Deregulation???

Discussion in 'Economy' started by Skull Pilot, Nov 1, 2008.

  1. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,634
    Thanks Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,001
    I am going to a real pain in the ass with this post. I promise to keep bumping this post up until I get an intelligent answer fronm one of you Obama ass kissers

    The fact is, if you want to blame deregulation for the mess we're in as BHO likes to do

    Transcript of second McCain, Obama debate - CNN.com

    And I believe this is a final verdict on the failed economic policies of the last eight years, strongly promoted by President Bush and supported by Sen. McCain, that essentially said that we should strip away regulations, consumer protections, let the market run wild, and prosperity would rain down on all of us.

    So BHO blames deregulation but then he gushes over Clinton saying:

    Heaping praise on President Bush's predecessor, Obama said of Clinton: "In case all of you forgot, this is what it's like to have a great president."

    But here's the rub. The financial services industry was not deregulated under GW.

    Meltdowns and Myths: Did Deregulation Cause the Financial Crisis?

    More typically, of course, the word deregulation has been used as shorthand to describe the repeal or easing of particular rules. To the extent there was a heyday of such deregulation, it was in the 1970s and 1980s. It was at this time that economists--and consumer activists--began to question many longstanding restrictions on financial services.

    The most important such restrictions were rules banning banks from operating in more than one state. Such rules were largely eliminated by 1994 through state and federal action. Few observers lament their passing today, and because regional and nationwide banks are far better able to balance risk, this "deregulation" has helped mitigate, rather than contribute to, the instability of the system.


    Who was pres. in 1994?

    Gramm-Leach-Bliley and Beyond

    The next major "deregulation" of financial services was the repeal of the Depression-era prohibition on banks engaging in the securities business. The ban was formally ended by the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which followed a series of decisions by regulators easing its impact.

    While not without controversy, the net effect of Gramm-Leach-Bliley has likely been to alleviate rather than further the current financial crisis.

    In fact, President Bill Clinton--who signed the reform bill into law--defended the legislation in a recent interview, saying, "I don't see that signing that bill had anything to do with the current crisis. Indeed, one of the things that has helped stabilize the current situation as much as it has is the purchase of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America, which was much smoother than it would have been if I hadn't signed that bill."[3]


    So let's get this straight. Clinton deregulates banks. Deregulation is blamed for all of our current problems. But Clinton says HIS deregulation actually made dealing with the current situation easier. And obviously BHO agrees. But riddle me this if the deregulation that Clinton signed helped out economy then how can the deregulation that never happened under GW hurt our economy?


    Regulatory Agency Trends

    But what of the regulatory agencies? Did they pursue a deregulatory agenda during the Bush Administration? Again, the answer seems to be no.

    In terms of rulemaking--the promulgation of specific rules by regulatory agencies--the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is by far the most active among agencies in the financial realm. Based on data from the Government Accountability Office, the SEC completed 23 proceedings since the beginning of the Bush Administration that resulted in a substantive and major change (defined as an economic effect of $100 million or more) in regulatory burdens. Of those, only eight--about a third--lessened burdens.[4] Perhaps surprisingly, the Bush record in this regard is actually less deregulatory than that of the Clinton Administration, which during its second term lessened burdens in nine out of 20 such rulemaking proceedings.


    A False Narrative

    In the wake of the financial crisis gripping the nation, it is tempting to blame "deregulation" for triggering the problem. After all, if the meltdown were caused by the ill-advised elimination of necessary rules, the answer would be easy: Restore those rules.

    But that storyline is simply not true. Not only was there was little deregulation of financial services during the Bush years, but most of the regulatory reforms achieved in earlier years mitigated, rather than contributed to, the crisis.

    This, of course, does not mean that no regulatory changes should be considered. In the wake of the current crisis, debate over the scope and method of regulation in financial markets is inevitable and, in fact, necessary. But this cannot be a debate over returning to a regulatory Nirvana that never existed. Any new regulatory system would be just that--complete with all the uncertainty and prospects for unintended consequences that define such a system. Policymakers must not pretend otherwise.


    And here is more:

    American Thinker: Obama runs against Clinton prosperity by attacking deregulation

    on regulation in general, my CEI colleague Wayne Crews notes in his study "10,000 Commandments" that the Bush administration has set records for the tens of thousands of pages it put in the Federal Register. So to the extent that Obama says he will reverse financial deregulation, what he would largely be overturning are the financial modernizations Clinton signed that Clinton administration officials agree led to the ‘90s prosperity.

