Not Just Bush's Fault: The Story Behind Clinton and the Glass-Steagall Act

[TakeAStepBack]

Clinton's term was good economic times because the US was in the middle of two huge bubble booms (which later busrt). The NASDAQ bubble and the housing bubble. Of course, there was also the biggest bubble of them all which has still yet to pop, but it will.

Keynes economic theories are voodoo and have no place in real world dynamics. These are failed theories and ideas, even when you mash them up with Friedman's ideas. So, yes, really. Clinton push LOLberal policies the same as Bush. Only he rode the bubbles until he was done, when Bush came in in 2000, he had the NASDAQ bubble to contend with. When dealing with it, he advanced the burst of the housing bubble. Luckily for him, he left that one for Obama to run clean up crew. But the federal reserve is out of ammo now. So we're just expanding M1 adn M2, along witht he federal reserves balance sheet to cover it up. QE3 is right around the corner.

Bullshit.

The fact you can stream video on your computer were because of the efforts of the Clinton administration.

That's hardly a "tech bubble".

Or would you like to go back to the days of nntp and usenet?

Oh, good lord you're stupid on this subject. I'd stick to hyperpartisan fallacy.

 

[Sallow]

Keynes economic theories are voodoo and have no place in real world dynamics. These are failed theories and ideas, even when you mash them up with Friedman's ideas.

What evidence points you to that conclusion? Do you believe our government and Fed have been following a Keynesian script in the past 30 years?

They have been following a mash up of authoritarian/central planning policies for longer than that. Keynes ideas are just more prevelant today than Friedman's. Just ask helicopter Ben.

Alan Greenspan? Keynesian?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Yes, his policies indeed reflected a mash up of Keyens and Friedman theories.

But you wouldn't understand that because you're obviously not too familiar with either of their theories, or economics at all.

But laugh it up and act all pompous without bringing anything to the table except your ignorance. It is entertaining.

 

[Sallow]

Clinton's term was good economic times because the US was in the middle of two huge bubble booms (which later busrt). The NASDAQ bubble and the housing bubble. Of course, there was also the biggest bubble of them all which has still yet to pop, but it will.

Keynes economic theories are voodoo and have no place in real world dynamics. These are failed theories and ideas, even when you mash them up with Friedman's ideas. So, yes, really. Clinton push LOLberal policies the same as Bush. Only he rode the bubbles until he was done, when Bush came in in 2000, he had the NASDAQ bubble to contend with. When dealing with it, he advanced the burst of the housing bubble. Luckily for him, he left that one for Obama to run clean up crew. But the federal reserve is out of ammo now. So we're just expanding M1 adn M2, along witht he federal reserves balance sheet to cover it up. QE3 is right around the corner.

Bullshit.

The fact you can stream video on your computer were because of the efforts of the Clinton administration.

That's hardly a "tech bubble".

Or would you like to go back to the days of nntp and usenet?

Oh, good lord you're stupid on this subject. I'd stick to hyperpartisan fallacy.

Stupid?

Baud rates alone went through the roof under Clinton.

Prior to Clinton the "internet" was a "hobby" like ham radio.

Now it's a major venue for startups to generate revenue.

 

[bodecea]

More than enough blame to sahre.

Q: Did Bill Clinton Repeal the Glass-Steagall Act?

A: No, but he signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed some of the provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act.

--

On November 12th, 1999, Bill Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed SOME of the provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act.

According to Wikipedia.org, "the repeal of provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks."

and

"…The Glass-Steagall Act prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company."

So, as a result of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a commercial bank would be able to buy an insurance company, or a commercial bank would be able to buy an investment bank, etc.

The three co-sponsors of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act were:

Sen. Phil Gramm - R
Rep. Jim Leach - R
Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. - R

In 1999, the Republicans held a majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The final version of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act passed the House by a vote of 362-57 and the Senate by a vote of 90-8. This made the bill "veto proof", meaning that if Clinton had decided to veto, the bill would have been passed anyways. Having said that, if Clinton truly didn't want the bill to become law, he could have vetoed the bill in a symbolic gesture, but this did not happen. Many people point to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act as a major reason why the financial sector imploded in 2008. When it comes to pointing fingers, both parties get the blame. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was co-sponsored by three Republicans, signed into law by a Democratic president and had the overwhelming support of both parties when it was eventually passed.

Republicans complain that blame is being put on Bush when that was almost 4 years ago....but you have no problem going back 12+ years to get at Clinton.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Yes, stupid. Incredibly. But by all means, keep the entertainment rolling.

 

[Mac1958]

.

This "it's all their fault" bullshit is a great example of the intellectual honesty I scream about on a daily basis.

This continuing economic debacle is incredibly complex in its nature, depth and breadth, there are myriad "villains" from both "ends" with their fingers in this, and I refuse to believe that the simplistic finger-pointers are not intelligent enough to see that. Therefore, I can only assume they're not being honest.

God damn, folks, when does the bullshitting end?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

.

 

[8537]

Perhaps you've never read Keynes general theory.

The General Theory for a totalitarian state? a note on Keynes's preface to the German edition of 1936

I have a passing familiarity with the topic. Do you assume that Keynesian = Authoritarian?

Where do you find that in General Theory on E, I, & M? This is an honest inquiry...and let's assume for discussion purposes that I know enough about the topic to properly discuss it.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I think that anyone who is paying attention realizes the damage Clinton did to this country. First of all we have what you point out. If Clinton thought it wrong he could have rallied the democrats, or enough of them to make it not a veto proof majority.

The bill was passed 362-57 in the House and 90-8 in the Senate. That you could blame the passage of such a bill on the President shows just how much of a pathetic hack you are.

 

[Sallow]

Yes, his policies indeed reflected a mash up of Keyens and Friedman theories.

But you wouldn't understand that because you're obviously not too familiar with either of their theories, or economics at all.

But laugh it up and act all pompous without bringing anything to the table except your ignorance. It is entertaining.

Oh..so now in ONE post..you changed your position.

I suppose that's what is known as "evolving"..

Right?

Reality..however..shows Greenspan was a Friedman acolyte from the jump. Heck..it's rumored that he had an affair with Ayn Rand.

Yuck.

 

[Sallow]

Yes, stupid. Incredibly. But by all means, keep the entertainment rolling.

You even know what nntp is?

I mean before you google it..

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Dot-com bubble - MisesWiki

The Dot-com bubble or IT bubble was a dramatic boom-bust cycle of the American economy during the years 1995–2002.

The height of the boom was characterized by enormous increases in stock prices, and especially the prices of Internet-related assets. The bust saw the rapid decline of most of the same prices. The Internet companies whose share prices were bid up came to be known as "dot-com" companies, from the common Internet domain name extension, ".com." In addition to the stock market bubble, the period in question saw increasing consumer leverage, a booming housing market, increasing debt-to-equity ratios, and lower down payments on homes. The turn that came in 2000 triggered the liquidation of boom-inspired malinvestments. The Federal Reserve attempted to engineer a "soft landing" with a moderate tightening of credit conditions. By the end of 2000 the NASDAQ slid to 2471 from the March peak of 5048

The Dot-com bubble or IT bubble was a dramatic boom-bust cycle of the American economy during the years 1995–2002.

BackgroundThe boom began against a backdrop of generally improving economic conditions in the U.S. in 1993 and 1994. The Plaza Accord of 1985 had improved the profitability of U.S. manufacturing, as the G-5 powers agreed to subsidize U.S. exporters by artificially lowering the exchange rate of the U.S. dollar. (One author identifies the Plaza Accord and the accompanying monetary expansion in Japan as the beginning of that country’s own boom and bust.) The American economy had come out of the recession of 1990–1991 in fair shape, with some of the misallocations of the 1980s boom having been corrected. It seemed investments in information technology were finally paying off, and manufacturing productivity was increasing. The stock market began to climb in 1993, and the recovery looked robust enough that the Federal Reserve began to raise rates.

But, beginning with the Mexican crisis and bailout of late 1994 and early 1995, the Federal Reserve was faced with a series of financial collapses. Over the rest of the nineties, the Federal Reserve oscillated between halfhearted attempts to restrain the equity boom and responding to crises that it believed called for reversing the previous restraint. In the meantime, theories of a "new economy" developed, both inside and outside the Federal Reserve, to justify soaring asset prices.

The "Reverse Plaza Accord" was an important factor in creating the late nineties boom. By that agreement, the big three powers (the U.S., Japan, and Germany) bailed out a Japanese manufacturing economy that was slowing to a halt under the pressure of the record-breaking ascent of the yen. They did so by engineering a striking reversal of the steep decline of the exchange rate of the dollar that had taken place over the previous decade.

Read it all at the link. Including cite sourcing.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Perhaps you've never read Keynes general theory.

The General Theory for a totalitarian state? a note on Keynes's preface to the German edition of 1936

I have a passing familiarity with the topic. Do you assume that Keynesian = Authoritarian?

Where do you find that in General Theory on E, I, & M? This is an honest inquiry...and let's assume for discussion purposes that I know enough about the topic to properly discuss it.

Without the available time to dive into this deep, but potentially great discussion, I'll give you what Hayek Had to say on Keynes general theory.

http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae14_3_2.pdf

 

[Full-Auto]

Clinton's term was good economic times because the US was in the middle of two huge bubble booms (which later busrt). The NASDAQ bubble and the housing bubble. Of course, there was also the biggest bubble of them all which has still yet to pop, but it will.

Keynes economic theories are voodoo and have no place in real world dynamics. These are failed theories and ideas, even when you mash them up with Friedman's ideas. So, yes, really. Clinton push LOLberal policies the same as Bush. Only he rode the bubbles until he was done, when Bush came in in 2000, he had the NASDAQ bubble to contend with. When dealing with it, he advanced the burst of the housing bubble. Luckily for him, he left that one for Obama to run clean up crew. But the federal reserve is out of ammo now. So we're just expanding M1 adn M2, along witht he federal reserves balance sheet to cover it up. QE3 is right around the corner.

Bullshit.

The fact you can stream video on your computer were because of the efforts of the Clinton administration.

That's hardly a "tech bubble".

Or would you like to go back to the days of nntp and usenet?

Oh, good lord you're stupid on this subject. I'd stick to hyperpartisan fallacy.

Sallow really wrote this????


Oh brother.................The economic stupidity continues.............

 

[8537]

Perhaps you've never read Keynes general theory.

The General Theory for a totalitarian state? a note on Keynes's preface to the German edition of 1936

I have a passing familiarity with the topic. Do you assume that Keynesian = Authoritarian?

Where do you find that in General Theory on E, I, & M? This is an honest inquiry...and let's assume for discussion purposes that I know enough about the topic to properly discuss it.

Without the available time to dive into this deep, but potentially great discussion, I'll give you what Hayek Had to say on Keynes general theory.

http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae14_3_2.pdf

It's a difficult discussion to have between quips on a message board. I look forward to reviewing that document. Perhaps we can address the topic at a later time.

 

[Papageorgio]

And a Republican controlled congress.

With the House vote of 362-57 and a Senate vote of 90-8. Very tough to imagine it was just Republicans that pretty much made this veto proof. Also if Clinton would have vetoed it, it would have shown his displeasure in signing, but he didn't so maybe he was one of those Democrats that like it.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I have a passing familiarity with the topic. Do you assume that Keynesian = Authoritarian?

Where do you find that in General Theory on E, I, & M? This is an honest inquiry...and let's assume for discussion purposes that I know enough about the topic to properly discuss it.

Without the available time to dive into this deep, but potentially great discussion, I'll give you what Hayek Had to say on Keynes general theory.

http://mises.org/journals/qjae/pdf/qjae14_3_2.pdf

It's a difficult discussion to have between quips on a message board. I look forward to reviewing that document. Perhaps we can address the topic at a later time.

I'll put something more substantial together on it later. I'd love to have a good discussion on this topic with someone of good understanding on the subject.

 

[Freewill]

.

This "it's all their fault" bullshit is a great example of the intellectual honesty I scream about on a daily basis.

This continuing economic debacle is incredibly complex in its nature, depth and breadth, there are myriad "villains" from both "ends" with their fingers in this, and I refuse to believe that the simplistic finger-pointers are not intelligent enough to see that. Therefore, I can only assume they're not being honest.

God damn, folks, when does the bullshitting end?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

.

I agree with you, it is the 545 giver or take, that are in Congress that have f.ed up the country. They have ceded way too much power to Obama.

 

[Truthmatters]

More than enough blame to sahre.

Q: Did Bill Clinton Repeal the Glass-Steagall Act?

A: No, but he signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed some of the provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act.

--

On November 12th, 1999, Bill Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed SOME of the provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act.

According to Wikipedia.org, "the repeal of provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act effectively removed the separation that previously existed between investment banking which issued securities and commercial banks which accepted deposits. The deregulation also removed conflict of interest prohibitions between investment bankers serving as officers of commercial banks."

and

"…The Glass-Steagall Act prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company."

So, as a result of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a commercial bank would be able to buy an insurance company, or a commercial bank would be able to buy an investment bank, etc.

The three co-sponsors of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act were:

Sen. Phil Gramm - R
Rep. Jim Leach - R
Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. - R

In 1999, the Republicans held a majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The final version of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act passed the House by a vote of 362-57 and the Senate by a vote of 90-8. This made the bill "veto proof", meaning that if Clinton had decided to veto, the bill would have been passed anyways. Having said that, if Clinton truly didn't want the bill to become law, he could have vetoed the bill in a symbolic gesture, but this did not happen. Many people point to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act as a major reason why the financial sector imploded in 2008. When it comes to pointing fingers, both parties get the blame. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was co-sponsored by three Republicans, signed into law by a Democratic president and had the overwhelming support of both parties when it was eventually passed.

why did bush hold back the broker provisions of GLBact for 8 long years?

so the banks could fuck us

 

[Truthmatters]

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.





How can you blame ANYONE for what was in GLBact if Bush refused to alolow the whole bill to ever be implimented?