comments_imageCOMMENTS: 89

Don't You Think It's Time to Reinstate the Laws That Would Have Prevented the Financial Crash?

It's been 10 years since Washington repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, the moment we got royally screwed by the banking system -- and we're still paying the price.
November 14, 2009  |  
 
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

This week marks the tenth year anniversary of the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley or Financial Services Modernization Act, marking the moment when we were royally screwed by the banking system. Thank you to all those involved.

It's amazing how downright ebullient, President Bill Clinton was at that signing ceremony on November 12, 1999. an event introduced by then Treasury Secretary (now Obama advisor) Larry Summers, successor to Robert Rubin. Those restricting, anti-competitive Depression era, laws were finally behind us. Awesome.

Fast-forward to now and must of us know how devastatingly expensive that signature was for the American public. Yet, despite our government having deployed or made available over $14.1 trillion worth of federal subsidies to fix Wall Street, the banking landscape is less stable than it was before last year's crisis. And, despite national unemployment approaching double digits, and another record quarter of foreclosures, we stand farther away from the intent of Glass Steagall than ever.

Banks weren't handled with kid gloves then. They were treated like the spoiled, reckless, destructive beings they were. After the stock market crash in 1929, the country sunk into the throes of the Great Depression, characterized by 25% unemployment, bread lines, rampant foreclosures, and general despair. In 1932, the Pecora commission examined the shady banking practices that contributed to the devastation, all of which hinged on one thing - banks had used depositor capital and loans to speculate with. Exactly like the practices going on before and since last fall's financial calamity. The result of that speculation gone wrong tanked the economy. Glass-Steagall logically sought to ensure this wouldn't happen again. It divided up the banking landscape into two parts, commercial banks and investment banks. The federal government would back commercial banks and consumer deposits through establishing the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). But, it wouldn't be Wall Street's investment bank bookie and bitch.

Over the decades, the financial sector, armed with cunning lobbyists and overpaid lawyers, took many swipes at Glass-Steagall, but none as devastating as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Since then, the banking sector's powerful ate its weak, amidst a wave of massive consolidation. Nearly half of the nation's biggest bank mergers took place just before or since that Act was passed. All these mega banks can thus churn deposits and loans into debt or capital to fund speculation, risk, and create a roller coaster of an economy that is defined simply on whether those bets, or asset creations, work or not, at any given moment. Heads they win, tails we lose.

Last fall, the Federal Reserve, and to some extent the Treasury Department, not only blessed, but subsidized the mergers and moniker changes (like seriously, if Carrie Prejean's title can be stripped, certainly Goldman's behavior warrants removal of the bank holding company title), helping too big to fail to become even bigger with riskier profiles than ever before. Only this time they are floated on public assistance. This is not progress. It's expensive insanity. And, it will blow up again. It is a matter of when, not if.

Meanwhile, as reform bills from Senator Christopher Dodd's (D-CT) to Representative Barney Frank's (D-MA), to the plans from the Treasury Department and the White House, make their way from concept to draft to vote, we've got to keep one thing in mind. The beast that is today's complicated, convoluted, risk taking, federal capital sucking, and bonus paying mega-bank is still roaming around free.

As long as it remains out of its cage, creating plans to slow its movements are always going to be much harder, than putting it back in a stronger cage. Though, it's important to have a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, better derivatives regulation (if only that were on the table for real), and 'funeral plans' as Dodd's bill calls them, to put too big to fail banks to bed just before they keel over, it doesn't change the nature of the beast.

And though one way to keep some of our money out of the mouths of the most rapacious banks, would be to reduce leverage limits and increase capital requirements for the riskiest banks, or as Tim Geithner and Fed Chairman, Ben Benanke like to call them, 'the systemically important' ones so they can pay for their own clean-up - this too has a catch.

The more capital banks are required to hold, while being allowed to operate as investment banks that use hoarded capital as collateral for increasing their own borrowing and trading businesses, the less lending they will provide to ordinary citizens and small businesses. Without splitting up the banking structure to avoid the hoard to trade, not to lend, scenario, we are creating legislation to help banks bloat on risk - they will have less than no incentive to do much else.

And as far as regulatory bodies are concerned? I dare any regulator, or for that matter human-being in Washington to come up with one single consistent risk parameter that can be used to determine exactly what percentage of each of the big bank's profits comes from speculative vs. customer driven business. Because, by virtue of how complex they all are, and have been allowed to remain, no two balance sheets are remotely similar - and I'm not talking about accounting terms, I'm talking about risk clarification ones.

Thus, whether we merge all regulators into one ginormous one, or have a council of them to deal with the hard issues of mega-collapse and crisis, or even place one inside the office of every top bank CEO, shadowing him like a probation officer (no that's not in one of the bills, it would just be fun to watch unfold), the beast remains out of the cage.

That's why we need to reinstate Glass-Steagall. Now. We need to dissect the speculative from the boring within our country's financial institutions. And yes, it's possible to achieve. Banks split off pieces of companies and move them around every day. Plus, the Glass Steagall Act didn't wave a magic wand that divided up bank divisions, it ingeniously used banks' own competitive desires against them, by giving banks a one-year period to dramatically reduce the portion of profit they made from investment banking activities to 10% of total profits. Banks were free to choose how to do this, knowing commercial banking got government backing, and investment backing didn't. Betting behaviors are more conservative when it's your own money, and not someone else's on the line. Stability follows.

We need to specifically reinstate section 16 of the Glass-Steagall Act that had restricted national commercial banks from engaging in most investment banking activities, up to a certain small percentage, coming from client directives, not their own proprietary trading. And, on the flip side, we need to reinstate section 21 that restricted investment banks from engaging in any commercial banking up to a certain percentage limit.

