this is what low levels of regulations gets you

[Quantum Windbag]

when you deregulate you end regualtions.

Every time the right talks us into deregulating something here we get a huge scandal and the people get screwed for their efforts to help industry when they cry about regulations.

So find a British message board and whine to them about the London Interbank Offered Rate scandal and their lack of regulations.


Easy Peasy.

I wish she would, somebody on one of those boards would teach her about how the reason this is a scandal is that the people involved ignored the regulations.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

To bad that three Dems on the housing & banking committees during the Bush years kept voting against any regulation bills that Bush wanted. That is untill they got back into power and then passed regulations. By 2008 when they did it was too late.
Setting the Record Straight: Six Years of Unheeded Warnings for GSE Reform

The Fs did not write any of the sub prime loans OR roll them into mortgage securities and sell them to unsuspecting buyers.

The Fs were one of the buyers you fool.

respewing republican lies is not going to win you any national elections

They bought the loans because the law required them to do so.

 

[KissMy]

It is TIME for republicans and libertarians to admitt their core idea of deregulation being GOOD for the economy has been pummeled by reality.

Stop using failed ideas to try and attract voters.

They found out your ideas are historically failed ideas and you will NEVER win another election with them.

Was deregulation bad for the economy when liberal Democrats championed it? If businesses like deregulation why do so many large corporations aand banks actively support them?

They will NEVER ADMIT Bill Clinton and many prominent democrats pushed for the killing of "Glass Steagall". Bill Clinton personally signed all the laws that deregulated Wallstreet & turned it into a gambling casino that raises prices on citizens & steals their savings.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0k2PmF-o5Q"]Who repealed the Glass-Steagall Act?[/ame]

Nov 13, 1999 New York Times: Clinton Signs Legislation Overhauling Banking Laws - President Clinton signed into law today a sweeping overhaul of Depression-era banking laws. The measure lifts barriers in the industry and allows banks, securities firms and insurance companies to merge and to sell each other's products.

''This legislation is truly historic,'' President Clinton told a packed audience of lawmakers and top financial regulators. ''We have done right by the American people.''

The bill repeals parts of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and the 1956 Bank Holding Company Act to level the domestic playing field for United States financial companies and allow them to compete better in the evolving global financial marketplace.

''With this bill,'' Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers said, ''the American financial system takes a major step forward toward the 21st Century -- one that will benefit American consumers, business and the national economy.''

Time: 25 People to Blame for the Financial Crisis - President Clinton's tenure was characterized by economic prosperity and financial deregulation, which in many ways set the stage for the excesses of recent years. Among his biggest strokes of free-wheeling capitalism was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, a cornerstone of Depression-era regulation. He also signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation. In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods. It is the subject of heated political and scholarly debate whether any of these moves are to blame for our troubles, but they certainly played a role in creating a permissive lending environment.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs3Z2Z2WMJk"]Bill Clinton Admits "I Was Wrong"[/ame]

Democrat Hud Secretary Andrew Cuomo admitted the mandate amounted to "affirmative action" lending that would result in a "higher default rate." The institution would "take a greater risk on these mortgages, yes; to give families mortgages who they would not have given otherwise, yes; they would not have qualified but for this affirmative action on the part of the bank, yes. It is by income, and is it also by minorities? Yes. "With the $2.1 billion, lending that amount in mortgages which will be a higher risk, and I'm sure there will be a higher default rate on those mortgages than on the rest of the portfolio." The CRA allowed ACORN "organizations to collect a fee from the banks for their services in marketing the loans. The Senate Banking Committee had estimated that, as a result of CRA, $9.5 billion had gone to pay for services and salaries of the organizers."

 

[saveliberty]

personal insults?


they make for very bad info

they make your decisions based on hate of your fellow Americans.

Its why you are always wondering why things dont work our for your party

I'm against liberals, that doesn't mean I'm FOR Republicans.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Regulators have known since at least August 2007 that banks were using artificially low Libor submissions to appear healthier than they were.

This isn't "De-Regulation" it's corrupt "Non Regulation".

Other posts have been made on the Libor scandal but self professed "experts" like Expat Panama have said that it was no big deal. In fact if I remember his words correctly he said "Banks loaning each other money at a low rate? How is that a scandal?"

It's precisely a scandal because they loan each other money at a low rate but they loan us money at a higher rate.

Plus these Predatory Banks have been hiding their losses off balance sheet to make it appear they are healthier than they are. The regulators and rating agencies are supposed to give fair and honest ratings so that Ordinary Folk like us can make the right Investment decisions but they haven't been doing so.

It's a Major Scandal but it has NOTHING to do with "De-Regulation" as the OP would like you to believe.

You do know that the US is not in charge of foreign banks, don't you? Are you going to start demanding that we regulate everyone in the world now?

You do know that the Privately Owned Federal Reserve uses OUR MONEY to loan to Foreign Banks right? Roughly 7.7 Trillion so far since 2008.

You DO KNOW that there is:

LIBOR based in London as well as:
Mibor
Sibor
Hibor
and
Kibor?

Guess which one is the predominate one and which is based in USD? (US Dollars)

And yes, considering that many people base their investment decisions on what happens in the Stock Market AND those same banks have received low interest Near ZIRP money from the Fed the US Regulatory Agencies SHOULD do the job they're SUPPOSED to do.

If that's too much to ask then the Fed shouldn't be loaning out OUR money like that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This isn't "De-Regulation" it's corrupt "Non Regulation".

Other posts have been made on the Libor scandal but self professed "experts" like Expat Panama have said that it was no big deal. In fact if I remember his words correctly he said "Banks loaning each other money at a low rate? How is that a scandal?"

It's precisely a scandal because they loan each other money at a low rate but they loan us money at a higher rate.

Plus these Predatory Banks have been hiding their losses off balance sheet to make it appear they are healthier than they are. The regulators and rating agencies are supposed to give fair and honest ratings so that Ordinary Folk like us can make the right Investment decisions but they haven't been doing so.

It's a Major Scandal but it has NOTHING to do with "De-Regulation" as the OP would like you to believe.

You do know that the US is not in charge of foreign banks, don't you? Are you going to start demanding that we regulate everyone in the world now?

You do know that the Privately Owned Federal Reserve uses OUR MONEY to loan to Foreign Banks right? Roughly 7.7 Trillion so far since 2008.

You DO KNOW that there is:

LIBOR based in London as well as:
Mibor
Sibor
Hibor
and
Kibor?

Guess which one is the predominate one and which is based in USD? (US Dollars)

And yes, considering that many people base their investment decisions on what happens in the Stock Market AND those same banks have received low interest Near ZIRP money from the Fed the US Regulatory Agencies SHOULD do the job they're SUPPOSED to do.

If that's too much to ask then the Fed shouldn't be loaning out OUR money like that.

Do you consider that an answer to my question? I thought it was a simple yes or no question, are you going to start insisting we regulate everyone in the world?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Secret Libor Transcripts Expose Trader Rate-Manipulation - Bloomberg


Light Touch

The scandal demonstrates the failure of London’s two-decade experiment with light-touch supervision, which helped make the British capital the biggest trading hub in the world. In his 10 years as Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown championed this approach, hailing a “golden age” for the City of London in a June 2007 speech. Even after the FSA pledged to toughen its rules following the 2008 financial crisis, supervisors failed to act on warnings that the benchmark was being manipulated.

Regulators have known since at least August 2007 that banks were using artificially low Libor submissions to appear healthier than they were. That month, a Barclays employee in London e-mailed the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, questioning the numbers that other banks were inputting, according to transcripts published by the New York Fed.

Nine months later, Tim Bond, then head of asset allocation at Barclays’s investment bank, publicly described the Libor figures as “divorced from reality,” saying in a Bloomberg Television interview that firms were routinely misstating their borrowing costs to avoid the perception they were facing stress.

The New York Fed and the Bank of England say they didn’t act because they had no responsibility for oversight of Libor. That fell to the British Bankers’ Association, the industry lobbying group that created the rate and largely ignored recommendations from central bankers after 2008 to change the way the benchmark is computed. Regulators also were preoccupied with the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, and forcing banks to be honest about their Libor submissions might have revealed they were paying penalty rates to borrow.

Posts such as yours are what we get as a result of people (you) with low intelligence.

 

[zakdavis]

people are still talking about LIBOR?