    Does BHO want to end the deregulatory changes enacted under his and your hero Bill Clinton???

    Again I ask how does Clintons major deregulation ease the burdens of the current economy and GW's lack of deregulation cause the current problems?
     
  2. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,318
    Thanks Received:
    12,691
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,747
    I agree, a lot of this is Clinton's fault just like welfare reform is his credit.

    One more reason that I've never been fooled into thinking the Clintons are liberals.

    But Bush shares fault, as do the policies of all the Republicans...Phil Gramm, John McCain...because this is THEIR philosophy more than it is a Democratic philosophy. And don't forget, Bush moved against the states enacting predatory lending laws...one of two straws that broke the camel's back. The other straw was tax cuts on capital gains, spurring the incredible greed fest we saw recently on wall street.
     
  3. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,634
    Thanks Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,001
    I would say the greed you mention was caused more by the fed's policy of holding down interest rates to negative rates that caused the speculatory greed in housing. And Greenspan started doing that under Clinton as well

    from 1993 and who was president then???

    Congress to Tell Greenspan To Keep Interest Rates Low - New York Times
     
  4. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403

    There appears to be a couple of reasons to enact deregulation.
    One being expediancy. The other appears to be to let the wolves in the sheep pen. Specifically, who are the wolves and how did they convince our government to let them into the pen.
     
  5. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,634
    Thanks Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,001
    I am reticent to blame this entire mess on deregulation.

    Especially since there has been no deregulation in the past 8 years. The meteoric rise of home prices started in 1995 shortly after the Fed under Clinton and Greenspan started suppressing interest rates.

    $home values.gif

    That along with Clinton's deregulation, or as he called it modernization, of banks was the genesis of today's "crisis". I doubt if either one alone would have resulted in as bad a situation as the two combined seem to have.

    I am not giving GW a pass here as many of you Dimocrats seem to think. The Repudlicans have their share of the blame but BHO and his ass kissers blaming today's situation on the very deregulation for which they praise Bill Clinton seems to show that the intelligent erudite Dimocratic presidential candidate either doesn't understand what he is saying or that he is knowingly lying to the public.

    Guess what I think?
     
  6. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    This disaster has many fathers, folks.

    I know some of you want simply answers but there is no single cause of this mess.
     
  7. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    31,472
    Thanks Received:
    4,840
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +15,256
    Sorry folks, you don't get to blame deregulation when there's something else even more detrimental in our monetary policy.

    Until we stop artificially manipulating the credit market, and enticing risky investment, there's no amount of regulation or deregulation that is going to help us. We wouldn't have had to be in a position of whether or not to blame deregulation for this mess, had there not been a policy of artificially cheap credit, particularly in the early part of the decade following the tech bubble and 9/11.

    There would have been no housing boom if rates had not been dangerously low. The answer to pulling through an economic downturn is not always to cheapen credit. Putting the country into more debt does not fix anything. And we are seeing that now. But what's the solution ONCE AGAIN?

    Cheap credit.

    When the banks start releasing all of this new money, the next mess begins.
     
  8. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    It has to start there--without cheap credit there wouldn't be anything "laying around" that would need regulation or oversight. To me, regulation just means making sure the "right" people have access to it. Amazingly enough people disagree about who the "right" people are. :lol:
     
  9. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    31,472
    Thanks Received:
    4,840
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +15,256
    There are no "right" people to have access to all the new money. Some will gamble it away on frivolous, risky investments. Others will invest it wisely, and if enough invest wisely, there will probably be another bubble. The new money will need to find somewhere to work, and typically, as we have seen, it finds an asset and inflates it.

    It won't be housing again, obviously. It won't be tech stocks. What will it be? My guess is something related to health. That, or infrastructure. Possibly agriculture as well.
     
  10. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,634
    Thanks Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,001
    BUMP

    Still looking for the Dimocrat that will answer the question

    Does BHO want to end the deregulatory changes enacted under his and your hero Bill Clinton???

    Again I ask how does Clintons major deregulation ease the burdens of the current economy and GW's lack of deregulation cause the current problems?
     

Share This Page