We should all agree with this!

[Nemo]

No, you can't have unregulated banking. Alan Greenspan was wrong in thinking that the market would regulate itself; and he admitted that he was wrong in his testimony before Congress. The congressional response was Dodd-Frank incorporating the Volcker Rule against proprietary trading by banking entities; which was violated by JP Morgan Chase Bank before the ink was dry on the "remedial" legislation. (How many billions were lost? Does anyone know?) Dodd-Frank was too little to late; and it was immediately attacked by the banking and Wall Street lobbyists that have succeeded in getting the few restrictions on trading financial derivative contracts "relaxed" to the point that it is back to "business as usual". In this, I fault President Obama's leadership; for although he did not create the problem, he failed to take decisive action to correct it. When he had the bankers by the balls and called them on the carpet at the White House, instead of bringing these rogues to heel, he let them off the leash. The gleeful bankers held a press conference to announce that the President had agreed to "work with them". You can rest assured that what happened before will happen again - and soon. And you and I - and everyone not responsible - will end up paying for it; and for a very, very long time to come.

 

[Dad2three]

The problem is regaining regulatory control over banking and financial markets. What happened was a change in government policy for regulation of banking entities. It started with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 that repealed the restrictions Glass-Steagal on banking enacted in the wake of the Great Depression; and the enactment of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, which exempted financial derivative contracts from administration in bankruptcy. See 11 U.S.C. § 546(e). This paved the way for banks and their parent companies to trade in derivatives on financial markets with legal immunity for the counterparties of these financial contracts.

The question is whether allowing banks to trade in financial derivative contracts is a good thing. It is not, witness the subprime mortgage debacle that triggered the stock market crash of 2008, bank failures and government bailout. There cannot be unregulated banking. Banks should be prohibited from speculating on high-risk securities (i.e., derivatives) - including trading their own debt securities - on the financial markets. The banking lobby’s argument that the banks should be given carte blanche to trade in financial derivative contracts to be competitive in world markets belies the responsibility for the risk of loss to be borne by the government, and, ultimately, the taxpayer; not to mention that derivatives are traded “over the counter” and carried “off balance sheet”, which undisclosed transactions violate all rules of bank accountability. Without a regulated banking system, there can be no security for commerce, financial collapse and economic chaos.

You're an idiot.
Banks literally have regulators sitting in their offices every day telling them what they can and cannot do.
Deregulation of banks. What bullshit. If we actually deregulated them we wouldn't have issues of government bail outs.

Banks used cheap capital to create a bubble. Their lending strategies fueled and fed off the housing bubble, and they did so using mortgage products whose performance was premised on continued growth of that bubble.

Regulators and policymakers enabled this process at virtually every turn. Part of the reason they failed to understand the housing bubble was willful ignorance: they bought into the argument that the market would equilibrate itself. In particular, financial actors and regulatory officials both believed that secondary and tertiary markets could effectively control risk through pricing.


http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf


Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”

 

[The Rabbi]

No, you can't have unregulated banking. Alan Greenspan was wrong in thinking that the market would regulate itself; and he admitted that he was wrong in his testimony before Congress. The congressional response was Dodd-Frank incorporating the Volcker Rule against proprietary trading by banking entities; which was violated by JP Morgan Chase Bank before the ink was dry on the "remedial" legislation. (How many billions were lost? Does anyone know?) Dodd-Frank was too little to late; and it was immediately attacked by the banking and Wall Street lobbyists that have succeeded in getting the few restrictions on trading financial derivative contracts "relaxed" to the point that it is back to "business as usual". In this, I fault President Obama's leadership; for although he did not create the problem, he failed to take decisive action to correct it. When he had the bankers by the balls and called them on the carpet at the White House, instead of bringing these rogues to heel, he let them off the leash. The gleeful bankers held a press conference to announce that the President had agreed to "work with them". You can rest assured that what happened before will happen again - and soon. And you and I - and everyone not responsible - will end up paying for it; and for a very, very long time to come.

Of ocurse you could have unregulated banking. We had it in this country for decades prior to the Great Depression.
ANd in the old days the bank's board was personally responsible for depositors' losses. How often do you think they went under then? The result was banking policy that was incredibly tight fisted. Real estate lending espeically was frowned on and hardly any bank did it.
Again, the problem is bankers know they are playing with Uncle's money. If they lose it, Uncle will give them more.