Doing these two things, would reduce the more systemically risky competitive desires between these two types of banks that spurs them to merge into institutions that are too big to exist without our help, or take the kinds of leveraged risks that drive short-term profits and bonuses, at the expense of long term financial system stability.

Similar to the original Glass-Steagall Act, commercial institutions would have say, eighteen months to reduce the percentage of their income derived from any type of equity, asset-backed securities, CDO or derivative products origination and trading to 10 percent, and one year to present a plan to do so.

While banks are learning to comply with these new-old laws, we should immediately reinstating lower deposit concentration limits on the banking industry to discourage further consolidation. Plus, we need to force the Fed to do its job to enforce existing limits, or give that enforcement power to the FDIC or another body that shows itself capable of performing this basic regulatory function. Today, two banks, Bank of America and Wells-Fargo are above 10 percent deposit concentration limits, and JPM Chase is close to 10 percent. Thank you for that, Fed. You're fired.

It's time to put the beast back in its cage, while taming it, by re-instating Glass Steagall, and keep it from inflicting even more danger on the rest of us. Meanwhile, we need to support all those in Washington that get this, and keep pressuring those who don't.


Nomi Prins is a senior fellow at the public policy center Demos and author of It Takes a Pillage: Behind the Bailouts, Bonuses, and Backroom Deals from Washington to Wall Street.

Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: banking, glass-steagall, financial industry, nomi prins, anniversary


Comments are closed-

Great Piece ... But Let's Not Stop There ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Nov 14, 2009 12:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We certainly do need to reinstate Glass-Steagal ... And Nomi is 125% correct, we must do it now or face a financial tsunami that would make 2008 look like childs' play.

And it is also correct that the banks are in much worse shape than they were in 2007. Why haven't they been taken over? The reason is they have changed the rules to let banks to value their shaky assets as good as gold.

They changed "mark to market" to, what they themselves call "mark to make believe" ... in other words it is a sham that allows failed banks to continue to operate.

These banks hoard money once it moves through the system because they know that they have huge losses coming. This hoarding is so big it is sucking the money needed to run the economy out of the economy.

Just two banks, Bank of America and Wells Fargo control 20% of bank deposits yet I dare anyone to declare these banks solvent.

Insolvent banks have to be reconciled where the assets match the obligations. Many smaller banks are being taken out but not these politically connected banksters and they and others are sucking our money supply dry with their hoarding.

It is time to take on these malignancies and cut them out of the system, because as Nomi said, they will take us all out, sooner with their money hoarding, or later when they implode with bad debts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What Did You Expect... Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: What Did You Expect... Posted by: mmckinl
» RE: I sort of figured that... Posted by: oregoncharles

Comments are closed-

For the record
Posted by: Perry Logan on Nov 14, 2009 2:23 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Smiling or not, Clinton opposed repeal of Glass-Steagall. He signed the bill only because it had a veto-proof majority.

By the same token, there is no way in Hell Obama will ever re-regulate the banking system. He is far to the right of Clinton--and incompetent, to boot.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: For the record Posted by: thebeerdoctor
» Wrong again Perry Posted by: brunowe

Comments are closed-

The Public Option
Posted by: ProgressiveManiac on Nov 14, 2009 5:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So suppose we restore the Glass Steagle act. In another 50 years, when memories of the last depression have again grown dim, will another generation of American politicians be again fooled by some slick line about freeing up the banks to operate more efficiently? Will they too get rid of unnecessary regulations like Glass Steagle that, supposedly, are stifling the economy? Will another crash and yet another depression be the inevitable result?

I do not mean to suggest that banks should not be regulated. By all means, Glass Steagle or something like it should be restored. But something more is needed, something with more persistence than just words on a law that can easily be changed or ignored.

North Dakota may be trying to teach the rest of us a lesson by their good example. Alone among the fifty states they have a state bank. And I don't just mean a bank that is called the First Bank of North Dakota. The state of North Dakota owns and operates their state bank, and that bank makes sure that local businesses have necessary credit. In fact it makes sure that the state itself has necessary credit. In effect, this state bank is operated as a public utility.

Private banks operate in North Dakota, of course, but they have to compete with the state bank, much the way that UPS and Federal Express compete with the U.S. Post Office. More importantly, residents of North Dakota have the option of putting their money into a bank that they can trust to be operating responsibly and in the public interest. They are in no way required to put their money there and that is also a good thing, but they have the option.

By the way, among the states, North Dakota is having one of the best records in responding to the current economic difficulties. They have one of the best records on unemployment, for example. The other states would do well to study and understand what North Dakota has done. They should seriously consider doing something similar.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Public Option Posted by: luckypuck

Comments are closed-

We can only hope...
Posted by: Celtic Tiger on Nov 14, 2009 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hate to be cynical but do you really think a reinstatement of Glass-Steagall or something like it is going to happen with this Congress and Administration? Obama seems to owe to0 much to Wall Street, and with Rahm calling the shots, those money connections will only be strengthened. Meanwhile, the spineless Dems in the Senate, their conservative mole Blue Dogs and DINOs like Lieberman will prevent any such remediation from happening. The Repubs are predictable and irrelevant in this context.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: We can only hope... Posted by: dale0k

Comments are closed-

goto:GoldmanSachs666.com
Posted by: weathered on Nov 14, 2009 7:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
behold the Vatican of greed.

Love of money is an illness, a pathology that has only one course of treatment:Charity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Delusions? Posted by: oregoncharles
» Wait A Sec! Posted by: armorypk
» Fair enough. Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: Reading Test. Posted by: oregoncharles

Comments are closed-

The only good economic effect of repealing Glass-Steagel
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Nov 14, 2009 7:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Signmakers kept extremely busy making new signs for bank branches every 2 years or less! Several branch bank buildings around here have had half a dozen name-changes since the repeal. Signmaking is the only reliable blue-collar job left, thanks to the banks.

