The Daily Kos has the article Elizabeth Warren still taking on the banksters, regulators which features the video below.

Here is a transcript excerpt that was in The Daily Kos article.

“In 2013 alone, JP Morgan spent nearly $13 billion to settle claims with the federal government. Claims relating to its sale of fraudulent mortgage-backed securities, its illegal foreclosure practices like robo-signing, its manipulation of energy markets in California and the midwest, and its handling of the disastrous London Whale Trade,” Warren said. “You might think that presiding over activities that led to payouts for illegal conduct would hurt your case for a fat pay bump.” […]

“I think this raises questions over whether our enforcement strategy is working or whether it’s actually so bad that we’re making it more likely for big banks to break the law,” Warren said, adding that it is now a common belief in the banking industry to make money by any means necessary because the government fines will never reach the level of profits potentially made through questionable and illegal practices.

“Does anyone on this panel seriously think the government’s current enforcement system for financial crimes is actually working in the sense of deterring future lawbreaking?” Warren asked the regulators.

I am waiting to see what action Senator Warren takes with the Commodities Futures Trading Commision (CFTC) who appointed a woman from this bank to an advisory commission. This woman was head of the part of bank that settled with the FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) for the energy manipulation that Senator Warren mentions in the beginning of her question.

See my previous post Twitter 2, JP Morgan, 0: Bythe Masters Withdraws After One Day Appointment as CFTC Advisor for more details on the issue that Elizabeth Warren should hit next. If she can’t get a forum at her committee, she should take to the floor of the Senate.

The Daily Kos has the article CNN breaks mold and tells truth about CBO report.

The estimated reduction stems almost entirely from a net decline in the amount of labor that workers choose to supply, rather than from a net drop in businesses’ demand for labor, so it will appear almost entirely as a reduction in labor force participation and in hours worked relative to what would have occurred otherwise rather than as an increase in unemployment (that is, more workers seeking but not finding jobs) or underemploy­ment (such as part-time workers who would prefer to work more hours per week).

What the Republicans don’t say is that the people who decide to leave their jobs because of the ACA can do so because they are no longer trapped in jobs they don’t like with employers they don’t like because they need the employer provided health care insurance.

Taking a strong hold that employers have over workers reduces one more power they have to hold salaries down.

People who have been delaying retirement because of the need for health care insurance for a younger spouse can now retire.  They leave open a job for younger workers to take probably at a lower salary.  You’d think companies would be happy for this part.

The people who have a creative idea for a start up company can now leave their jobs and strike out on their own because they can afford their own health care insurance.  This is the kind of movement we have always depended on to get us out of past recessions.

Why are the Republicans so dead set against the 99% getting a fair shake for once?