 

[The Rabbi]

The problem is regaining regulatory control over banking and financial markets. What happened was a change in government policy for regulation of banking entities. It started with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 that repealed the restrictions Glass-Steagal on banking enacted in the wake of the Great Depression; and the enactment of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, which exempted financial derivative contracts from administration in bankruptcy. See 11 U.S.C. § 546(e). This paved the way for banks and their parent companies to trade in derivatives on financial markets with legal immunity for the counterparties of these financial contracts.

The question is whether allowing banks to trade in financial derivative contracts is a good thing. It is not, witness the subprime mortgage debacle that triggered the stock market crash of 2008, bank failures and government bailout. There cannot be unregulated banking. Banks should be prohibited from speculating on high-risk securities (i.e., derivatives) - including trading their own debt securities - on the financial markets. The banking lobby’s argument that the banks should be given carte blanche to trade in financial derivative contracts to be competitive in world markets belies the responsibility for the risk of loss to be borne by the government, and, ultimately, the taxpayer; not to mention that derivatives are traded “over the counter” and carried “off balance sheet”, which undisclosed transactions violate all rules of bank accountability. Without a regulated banking system, there can be no security for commerce, financial collapse and economic chaos.

You're an idiot.
Banks literally have regulators sitting in their offices every day telling them what they can and cannot do.
Deregulation of banks. What bullshit. If we actually deregulated them we wouldn't have issues of government bail outs.

Banks used cheap capital to create a bubble. Their lending strategies fueled and fed off the housing bubble, and they did so using mortgage products whose performance was premised on continued growth of that bubble.

Regulators and policymakers enabled this process at virtually every turn. Part of the reason they failed to understand the housing bubble was willful ignorance: they bought into the argument that the market would equilibrate itself. In particular, financial actors and regulatory officials both believed that secondary and tertiary markets could effectively control risk through pricing.




Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”


]

WAHHH! BOOSH LIED US INTO WAR! BUSH CAUSED THE CRASH! BUSH WAS A STOOGE TO DICK CHENEY! WAHHH!!!

Go smoke some more crack, you crack pot.

 

[Dad2three]

You're an idiot.
Banks literally have regulators sitting in their offices every day telling them what they can and cannot do.
Deregulation of banks. What bullshit. If we actually deregulated them we wouldn't have issues of government bail outs.

Banks used cheap capital to create a bubble. Their lending strategies fueled and fed off the housing bubble, and they did so using mortgage products whose performance was premised on continued growth of that bubble.

Regulators and policymakers enabled this process at virtually every turn. Part of the reason they failed to understand the housing bubble was willful ignorance: they bought into the argument that the market would equilibrate itself. In particular, financial actors and regulatory officials both believed that secondary and tertiary markets could effectively control risk through pricing.




Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”


]

WAHHH! BOOSH LIED US INTO WAR! BUSH CAUSED THE CRASH! BUSH WAS A STOOGE TO DICK CHENEY! WAHHH!!!

Go smoke some more crack, you crack pot.

Sorry, if history of the US doesn't fit in the conservatives world view, but conservatives are NEVER on the correct side of history AND yes, who is in charge matters

The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it.
P. J. O'Rourke

 

[Rshermr]

Banks used cheap capital to create a bubble. Their lending strategies fueled and fed off the housing bubble, and they did so using mortgage products whose performance was premised on continued growth of that bubble.

Regulators and policymakers enabled this process at virtually every turn. Part of the reason they failed to understand the housing bubble was willful ignorance: they bought into the argument that the market would equilibrate itself. In particular, financial actors and regulatory officials both believed that secondary and tertiary markets could effectively control risk through pricing.




Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”


]

WAHHH! BOOSH LIED US INTO WAR! BUSH CAUSED THE CRASH! BUSH WAS A STOOGE TO DICK CHENEY! WAHHH!!!

Go smoke some more crack, you crack pot.

Sorry, if history of the US doesn't fit in the conservatives world view, but conservatives are NEVER on the correct side of history AND yes, who is in charge matters

The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it.
P. J. O'Rourke

Yes, but, according to conservatives, it is NEVER their fault. Never, never, ever. And they turn up the the noise machine, and the con tools bring on the talking points. You know what they are going to say before they say it. Some version of;
NOT OUR FAULT, IT WAS THE LIBERALS, NOT OUR FAULT.
Those with integrity take credit for their errors as well as their success. Cons totally lack integrity.

 

[The Rabbi]

WAHHH! BOOSH LIED US INTO WAR! BUSH CAUSED THE CRASH! BUSH WAS A STOOGE TO DICK CHENEY! WAHHH!!!

