133. I don’t think its the responsibility of the government to fix a small tactical error in a large corporation like this. the power should belong to the owner not the government

  134. No. I don’t think Federal Regulators should take over. The power needs to stay with the people who are already in charge, they’re a big bank and in time they will be able to make up for the money that was lost! Let them deal with the problem, if they’ve done a good job with the company for as long as it’s been around, they can get out of this on their own.

  135. I think that the founders of the company deserve to keep it. The government shouldn’t be able to just take over the founders company. Let them resolve the problem.

  136. No, i think that the power of the company should stay with the people that found it. They know what they are doing because they are the owns who made the company. They will know how to run it better then anybody else does they just made a mistake but they will probably find a way to fix the problem.

  137. If they are going to wind it down back to its normal state than yes the federal government should take over. I think this because, the bank just lost 2 Billion dollars and they need to prevent that from happening again. They also need to prevent that from happening again because, the 2 billion that the bank just lost was not just their money it was part of the peoples money who have an account at the bank.

  138. Should federal regulators take over our nation’s largest bank JP MORGAN CHASE to wind down a large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail it out and destroying the financial system? Why or why not? Well I think we should just transfer all of the money to Gringotts because it’s the most well protected and most secure bank in the Wizarding world although in year one it was broken into by he who shall not be named. But he’s a dark lord and I don’t think we have to worry about him anymore.

  139. No, the government should not get involved with the bank. The bank took a risk and they lost some major money. This happens while you are running a business. This is blown a little bit out of proportion, just because it is the largest bank doesn’t mean the government has to get involved to get them out of a situation. They got in the mess so they should be able to get out, if they can’t then they will just have to lose their company.

  140. I don’t think the government should take over large banks. Such banks like JP Morgan Chase are at risk of losing great deals of money but it is also their responsibility. They are responsible for making such decisions on whether to sell their bank or try and revive what was lost. If the government did ever take over, it would destroy our financial system and that’s not right.

  141. I don’t think the bank should be handed over to the feds. I think that the bank has been its own thing for along time and can bounce back by itself. And the government isn’t so good at money too, 14 trillion in dept…….

  142. No, I don’t think the bank should be taken over by the government. I think the bank should remain to it’s owner. The government should only step in if they are going into bankruptcy.

  143. I am definitely not qualified to answer that question. I know nothing of economics or banking. All the terminology associated with them make me sick to my stomach, to be honest. I don’t like corporations and heads of banks.

  144. This is something the government should stay out of besides they’re not in that much trouble they made more this year than what they have lost. Nobody is going to have to pay taxes either to save the business because they would have to file for bankruptcy for that to happen and I don’ think that’s going to happen. As long as JP Morgan can find a way to get their money back we probably won’t be hearing about it anymore in the news unless White Whale is doing something illegal or something.

  145. I do not think that the government should take over the big banks, or at least not yet. JP Morgan Chase made one mistake, if they can revive themselves the government should not take over the bank. However, if they can not and make another big mistake like this the government should take over, at least until they get everything under control and are able to not make such big mistakes.

  146. I believe that the company should stay with the people who founded the company and not with the government.if they lose the money they should just sell the company to some other person and just get over it. They could have done this a long time ago but making it a big deal now is not the way to go. The loyal costumers might switch because they were relying on the founder’s business but they would switch if the government took control.

  147. no i don’t think so it should stay in their hands they have made it this far and threw harder losses i bet and im sure they can make it now

  148. I think that there should be a certian size limit as to how big a bank can be before the government takes it over. I don’t think that many people understand the economic problems we would have if big banks crashed a lot. I think that JP Morgan shoudl have the option to downsize to a more manageable size or have it be taken over by the government.

  149. No, i dont think that the bank should take it over. I think that they just made a mistake, and that they will fix it. Every one makes mistakes, just like BP did last year, they will recover from this.

  150. The people who founded the bank company worked hard to start this company. the government is trying to feed off of the hard working people, and give it to the people who are doing nothing but going to their mailbox to get their government handouts.

  151. no the people who founded and started JP Morgan should have the power to run it, no government involvement.

  152. i think they shouldnt. the bank is having a bad time but they shouldn’t take them over.

  153. No, the federal regulators should not take over the bank. They made the business so that means it is theirs. They could just help find a better way to protect it.

