   Obama's financial Overhaul
ArticleQuote:"We did not choose how this crisis began. But we do have a choice in the legacy this crisis leaves behind," Obama said. "So today, my administration is proposing a sweeping overhaul of the financial regulatory system, a transformation on a scale not seen since the reforms that followed the Great Depression."Quote:We are called upon to recognize that the free market is the most powerful generative force for our prosperity -- but it is not a free license to ignore the consequences of our actions."This is far-reaching- government gaining more control over the financial system. What's your opinion of this new 'sweeping' overhaul?   
  It's a lot easier to argue against government intervention when, left to your own devices, you do not plunge the world into financial chaos as your bets get called in.He's not talking about lining up bankers and shooting them China-style, though that would save a lot of money; it seems like he's removing loopholes (such as the limp-wristed Office of Thrift Supervision, which I didn't realize existed and would have assumed to be a joke until now) and bolstering existing ministries to give them a better picture of financial stability across the American economy.What might be less defensible is the massive reach into derivatives swapping; however, if it works as designed, it would've prevented this entire problem in the first place.People are going to bitch inevitably; Americans seem to vastly resent any shifting of responsibility towards the federal government, and countries that had stronger bureaucracies also got screwed over in this whole mess because of the massive amount of dollars flowing through the American cash hose.   ;Quote:Original post by MarminArticleQuote:"We did not choose how this crisis began. But we do have a choice in the legacy this crisis leaves behind," Obama said. "So today, my administration is proposing a sweeping overhaul of the financial regulatory system, a transformation on a scale not seen since the reforms that followed the Great Depression."Quote:We are called upon to recognize that the free market is the most powerful generative force for our prosperity -- but it is not a free license to ignore the consequences of our actions."This is far-reaching- government gaining more control over the financial system. What's your opinion of this new 'sweeping' overhaul?Since last year the myth that industries will police themselves was completely disproven, I welcome these changes.See people love to espouse the idea that if people are able to do anything they want, things will still work out. But what has the internet shown us about this idea? How often do you find forums without moderators, for example? Why is that, do you think? Because people have proven time and time again throughout history that if you give them free reign to do anything they want, they will inevitably screw things up for everyone.Banks, you fucked up. Time to take your medicine.   ;Quote:Original post by MarminThis is far-reaching- government gaining more control over the financial system. What's your opinion of this new 'sweeping' overhaul?What's yours?For the record, government has always had control over the financial system. In fact, in the past the government had much more control, and we only arrived at the situation of the last few years due to a relative "rash" of de-regulation.Anyway, are there any of the generally outlined proposals you take issue with? You think, maybe, hedge funds shouldn't be overseen by the SEC? You think futures, derivatives and securities shouldn't be regulated - so financial institutions can go right back to chopping up and selling unsecured debt so that the whole system can come crumbling down (again) when creditors try to collect? Do you really think credit products are sound and fair, currently? (You should watch ">Maxed Out, then.)What is your objection, exactly?   ;  I wonder if more government control will really have the intended effect; bank are going to complain that it will limit economic growth.  Let's face it, if you have the skills and means to make big bucks out of something-  is it not natural to proceed with it and cash in? I'm personally not money-hungry, but I can imagine that it is very appealing to some. The current crisis is not only the banks fault.These changes will go through eventually, I think. Until some decades later, another time, the whole process repeats itself again.Quote:so financial institutions can go right back to chopping up and selling unsecured debt so that the whole system can come crumbling down (again) when creditors try to collect? They provided what some consumers wanted. Was it illegal for the banks to do? If not, the instance who provided the means is also to blame.   ;Quote:Original post by MarminI wonder if more government control will really have the intended effect; bank are going to complain that it will limit economic growth.Looks like you didn't even read the article you linked:Quote:A lot of banks and trade associations oppose the new consumer protection agency -- especially the idea of giving it power to curb financial products if they're found to be deceptive or unfair."We have a concern creating another regulatory burden, and wonder how they plan on paying for the agency," said Dan Berger, head lobbyist for the National Association of Federal Credit Unions, which otherwise supports the reform plan.But most of the banking industry expected -- and some even called for -- giving the Federal Reserve more powers to monitor systemic risk and setting up a new way to unwind big financial firms.Scott Talbott of the Financial Services Roundtable said banks "won, tied and lost" in the proposal, pointing out aspects they supported, opposed and could accept.And the Financial Services Forum, which represents 17 chief executives, said the proposal overall appears "comprehensive" and "reasonable," said president Rob Nichols."I think this is a great start of the dialogue for what's going to take place on the Hill over the next six months," Nichols said.Quote:Let's face it, if you have the skills and means to make big bucks out of something-  is it not natural to proceed with it and cash in?I don't even know what that's supposed to mean.Quote:so financial institutions can go right back to chopping up and selling unsecured debt so that the whole system can come crumbling down (again) when creditors try to collect? They provided what some consumers wanted. Was it illegal for the banks to do? If not, the instance who provided the means is also to blame.No, it wasn't illegal, but it was unethical. And maybe it should be illegal.   ;Quote:Original post by OluseyiQuote:Original post by MarminI wonder if more government control will really have the intended effect; bank are going to complain that it will limit economic growth.Looks like you didn't even read the article you linked:Quote:A lot of banks and trade associations oppose the new consumer protection agency -- especially the idea of giving it power to curb financial products if they're found to be deceptive or unfair."We have a concern creating another regulatory burden, and wonder how they plan on paying for the agency," said Dan Berger, head lobbyist for the National Association of Federal Credit Unions, which otherwise supports the reform plan.But most of the banking industry expected -- and some even called for -- giving the Federal Reserve more powers to monitor systemic risk and setting up a new way to unwind big financial firms.Scott Talbott of the Financial Services Roundtable said banks "won, tied and lost" in the proposal, pointing out aspects they supported, opposed and could accept.And the Financial Services Forum, which represents 17 chief executives, said the proposal overall appears "comprehensive" and "reasonable," said president Rob Nichols."I think this is a great start of the dialogue for what's going to take place on the Hill over the next six months," Nichols said.So you really believe everything the banks tell?  They're in it for the profit, nothing else, and these measures will rob them of some of it. They can't so anthing else than agree, because else the gov'ment comes to them and robs them of even more. They wait, comply, and when the time is ripe, they streak again. Quote:Quote:Let's face it, if you have the skills and means to make big bucks out of something-  is it not natural to proceed with it and cash in?I don't even know what that's supposed to mean.It means, the basis of this 'crisis',   greed, will not stop with any measure taken. It 's easy to say for a person that he's not greedy, don't want free or easy money, but when the moment comes , and they have the opportunity, most if not all will accept it.   ;Quote:Original post by Marminthe basis of this 'crisis', greed, will not stop with any measure taken. It 's easy to say for a person that he's not greedy, don't want free or easy money, but when the moment comes , and they have the opportunity, most if not all will accept it.Yes, motive and opportunity are necessary to create an economic crisis. In this case the motive is greed and the opportunity is lax or inappropriate laws and regulations. I believe that it is possible to remove greed as a motive it is just very difficult to raise a person to be content with less than they can get monetarily. However, greed isn't a switch so much as it is on a continuum. Most people aren't that greedy that they would do *anything* to sate their greed. Things like laws, societal conventions, personal background, and amount of risk prevent a lot of people's greed from getting out of hand.   ;Quote:The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil menWhy do I quote this? Because it describes what this so-called crisis is about.There is no crisis. There is only fraud and theft. Crisis implies that an unfavourable situation evolved out of unfavourable conditions. The present situation did not evolve, it was made and it is being sustained, because it is profitable for the evil and the vicious.There are criminals under the protectorate of the present legal injustice who have been stealing the money of the hard working masses (not only in the USA, but also in the EU), unquestioned and unchallenged, and neglecting all possible consequences.Apart from the billions "lost" in gambling (euphemised "short sales"), even more billions simply "disappeared" over night when things became a bit tighter. Money is never "lost" and never "disappears", it only changes owner. Funnily, nobody wonders where all that money went to.Other vultures took the occasion to deliberately ruin perfectly healthy companies by withdrawing all funds over night, and are presently getting away with blackmailing governments for ransoms in the billions, under pain of mass unemployment.Yet other hyenas take the occasion -- under massive fear-mongering in companies that (despite the "crisis") make huge profits -- to lay off and outsource and to reinvent slave labour in their own countries.The US government wants to make at least some of these things a little bit harder and wants a little bit more control? Both thumbs up for that.   ;Quote:Original post by MarminSo you really believe everything the banks tell?  They're in it for the profit, nothing else, and these measures will rob them of some of it. They can't so anthing else than agree, because else the gov'ment comes to them and robs them of even more. They wait, comply, and when the time is ripe, they streak again.Can you actually read at, like, a fifth-grade level? I've been trying hard to be less insulting, but you're pushing it.In the article quotation, the various financial interest state that they have things they disagree with - which knocks down your "of course they'll agree with it" rhetorical nonsense. Further, even before the bank bailouts of last year, there was a bank president who wrote to congress petitioning against it. Banks aren't just Chase, BofA and Citi; there are hundreds, thousands of financial institutions in this country, many of which qualify to be considered "small businesses." You think every last single one of them is solely dedicated to rapacious usury of their customers?Get an education - and I'm not talking about schooling.Quote:It means, the basis of this 'crisis',   greed, will not stop with any measure taken. It 's easy to say for a person that he's not greedy, don't want free or easy money, but when the moment comes , and they have the opportunity, most if not all will accept it.I guess we should just give up, bend over and get fucked, then, right? I mean, that's your resigned prescription, isn't it?The capitalist system is aptly described as one in which the comparative greed of market participants competing for fixed resources results in an approximately equitable (commensurate to effort) distribution. It is by no means perfect, and steps must be taken to preserve competition - this is why we have anti-trust laws, for instance. Further, steps must be taken to ensure that the losers don't lose too badly, which is why we have welfare and unemployment insurance, and we all chip in to the basket out of which these social benefits are paid.Regulation is a necessity to preserve the capitalist system, or it gets consumed by itself. The challenge is finding the right balance between regulation and free enterprise. The danger we face now is that, somehow, corporations have managed to convince a large swaths of the general public that regulation is an evil, that it is government "meddling" in private affairs - even as those selfsame corporations steal, cheat and take consumers for every last red cent they have.Wake up!Quote:Original post by samothApart from the billions "lost" in gambling (euphemised "short sales"), even more billions simply "disappeared" over night when things became a bit tighter. Money is never "lost" and never "disappears", it only changes owner. Funnily, nobody wonders where all that money went to.Ordinarily, I agree with you. However in this case, there is an interesting exception: money was "created" out of thin air (as opposed to out of a valuation of a resource or finished good/service) by speculation on the derivatives market, and the speculation was rampant, resulting in gross overvaluation of the debts held. This created "phantom" money, and a big part of the economic contraction we've experienced has been the discovery that this phantom money was, in fact, nonexistent.For the first time on this large a scale in history, money "disappeared."Other than that, I agree completely with you.   