Go smoke some more crack, you crack pot.

Sorry, if history of the US doesn't fit in the conservatives world view, but conservatives are NEVER on the correct side of history AND yes, who is in charge matters

The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it.
P. J. O'Rourke

Yes, but, according to conservatives, it is NEVER their fault. Never, never, ever. And they turn up the the noise machine, and the con tools bring on the talking points. You know what they are going to say before they say it. Some version of;
NOT OUR FAULT, IT WAS THE LIBERALS, NOT OUR FAULT.
Those with integrity take credit for their errors as well as their success. Cons totally lack integrity.

What have liberals taken responsibility for?

 

[Rshermr]

Pretty much anything they are responsible for. Economies as they happened if they were in charge. But they have not had to take responsibility for the great republican depression of 1929 or the great republican recession of 2008. Nothing else comes close.
Then, they push libertarian socio/economic society, which has NEVER worked and never will. But by laying out the methods of getting there and getting tools to follow them, they get richer and more powerful while the middle class looses. Which means there is no real reason to listen to them, anyway.

 

[The Rabbi]

Pretty much anything they are responsible for. Economies as they happened if they were in charge. But they have not had to take responsibility for the great republican depression of 1929 or the great republican recession of 2008. Nothing else comes close.
Then, they push libertarian socio/economic society, which has NEVER worked and never will. But by laying out the methods of getting there and getting tools to follow them, they get richer and more powerful while the middle class looses. Which means there is no real reason to listen to them, anyway.

thanks. Liberals never take responsibility for their fuck ups. It's always someone else's fault.

 

[Dad2three]

Sorry, if history of the US doesn't fit in the conservatives world view, but conservatives are NEVER on the correct side of history AND yes, who is in charge matters

The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it.
P. J. O'Rourke

Yes, but, according to conservatives, it is NEVER their fault. Never, never, ever. And they turn up the the noise machine, and the con tools bring on the talking points. You know what they are going to say before they say it. Some version of;
NOT OUR FAULT, IT WAS THE LIBERALS, NOT OUR FAULT.
Those with integrity take credit for their errors as well as their success. Cons totally lack integrity.

What have liberals taken responsibility for?

Labor laws, min wage, clean air act, environmental laws, civil rights, union rights, SS, Medicare, etc.. ALL things CONSERVATIVES FOUGHT (GOP isn't the same conservative)

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Got it, markets need to have the MYTHICAL 'free hand' in order for them to work properly, lol

YOU are crazy, dumb AND not honest. The trifecta for conservatives...

why do you call it mythical when China just unleashed Adam's Smith's "invisible hand" { not free hand} and instantly saved 50 million people from en masse lliberal starvation? Ever heard of East/West Germany? See why we have to be 100% positve that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

West Germany is doing pretty well. Semi socialist and investing in clean energy. Unions, National health care and all. I'll stop so you can get some garlic and a holy cross, maybe a wooden stake and a mallet too.

West Germany doesn't exist in this world, where do you live?

 

[The Rabbi]

Yes, but, according to conservatives, it is NEVER their fault. Never, never, ever. And they turn up the the noise machine, and the con tools bring on the talking points. You know what they are going to say before they say it. Some version of;
NOT OUR FAULT, IT WAS THE LIBERALS, NOT OUR FAULT.
Those with integrity take credit for their errors as well as their success. Cons totally lack integrity.

What have liberals taken responsibility for?

Labor laws, min wage, clean air act, environmental laws, civil rights, union rights, SS, Medicare, etc.. ALL things CONSERVATIVES FOUGHT (GOP isn't the same conservative)

Liberals have taken responsibility for the poverty, misery, and ruin they've caused with all that shit? Show me!

 

[The Rabbi]

why do you call it mythical when China just unleashed Adam's Smith's "invisible hand" { not free hand} and instantly saved 50 million people from en masse lliberal starvation? Ever heard of East/West Germany? See why we have to be 100% positve that liberalism is based in pure ignorance?

West Germany is doing pretty well. Semi socialist and investing in clean energy. Unions, National health care and all. I'll stop so you can get some garlic and a holy cross, maybe a wooden stake and a mallet too.

West Germany doesn't exist in this world, where do you live?

WHy do you need facts when you have narrative?
The truth is that Germany has lagged the US in growth for years, until Obama came in and made anemic Euro growth look like a powerhouse by comparison.

 

[Dad2three]

What have liberals taken responsibility for?