Plus all those stadiums (stadia?) and sports arenas that had to change their names after their "sponsor" bank got swallowed up or morphed into something else.

Those signs are the only thing holding the economy up at this point!

As they told Dustin Hoffman in "The Graduate": "Plastic!"

But I can think of one industry where in the future, plastic just will not do: somebody should bring back domestic-made WIRE coathangers to cash in when Roe v. Wade is repealed!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

In a corportocracy everything is upside-down
Posted by: lclark on Nov 14, 2009 8:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Institutions whose motives are not mitigated by basic considerations of community or the common good have restraints removed.

A corporation is a legal entity whose only motivation is profit. It has no conscience. If it were an actual human it would be a sociopath.Consequently, for the good of actual people it should be restrained.

Instead, we have credit card interest rates that a generation ago were considered "loan shark" rates...usury. We have new bankruptcy laws that take property from individuals who get into financial difficulty because of illness. We have money for wars to guard pipelines ( that's the real Afganistan) but no money to mass deploy technology to remove dependence on foreign oil. And attempts to pass mandated spending by citizens on healthcare rather than a publicly funded universal plan that does not involve private profit.

The government is increasingly interfering in the lives of individuals, regulating and restricting them in numerous ways "for thier own good".

Seat belt laws, smoking restrictions, increasing road block checks, security checks in airports, camera monitoring, "smart chips" that log toll fees but also coincidently log the travel path of indivduals, and on and on.....individuals are increasingly burdened by laws as well as being socially engineered to accept the concept that government can arbitrarily legislate individual behavior.

It should be apparant to citizens what has happened.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Rape Middle Class
Posted by: CLARENCE SWINNEY on Nov 14, 2009 8:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rich

1945-1% had 30% of total wealth
1979-20%

33% decline

Result of Estate Tax-
70/90% Top Income Rate
28% Unearned Rate

1979-20%
1989-36%

80% Increase

WHY?

Reagan 750B Tax Cut

Reagan Void Revenue Sharing to transfer tax to middle class local taxes

Unearned to 15% from 28%

Transfer S&L assets to Wall Street.

Bush had to borrow `140 Billion to pay for it.

140B made several Billionaires.

Milken-Ichan-Perelman-Kravis
-Kohlberg-Roberts-Hearst
-Lee-Peltz-Ross-Gores--

Millions lost jobs.
Takeovers destroyed many large firms.

Reagan spend like drunk on military contracts
to enrich pals on Wall Street under guise of fighting a warm cold war.

His governorship was financed by California Defense Rich.

Bush II tried to emulate Reagan policies of enrich the rich.

He succeeded.

In 2007--1%--took 35% of Wealth Gain and 45% of Income growth from 1980.

20% owned 93% of all Financial Wealth.

80% owned 7% or equity in homes.

Forbes richest 400 shows many Hedge Fund managers who got that wealth in a five year period 2001-2005.

Vegas gambling. AIG will cover your bet.

Three Hedge Fund Managers made 4000 Million in one year and paid at 15% tax Rate.

Wall Street converted to--RICH MAN GAMBLING CASINO. undeniable.

Wall Street should create jobs for middle class.

In 8 years net new job growth was 3,000 Per Month.

Compare to Carter 218,000 and Clinton 237,000.

Wealth flushed up and jobs flushed out.

20 years of 3 conservative presidents gave us--
1000B debt to 11,500B
600B budget to 3600B
23M net new jobs

Compare to:

Carter + Clinton=2.8 MIllion Per year
3 Conservatives =1.1M per year

Involvement in 8 wARS VERSUS 2 BY cARTER & cLINTON

Nicaragu-el salvador-grenada-somalia-gulf-lebanon -iraq--afghanistan

cost in dollars plus livesplus reputation

somalia + kosovo

Conservatives gave us Great Depression now Great Recession.

Folks! This is a long long Recovery.

Want more Hell

-Re-elect Republicans.

cswinney2@triad.rr.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ape Middle Class Posted by: JSquercia

Comments are closed-

Bob O Link
Posted by: bob-o-link on Nov 14, 2009 8:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article by a terrific reporter!

Check out more at:

http://sites.google.com/site/thecatbirdsnest/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Betting on bankers...
Posted by: franklyspanking on Nov 14, 2009 8:54 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...who bet on falling over houses mortgaged to people without jobs was rather silly to start with.

Shall we just ban folks from doing silly things with their money? And what shall the fine or penalty be?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Debtors prison. Posted by: SteveO

Comments are closed-

NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Nov 14, 2009 9:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When there was talk of combing the Banks and securities firms I was working at Merrill Lynch. At first we thought it was a joke. No one ever thought it was a good idea. The public would never benfit from such an arrangement. The beneficiaries of this foolish move were as usual the guys at the top. Banks thought they could compete but soon found out that they didn't have the knowledge and the personnell to be anything but a bank. There's alot to be said for 'staying in your own lane'. It turned out to be a bad decision. We don't need a whole bunch of new rules, just what we had in place. Mostly written in 1933. It worked for 70 years. Financial markets can be eratic for many reasons, but what we saw happen in 2007-8 would never have happened with the old rules in place. Creative mortgages and other lending practices would have been prevented. I'm a little more optmistic about making the rules. If there were another event such as the one we're trying to get out of, no one would survive. I think the smart people involved know that. The S.E.C. has to be taken back a decade when they made a difference and served a purpose. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Obama, listen up
Posted by: elaine46 on Nov 14, 2009 9:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not voting for Obama again unless he does put these safeguards back into place. He has his millionaire status and his gov funded health insurance. If he does not follow through on reforms to help the 95% of us who have been victimized, he does not deserve a second term.