  154. I think that the government should have partial control over the bank because it is a big responsibility. The worlds largest bank shouldn’t be making mistakes and loosing that much money.

  155. I don’t think the government should take over control of JPMorgan. It’s their fault they lost 2 billion dollars, why should the government have to deal with their mess up. Unless the business is in serious trouble, their is no reason they can’t handle it on their own.

  156. No, the bank should not be overturned because everyone has off days but eventually they get back on track.

  157. the bank should not be taken over by the government. look at what the government has done with money. the bank should be able to stay independent.

  158. The power should definitely stay with the company because they are the ones that created it and that they should still be able to control it. Even if they did make a mistake and lose lots of money for it. They’re a bank, so of course they can get it back pretty quickly.

  159. No, give them a second chance. I’m sure they can make the money back. It would just take time.

  160. No, because that is the opposite of capitalism. If the government starts seizing companies, then that could lead to the government taking other rights of ours.

  161. The bank should get helped out. People are taking out large loans and then bankrupting on them, so the bank just gets hit. They should do something about this. it not the banks fault so much. It is one person who did this and she retired.

  162. no i don’t think the government should take over jp Morgan because its their fault for losing 2 billion dollars. i think they should take control only if the bank is in serious trouble. i think that they will never be in serious trouble

  163. I don’t think that federal regulators should take over JP MORGAN, because the power should be with the people who founded the company.

  164. I think power should stay with the people who founded the business and not in the government.

  165. no,i don’t think the bank should be turned over to the federal regulators.I think the bank should still stay to the owner,if they survived this long they could get the money back.

  166. No, the federal regulators should not take over the bank. But they should at least find better ways to protect it.

  167. I don’t think that the government should take over the bank. They got themselves into the debt they’re in. They can try and figure out a way to get out of it all on their own. It’s also another way the government can get more power and control more. They can’t control everything.

  168. I don’t think that the government should take over JP Morgan Chase. The bank got itself into debt and should get itself out. They are the ones who made the mistake and should fix it themselves and learn from it instead of someone else cleaning up their mess for them.

  169. I do not think JP Morgan Chase should be taken over by the government. The company took a risk and lost money, which is part of running a business. The company needs to be managed better, but the government shouldn’t be the one to do it. The government has a horrible record for managing businesses and companies. For example, the government has lost 500 billion dollars on green energy companies that have gone bankrupt. I think JP Morgan Chase should do more to manage projects before they go through with them.

  170. JP Morgan Chase should stay independent for the time being. In the current economy these companies can’t afford to take risks or loose a lot of money. The company is still thriving and it was just a bit shaken.

  171. I don’t think federal regulators should take over our nation’s largest bank JP MORGAN CHASE. They shouldn’t because the company that founded it should remain in their control and remain in their power.

  172. Should federal regulators take over our nation’s largest bank JP MORGAN CHASE to wind down a large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail it out and destroying the financial system? Why or why not?

    No because if they do take over the bank, the people who have CHASE will have to take all of their information to another bank. Another reason for saying no is that the Federal government would have to deal with lots of protesters and complaints about taking it over.

  173. I think the bank should remain in the hands of the people who currently run it, since it is a business in the private sector, even if the business is shared on the stock market. The whole point of a capitalist system is that the government doesn’t interfere with economic affairs, that is, Laissez-Faire. The government has their own issues to worry about, what with being in debt 14 trillion dollars, and they don’t need to be spending their time and resources managing businesses. If the bank has to go out of business, it will-although JP Morgan Chase is far from that-but that’s not up to the government to regulate.

  174. No because the government already controls everything else, but taxpayers already pay for the government’s mistakes, so it would be unfair for them to help pay for $2 billion lost. Also, it was the company’s fault, so they should deal with it themselves. The government has no need to be involved.

  175. Should federal regulators take over our nation’s largest bank JP MORGAN CHASE to wind down a large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail it out and destroying the financial system? Why or why not?
    I don’t think that federal regulators should take it over. It’s a business not the government’s responsibilities. We shouldn’t have to pay taxes to bail it out either because it isn’t the government’s job to facilitate outside businesses.

  176. Not unless the company absolutely cannot get itself under control and taxpayers money is at stake. If the company is going to go bankrupt then I think measures should be taken to help bail the company out as it’s a big part of our economy and the loss of such a large company could have devastating effects on our economy.

