Tell me, Congressman, do you really think that’s what all the GOP voters this year really thought they were voting for?
Of course, he was talking about the main-street banks – not those damned Wall Street banks that got the bailout.
But I do wonder how he thinks that the banks’ customers fit into the scheme of bank regulation.
Just a standard Republican letting you know who he works for.
“It’s a COOKBOOK!!!”
Wait, there’s dust on the cover…
The goverment serves the people - including the peoples’ businesses and companies. What’s wrong with that?
Businesses and companies don’t serve the government.
No, they don’t. On the other hand, the regulators don’t exist to serve the banks. You can’t be subservient to an industry and regulate it.
Accurate, but if an organisation has some say in terms of regulation and control, then it’s not always a good idea for it to start off with a position of utter subservience.
The government serves the people, as you say, but it serves all people. If you focus on serving one group alone generally that means shafting everyone else to do so.
Aren’t you forgetting the exemplary conduct of the Minerals Management Service ?
Without their aid, Deepwater Horizon/Macondo Prospect would have been an impossibility!
There are some businesses that serve the government, but setting that aside –
Is bank regulation really just about serving the banks? Isn’t the basic aim of bank regulation making the banking system work better for the banks’ customers? (And those customers do include non-banking companies and businesses, as well as individuals.) It is worrying if a Congressman does not automatically assume that he’s really trying to help the banks’ customers, not the banks, even if helping the banks may often help their customers.
I would replace the word “don’t” with “shouldn’t”. This is exactly why the Fed exists today, and it’s been their role since the Reagan administration. Bailouts is what they do, and Wall Street knows it, which is why they have zero compunction about carrying out the most outrageously rapacious financial schemes to place us all in jeopardy.
It’s the new economic cycle.
- Republicans take over government.
- Republicans deregulate financial institutions.
- Financial institutions start taking foolish risks.
- Foolish risks pay off for awhile.
- Republicans take all the credit for prosperity.
- Democrats warn about dangers of foolish risks.
- Republicans laugh at Democrats and say that this time is different and prosperity will never end.
- Foolish risks turn sour and cause economic collapse.
- Republicans protect their friends from consequences of collapse.
- Republicans briefly held responsible for their actions. Democrats take over government.
- Democrats address the consequences of economic collapse.
- As soon as the worst is over, Republicans start complaining about the costs of recovery. Blame that on the Democrats.
- Republicans receive lost of campaign money from financial institutions in return for promises of deregulation.
- Return to step 1.
You left out (somewhere around 7) “Some Democrats give up, forget all they know about bubbles”.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/bofa-pay-137-million-settle-claims-defrauded-schools-hospitals/ Banks are fine corporate citizens who would never harm Americans.
Just google banking fines and pages and pages come up.
Even worse, the fines are a tiny percentage of profits. It’s a ridiculous system as it now operates.
We are so fucked.
With every passing day I’m more and more glad that I’m married to an EU citizen so I can move to Europe if it becomes necessary.
Just so the numbering doesn’t get thrown out of whack, make it “7a” and add “lest they be accused of class warfare.”
Huh. This was exactly the complaint about the FAA’s oversight of airlines.
When some poor maintenance practices were found out, the consensus view was that the governmental agency in charge of regulating airlines had developed, “an overly collaborative relationship”. Not OK with metal hurtling through the air, but apparently fine when it’s money.
Speaking of the FAA … a buddy in the airline industry was complaining to me just a couple of days ago.
Apparently their idea of enforcing standards is to ask the carrier how he is going to do things and then simply enforce the carriers own procedures.
His complaint was that there may be no correct way to do something in the first place… they just need to have something to enforce.
Certainly following established procedures is important but it would be nice if the agencies with the power also had some expertise.
But then you’d have to pay the experts.
We already have a scandal over Obama overpaying too many Federal bureaucrats who aren’t doing a lick of good in their ‘government jobs’*, and should all be made to go out and obtain actual gainful employment in the private sector.
*Yeah, ‘government jobs’. It’s an oxymoran. Deal with it.