In the meantime, none of my retirement savings is going into the stock market. We suffered two crashes during the W administration, and I would have been much better off and a whole lot less stressed, if my modest funds had been in a fixed position. Let the rich stick it to each other on Wall Street, and they will get what they deserve.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

No Corporation Should Be Too Big to Fail
Posted by: tongjm on Nov 14, 2009 9:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree 100% on this. Once we get health care legislation out the door, the next top priority is putting in place whatever regulations we need to make sure the current financial crisis never happens again. Making sure no corporation is allowed to become too big to fail would be one huge step.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

What Financial Crash ? - This Is How My Home Town Has Improved Since I Left..
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Nov 14, 2009 11:18 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oldham has gone really upmarket since Norman Tebbit (One of Margaret Thatcher's Boys) told me to get on my bike and get a job...The rest of the UK soon to follow this wonderful progression from poverty to wealth - with everyone living contented lives in happinness and peace...

Strangely enough Oldham is the only place where I have driven a brand new car out of the showroom - Morris Marina 1.8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ar1MJJUwGQ

Oldham's New Wealth

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

"Whose Team Is It, Anyway?"
Posted by: oregoncharles on Nov 14, 2009 1:07 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good title from Katha Pollitt's piece today - meaning, of course, the Democratic Party. But it's a silly question; the answer is obvious:

It's Goldman Sachs's.

They paid for it and they own it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Prins is right. Regulation is the key to Reform.
Posted by: yellow on Nov 14, 2009 2:38 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact that two banks are already above the 10% limit for national share of deposits shows that much of the bailout money went to concentrate banking capital. After trillions in bailout money and the opportunity to borrow from the FED at record low rates of 0% the banks still lend out at near 30% rates of interest on credit cards and fairly high rates on long term loans when they lend at all. Much bank capital is going into speculation rather than lending to the middle class consumers and small businesses.

Economic concentration will be the consequence of recent financial policy. Debt will continue to grow. Government debt is about $12 trillion but private consumer and corporate debt brings the total to over $54 trillion. Banks are reporting record profits. Much of it is from investment operations like IPOs and Mergers and Acquisitions. The US financial sector accounts for only 8% of the US GDP but over 40% of US corporate profits.

I don't see the FED as being responsible. To focus on the FED is wrong and will render the wrong policy results for two reasons. First, the Fed's control of the money supply and its ability to expand or contract it doesn't much affect output and employment; as Keynes pointed out if no one is willing to invest there will be no borrowing, spending and job creation. Since spending isn't always sufficient to close the output gap, government stimulus is needed to create the conditions of profitable investment so that this occurs. Secondly, The crisis wasn't caused primarily by artificially low interest rates which created bubbles that deflated and crashed the economy in the process. It was more significantly caused by streams of foreign investment flowing into US financial markets creating a surplus of capital that (a)held down interest rates to allow consumer borrowing and spending and (b)supported a market for imported goods that funded foreign lending through US bond markets.

This was an institutional arrangement that the FED could not alter since global capital markets had outgrown and overwhelmed the US central bank. The Feds resources are dwarfed by those of private global capital markets. Other problems also existed like the inability to accurately price risk and overall corruption of the system but this is another topic. Extensive regulation will be needed to correct the financial maladies of the US.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

how to play Jim Cramer
Posted by: eosrk on Nov 14, 2009 2:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
when he says to not sell a stock that had a good runup, start selling, when he says buy you hold out, when he says sell, you short, when he dosen't talk about the stock for awhile then buy cause that's what he does on a daily basis

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Contact Obama, your congressman, and senators about this
Posted by: yurbud on Nov 14, 2009 3:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

Don't you think its time we put an end to the organized criminal combines...
Posted by: Prinzowhales on Nov 14, 2009 4:06 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...that made things like Glass-Steagle necessary? Put an end to the extraordinary largesse provided to the banking industry and other financial intermediaries who prey on the American people. The FED and its banker owners are nothing more than filthy usurers who add nothing to the commonweal except added expense.

The biggest part of almost everyone's mortgage is the price of money--interest you have to pay to borrow bills of credit called money that is for the most part made up out of thin are through the fractional reserve banking system. This same process can be accomplished through a public agency without interest!

End the parasitism of the bankers! Why waste our money and energy regulating an industry that is an evil even when it is not floundering or belly-up in a self-orchestrated depression?

Goldman Sachs' Washington office manager gave the bankers trillions--this will never be recovered from the industry through taxation.
You gave them trillions, they gave themselves billions of dollars in bonuses. Now you want to re-regulate them? No! Time to put the banks down like the rabid, poisonous creatures that they are!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

corporate charters
Posted by: maxsmart on Nov 14, 2009 4:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe all corporations should have revokable corporate charters for remediation of corporate hedonism and promiscuity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

What will it take to open peoples eyes to these guys?
Posted by: sicntired on Nov 14, 2009 8:39 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They speculate on everything,driving the prices to where they want them to go.If you don't think the larger institutions can manipulate anything they want you live in a dream.Without regulation we are already on our way to the next bubble and more than 10 %,some say 20% of our population is out of work.Factor in the ones that have just quit and it paints a sad picture.You think the health care debate was ugly.Just try to regulate the financial institutions and you will hear the howling all the way to California.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

We are now at a
Posted by: dadanbetty on Nov 15, 2009 3:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
level in society where families are being torn apart due to what I would refer to as ignorance, selfishness, greed, stupidity, fear and just overall a lack of a realistic sense of caring for others who are not American inside America, unless of course, they're in the military overseas.