Labor laws, min wage, clean air act, environmental laws, civil rights, union rights, SS, Medicare, etc.. ALL things CONSERVATIVES FOUGHT (GOP isn't the same conservative)

Liberals have taken responsibility for the poverty, misery, and ruin they've caused with all that shit? Show me!

Yes, lets go back to the age of a Dickens novel the conservatives miss...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Labor laws, min wage, clean air act, environmental laws, civil rights, union rights, SS, Medicare, etc.. ALL things CONSERVATIVES FOUGHT (GOP isn't the same conservative)

Liberals have taken responsibility for the poverty, misery, and ruin they've caused with all that shit? Show me!

Yes, lets go back to the age of a Dickens novel the conservatives miss...

dear under capitalism a corporation has to provide the best jobs and products possible to survive. Now do you see the beauty in capitalism? China just saved 60 million from starvation with capitalism not with liberal laws. It was the liberal laws that slowly starved 60 million.

Simple enough??

 

[Dad2three]

No, you can't have unregulated banking. Alan Greenspan was wrong in thinking that the market would regulate itself; and he admitted that he was wrong in his testimony before Congress. The congressional response was Dodd-Frank incorporating the Volcker Rule against proprietary trading by banking entities; which was violated by JP Morgan Chase Bank before the ink was dry on the "remedial" legislation. (How many billions were lost? Does anyone know?) Dodd-Frank was too little to late; and it was immediately attacked by the banking and Wall Street lobbyists that have succeeded in getting the few restrictions on trading financial derivative contracts "relaxed" to the point that it is back to "business as usual". In this, I fault President Obama's leadership; for although he did not create the problem, he failed to take decisive action to correct it. When he had the bankers by the balls and called them on the carpet at the White House, instead of bringing these rogues to heel, he let them off the leash. The gleeful bankers held a press conference to announce that the President had agreed to "work with them". You can rest assured that what happened before will happen again - and soon. And you and I - and everyone not responsible - will end up paying for it; and for a very, very long time to come.

Of ocurse you could have unregulated banking. We had it in this country for decades prior to the Great Depression.
ANd in the old days the bank's board was personally responsible for depositors' losses. How often do you think they went under then? The result was banking policy that was incredibly tight fisted. Real estate lending espeically was frowned on and hardly any bank did it.
Again, the problem is bankers know they are playing with Uncle's money. If they lose it, Uncle will give them more.

On average, more than 600 banks failed each year between 1921 and 1929. Those failures led to the end of many state deposit insurance programs. The failed banks were primarily small, rural banks, and people in metropolitan areas were generally unconcerned. Investors and other businessmen thought that the failing institutions were weak and badly managed and that those failures served to strengthen the banking system. A major wave of bank failures during the last few months of 1930 triggered widespread attempts to convert deposits to cash. Confidence in the banking system began to erode, and bank runs became more common. In all, 1,350 banks suspended operations during 1930. Some simply closed their doors due to financial difficulties, while others were placed into receivership.


To begin to understand both the severity of the crisis and the impact it had on everyday Americans, it is necessary to try to come to grips with its magnitude. In the four years of 1930-1933 alone, nearly 10,000 banks failed or were suspended. These banks held deposits of over $6.8 billion (equivalent to perhaps $60 billion today’s dollars, but representing a much larger share of depositor’s wealth then). The depositors in these banks lost nearly 20% of these deposits when the banks failed.


Banks Failures: The 1920?s and The Great Depression | EconProph

 

[Dad2three]

Liberals have taken responsibility for the poverty, misery, and ruin they've caused with all that shit? Show me!

Yes, lets go back to the age of a Dickens novel the conservatives miss...

dear under capitalism a corporation has to provide the best jobs and products possible to survive. Now do you see the beauty in capitalism? China just saved 60 million from starvation with capitalism not with liberal laws. It was the liberal laws that slowly starved 60 million.

Simple enough??

YOU seriously have to be the dumbest con on this site, with SOOOOO many ignorant conservatives on this site, that take real work Bubba

 

[Sunni Man]

The jews own and run the Federal Reserve.

So the American goyim will continue to get fleeced by the banks.

And our nation will never get out of debt. ..

 

[Moonglow]

When it was not regulated financial panics, depressions and recessions were still happening in the USA..

 

[Moonglow]

The jews own and run the Federal Reserve.

So the American goyim will continue to get fleeced by the banks.

And our nation will never get out of debt. ..

The US has had a debt since George Washington...