Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The banksters will always buy someone off to push their agenda.
It took them years to find a patsy to get Glass-Steagall revised.
A single Congressman can't do it alone though...
If something like that makes it through the House and Senate and gets to Obama to sign then you have to know that it's more than one guy that got bought out by the banksters.
Wait and see if something like this makes it to the Senate floor and what the Senate does with this.
Congress can see that the Volcker Rule wouldn't work -- but it can't understand why. In the hearing, committee chairman Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) hinted at regulators' likely inability to differentiate between allowable "bank hedging behavior" and prohibited "profit-making trades."
But he skipped over the impossibility of distinguishing between essential credit that needs a government safety net and fun-and-profit credit that, Volcker says, doesn't.
...Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) got Volcker to admit that the rule "certainly would not have solved the problem at AIG (NYSE: AIG)" nor at Lehman Brothers. "It was not designed to solve those particular problems," Volcker said.
And a good explanation of why the Volcker Rule won't help and what really needs to be addressed, here:
Quote:
The issue at hand is that it is a real solution to a non-problem. Firms that combine elements of commercial banking, broker-dealers & prop trading can pose systemic hazards but this rule focuses on the least problematic issue–commercial banks are simply not significantly involved in private equity or hedge fund-like investing.
Volcker Rule: A half-solution to a non-problem « Wall Street Arrow: Market Insights (http://wallstreetarrow.com/2010/02/10/volcker-rule-a-real-solution-to-a-non-problem/ - broken link)
Seems Obama's economic advisor Volcker doesn't get it, but Republican Sen. Johanns does.
When will we stop blaming one party over the other. Nothing is changing. They're all in bad with corporate America. Everything else is a deflection and we fall for it every time.
I like the Volcker rule... it evens the playing field FOR investors, not big corporations which profit from it... if they even try to reverse it, I will vote them out of office... its making me start to think that Democrats are better than Republicans with crap like this...
Join the club...the democrat party has been doing the same to me for the last 40 years.
I like the Volcker rule... it evens the playing field FOR investors, not big corporations which profit from it... if they even try to reverse it, I will vote them out of office... its making me start to think that Democrats are better than Republicans with crap like this...
The problem is that you have a clue of basic economics...most voters don't. This will barely be a blip on anyone's radar...because they just don't understand the implications.
All this talk about how banks are not lending money...
This is directly related to the governments involvement in the system.
Government has caused this mess, not the banks.
Banks risk your investment/deposits, to loan and receive interest on that loan. That interest pays you a little back, but also pays to run the bank. Now, those loans are a risk and the bank does not want to loose money for its depositors. Once strict protocol to qualify for a loan to protect the depositors, was dropped by rules and regulations the Progressive governments enacted so poorer people could qualify for loans.
See, Barney Frank has been in charge of this for some time now, as head of the Financial sectors.
So, this was the perfect storm, that was basically planned by our past Progressive government.
Have you read anything written by past Pres. Clintons friends, Cloward & Piven?
If you have you know how this fits perfectly in their strategy.
Once everything started downhill, the government that caused the problem, gets back in their and tries to save those they threw under the bus, helping their cause.
A lot of Politicking, like they were mad at the banks. Big bonuses with our money! It was planned!
They had you focused on Healthcare, Stimulus, Cap & Trade.
Now the banks won't let go of their cash after they were bailed out and gave their guys big bonuses.
Hell no they are not making loans. The rules and restrictions placed on them, to please the people the government propaganda machine have influenced to think it is the banks fault, are making the banks cling to there cash. Hahahaha! Because the government and the people want them to risk the money, yet they are guaranteed no reward. It is better to sit on what they have.
Had they been allowed to fail, the smaller banks that were not involved would have bought the failing bank. We would have been out of this mess long ago. Had they let the market play itself out, we would have pulled out of this stronger and long ago.
Please explain to me how banks can adhere to the Volker rule and make markets? They can't.
It worked fine between 1933 and 1999, until Phil Gramm came to be. If you want to blame one person for the recession, he would be on the short list.
All the Volker rule does is re-enactement of Glass-Steagall.
Now to the critics benefit, with a world wide economy, banks can move capital "somewhat" easier so there is some competition concerns. However, the maturity of financial markets world wide are still centered around a few centers and there is a chance all may end up having similiar rules in the end to prevent massive bubbles from forming.
Shame on them for actually caring about American business interests. I mean..next thing you know...unemployment might drop under 9%!!!!!!!! Can't have any of that now, can we?
Get the investment out of the banks or let those banks become strictly "investment banks".
As a previous poster stated..this worked just fine under Glass Steagall.
Let JPM spin off it's investment arm. The problem is they comingled money and did more investing in Wall Street than lending to Main Street.
What the reform bill should have done is to reinstate Glass-Steagall in its entirety and force the banksters to adhere to that.
Notice it's the big "investment" banks that are crying foul. The bailout banks.
Is your local credit union crying over this ?
It worked fine between 1933 and 1999, until Phil Gramm came to be. If you want to blame one person for the recession, he would be on the short list.
All the Volker rule does is re-enactement of Glass-Steagall.
Now to the critics benefit, with a world wide economy, banks can move capital "somewhat" easier so there is some competition concerns. However, the maturity of financial markets world wide are still centered around a few centers and there is a chance all may end up having similiar rules in the end to prevent massive bubbles from forming.
That is nutty you are talking about Glass Steagall. The Volker rule is not Glass Steagall.
Capital is fluid. There is no reason NY or London has to be the primary location, no reason. You can sit on a beach in Fiji and trade.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