The hopeful news is, of course, that it doesn't have to be this way. Really! Getting off the American pigslop/pill diet,
reading some books and vastly improving one's listening and other vital communications skills such as writing and reading comprehension, could pretty much be called a panacea for the United States of America NOW! A little traveling around publicly wouldn't hurt either.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Bring back Eliot Spitzer
Posted by: fijisailor on Nov 15, 2009 3:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes let's get Glass Steagall back and also Eliot Spitzer who actively chased down the people responsible for this mess as NY State Attorney General BEFORE the crash.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bring back Eliot Spitzer Posted by: erinzmum

Comments are closed-

Federal Credit Unions could use a little regulation as well
Posted by: DaBear on Nov 15, 2009 7:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Especially when it comes to gerrymandering their accounting systems so the computer collects all transactions for a 24 hour period then "bounces" checks being cleared on the transaction totals rather than going chronologically per transaction. It generates fees for the "members" of the co-op but then the co-op never gives those back in reduced interest rates or loans to those without picture perfect FICO scores. The working/lower classes who want the social values system of a community credit union cooperative end up being punished by the "system" and the "policy" by FCU's.

Granted they're a LOT less destructive than banks which routinely fuck-over anyone lower than upper middling class. My last year in a bank saw $8900 in "fees" (ATMs, bank charges, transfer fees, etc.) The worst credit union wrought only half that damage in the worst year.

But, damage is damage. Anyone in the financial services industry should be regulated up to their necks because in this nation money is E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G. Until the owning class starts to pay a fair livable wage for all the god damned work they suck out of workers, there will continue to be a large class of working poor form whom "banking" with a traditional bank or an FCU will be nothing short of a nightmare because of "systems" and "policies" designed to screw the living shit out of them on a daily basis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Re-enact Glass-Steagall
Posted by: wormfarmer on Nov 15, 2009 9:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've been down this road before, which was why it was written in the first place. When are we gonna LEARN?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Crimes
Posted by: bubbasbobb on Nov 15, 2009 11:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Derivatives were a big factor in the 1907 crash. Until they are again outlawed, you can't take any "effort" in Washington seriously.

Considering the biggest financial scam in history has just been pulled off, and the same guys control the right people in both parties, Congress, and each administration, I don't think they are in any hurry to fix anything, do you?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

North Dakota unemployment trends
Posted by: prusso on Nov 17, 2009 3:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
North Dakota unemployment is improving, but conditions vary throughout the state according to this heat map:
http://www.localetrends.com/st/nd_north_dakota_home

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

http://www.ebuyings.com
Posted by: jacklang0001 on Nov 17, 2009 5:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.ebuyings.com
have some cheap things ...
nike shoes, fashion clothes ;brand handbags ,wallet ...
free shipping
competitive price
any size available
accept the paypal

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Did your Senator help kill Glass-Steagall?
Posted by: erinzmum on Nov 17, 2009 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't let this great article go to waste!

If your representatives voted in favor of Gramm-Bliley-Leach (S.900), then give 'em hell, and help boot them out of office!

Here's a link to the votes--I had to split the link into three pieces, so just delete the space between the sections:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/

roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=

1&vote=00105

Hint: Only two Dems voted to pass this piece of garbage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

ozzy
Posted by: coyotedave on Dec 1, 2009 1:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why wouldn't they re-instate "glass-Stegall"?

Couldn't The administrationuse the Banks to fund there Wars....with Taxpaper money (directly)..How do they finance the War?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

Great Piece ... But Let's Not Stop There ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Nov 14, 2009 12:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We certainly do need to reinstate Glass-Steagal ... And Nomi is 125% correct, we must do it now or face a financial tsunami that would make 2008 look like childs' play.

And it is also correct that the banks are in much worse shape than they were in 2007. Why haven't they been taken over? The reason is they have changed the rules to let banks to value their shaky assets as good as gold.

They changed "mark to market" to, what they themselves call "mark to make believe" ... in other words it is a sham that allows failed banks to continue to operate.

These banks hoard money once it moves through the system because they know that they have huge losses coming. This hoarding is so big it is sucking the money needed to run the economy out of the economy.

Just two banks, Bank of America and Wells Fargo control 20% of bank deposits yet I dare anyone to declare these banks solvent.

Insolvent banks have to be reconciled where the assets match the obligations. Many smaller banks are being taken out but not these politically connected banksters and they and others are sucking our money supply dry with their hoarding.

It is time to take on these malignancies and cut them out of the system, because as Nomi said, they will take us all out, sooner with their money hoarding, or later when they implode with bad debts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What Did You Expect... Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: What Did You Expect... Posted by: mmckinl
» RE: I sort of figured that... Posted by: oregoncharles

Comments are closed-

For the record
Posted by: Perry Logan on Nov 14, 2009 2:23 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Smiling or not, Clinton opposed repeal of Glass-Steagall. He signed the bill only because it had a veto-proof majority.

By the same token, there is no way in Hell Obama will ever re-regulate the banking system. He is far to the right of Clinton--and incompetent, to boot.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: For the record Posted by: thebeerdoctor
» Wrong again Perry Posted by: brunowe

Comments are closed-

The Public Option
Posted by: ProgressiveManiac on Nov 14, 2009 5:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So suppose we restore the Glass Steagle act. In another 50 years, when memories of the last depression have again grown dim, will another generation of American politicians be again fooled by some slick line about freeing up the banks to operate more efficiently? Will they too get rid of unnecessary regulations like Glass Steagle that, supposedly, are stifling the economy? Will another crash and yet another depression be the inevitable result?

