Monday May 28, 2012

JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

Obama, GOP wrangle over Wall Street regulations

World Apr. 15, 2010 - 07:44AM JST ( 23 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

23 Comments

0

adaydreamApr. 15, 2010 - 11:48AM JST

The GOP will protect Wall Street no less then they attempted to protect insurance companies. The GOP has already been assigned a new buzz word, "Bailout". They will do anything to save Wall Street. After losing the insurance lobby they are desperate. < :-)
0

manfromamericaApr. 15, 2010 - 01:12PM JST

yes, adaydream, only republicans like banks.
0

WilliBApr. 15, 2010 - 01:17PM JST

There are no "too big to fail" institutions.

Both political parties in the US (as well as all European politicians) fall into the same trap of thinking they have to do "good" by using tax payers money to bail out failed companies.
0

goddogApr. 15, 2010 - 01:18PM JST

Lots of people lost their shirts, so something needs to be done.
0

manfromamericaApr. 15, 2010 - 01:20PM JST

The GOP has already been assigned a new buzz word, "Bailout".

Didn't the Democrat controlled congress pass the Bailout? oops...

There are no "too big to fail" institutions. Both political parties in the US (as well as all European politicians) fall into the same trap of thinking they have to do "good" by using tax payers money to bail out failed companies.

Right on!
0

adaydreamApr. 15, 2010 - 01:32PM JST

bush signed them into effect. That good old GOP president.

If they were wrong, then he should have vetoed them. < :-)
0

djuiceApr. 15, 2010 - 03:00PM JST

Why does Obama hate capitalism and success so much? Get ready for another fight for socialism.
0

jruaustraliaApr. 15, 2010 - 05:11PM JST

The GOP will protect Wall Street no less then they attempted to protect insurance companies. The GOP has already been assigned a new buzz word, "Bailout".

Such vague overstatements that will surely bite you back. Mr Obama afterall bailed them too. Not only that, he has continually backed the same person that started the craze--the Reserve Chairman Ben BERNANKE who this year was re-appointed for supposedly saving the world from another Great Depression. Yesterday, the Chairman warned of a spiralling deficit, and any fair-minded American would have you reminded that back in Dec. 08 Mr Bernanke wasn't thinking of US deficit when he he continued bailing failing banks-- and to the amazement of many around the globe. (Hence the nickname HELICOPTER BEN). Mr BERNANKE and the pollies in Washington might have selective amnesia, but the act (and the aftermath) speaks for itself...
0

BadseyApr. 15, 2010 - 08:25PM JST

Obama is right and we do need to audit the Private Federal Reserve and its' owners Goldmann Sachs et al. Fight the hand that feeds you Obama.
0

SargeApr. 15, 2010 - 08:33PM JST

"too big to fail financial institutions"

How about too big to fail automakers, like Government Motors?
0

Taka313Apr. 15, 2010 - 10:07PM JST

The more I read about companies setting up dummy firms to move their losses around and cook their books, the more I feel we need stronger regulations with real punishments for offenders.

Taka
0

skipthesongApr. 15, 2010 - 10:10PM JST

why is Dodd even in this picture? Anyone there from 2006 shouldn't be there.
0

TheQuestionApr. 15, 2010 - 11:54PM JST

There are no "too big to fail" institutions.

Here here.

The more I read about companies setting up dummy firms to move their losses around and cook their books, the more I feel we need stronger regulations with real punishments for offenders.

You're not in business are you? The business firms know the laws better than the regulators that write them, there are whole departments of freaky little geniuses that only exist to find new and clever ways to get around the law, and in a perfectly legal way. The SEC is a joke and is only reationary at the best of times, always has been and always will be.

I say deregulate the heck out of them and let the big guys tear each other apart. They'll restrict loans, raise rates, and force people to actually think about their financials for once in their lives. Plus it lets new banks and financial groups get into the fold, new minds are desperatly needed right now. I'm tired of people wining about executive bonuses and 'irresponcible' investing, that's what people in business do, they make money by whatever means. If they lose money than they fail and their business dies, that should be the way of things.
0

Taka313Apr. 16, 2010 - 01:16AM JST

The Question,

The problem with your solution is that it's a scorched earth approach.

And I live on Earth. And I'm not convinced that deregulation will do anything except bring back autrocious labor practices.

Taka
0

TheQuestionApr. 16, 2010 - 07:31AM JST

And I live on Earth. And I'm not convinced that deregulation will do anything except bring back autrocious labor practices.

Problem is finding people that would work in those conditions in the modern age. Even if labor regs were dropped you'd be hard pressed to find any American willing to work 80 hour weeks for $2 an hour. Business still have to keep themselves economies of scale and to do that they have to deal with the supply and demand restrictions that consumers naturally put on them as well of their own labor constraints.

Government has worked it into the minds of the people that without these regulations they would be at the mercy of big business when in reality it is business that was, is, and will always be at the mercy of the consumers. So unless a company is dead set against making long term, sustainable profits they will act within the scope of conventional economics and keep their products affordable otherwise...who would buy them?
0

GJDailleultApr. 16, 2010 - 08:02AM JST

So unless a company is dead set against making long term, sustainable profits

What are you on about? The article is about banks. Their product is debt.
0

jruaustraliaApr. 16, 2010 - 09:41AM JST

The article is about banks. Their product is debt.

LOL This brings us back to Buz Studies 101. BTW 'big banks' also sell exotic derivatives (Check the article). It's the evolution of these so-called sophisticated derivatives that the US Gov't is now proposing to regulate, not avoid, which I happen to agree.
0

EgalityrannyApr. 16, 2010 - 02:44PM JST

The top contributors to the 08 Obama campaign are probably not too worried by the clunky class war rhetoric, the glowering, strangely Nixonian face Obama puts on when his handlers tell him to get out there and talk tough about 'abuses' and 'lack of regulation.' Goldman Sachs came in at number 2. Clever bunch. Citi at number 6. What a surprise, eh.

University of California $1,591,395

Goldman Sachs $994,795

Harvard University $854,747

Microsoft Corp $833,617

Google Inc $803,436

Citigroup Inc $701,290

JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132

Time Warner $590,084

Sidley Austin LLP $588,598

$493,835
0

Taka313Apr. 17, 2010 - 01:19AM JST

when in reality it is business that was, is, and will always be at the mercy of the consumers

That doesn't take the worker into consideration. It only considers the producer and the buyer.

The workers have to have protection too.

Taka
0

manfromamericaApr. 17, 2010 - 03:17PM JST

That doesn't take the worker into consideration. It only considers the producer and the buyer. The workers have to have protection too.

The mantra of communism. And we all saw how that worked out. almost 100 million dead, then total collapse.
0

adaydreamApr. 18, 2010 - 12:02AM JST

Egalityranny, how much did these same companies give the republicans?

Sen. McConnell goes to NYC to see the Wall Street tycoons and he comes back against the regulations. McConnell is bought and paid by Wall Street also. < :-)