Truthmatters
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2007
- 80,182
- 2,272
- 1,283
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #181
why did the Bush SEC keep these compliance times in place and refuse to impliment the bill for nearly a decade?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
dear idiot to prove that claim you need to go get SEC releases under clinton showing that they are holding BACK the broker rules.
A bill with HUGE implications for these massive entities are never implimented instantly.
compliance times are allowed.
8+ years is jerryriiging not reasonable compliance times
why did the Bush SEC keep these compliance times in place and refuse to impliment the bill for nearly a decade?
what was the implimentation plan for GLBact.
go get the documents which prove what you claim.
I already gave you documents to show the first year had a implimentation period waver for the banks to give time to comply.
Why did the Bush sec refuse to allow that plan to continue and instead held back the broker rules right up until a couple of days after Bush had to go on TV and tell us all the economy was about to tank.
SEC Votes for Final Rules Defining How Banks Can Be Securities Brokers
Eight Years After Passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, Key Provisions Will Now Be Implemented
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2007-190
Washington, D.C., Sept. 19, 2007 - Ending eight years of stalled negotiations and impasse, the Commission today voted to adopt, jointly with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board), new rules that will finally implement the bank broker provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. The Board will consider these final rules at its Sept. 24, 2007 meeting. The Commission and the Board consulted with and sought the concurrence of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Office of Thrift Supervision.
In addition, the Commission also voted to issue
SEC Votes for Final Rules Defining How Banks Can Be Securities Brokers
So the brokers who actually worked for the Securities Brokers still had to follow the rules all brokers have to follow.
Good to know.
Now what were you whining about again?
Prove its not a recovery using FACTS
SEC Votes for Final Rules Defining How Banks Can Be Securities Brokers
So the brokers who actually worked for the Securities Brokers still had to follow the rules all brokers have to follow.
Good to know.
Now what were you whining about again?
Figured we would have gotten back to defending this phony recovery we are experiencing by now.
Prove its not a recovery using FACTS
Already did. Your labor force is getting shrinking and shrinking...
And the people leaving it are growing and growing...
Personal Incomes are shrinking...
Disposable Incomes are as well...
The economy is suppose to be getting 'wealthier' but more and more Americans are turning to credit to maintain their lifestyle.
Must have something to do with that pesky savings rate, which is practically non-existent...
Need any more 'facts?' I've got plenty.
2.5% growth after 5 years of Obamanomics is good? Is that how low the bar is set?
Also F&F have records profits (A national shame and disgrace) so your "But Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh crashed the economy earned" excuse now earns you a tall glass of
Penn: Shut the fuck up - YouTube
dear idiot ,
becuase the first of the baby boomers are retiring does not CHANGE the definition of recovery.
go get the Definition of recovery and tell me how what we are in does NOT fit that defintion.
You MUST be lying about what you do as a job or you muct be really shitty at it if you cant even understand you dotn get to redefine economic terms just to support your historically failed ideas