I do not mean to suggest that banks should not be regulated. By all means, Glass Steagle or something like it should be restored. But something more is needed, something with more persistence than just words on a law that can easily be changed or ignored.

North Dakota may be trying to teach the rest of us a lesson by their good example. Alone among the fifty states they have a state bank. And I don't just mean a bank that is called the First Bank of North Dakota. The state of North Dakota owns and operates their state bank, and that bank makes sure that local businesses have necessary credit. In fact it makes sure that the state itself has necessary credit. In effect, this state bank is operated as a public utility.

Private banks operate in North Dakota, of course, but they have to compete with the state bank, much the way that UPS and Federal Express compete with the U.S. Post Office. More importantly, residents of North Dakota have the option of putting their money into a bank that they can trust to be operating responsibly and in the public interest. They are in no way required to put their money there and that is also a good thing, but they have the option.

By the way, among the states, North Dakota is having one of the best records in responding to the current economic difficulties. They have one of the best records on unemployment, for example. The other states would do well to study and understand what North Dakota has done. They should seriously consider doing something similar.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Public Option Posted by: luckypuck

Comments are closed-

We can only hope...
Posted by: Celtic Tiger on Nov 14, 2009 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hate to be cynical but do you really think a reinstatement of Glass-Steagall or something like it is going to happen with this Congress and Administration? Obama seems to owe to0 much to Wall Street, and with Rahm calling the shots, those money connections will only be strengthened. Meanwhile, the spineless Dems in the Senate, their conservative mole Blue Dogs and DINOs like Lieberman will prevent any such remediation from happening. The Repubs are predictable and irrelevant in this context.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: We can only hope... Posted by: dale0k

Comments are closed-

goto:GoldmanSachs666.com
Posted by: weathered on Nov 14, 2009 7:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
behold the Vatican of greed.

Love of money is an illness, a pathology that has only one course of treatment:Charity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Delusions? Posted by: oregoncharles
» Wait A Sec! Posted by: armorypk
» Fair enough. Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: Reading Test. Posted by: oregoncharles

Comments are closed-

The only good economic effect of repealing Glass-Steagel
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Nov 14, 2009 7:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Signmakers kept extremely busy making new signs for bank branches every 2 years or less! Several branch bank buildings around here have had half a dozen name-changes since the repeal. Signmaking is the only reliable blue-collar job left, thanks to the banks.

Plus all those stadiums (stadia?) and sports arenas that had to change their names after their "sponsor" bank got swallowed up or morphed into something else.

Those signs are the only thing holding the economy up at this point!

As they told Dustin Hoffman in "The Graduate": "Plastic!"

But I can think of one industry where in the future, plastic just will not do: somebody should bring back domestic-made WIRE coathangers to cash in when Roe v. Wade is repealed!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

In a corportocracy everything is upside-down
Posted by: lclark on Nov 14, 2009 8:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Institutions whose motives are not mitigated by basic considerations of community or the common good have restraints removed.

A corporation is a legal entity whose only motivation is profit. It has no conscience. If it were an actual human it would be a sociopath.Consequently, for the good of actual people it should be restrained.

Instead, we have credit card interest rates that a generation ago were considered "loan shark" rates...usury. We have new bankruptcy laws that take property from individuals who get into financial difficulty because of illness. We have money for wars to guard pipelines ( that's the real Afganistan) but no money to mass deploy technology to remove dependence on foreign oil. And attempts to pass mandated spending by citizens on healthcare rather than a publicly funded universal plan that does not involve private profit.

The government is increasingly interfering in the lives of individuals, regulating and restricting them in numerous ways "for thier own good".

Seat belt laws, smoking restrictions, increasing road block checks, security checks in airports, camera monitoring, "smart chips" that log toll fees but also coincidently log the travel path of indivduals, and on and on.....individuals are increasingly burdened by laws as well as being socially engineered to accept the concept that government can arbitrarily legislate individual behavior.

It should be apparant to citizens what has happened.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Rape Middle Class
Posted by: CLARENCE SWINNEY on Nov 14, 2009 8:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rich

1945-1% had 30% of total wealth
1979-20%

33% decline

Result of Estate Tax-
70/90% Top Income Rate
28% Unearned Rate

1979-20%
1989-36%

80% Increase

WHY?

Reagan 750B Tax Cut

Reagan Void Revenue Sharing to transfer tax to middle class local taxes

Unearned to 15% from 28%

Transfer S&L assets to Wall Street.

Bush had to borrow `140 Billion to pay for it.

140B made several Billionaires.

Milken-Ichan-Perelman-Kravis
-Kohlberg-Roberts-Hearst
-Lee-Peltz-Ross-Gores--

Millions lost jobs.
Takeovers destroyed many large firms.

Reagan spend like drunk on military contracts
to enrich pals on Wall Street under guise of fighting a warm cold war.

His governorship was financed by California Defense Rich.

Bush II tried to emulate Reagan policies of enrich the rich.

He succeeded.

In 2007--1%--took 35% of Wealth Gain and 45% of Income growth from 1980.

20% owned 93% of all Financial Wealth.

80% owned 7% or equity in homes.

Forbes richest 400 shows many Hedge Fund managers who got that wealth in a five year period 2001-2005.

Vegas gambling. AIG will cover your bet.

Three Hedge Fund Managers made 4000 Million in one year and paid at 15% tax Rate.

Wall Street converted to--RICH MAN GAMBLING CASINO. undeniable.

Wall Street should create jobs for middle class.

In 8 years net new job growth was 3,000 Per Month.

Compare to Carter 218,000 and Clinton 237,000.

Wealth flushed up and jobs flushed out.

20 years of 3 conservative presidents gave us--
1000B debt to 11,500B
600B budget to 3600B
23M net new jobs

Compare to:

Carter + Clinton=2.8 MIllion Per year
3 Conservatives =1.1M per year

Involvement in 8 wARS VERSUS 2 BY cARTER & cLINTON

Nicaragu-el salvador-grenada-somalia-gulf-lebanon -iraq--afghanistan

cost in dollars plus livesplus reputation

somalia + kosovo

Conservatives gave us Great Depression now Great Recession.

Folks! This is a long long Recovery.

Want more Hell

-Re-elect Republicans.

cswinney2@triad.rr.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ape Middle Class Posted by: JSquercia

Comments are closed-

Bob O Link
Posted by: bob-o-link on Nov 14, 2009 8:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great article by a terrific reporter!

Check out more at:

http://sites.google.com/site/thecatbirdsnest/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Betting on bankers...
Posted by: franklyspanking on Nov 14, 2009 8:54 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...who bet on falling over houses mortgaged to people without jobs was rather silly to start with.

Shall we just ban folks from doing silly things with their money? And what shall the fine or penalty be?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Debtors prison. Posted by: SteveO

Comments are closed-

NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Nov 14, 2009 9:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When there was talk of combing the Banks and securities firms I was working at Merrill Lynch. At first we thought it was a joke. No one ever thought it was a good idea. The public would never benfit from such an arrangement. The beneficiaries of this foolish move were as usual the guys at the top. Banks thought they could compete but soon found out that they didn't have the knowledge and the personnell to be anything but a bank. There's alot to be said for 'staying in your own lane'. It turned out to be a bad decision. We don't need a whole bunch of new rules, just what we had in place. Mostly written in 1933. It worked for 70 years. Financial markets can be eratic for many reasons, but what we saw happen in 2007-8 would never have happened with the old rules in place. Creative mortgages and other lending practices would have been prevented. I'm a little more optmistic about making the rules. If there were another event such as the one we're trying to get out of, no one would survive. I think the smart people involved know that. The S.E.C. has to be taken back a decade when they made a difference and served a purpose. ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Obama, listen up
Posted by: elaine46 on Nov 14, 2009 9:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not voting for Obama again unless he does put these safeguards back into place. He has his millionaire status and his gov funded health insurance. If he does not follow through on reforms to help the 95% of us who have been victimized, he does not deserve a second term.

In the meantime, none of my retirement savings is going into the stock market. We suffered two crashes during the W administration, and I would have been much better off and a whole lot less stressed, if my modest funds had been in a fixed position. Let the rich stick it to each other on Wall Street, and they will get what they deserve.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

No Corporation Should Be Too Big to Fail
Posted by: tongjm on Nov 14, 2009 9:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree 100% on this. Once we get health care legislation out the door, the next top priority is putting in place whatever regulations we need to make sure the current financial crisis never happens again. Making sure no corporation is allowed to become too big to fail would be one huge step.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

What Financial Crash ? - This Is How My Home Town Has Improved Since I Left..
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Nov 14, 2009 11:18 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oldham has gone really upmarket since Norman Tebbit (One of Margaret Thatcher's Boys) told me to get on my bike and get a job...The rest of the UK soon to follow this wonderful progression from poverty to wealth - with everyone living contented lives in happinness and peace...

Strangely enough Oldham is the only place where I have driven a brand new car out of the showroom - Morris Marina 1.8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ar1MJJUwGQ

Oldham's New Wealth

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

"Whose Team Is It, Anyway?"
Posted by: oregoncharles on Nov 14, 2009 1:07 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good title from Katha Pollitt's piece today - meaning, of course, the Democratic Party. But it's a silly question; the answer is obvious:

It's Goldman Sachs's.

They paid for it and they own it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Prins is right. Regulation is the key to Reform.
Posted by: yellow on Nov 14, 2009 2:38 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact that two banks are already above the 10% limit for national share of deposits shows that much of the bailout money went to concentrate banking capital. After trillions in bailout money and the opportunity to borrow from the FED at record low rates of 0% the banks still lend out at near 30% rates of interest on credit cards and fairly high rates on long term loans when they lend at all. Much bank capital is going into speculation rather than lending to the middle class consumers and small businesses.

Economic concentration will be the consequence of recent financial policy. Debt will continue to grow. Government debt is about $12 trillion but private consumer and corporate debt brings the total to over $54 trillion. Banks are reporting record profits. Much of it is from investment operations like IPOs and Mergers and Acquisitions. The US financial sector accounts for only 8% of the US GDP but over 40% of US corporate profits.

I don't see the FED as being responsible. To focus on the FED is wrong and will render the wrong policy results for two reasons. First, the Fed's control of the money supply and its ability to expand or contract it doesn't much affect output and employment; as Keynes pointed out if no one is willing to invest there will be no borrowing, spending and job creation. Since spending isn't always sufficient to close the output gap, government stimulus is needed to create the conditions of profitable investment so that this occurs. Secondly, The crisis wasn't caused primarily by artificially low interest rates which created bubbles that deflated and crashed the economy in the process. It was more significantly caused by streams of foreign investment flowing into US financial markets creating a surplus of capital that (a)held down interest rates to allow consumer borrowing and spending and (b)supported a market for imported goods that funded foreign lending through US bond markets.

This was an institutional arrangement that the FED could not alter since global capital markets had outgrown and overwhelmed the US central bank. The Feds resources are dwarfed by those of private global capital markets. Other problems also existed like the inability to accurately price risk and overall corruption of the system but this is another topic. Extensive regulation will be needed to correct the financial maladies of the US.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

how to play Jim Cramer
Posted by: eosrk on Nov 14, 2009 2:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
when he says to not sell a stock that had a good runup, start selling, when he says buy you hold out, when he says sell, you short, when he dosen't talk about the stock for awhile then buy cause that's what he does on a daily basis

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Contact Obama, your congressman, and senators about this
Posted by: yurbud on Nov 14, 2009 3:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

Don't you think its time we put an end to the organized criminal combines...
Posted by: Prinzowhales on Nov 14, 2009 4:06 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...that made things like Glass-Steagle necessary? Put an end to the extraordinary largesse provided to the banking industry and other financial intermediaries who prey on the American people. The FED and its banker owners are nothing more than filthy usurers who add nothing to the commonweal except added expense.

The biggest part of almost everyone's mortgage is the price of money--interest you have to pay to borrow bills of credit called money that is for the most part made up out of thin are through the fractional reserve banking system. This same process can be accomplished through a public agency without interest!

End the parasitism of the bankers! Why waste our money and energy regulating an industry that is an evil even when it is not floundering or belly-up in a self-orchestrated depression?

Goldman Sachs' Washington office manager gave the bankers trillions--this will never be recovered from the industry through taxation.
You gave them trillions, they gave themselves billions of dollars in bonuses. Now you want to re-regulate them? No! Time to put the banks down like the rabid, poisonous creatures that they are!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

corporate charters
Posted by: maxsmart on Nov 14, 2009 4:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe all corporations should have revokable corporate charters for remediation of corporate hedonism and promiscuity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

What will it take to open peoples eyes to these guys?
Posted by: sicntired on Nov 14, 2009 8:39 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They speculate on everything,driving the prices to where they want them to go.If you don't think the larger institutions can manipulate anything they want you live in a dream.Without regulation we are already on our way to the next bubble and more than 10 %,some say 20% of our population is out of work.Factor in the ones that have just quit and it paints a sad picture.You think the health care debate was ugly.Just try to regulate the financial institutions and you will hear the howling all the way to California.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

We are now at a
Posted by: dadanbetty on Nov 15, 2009 3:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
level in society where families are being torn apart due to what I would refer to as ignorance, selfishness, greed, stupidity, fear and just overall a lack of a realistic sense of caring for others who are not American inside America, unless of course, they're in the military overseas.

The hopeful news is, of course, that it doesn't have to be this way. Really! Getting off the American pigslop/pill diet,
reading some books and vastly improving one's listening and other vital communications skills such as writing and reading comprehension, could pretty much be called a panacea for the United States of America NOW! A little traveling around publicly wouldn't hurt either.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Bring back Eliot Spitzer
Posted by: fijisailor on Nov 15, 2009 3:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes let's get Glass Steagall back and also Eliot Spitzer who actively chased down the people responsible for this mess as NY State Attorney General BEFORE the crash.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bring back Eliot Spitzer Posted by: erinzmum

Comments are closed-

Federal Credit Unions could use a little regulation as well
Posted by: DaBear on Nov 15, 2009 7:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Especially when it comes to gerrymandering their accounting systems so the computer collects all transactions for a 24 hour period then "bounces" checks being cleared on the transaction totals rather than going chronologically per transaction. It generates fees for the "members" of the co-op but then the co-op never gives those back in reduced interest rates or loans to those without picture perfect FICO scores. The working/lower classes who want the social values system of a community credit union cooperative end up being punished by the "system" and the "policy" by FCU's.

Granted they're a LOT less destructive than banks which routinely fuck-over anyone lower than upper middling class. My last year in a bank saw $8900 in "fees" (ATMs, bank charges, transfer fees, etc.) The worst credit union wrought only half that damage in the worst year.

But, damage is damage. Anyone in the financial services industry should be regulated up to their necks because in this nation money is E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G. Until the owning class starts to pay a fair livable wage for all the god damned work they suck out of workers, there will continue to be a large class of working poor form whom "banking" with a traditional bank or an FCU will be nothing short of a nightmare because of "systems" and "policies" designed to screw the living shit out of them on a daily basis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Re-enact Glass-Steagall
Posted by: wormfarmer on Nov 15, 2009 9:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've been down this road before, which was why it was written in the first place. When are we gonna LEARN?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Crimes
Posted by: bubbasbobb on Nov 15, 2009 11:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Derivatives were a big factor in the 1907 crash. Until they are again outlawed, you can't take any "effort" in Washington seriously.

Considering the biggest financial scam in history has just been pulled off, and the same guys control the right people in both parties, Congress, and each administration, I don't think they are in any hurry to fix anything, do you?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

North Dakota unemployment trends
Posted by: prusso on Nov 17, 2009 3:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
North Dakota unemployment is improving, but conditions vary throughout the state according to this heat map:
http://www.localetrends.com/st/nd_north_dakota_home

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

http://www.ebuyings.com
Posted by: jacklang0001 on Nov 17, 2009 5:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.ebuyings.com
have some cheap things ...
nike shoes, fashion clothes ;brand handbags ,wallet ...
free shipping
competitive price
any size available
accept the paypal

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Did your Senator help kill Glass-Steagall?
Posted by: erinzmum on Nov 17, 2009 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't let this great article go to waste!

If your representatives voted in favor of Gramm-Bliley-Leach (S.900), then give 'em hell, and help boot them out of office!

Here's a link to the votes--I had to split the link into three pieces, so just delete the space between the sections:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/

roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=

1&vote=00105

Hint: Only two Dems voted to pass this piece of garbage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

ozzy
Posted by: coyotedave on Dec 1, 2009 1:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why wouldn't they re-instate "glass-Stegall"?

Couldn't The administrationuse the Banks to fund there Wars....with Taxpaper money (directly)..How do they finance the War?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS