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.
He is a true partisan, and to a true partisan EVERYTHING is about the party, and whatever arguments they do not like, are labeled as "partisan' (of the opposite side). There is no reasoning with such people.
You are a liar. I can prove through several posts in the past that I do not stand on party lines.
It's astounding how irresponsible the House is these days. Passed Trumpcare. House Intelligence committee hearings are a mess. Now this.
That is why we have the senate, to protect us from crazy people like Hensarling and the other house members. Just think of the great healthcare we could have if not for the senate throwing out the house bill.
This will not go anywhere in it's current form, the problem with community banks does need to be addressed but they are using that as an excuse for drastic change. They fought the CFB for years even though authorized, other than small banks this is a solution looking for a problem.
'Hensarling's nearly 600-page bill would defang Dodd-Frank by repealing the so-called Volcker Rule, which prevents government-insured banks from making risky bets with investments. It would also scrap a requirement, which goes into effect Friday, that retirement advisers put their clients' interests ahead of their own."
Assuming You wish serious commentary and discussion without a long historical commentary to lay base, getting to my point of why I would challenge if even indirectly Your POV, might You not be against reading two articles out forward for serious consideration. I rather take a historical perspective on the subject than partisan...
Would not we have to consider the reasons first and foremost why the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 was repeal? Yes, Gramm-Leach-Bailey was introduced and authored by Republicans and passed with bi-partisan support. It was signed by Clinton in 1999. This lead to the Dodd-Frank Act, passed by Congress in response to the banking collapse and financial crisis of 2007-2008.
For the youthful reading audience...
Quote:
What is the financial crisis of 2008?
The financial crisis of 2007–2008, also known as the global financial crisis and the 2008 financial crisis, is considered by many economists to have been the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. ... The crisis was nonetheless followed by a global economic downturn, the Great Recession.
Many thought American Banks were at a disadvantage in competing with European Banks because of limitations imposed by the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.
Quote:
Europe has always had "universal banking" in which one bank does commercial banking, investment banking, and insurance. These allows European banks to do these sorts of transactions much more cheaply.
In the 1930's, this didn't matter to American banks because American banks were not in competition with European banks over the same customers. However, in the 1970's technology made it easier for European banks to operate in the United States, and Americans to do banking in Europe. This meant that the small size of American banks started to be a disadvantage and Glass-Steagall was repealed to allow for the creation of American megabanks that could compete with European ones.
What You are referring Sir does not completely destroy Dobb-Frank Act does it?
Quote:
Despite rhetoric from both parties describing a “repeal” of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Financial CHOICE Act leaves many Dodd-Frank provisions intact and may provide a useful strategy for effective reform: maintaining an emphasis on financial stability while trimming excessive regulations that have harmed consumers and business activities.
And now the articles which would help shorten my stating forth opinion and the whys...
"This law may have had good intentions," said Speaker of the House Paul Ryan on Thursday, referring to the Dodd-Frank Act, "but its consequences have been dire." Republicans said the reforms contained in the Financial CHOICE Act would rein-in regulations that have made it harder for small banks to operate, while providing a better mechanism for unwinding large banks that become unstable.
Quote:
A major component of the House-passed bill would give small banks an escape from complying with the complex Dodd-Frank rules that attempt to stop banks from taking on too many risky investments. Though those rules are only necessary for larger banks, all financial institutions must abide by them. Under the Financial CHOICE Act, smaller banks would have the option of ignoring those rules if they maintain a larger reserve of cash as a backstop against bad investments.
Another key element of the bill would create a new chapter in the bankruptcy code to allow failing banks to be unwound through bankruptcy instead of relying on bailouts or government-imposed restructuring. Even though Dodd-Frank was passed, in part, to prevent future bailouts of banks deemed "too big to fail," the law may have created a regulatory environment that makes future bailouts more likely by giving the federal government a larger role to play.
another article for Your consideration... House can boost lending, improve stability through financial reform bill
Data from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University show that the number of regulatory restrictions on U.S. banks has doubled since the passage of Dodd-Frank. Not only has this flood of regulations stifled bank lending and economic activity, but Republicans, as well as many economists, argue that the convoluted structure of these rules has actually destabilized the financial system.
Quote:
In addition, many economists argue that the complex risk metrics used by U.S. regulators are less effective than a clear and simple leverage ratio, because they allow banks to exploit loopholes and game the system. Many studies, including by economists from the Bank of England, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and Nobel Prize winners find that leverage ratios are more effective and that using simple measures would help reduce risk in the banking system.
I am interested in reading a serious response from You and will read anything forward such as articles etc, regarding Your stance / POV. Am taking a chance that You were serious in creating this thread for discussion and not for addressing party politics under the guise of a seemingly legitimate subject of discussion.
Thank You for introducing this topic of discussion Sir. Respectfully awaiting Your reply. Thank You.
Last edited by Something Needs To Change; 06-09-2017 at 12:51 PM..
Reason: correct brackets for quote.
Assuming You wish serious commentary and discussion without a long historical commentary to lay base, getting to my point of why I would challenge if even indirectly Your POV, might You not be against reading two articles out forward for serious consideration. I rather take a historical perspective on the subject than partisan...
I took historical perspective, not partisan. We are about to repeat the same mistake which drove the economy off the cliff. There is nothing partisan about being cautious about repeating errors when we have barely recovered from the last error.
Quote:
The bill’s backers also say financial institutions would have more opportunity to create new financial services that could benefit consumers, businesses and the economy.
Allowing banks to create those new "services" is exactly what caused the meltdown last time.
I agree with Jefferson about banks and how dangerous they can be to the nation as whole when they are allowed to run free.
Thank You Sir. Could You please respond to the issue put forth in the articles if You have time. I am interested in Your take / opinion. ah! NVM.
Thank You.
What specific issue are you referring to?
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.
