Should We Re-enact Glass-Steagall?

hvactec

VIP Member
Jan 17, 2010
1,316
106
83
New Jersey
The repealing of the Glass-Steagall Act was heralded as one of the greatest bipartisan achievements of our time. It was passed by an overwhelming majority by both Democrats and Republicans and signed into law by President William Jefferson Clinton on November 12, 1999.

The minority who spoke out against the repeal were ridiculed and dismissed. Their words ring out as an ominous reminder of our foolishness. Greed can never be self regulated. Conflicts of interest are inherently vulnerable to loss of objectivity. A system without checks and balances is always doomed to fail in the end. If it is not tended and pruned systemically from the get go, it will grow wild and ultimately unproductive in the end.

Commercial and investment banking were able to cross the invisible divide and create an intricate network filled with conflicts of interest, newly created classes of securities, and institutions that became “too big to fail”. With their rapid growth the SEC and other regulators were unable to keep up with the changing landscape. Conflicts of interest began to form within the regulatory and rating agencies which further reduced the objectivity and accountability of the industry. It was only a matter of time before another downturn would hit and the bubble would burst causing one of the worst financial catastrophes we have seen in eighty years.

Senator John McCain and Senator Maria Cantwell in 2009 proposed legislation similar to the original Glass-Steagall Act that would reinstate the separation between commercial and investment banking. However, fierce opposition from banks who would be directly affected by the legislation effectively nixed any chance the bill had for passage.

The Dodd-Frank Act was an attempt to place additional protections for consumers, but not enough for adequate protection. It also failed to cut the size of institutions, which is the major factor in the crisis.

In Europe, stricter regulations are being called for in light of the global crisis and legislation is being constructed based on the original Glass-Steagall Act. This is significant because one of the original reasons for repeal is other countries’ ability to run their institutions without these restrictions

read more Should We Re-enact Glass-Steagall? - Chicago Civil Rights | Examiner.com
 




Three voices calling for less regulation in the financial sector.

My guess is that one of them at least doesn't know that is what they are doing.

I think perhaps you didn't read the OP very carefully.

Re-enacting Glass-Steagall isn't less regulation.

Apparently you think (mistankenly) that Dodd-Frank is less restrictive than Glass-Steagal.
 
Last edited:
Three voices calling for less regulation in the financial sector.

My guess is that one of them at least doesn't know that is what they are doing.

I think perhaps you didn't read the OP very carefully.

Re-enacting Glass-Steagall isn't less regulation.

Apparently you think (mistankenly) that Dodd-Frank is less restrictive than Glass-Steagal.

It's a lot less restrictive and does very little about "Dark Pools".
 
Keep in mind that the federal government couldn't even run an in-house post office without stealing stamps. The congressional caffeteria went broke when the government ran it. Fannie Mae collapsed while Barney Frank was telling Americans it was solvent. Do we want the fruit cake politician to run American corporations too?
 
I think perhaps you didn't read the OP very carefully.

Re-enacting Glass-Steagall isn't less regulation.

Apparently you think (mistankenly) that Dodd-Frank is less restrictive than Glass-Steagal.

It's a lot less restrictive and does very little about "Dark Pools".

Let me get this straight, you want me to believe that a law that was written to fix Enron and the other problems that came up in the financial market ended up being less restrictive than the law it replaced?
 
We just almost had a major depression allowed principly by deregulation, and you call regulation fascism? I don't understand the how you people that support deregultion can be so fucking stupid? You stick to your conservative agenda to point of complete stupidity. There is a doctrine in life that says something about being flexible and dynamic so that you respond to any situation with the best tactic. Sticking to an ideology simply for the sake of sticking to an ideology doesn't get you anywhere except full of bad ideas when the situation changes.
 
Yes.

However, we really need a global Glass-Steagall to put some kind of control over the system worldwide. It is not enough for the US, it requires international control. Otherwise, the banks will just move to whatever countries will allow them to operate without control and we would solve nothing.
 
Last edited:
Yes.

Glass-Steagall kept Deposit Banks and Investment Banks separate. Without it, banks were able to gamble with depositors money and that's what led to the Toxic Derivatives Scam.

Separate them back out and let the investment banks sink or swim on their own without Gov't bailouts.

Breaking apart commercial and investment banking wouldn't prevent the need for bailouts.
 




Three voices calling for less regulation in the financial sector.

My guess is that one of them at least doesn't know that is what they are doing.

I think perhaps you didn't read the OP very carefully.

Re-enacting Glass-Steagall isn't less regulation.
It's not that they haven't read it carefully. The problem is they've been brainwashed and these backward concepts are imbedded in their minds.

There is a reason why such propagandists as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, et. al., are multi-millionaires.
 

Forum List

Back
Top