  177. Your question: Should federal regulators take over our nation’s largest bank JP MORGAN CHASE to wind down a large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail it out and destroying the financial system? Why or why not?\

    no, I think the companies “power” should remain in the hands of the companies founders. If the company goes bankrupt, they should sell it.

  178. no i don’t think the government should take over jp Morgan because its their fault for losing 2 billion dollars. i think they should take control only if the bank is in serious trouble. i think that they will never be in serious trouble

  179. No, the government should leave the bank alone because it needs to work out its own problems, and the person/ people who founded it need to handle it, and there is no use in destroying our financial system.

  180. I dont think they should take over because then the government will have all the money and invest it towards the governments benefits. I think that it was a mistake and a big one but EVERYONE has made or is going to make a big mistake in there life. They should just try to ignore it and hope it doesnt happen again.

  181. i think that the federal regulators should take over the bank with out forcing taxpayers to bail it out, because it would help them get a grip on what they need to get done. Also they said that they wanted help from the federal regulators.

  182. No I don’t think the federal regulators should take over. I think it should stay with the founders. If the government takes over it will upset a lot of people and probably won’t do much good.

  183. I do not think that they should hand over the banks. The owner should take responsibility and fix what needs to be done and not make larger banks instead. Making it will just be another way for the government to control us. The power should stay in the hands of whoever founded it.

  184. No I do not think that the government should take over JP Morgan Chase. The people who founded it and work for it know what they are doing, that’s how they got there. It wouldn’t be right to just fire them like the plan suggests. So we should just let the leaders of the bank take care of it.

  185. Federal regulators should not take over our nation’s largest bank JP MORGAN CHASE because it belongs to the people who founded the company. that’s like the government taking control of Facebook and monitoring every single person in america. It just isn’t right and should not be allowed.

  186. Unless they lose more money in the future, then maybe the government should take over, but a least give the bank a chance to get there money back and go on from there. its not like this happens every year or so.

  187. no, whiever made the company should stay as leader of that company, but under close watch/supervision by the government to ensure they are making profit

  188. I believe that it should be mixed because the government would provide a good security for the company and the company would run the basics daily operations because they know what works. If you combine these things there will be less money lost. It will also prevent the bank from any other money deficits.

  189. I think the federal regulators should take over JP MORGAN CHASE. My reason being that if the taxpayers are forced to bail it out, the question clearly says, it’d destroy the financial system. Our nation is already having enough troubles with money, and taxpayers are not happy, so we should just keep their money out of the situation.

  190. no because that gives the government too much power. they should leave it in the care of the people who founded it. if it goes bankrupt then they make a new one because they are rich.

  191. No, i think that the power of the company should stay with the people that found it. They obviously know what they are doing because they made it to what it is now. I think that they just made a mistake and they will find a way to fix it.

  192. I think that they should take control of the bank, or at least momentarily. After this whole situation is under control then control of the bank should be passed back to it’s original owners.

    • Don’t you think that the bank should have a little bit of time to take control of itself before the government steps in?

  193. I think that the worlds largest bank should be taken over by the government because they have so much money that it would be a lot safer this way.

  194. I don’t think this is a good idea because it would give the government more control over the people and I don’t believe that is right. Let the company deal with its own problems. However if it gets to the point where tax payers are going to have to bail the bank out, then I believe that the government should step in.

  195. No i don’t think that the government should take over this company because i think that the owners have the right to keep their own business. And let’s be real here….the government it just a buncha flapjacks with some power that usually screw up everything.

  196. Your question: Should federal regulators take over our nation’s largest bank JP MORGAN CHASE to wind down a large institution without forcing taxpayers to bail it out and destroying the financial system? Why or why not?

    My Answer: No they should not because that means more control that the government has. It also should stay in the hands of the people who know all the ropes to the place. Also the bank knows how to handle these situations most of the time,

  197. I do not think that the government should take over this early in the game. I think that the bank should get a few more months to prove that they won’t lose money again, and don’t need tax payers to bail them out. If they lose a large sum of money again, then the government should step in.

  198. no i don’t think they should change the company and i don’t think they should make taxpayers pay for what going to happen to it.

  199. No I don’t think the government should take control of the bank. The bank and its business should stay with the people who created it, not with the government. The government should only step in if the bank is in serious danger of bankruptcy.

  200. I think that the government should have partial control over the worlds largest bank because it is a lot of responsibility. The worlds largest bank shouldn’t be making dumb mistakes and loosing that much money.

  201. I don’t think that the government showed own or take over any bank or company for that matter. They screwed up so it is their lost and if they crash they should repay everyone and pay to fix anything in the economy that goes wrong. I think everything is fine though and they will recover.

    • I totally agree. Although, I don’t think that the government should let them crash. They should step just before they crash, if needed

  202. no i thinck they should wait alittle longer, and see if they can fix this on there own. but if not then sure take it over and fix the problem

  203. no, the people who created the company should keep power over it because they have those rights. It wouldn’t be fair to the company owners for the government to take it over.The owners of the company should do what they feel would be right.

  204. I think the government should take over the worlds largest bank because when it gets to have that much money in it just more safe to have it under government controls. I also think it would be smart because if the government took over the bank it wouldn’t destroy the financial system.

  205. No i do not think they should unless they have to. Like if JP Morgan keeps making dumb decisions like the one they just did then ya. But if they everhelp them the n after the

  206. No, the bank lost money, so why does that mean anyone should bail them out? Let them fix it themselves, neither taxpayers of the government should give them money. Why is this such a problem? Let them sort it out and don’t supply them with anything. It’s not like they’re in real danger anyway.

  207. no, i wouldn’t want somebody interfering with my business. Nobody should bail them out because if you cause a problem and lose money its only your fault. they make more money in a month than most people will make in a year.

  208. No I don’t think that the federal government should take over the JP Morgan Chase bank. They should be able to get themselves out of their debt if they got themselves in it. They shouldn’t just take their company away from them, they should just give them awhile to get themselves out of the debt.

  209. no i think that the people that founded the company should still get to have the company. I wouldn’t just five away my company if we made that much money even if i had to pay that 2 million i would still keep the company. if they don’t want it anymore then just sell the company and move to a different company.

  210. No they should not take it of the people it should remain in the hands of those whom founded it and made it what it id today.

  211. In my case, yes, because if they do take over those banks, then we will haft to pay less taxes, which is all ways a good thing especially for the economy today.

  212. I don’ think the government should take the bank because it should stay with the people who have always worked there and owned it. People dont make other large companies get smaller because of risk so why let banks? There should be no difference.

  213. No, I do not believe they should hand it over because the founders of this company should own up to what they have done and try their hardest the fix it. If they believe this is not possible, then they should hand it over. Otherwise, the owners are big boys and can handle this on their own.

  214. Yes they should, because if the financial system is destroyed over this one big bank, then everything will plummet. Why should tax payers have to pay for the banks mistakes? The government should take over JP Morgan, and shut it down.

  215. I think it would be as good idea for the regulators to take over the bank. They said the trades were poorly reviewed and badly monitored. That means it could happen again in the future. If they were to keep making these mistakes than that could really hurt us if they have to bail them out. If the government took over the bank they might make better choices and not lose 2 billion dollars.

  216. Yes, I think the federal regulators should take over the JP Morgan Chase. I think they should take it over because the bank had already lost so much money. So they need someone to take it over to prevent losing money again.

  217. no i think that the bank owner should be the one running his bank and making all the decisions he needs to keep his bank running.

  218. I think The company should stay in control, they’ll bounce back, just cause something wrong happens doesn’t mean it’s always gonna stay like that.

  219. Yes, basically if i would have to pay extra if they didn’t then of course I would want the government to take care of it. If I didn’t have to pay more then I think that the company should remain under control of its ceo’s.

  220. Yes, I think the Federal government should take over JP Morgan Bank because taxpayers have to pay to bail it out and our economy isn’t the best right now.

  221. No I don’t think that they should take over the bank because its there business if they can take care of it let them if they can’t then help them out a little bit so that they can get back on track.

  222. I don’t believe they should its the banks job to keep that stuff under control and they need to keep doing that and stop making stupid petty mistakes.

  223. I believe they should hand over the company with ease because they are clearly not responsible enough to focus on what they’re doing and who they’re giving there money to. You cant loose 2 Billion dollars and expect everything to be okay. What they did was wrong selfish and they should be charged for what they have done and be forced to give up they’re company.

  224. I do think that the government should step in for a while just so they can get the bank back on its feet. It was a very poor investments that had caused the bank to lose so much money. Hopefully, if the government takes over they can gain all that money back, even make more money than the bank usually does.

  225. I do not believe that J P Morgan Chase should be taken over. They are the nations largest bank. That means they must now how to manage and spend the money that they have. Though it is a little weird that they lost $2,000,000,000 dollars, I think they can get it back. If people start to mess with the bank it could cause more money loss or a bigger financial crisis. So as long as the bank is being smart and working to get back their money, we should be fine.

  226. No they shouldn’t. They should stay in with the owners they have now. It’s not like they’re bankrupt seeing that there was 5 billion dollars made in the first 3 months of this year, so the bank shouldn’t have federal regulations take over them.

  227. I don’t think the federal regulators should take over our nation’s largest bank. I think that since the bank knows what they did, and they know it was wrong, and it hasn’t happened before.. I think they could fix the problem and be back on top in know time. They can wind down themselves, if federal regulators got involved it would only make it worst in my opinion.

  228. I think they should take over because yeah everyone makes mistakes but losing two billion dollars is a lot, and if they did then taxpayers wouldn’t have to bail it out and having the financial system destroyed.

  229. No they should not take control of JP Morgan. it is owned by a person, and they cant just take his company. That wouldn’t help the unemployment rate, because many other people could lose their jobs.

  230. No, they shouldn’t take over the company. They should remain in the hands of the people who found it in the first place. If they go bankrupt they could sell it and move on from it.

  231. im not sure what that means but if they have 2 billion they can just throw away like that then they need to be taxed alot more because that money could be going to better use.

  232. I think that federal regulators should take over the JP MORGAN CHASE because they already lost a lot of money so if they have someone to control it, they can prevent another loss of money. They can also handle the money with better care so that they don’t go bankrupt. This is why I think the federal regulators should take over the JP MORGAN CHASE and they could save money too.

  233. They should take control but only to help by protect the money. I don’t think that the taxpayers should pay for it. It would be good to help JP Morgan Chase with its problem.

  234. no, they should keep there power because look at what it has become today. It’s make billions of dollars. I wouldn’t want other people come in and try to take it away from me.

  235. Taxpayers shouldn’t have to bail out Chase. That’s one more way that the people are controlled. They just need to sell it and move on.

  236. I think that federal regulators should take over the bank. Its their responsibly to take care of it not other people. Its not fair for tax payers to pay money for their losses.

  237. No I think that they should not take over the bank. I think that the people who have power over right now should remain in that position. I am sure that they will eventually get things back on track.

  238. Yes, i think we should because if not we the people are going to have to pay for it. Plus its their’s, not our responsibility to take care of it. Its not fair for peoples taxes going to something it doesn’t need to go to.

  239. I think that the people whos hands it is in now should stay that way. They are the ones who made it what it is. & if it goes bankrupt than they should deal with it. Even if that means selling it.

  240. no i think the company should be able to bail its self out. They should see if the company can bail out first and then if they make no progress they should help out. Thats what they should do

  241. No, they wanted to shut down financial systems so they’re not controlling people. If they lose all their money then they should just sell it and try doing something new.

  242. I think that the bank should be able to control its own. They made the business so that means it is theirs. So the government really has no reason to step in until the bank asks them for their help.

  243. I don’t think hat they should because the company should remain in the hands of those who founded it and what they made of it.I think this will hurt to company more and may make them go bankrupt they should just let it sell.

  244. No the company should stay with the people who had founded it rather than take away all their hard work they put into it o what it is today.

  245. I don’t know…I don’t even understand this concept. I’m guessing no because everything should stay original?

  246. No, the government should not take over the bank because they need to solve the problem out on their own. They can either fix the problem, or make it worse. They should rely on the founders of the company for such changes.

  247. no because its just another way are governmental can controlling us with their power.some might think that its a good idea because the can limit are spending and still leave are money to us.

  248. NO because that’s just one more way they can control people and whats the point of destroying our financial system that’s just wrong. Why do something so big now when they could have done this a long time ago.

  249. no, the power of the company should remain in the hands of those whom founded it and made it what it is today. if they go completely bankrupt then they should sell it and move on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: