Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Sun 06/27/2010 View Sat 06/26/2010 View Fri 06/25/2010 View Thu 06/24/2010 View Wed 06/23/2010 View Tue 06/22/2010 View Mon 06/21/2010
1
2010-06-27 Home Front: Politix
Wall Street reform: What's in the bill
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by gorb 2010-06-27 04:06|| || Front Page|| [5 views ]  Top

#1 Sounds awful.

Misses the systematic problem (Regulatory induced debt creation), gives more power to bureaucrats to decide who should get loans.
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2010-06-27 06:16||   2010-06-27 06:16|| Front Page Top

#2 Fixed-equity annuities: Prohibits tougher federal rules on life insurance products, in which customers pay a lump sum upfront

Change indeed.
Posted by Shipman 2010-06-27 06:48||   2010-06-27 06:48|| Front Page Top

#3 I'd say the systemic problem is the implicit bailout guarantee given by governments.

Lenders must take the whole of the risk from their lending and that means shareholders have to take the risk.
Posted by phil_b 2010-06-27 07:38||   2010-06-27 07:38|| Front Page Top

#4 A lot (not all) of this seems reasonable. But since it comes from Frank & Dodd, with no transparency and in a big rush, I have to figure it is somehow a big Trojan Horse.
Posted by Glenmore 2010-06-27 08:02||   2010-06-27 08:02|| Front Page Top

#5 Is there any problem to which the solution is less federal regulation?
Posted by Matt 2010-06-27 08:49||   2010-06-27 08:49|| Front Page Top

#6 That pic is disturbing
Posted by Beavis 2010-06-27 08:50||   2010-06-27 08:50|| Front Page Top

#7 2,000+ pages. And I'll bet most congresspersons won't even read the summary.

And I'll bet there's a siphon for cash for the DNC and/or Unions in there somewhere. I don't think Dodd or Frankie could resist.
Posted by CrazyFool 2010-06-27 09:05||   2010-06-27 09:05|| Front Page Top

#8 
AoS at 0830 CT: pic removed. We generally don't want to load pics from PhotoBucket, etc here at the Burg as it has the potential to slow loading (and occasionally does). Sorry.
Posted by Steve White 2010-06-27 09:37||   2010-06-27 09:37|| Front Page Top

#9 Take note, ladies and gentlemen, especially those who've not posted for fear of being caught doing it wrong: even such an experienced moderator as Dr. Steve sometimes does it wrong and has to be fixed.* ;-)

*We aren't going to talk about the many things I've done, or how many times I had to beg the moderators to fix it, 'k? 'Cause that would be too mortifying for words.
Posted by trailing wife 2010-06-27 10:13||   2010-06-27 10:13|| Front Page Top

#10 Seems to me the idea is to create new regulatory agencies, stuff them with the nose people, and as the small and medium business attempt to comply and drown in red tape and contradicting requirements at some point, when the new agency is operational enough, the olde regulator office can be closed and touted as cutting government expenses but nobody will really be fired. The in people will be transferred to the new business bureau and the leftovers will go to other fed agencies.

It is a fix alright.
Posted by swksvolFF 2010-06-27 14:18||   2010-06-27 14:18|| Front Page Top

#11 The bill is deficient in several areas:

1. The bill will not bode well for individuals who want to sue for damages as the result of fraudelent behavior. "Congress has largely declined to increase the role of private litigants in deterring misconduct and encouraging accountability. In the wake of the stock market crash of 1929, Congress empowered individual investors to sue for misrepresentations and other misconduct in connection with the issuance and sale of securities. Securities fraud litigation exploded from there."
2. Reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which had a large part in creating the housing bubble and the current crisis is ignored.

3. The bill ignores a "competitive market" probably because the people who designed the bill really don't know (or care) much about competitive markets.
Posted by JohnQC 2010-06-27 14:39||   2010-06-27 14:39|| Front Page Top

#12 That pic is disturbing

Much like the legislation.
Posted by gorb 2010-06-27 23:33||   2010-06-27 23:33|| Front Page Top

23:48 Pappy
23:33 gorb
23:21 Procopius2k
23:13 miscellaneous
23:11 ed
23:10 miscellaneous
23:01 SteveS
22:55 Frank G
22:54 Asymmetrical
22:51 Lumpy Anguting2786
22:46 linker
22:43 Lumpy Anguting2786
22:42 Bernardz
22:39 Bernardz
22:35  abu do you love
22:03 swksvolFF
21:51 Asymmetrical
21:44 rammer
21:40 swksvolFF
21:39 borgboy
21:33 Nimble Spemble
21:32 Nimble Spemble
21:26 borgboy
21:20 borgboy









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com